It was an acrimonious contest and, some suggest, somewhat underhanded by the one of more of the former incumbents.
The fact that the opposition candidates prevailed probably means that no action will be forthcoming to find, and punish, those who may have tried to intimidate the winners.
THERE ARE TWO COMMON PHRASES, slightly modified, that come to mind as I recover from last night’s board meeting:
- Shot themselves in their feet 1
Hoisted by their own patards. (Wm Shakespeare, Hamlet, c. 1602)2.
There has for some time been discontent by some residents of the board that, for the most part, was peopled by the same members for a decade. (No term limits for board members. Hopefully that will change.)
However, recently — as in the last 180 days or so — the board and the property management group to which it genuflects, has knowingly or not done almost everything possible to generate ill-will toward themselves.
- First, the management group engages a site representative who agrees to be present three days-a-week from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. (total 12 hours-a-week) and who will see residents (the people who indirectly pay her wages) by apointment only.
That not sufficient, the management company sends out harsh “violation” letters to residents who need to attend to “beauty” issues such as cleaning roofs and driveways.
The old saw, It’s not WHAT you say but HOW you say it came to the fore. Rather than politely and civilly reminding a property owner that something needed attention —”We notice that the roof and driveway need to be cleaned. Let us know when this will be done." — the first letter is a violation notice that, according to the on-site person, is the way the lawyers want it.
Adding insult to injury, the letters were dated well before being sent, were mailed (as the lawyers insisted) via certified — read “extra expense” — mail, and separate letters were sent for each alleged “violation.”
I was told, by a lawyer, that the management company lawyers are paid $300 per letter! I received two letters and some neighbors received as many as five separate violation letters. Simple math: 5*300=1500; US$1,500 for sending fill-in-the-blank form letters.
One of the candidates for a new board is a forensic accountant.
He took the proposed 2020 budget apart and pointed out what he claims are inaccuracies.
The meeting Monday night was to start with the budget, but when the candidate/accountant started to challenge each line and the management association’s accountant commenced to explain, time flew.
Finally one board member made a motion to table the budget until a later date. The motion was seconded, but no vote was taken. The now-ex president of the board, a lawyer, apparently lacking knowledge of rules of order or the power of her position, allowed the accountants to continue to debate.
FINALLY, since it was pointed out several times that there was a motion to table the budget, the matter was closed. The management accountant walked out of the meeting with the blessings of the audience.
As required, one of the management company lawyers, called for nominations for the board.
She started by polling each current board member if they would be willing to accept a nomination. Four of the seven members of the board, apparently realizing they were sailing on the Titanic, declined to be dominated.
Nominations were then called from the floor.
Just to keep things “interesting,” there were eight people nominated for the seven-member board, causing the State election official to have every proxy counted and verified. Lots of overtime.
Had the election for some reason not happened, the old board would be “rolled over” and in place for another year.
- It seems to this scrivener that if incumbents had been “rolled over” the four board members who declined to be nominated should have, at the first opportunity, resigned and their replacements appointed by the board members who DID accept nominations.
As it happened, the election was held and the newly constituted board was seated.
NOW, let us see if the newly elected board will follow up on its promises.
1. Come up with a new, transparent budget
2. Call for bids on all expiring contracts, including the management company
3. Replace the 12 hours-a-week on-site manager with one who is polite, accessible, and knows for whom she, or he, is working
4. Establish term limits for board members — say three years.
Granted, these are this scrivener’s priorities.
I’d also like to see the sub-division web site list each board members’ contact information: name, phone number, email at a minimum. This information also should be on the first sheet of each paper letter and PDF file sent by the board.
Outgoing board members never put their contact information where residents could easily find it. It’s a minor thing, but if you don’t want to be bothered by those nasty people who elected you, . . .
I hope that the new board members will ask the retired board members for their opinions and that the four ex-board members will provide assistance as requested. It would be sad if the subdivision residents behaved as badly as the professional politicians of both parties in Washington DC.
The election was acrimonious, but it is history.
Sources
1. Shot in foot: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shoot_oneself_in_the_foot
2. Shakespeare: https://tinyurl.com/yc5s86pj
PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.
Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.
Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.
No comments:
Post a Comment