Posts: 14,116
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
when were the members of the community polled to see which of the three connectivity points were favored?
During the PREP fair, August 30 2014; recommendations forwarded to Council on May 3 2016. Greggor Ilagan requested the creation of an Ad Hoc Committee to study the issues.
http://records.co.hawaii.hi.us/weblink/1...Page1.aspx
Next meeting August 23 2016.
http://records.co.hawaii.hi.us/weblink/1...Page1.aspx
However (as I've pointed out numerous times), County cannot provide support to any "privately owned" road, nor would any such project be cost-effective given the expensive requirements (40-foot wide pavement on 60-foot easement). State has made it abundantly clear that no funding is available for any "new" road projects.
Perhaps the "failure to provide emergency access" issue could be used to file a Federal lawsuit which would further drain County resources without providing any new infrastructure.
Posts: 52
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2015
I hope the board that is doing the good job on the roads files sue on Barbara Arthurs and recieves ther legal costs. by the way no ballots were sent out.
Kw
Posts: 1,163
Threads: 32
Joined: Aug 2009
My understanding is that the Board's legal costs would be covered by Association insurance, but Barbara's legal costs are coming out of her pocket. The fact that the case has not been dismissed by now would lead one to believe that there may be something to her arguments. I'm not sure either side is totally blameless, but I am encouraged that outside adults are reviewing the situation.
BTW, has anyone kept track of how many of the "official" Board's membership were elected by the entire membership (as opposed to "special elections" held during Board meetings that only a handful of members attend)?
Posts: 52
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2015
I believe OLCA pays the first 25000 then inc kicks in . She should pay 25000 to reimburse the community.
Kw
Posts: 1,085
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2016
The D&O insurance policy covers the Directors and Officers, but not the Association. So there has been a 2nd attorney representing the association. I believe he is being paid from the "Legal Defense Fund". I believe that the $25,000 D&O deductible is also paid from this fund. Some will argue that neither of these expenses should be coming out of that fund, but that is another discussion. According to the court website, the attorney for the association has withdrawn and has been replaced by 3 other attorneys. Also, according to the court website, a request for the transcripts of the last hearing has been made by a private party. I'm still hoping that those transcripts will surface here like the last ones did.
Like many of you, I did not receive any notification for the meeting and vote at the Elks Club. Nor has anyone that I have talked to. However, ASSUMING that this meeting actually took place and 40 people showed up to vote, it begs the question: How did these people find out about it? If any of you were notified of this meeting, I would be interested in hearing how you were notified, i.e., newsletter, website, e-mail, phone call, smoke signals, etc.
As to paying the fees....the plaintiffs (OL Voice, Aurthurs &Co.) have a stated goal of placing OLCA into receivership. Since fiscal solvency of the organization is a huge factor in whether the court will grant this, not paying the fees is a benefit to this goal. Paying the fees is a benefit to the defendants who are trying to keep OLCA out of receivership. Your choice.
And finally,
"The bigger irony being: wasting time and money on pointless lawsuits when it's County that created the problems in the first place with their BS "privately owned roads open to the public".
If all the subdivisions pooled their lawsuit dollars ... progress could happen."
Kalakoa, you could not have hit the nail more squarely. For the amount of time and resources spent on this ridiculous pissing contest, we could have already been a year into this process, and not even needing the help of the other subdivisions.
Aloha
Welcome My2.02 and Fine Connoisseur
aloha, AP
P.S. Don't encourage Kalakoa
Posts: 14,116
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
we could have already been a year into this process, and not even needing the help of the other subdivisions
Going it alone, while admirable (and precedent-setting), doesn't really address the larger problem evidenced by the attitude of (some) HPP residents: "these are OUR roads that WE paid for, we don't want wear-and-tear from other Puna freeloaders".
Last I checked, all these "privately owned roads (open to the public)" are in Puna, and all these "agricultural" subdivisions got screwed by the same County.
Posts: 1,163
Threads: 32
Joined: Aug 2009
My2, I haven't been to membership meeting in a while so I can't confirm the "40 members" number. But just to be clear, 40 votes doesn't equal 40 members - members who own more then one lot get more than one vote, so association priorities can be swayed by just a handful of owners. As to the question about notification, I can't answer that. But I will point out that when proxy voting was first implemented, the only members informed about proxy voting were those recruited by Board members (many of them who are still on the "official" Board) who were looking to oust other Board members. And finally, to the poster who recommended that members attend Board meetings to express their opinions, note that the Orchidland website states members are only allowed to make comments at the end of a meeting (after business has been conducted). The Board has also been known to go into "Executive Session" to discuss and vote in private.
Posts: 1,085
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2016
KeaauRich, a single member with 6 lots has 6 votes, but he is still just one member, and only counts one towards a quorum. But it's irrelevant how many were there, the point is that they were there. I wasn't notified, you weren't notified (or, as you say, you can't answer the question), and nobody on this forum was notified, or if they were they don't have the integrity to come forward with the truth. So, at this point, I feel comfortable in saying that attendance at this meeting was by special invitation only. Please, someone prove me wrong. Even a logical alternative theory will do.
I totally agree about the underhanded and illegal implementation of proxy voting by the other group. Two years later, and still there is no policy for the procedures. They are making it up as they go. I believe that this one item may have been the most influential in the filing of the lawsuit.
As you can see, I have no love for either side. However, I do recognize the good things that have been done. I wish that people could come to their senses and learn to work together. So much time, energy and resources being wasted.
Posts: 1,085
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2016
Going it alone, while admirable (and precedent-setting), doesn't really address the larger problem evidenced by the attitude of (some) HPP residents: "these are OUR roads that WE paid for, we don't want wear-and-tear from other Puna freeloaders".
Last I checked, all these "privately owned roads (open to the public)" are in Puna, and all these "agricultural" subdivisions got screwed by the same County.
All true. Whether it is done collectively or as "follow the leader", either way will work. The case is relatively easy. The hard part is herding the cats.
|
