12-18-2017, 04:17 AM
Terracore wrote:
The thing that did in the “Wirick Group” in my mind was the newsletters that said if you don't pay, you'll go to collections plus pay an extra 12% per year. But if you fall into this group, you're not allowed to vote. There will be no non-payers, just non-voters. And the voters will determine what the non-voters pay.
I agree about the voting structure, but I don't understand how the Wirick Group is responsible or why they should be singled out for blame. The Arthurs Group has done the same thing and would do it again. So has every other board since 1992. The reason is because it's in the bylaws. If anyone is to blame for this it would be the board that was involved in the 1992 class action and restructured the bylaws in this way. It immediately became a "catch-22" situation, i.e., to change the bylaws back to allowing everyone to vote requires a membership vote, but until the bylaws are changed only the paid up members will have a say on who gets to vote. It is unlikely that a majority of "paid-ups" would vote to allow "unpaids" to vote.
By the way, both groups are suggesting bylaws changes but neither group is looking into this one.
The thing that did in the “Wirick Group” in my mind was the newsletters that said if you don't pay, you'll go to collections plus pay an extra 12% per year. But if you fall into this group, you're not allowed to vote. There will be no non-payers, just non-voters. And the voters will determine what the non-voters pay.
I agree about the voting structure, but I don't understand how the Wirick Group is responsible or why they should be singled out for blame. The Arthurs Group has done the same thing and would do it again. So has every other board since 1992. The reason is because it's in the bylaws. If anyone is to blame for this it would be the board that was involved in the 1992 class action and restructured the bylaws in this way. It immediately became a "catch-22" situation, i.e., to change the bylaws back to allowing everyone to vote requires a membership vote, but until the bylaws are changed only the paid up members will have a say on who gets to vote. It is unlikely that a majority of "paid-ups" would vote to allow "unpaids" to vote.
By the way, both groups are suggesting bylaws changes but neither group is looking into this one.