Orchidland Special Membership Meeting

[DaVinci]

Again, it's a collective improvement. "Other people" is us, whether we see it that way or not. You don't own 1/2400th of the road lot... you own the lot, collectively, with 2400 other people. Fight the county and you'll just lose.

[Guest]

I don't live in Orchidland but I have had friends that do. I remember years ago the roads where terrible. I lost a muffler taking a friend home once. Well at that time they collected money from the residence to improve the roads. Apparently the person in charge stole it and left the island.

[kalakoa]

I have a problem with the current "pay twice, then pay again" system created by the convenient legal fiction that is "privately owned public roads".

It "should not" be the role of any collective to raise money for their own infrastructure so that they can then be taxed on the valuation increase.

If the roads are truly "private", fine: collective decides how to handle the situation.

If the roads are "privately-funded public", members of that collective should be able to deduct their maintenance costs from their property taxes. (Note that by County's own rules, you are not allowed to subdivide lots unless every lot has "access" -- and there are some really interesting test cases out there if you study the TMK maps.)

What we seem to have currently is "all the responsibilities, none of the rights". (Try putting up a tollbooth on "your" private road and see what happens.)

County retains ultimate liability for their role in "graciously allowing" this situation; it's conveniently arranged so that the various "private road collectives" don't have enough money to argue their case in a Federal court.

[unknownjulie]

So, how was the meeting and what happened? thanks!

[KeaauRich]

It was determined that since the membership hadn't been given 14 days notice (as per the bylaws) the special meeting wasn't legally valid. As a result, the meeting became a general discussion of the road proposal with some side conversations about the turmoil on the board that led to to issue in the first place. I think it's fair to say that the general consensus is that those assembled acknowledged that there were screw-ups by the Board, but that the Board was acting in good faith and their efforts as volunteers was appreciated. However, in order to prevent future problems, the Board (and membership) need to adhere strictly to Robert's Rules and the Association Bylaws (hence the decision not to take any votes at this gathering).

In terms of the roads discussion, those who spoke tended to be more in favor of raising the fees to do the master plan or at a minimum, rejiggering the fees to emphasize finishing paving the roads that are on the member-approved pavement schedule. Another special meeting will be called as soon as the Board can line up a hall and send out a mailing to the entire membership.

[unknownjulie]

Thanks for going and updating us!