|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 7, 2015 13:21:34 GMT -5
I liked the title of D's post on CHUG so much I decided to name this thread after it! Also, there are more to come in this "Series" so why not create a thread?
There is really not much to say about this. In the end, WHO CARES what the ultimate zoning numbers/letters are assigned to S-bag; the result is identical whether our zoning is referred to as residential, leisure, recreational, industrial, airport, agricultural, recycling area or swamp--these are just names!
The newly-named land use modification/abomination will permit the conduct of BIG BUSINESS on private and common properties and our beach will house a 100' tower and enclosure.
As far as the 3:1 number in opposition, I have no idea what D is referring to. If he would like, I'll post the snippet of audio where the Chairman recounted the For/Against. I have the entire audiorecord of the hearing and most of the people who phoned, spoke and wrote were in OPPOSITION specifically 24 FOR and 46 AGAINST. And the FOR's don't matter because the people speaking FOR were only supporting the internet; they did not even speak to the land use modification.
The few who spoke in support, including a board member and an ex-board member, spoke about liking the INTERNET which was irrelevant to the purpose of the hearing. Of course, Mr St aib recounted once again how he donated his towers to SLohA. One person supported the INTERNET who did not even live in S-bag! In general, the supporters did not seem to "get it" i.e. the real issue before the Commission.
Re "people not knowing in advance what was going on"-- what can you say to D who is so out of touch on so many things? Owners were not told what was going on! Owners are no longer permitted to discuss anything in advance of a motion or even speak during a meeting! No one said a word about a meeting with the County Attorney with Mamager in attendance or the business conducted there that was not properly noticed to the owners. A prepared BOD motion was made--without explanation-- and that was it!
No one knew what was going on until the pink signs went up. And the only way to find out was to call the Polk County phone number on the sign and ask! Even the Manager did not know when he answered an owner question in KK! (A rumor developed that it was about putting up cell phone towers.)
As an aside, there is an important message in D's post:
DON'T wear any tee shirts with writing on them!
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 12, 2015 6:59:09 GMT -5
2nd in the Series!
Mr President; you are making this much too easy and fun!
|
|
|
|
Post by smily on Jun 12, 2015 10:00:58 GMT -5
2nd in the Series!
Mr President; you are making this much too easy and fun!
|
|
|
|
Post by jimherbst on Jun 12, 2015 20:13:51 GMT -5
Regarding the Polk County Planning Commission's decision, I have a question regarding the finality of that vote. Being from the Midwest, I am unfamiliar with the "commission" form of county government. Rather, under the forms of municipal government I know, a planning commission is only a recommending body because its members are not elected by the voters. As such, a planning commission's recommendation must be voted upon by the elected governing body (i.e., the city council or board of county supervisors) before it becomes law. Does anyone know whether the Polk County Planning Commission has the final say, or does the matter still have to be voted upon by the Polk County Commissioners?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 13, 2015 6:30:54 GMT -5
The Appeal application states that it must be submitted within 7 days or the decision is final.
|
|
forever by yourside
Guest
|
Post by forever by yourside on Jun 13, 2015 7:39:12 GMT -5
I look at this argument about for and against the towers..I like to know the towers on S-bag ground do we get the renews from those towers or do we the residents of S-bag get all of the liability and a few chosen people keep the profit..It seem to me everyone on the board I ask can't answer this question.
I do not know why I am having a hard time with this question if we get to share in the prosperity..If SLHOA grt to share then I see no problem.And if not then I guess there is reason for further legally action against the board. That all I have to say about this..
Only the spoon knows what at the bottom of the pot!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lra on Jun 14, 2015 19:18:40 GMT -5
I am so pleased to announce I did something "wrong". I took a short cut and used poor judgement. Sorry, I inconvenienced anyone. Do know Gngr had nothing to do with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by pestcontrol on Jun 15, 2015 5:46:45 GMT -5
I am so pleased to announce I did something "wrong". I took a short cut and used poor judgement. Sorry, I inconvenienced anyone. Do know Gngr had nothing to do with it. In true S-bag "friendliness" and "helping one another" we heard that instead of talking to you directly to correct your mistake the police were called. Bet you just love your neighbors. NOT. Even though you made a mistake of judgement on something does not warrant the meanness you are experiencing. We wish you well. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 15, 2015 6:07:14 GMT -5
Post by Lra on 10 hours ago
OMG You did something WRONG! Are you announcing that you are not infallible and have lapse in judgement now and then!? I am shocked and appalled! Pfffttt to the Big House with your terminally flawed human butt for at least 60 days to think about your transgressions and don't ever make a mistake again!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lra on Jun 16, 2015 6:56:21 GMT -5
I am so pleased to announce I did something "wrong". I took a short cut and used poor judgement. Sorry, I inconvenienced anyone. Do know Gngr had nothing to do with it. Oh my gosh. All is well and one person in our neighborhood made a fool of himself by putting his nose into my business and even called in the police. If I would have been called first the hysterical scene he created would never have happened. Once again, trying to get me has failed. Please people get a life and leave me alone. I also heard from several witnesses that the resident pyromaniac (the one that I suspect was behind the cross burning and in the past has threatened to burn down our home) was there yelling about burning something or another again. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 16, 2015 7:45:09 GMT -5
Oh Joy! Another in the Mythbuster Series! I am not even going to post D's CHUG Current Issue's piece which is desparate-sounding and off-point.
Myth #6
This is the strategy of “mythbusting” described as “distraction from the point”. D-you don't get a technical pass here! It is probable that you have been careful to avoid the appearance of gathering a quorum outside the sunshine but that was not the point of the post.
Here is the point that you completely missed. Read again carefully and then bust again if you wish!
Owners have not been included in SLohA business conversation and process.
Owners have been excluded from the conversation for years and it is getting worse--not better--despite some superficial changes.
Owners are being disrespected and progressively marginalized with no input DURING business meetings, selected correspondence reading, snarky remarks and retaliatory measures directed at target owners and most recently, condensed and meaningless “financial summaries”.
Owners must rely on outside agencies to find out what is happening to our park behind our backs.
In my opinion, the business of SLohA is being used as a platform for YOUR and Internet Bb's private business interests. The Internet is not SLohA's business. The Board has been informed THREE times on a ballot that internet is not the legitimate business of SLohA. The Board was informed during a pre-lawsuit mediation that the presence of this business on the property can support a legal complaint of “breach of fiduciary duty”. (Remember, you are not covered by insurance for that!)
For-profit business conducted inside SLohA is forbidden by Covenant. Owners have had no disclosure or input into the building and expansion of KCNetwork's Internet business and its sponsorship by the board.. This board has burdened owners with additional expenses related to the support of this prohibited business being unlawfully conducted from our common and private properties.
Consider yourself lucky if someone doesn't S u e your pants off. Unfortunately, my plate is already full.
Myth #7.
This was the strategy of “propagandizing/promoting” under the guise of public-service mythbusting. Dick Tracy posted that KCNet's ..”main feed was on S-bag property” (and Owners should be paid lease rates for the space).
D "mythbusted" and gave us the “real take” i.e. the main feed is on private property!
Again, D completely ignored the Point of the Post i.e. that S-bag owners are being forced by the Board to relinquish possession of our recreational and beach properties so that KCNetwork's towers can be housed on them—without just compensation at current lease rates or royalties.
Dare I say that the private property referred to is Bb stab's?
And, what is D's “real take” on the definition of “main feed”? Splitting hairs again? Dare I say that nobody inside or outside S-bag would receive internet service if not for the infrastructure housed on Bb stab's private property which is also located in S-bag?
Now comes a lament on how much this internet business is costing KCNetworks et al....which cost breakdown does not account for the revenue of the 2500 subscribers OUTSIDE S-bag.
Here's a thought—Interesting but Irrelevant. This is none of SLohA's concern.
And then D goes on to extoll the virtues of the Spycameras (13) mounted all over the property.
Gosh, here we go full circle:
The Spy Cameras were never discussed with the owners
Owners vehemently objected to the sudden appearance of a spycam in the poolroom
Spy cameras have never assisted in the resolution of any property vandalism
The additional feed for installing camera-dedicated bandwidth was never discussed with Owners who may eventually stop paying for it when the useless spycams are removed or blown down.
Spycams apparently are for intimidation of owners and entertainment for privileged viewers.
Finally, I want to point out that the Forum our President refers to in his Series is not the AWS—it is the S-bag Resident Forum (SRF is you like to use letters). It currently has 68 members and is growing. The current daily Page Views averages 100 and, during season, has been as high as over 357. Mr. President: the people who are reading the S-bag Resident Forum are, for the most part, YOUR constituents. You represent ALL the people who own property in S-bag. They pay dues just as you do. They are not nameless, faceless pawns and pocketbooks for your entertainment and deserve a modicum of respect.
Mr. President: Do you think you are up to AT LEAST that modest degree of respect for the owners in here? And, if the answer is NO, I suggest that you resign as a board member and permit someone who does have respect to serve ALL members.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Jun 16, 2015 14:07:06 GMT -5
I have asked D B. about his affiliation with KCNetwork, and he keeps saying he does not have any ties with this Commercial Internet Corp. know as KCNet.
Now for someone that claims he does not have any ties with KCNet, you sure do have a lot of financial info, cost of feeds, cost of repairs, number of subcontractors, information others in SLR do not have privileged to.
You also have several Commercial Internet Dishes and repeaters antennas mounted on your residents rooftop on the Trail.
Lets us not forget, your name and KCNetwork Corp. were the two parties that filed the application
with Polk County for a Land Use Change in SLR.
But, I would like to Thank You D B. for all of the financial information about KCNet Corp.
you stated in your latest MythBuster on Current Isues. There is more Information in your Myth post, then I have been able to gather through Official Records Request in the past 4 yrs.
Thank You.. PS. You forgot to mention the 25 or so Communities KCNet Corp. is serving outside of S-bag Lake Resort, supported by SLohA's Towers. And the Goal is to go County Wide, then State Wide and then Nation Wide with this Newly formed Commercial Communication Corporation, know as KCNetwork located in SLR on Gray Hackle.
|
|
Expose
Pilgrim
"Always Seek The Truth"
Posts: 43
|
Post by Expose on Jun 16, 2015 23:33:13 GMT -5
If KCNets Operation is running in the Red in S-bag, you can count on Bobs Internet Service will be mandatory for all residents in SLR, real soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 17, 2015 10:22:59 GMT -5
If KCNets Operation is running in the Red in S-bag, you can count on Bobs Internet Service will be mandatory for all residents in SLR, real soon. and you can probably count on another lawsuit if that is attempted. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 19, 2015 20:41:09 GMT -5
4th in the Series!
Someone is embarrassed! D--EVEN IF I mistakenly attributed the the Current SOP #13 with the Proposed SOP Motion, (and that is certainly possible as there were several back and forth readings of the current and proposed SOP) --you, once again, missed the point.
YOU and YOU ALONE wanted to water down the proposed/current SOP with language that would maintain the horrible status quo of ignoring premises liability and the "quiet enjoyment of Owner Property". YOU and YOU alone wanted to only remove the "Anytime Visitor Book" when EVERYONE else present wanted Owners to accompany their Visitors. YOU ALONE resisted with repeated and insistent statements the proposal that OWNERS attend their guests at all functions and amenities. (This is common sense and nearly a universal practice in group/club settings.) YOU, D, tried every diversion possible to avoid a vote on the proposed SOP including trying to adjourn the meeting and calling for "more research". Then, you used your position to strong arm Suthrd to make "only the first part of the motion". When Suthrd refused to change his Motion in accordance with your request, YOU ALONE voted against it. You ALONE voted against giving all the owners much needed relief from the dangerous and obnoxious element trespassing at our pool. (Was this because your daughter and kids used the pool and YOU are too busy and important to accompany them?)
And then-to add another layer of incompetence and disrespect, YOU decided to mythbust and repost the OLD SOP from 2011 under Current Issues --rather than begin re-education of Owners with the NEWLY-adopted requirement!
Why did YOU NOT post the new SOP #13"? This was a disservice to all owners and reflects your self-centered concern with "being right" and perpetuating your silly Mythbuster series! Is there any wonder why everything you say and do is looked at with distrust and disgust?
MythBuster #9 This was an incredible answer by D.
Answer: All I can do is tell you the truth, what you choose to believe is up to you. If you really wanted the truth, you could do exactly what I did and go see Mr. St aib and ask him if he would share the figures with you. I also asked him if it would be okay to post those figures on the web site to Bust the Myth that eastpolk was misrepresenting. Why make records request for that information through SLohA when they don't have what you were looking for. I do not have the privilege of knowing about the “20 or so Communities being serviced by his company, nor did he ever mention to me, anything about going County wide, State wide and then Nation wide.
Two points: ALL the information about the 20 or so communities being serviced by KCNet" is on the website:
KCNetwork New Customers
See next post
Insofar as KCNet's intention to go county/state/nationwide, Bb St aib went into great detail about this on his SLohA website, stating in detail that he/the prospective buyer are soliciting bulk contracts from local associations with expansion plans.
See next post
And even D knows that the Owners in here have NO LEGAL STANDING to request records from an independent for-profit corporation! The fact that he enjoys such a privilege is not surprising.
D is either reinventing the truth or he is oblivious.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 20, 2015 6:39:49 GMT -5
Supplement to MythBusters #4D--On KCNet's plans to expand business inside and outside SLR, as written by Internet Bb on his website in Sept 2014: Note that this proposed sale is dependent upon forcing all Saddlebaggers to support the KCNet's internet business. D--Below is a listing of KCNet's service to outside subscribers--the HOA/Condo Associations referred to above: 
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 23, 2015 15:38:40 GMT -5
Whooppee! It's another >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mythbusters #6 in the series
Myth #10
D replied to my version of reality at the meeting, which I attended, heard well, listened to with great interest and recorded. That does not mean I will always get every single detail correct and in order, but I sure did get "the gist". He is welcome to his spin and here it is:
D's Answer;
NOTHING CHANGED?!? All that back and forth discussion and trying to rush out of there without voting on the motion and the end result was nothing changed???D's Note; This motion will be slightly modified from “owner" to “owner/resident" and will be ratified at the next Board meeting Tuesday July 14, 2015. There may be other slight changes.
Looks like "someone" is trying to backpedal the motion to make it 'Not change" even more!Then, he goes on about a Rule: D your memory is certainly cH allenging you these days. We have no Covenants and therefore, there are no Rules. These went away when you admitted the Covenants were expired as a legal strategy to try to moot my lawsuit--remember? (At least, that was the "SPIN".) You then began the revitalization process. When/IF that revitalization is approved by Florida DEO, the Rules will come back! In the meantime, you are certainly welcome to pretend in private, but I believe that, as President, you should not make that a public practice.On D's last comment about asking Internet Bb for records and his business information, there are not many people I know that are bold enough to entertain such a request! Who would be so rude as to ask for this information? Maybe someone close to Bb or to the business. Such a request for private financial information would have to be made through other compelling, legal means; hence, the reference to an Official Records Request which would ONLY be applicable to SLohA--not KCNetwork. Kapich?D seems to have a hard time comprehending AND finding things and clicking on links that are right in front of him on the forum. Here it is again:
Look up: www.kcnetwork.net
Click on KCnet Internet
New Customers (tab)
Internet Account Status: Read the next to last paragraph--written by Internet Bb and modified at some point on his site (full screenshot is available of the entire LOOOOOONG post but hard to see on a thumbnail like the 25 OUTSIDE CUSTOMER LISTING screenshot posted above).
(D: you are apparently on a very close basis with Bb; be sure to ask him for details on his "new projects" being installed in the summer of 2015 while all the snowbirds are absent from the park.)
Thanks for your input, D. Most responsiveness EVER by the Board to Owners!
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 5, 2015 16:33:15 GMT -5
We have a Mythbusters #11 but, in my opinion, it doesn't provide much content for a reply. Apparently, D finally found the link to the KCNetwork's site listing the 25 communities currently or anticipated to be serviced by KCNetworks. For reasons unknown, D repeatedly refers to these named areas as AREAS as if that makes any difference in comprehending the extensive saturation of the commercial activity promoted by the current/planned tower structures. Once again, D misses the point; i.e. that KCNetworks is a commercial enterprise serving at least 25 communities/ areas/ associations/neighborhoods/regions or whatever one wishes to refer to them as and that this is commercial activity that is conducted from within S-bag contrary to our deed restrictions and for the benefit ONLY to OUTSIDERS, KCNetworks and Investors/Sponsors. D then gives us another Sales Pitch/Plea that Kay c Internet is necessary for the existence of S-bag: D's statement is just laughable; this has been balloted and voted down multiple times in various incarnations by a MAJORITY of Baggers and the letters to Polk County opposed his Application 3:1 Against. The ballots against are a matter of record as are the many written objections to Polk County; I guess D is like a lot of politicians that think they can reframe reality if they just beat their drum enough times. As has been observed by many, including Polk County's own 2013 Broadband Assessment Report Polk County Broadband Plan there are 5 providers of internet service. Most people I know use Sprint and Verizon without a problem. There's your solution D--go forward with WIRELESS, MOBILE technology that already exists and is quickly making fiberoptic, terrestrial internet yesterday's technology.
BTW D: Why are you working so hard on the KCNetworks Persuasion Pitch to people? Shouldn't you be working on SLohA's Revitalization? |
|
|
|
Post by CAPT BILL on Jul 6, 2015 13:21:23 GMT -5
WHEN WERE THE SOP'S DEVELOPED? BEEN A RESIDENT FOR OVER 10 YEARS & UNTIL I RECEIVED SOP#13 - I NEVER KNEW THEY EXISTED.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Jul 6, 2015 13:35:49 GMT -5
I had a request for a copy of the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), and was told something like they are for managements use. I never received a copy as requested. Another SLR hidden document it seems.
16RC
|
|
