Posts: 1,265
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
kalakoa wrote:
Maybe someday enough people will demand the services they're paying for.
That's what it'll take to get a different result. Otherwise, keep putting $ down the black hole and nothing will change. The latter shouldn't be our option.
Posts: 175
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2014
When you have cancer, you cut it out and/or destroy it.
Many avenues have been researched and tried. It is wasting valuable time to try anything else because the results may be nothing. The only way anything will/can change is to get rid of the problem.We all know who the cancer is and we all know where it has spread. The board members stick together like a gang.They can not understand the bi-laws and they don't want to either. They try to use the bi-laws to shut us up and intimidate us but they usually use them the wrong way so they make things up to suit their needs and repeat it enough they believe it to be true. I actually feel sorry for their chosen ignorance and wicked ways.
Time to clean the house and remodel.
Posts: 10,218
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
"When you have cancer, you cut it out and/or destroy it."
HPP road maintenance compared to cancer. I didn't realise how low this thread would get, although knew it was always going to end up like this...
Posts: 1,265
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2014
quote:
Originally posted by TomK
"When you have cancer, you cut it out and/or destroy it."
HPP road maintenance compared to cancer. I didn't realise how low this thread would get, although knew it was always going to end up like this...
And you ironically fulfill your role to drive any HPP thread down even lower.
Posts: 143
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2014
Hey Tomk maybe you should read posts more than once before you reply. Katarina was obviously using a metaphor. Here, let me help you out. "A metaphor is a figure of speech that refers, for rhetorical effect, to one thing by mentioning another thing.[1] It may provide clarity or identify hidden similarities between two ideas."
Read her post again, she is referring to the board and her metaphor is spot on! She could also have used the term "blight'because the board is an "infection by a pathogenic organism." In this way, we can use metaphors to accurately describe the ACTIONS of the board; they are certainly a blight on HPP as well as a cancer that needs to be treated.
Posts: 1,247
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2014
"I knew it was going to end up like this". Self Realizing Prophecy?
Me thinks you misunderstood Katerina's post Mr. Tom. Although her description is a bit harsh, IMO, Road Maintenance per se was not being referred to as
Cancer, rather particular people charged with the duty of maintaining the roads were being called out. If you'd been to the latest BOD Meeting you would have seen that certain members of the BOD are intent on maintaining not the roads but their own power over us and our money .
The BOD actually discussed hiring the Lawyer (again, with our money) to threaten individual members who they THINK post here on PW. Guess they believe we're not entitled to express our opinions about an Association who demands ever increasing money from us so they can do ever less Road Maintenance! Pay up and shut up is what they want.
There are some really rotten apples in the barrel... (BOD) If you don't believe it, come to a meeting. I assure you, you will be sickened by what you see and hear.
Posts: 11,018
Threads: 750
Joined: Sep 2012
Hey Tomk... Katarina was obviously using a metaphor.
More hyperbole than metaphor, and possibly hyper-hyperbole at that. Which I think was what prompted TomK's response. I understand Katrina's intent, but found it a little over the top myself.
Merry, Merry, Merry Christmas!
"One may pretend knowledge of philosophy more successfully than that of arithmetic." -Last Aphorisms (or how about, one may pretend knowledge with an opinion more successfully than with facts)
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 143
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2014
Kenny makes a comment about one of the many disturbing things that happened at Wed. evenings board meeting, “certain members of the BOD are intent on maintaining not the roads but their own power over us and our money.” He may have in mind, from what I have learned, 1 agenda item from the board meeting. That is where director Jo Maynard, District 5 (subject of a recall petition) succeeded in her second attempt at passing a board policy which in effect is an addition and a change to the bylaws and amounts to a “save Jo’s arse” policy but is in the real world an obvious conflict of interest. She wanted and got, thanks to her “Jedi” mind control trickery (you remember how that works, low intelligence people are easily manipulated) a policy described on the agenda as “”Unfinished Business: 4. Approve District recall policy – Jo”. As far as I am aware, no one outside of the tight little cabal of directors knows the contents of the language of the policy except for what could be over heard as discussed by the directors during the so called debate of the policy.
Apparently, 1 part of the new illegal (as in violation of bylaws, see Art. VIII Sec. 7. (a),(b) and ©) board policy puts a time limit on the gathering of recall signatures. The bylaws are silent on setting a time limit because first, the members of that district are required to gather a minimum of 200 signatures to start a recall ballot. Once the signatures are gathered the office then mails a ballot to every lot in that district. 200 signatures is a very high and difficult goal to reach. Second, it is none of the boards business how long the signature process takes.
Jo Maynard, District 5 (subject of a recall petition) was heard telling the other directors that “she’s out of here in 6 months any way”, meaning her term is up at the end of June. Really, that’s why she has been working so hard on this “policy” for at least 4 months because she is not running for reelection again? I think it is more probable that Jo Maynard, District 5 (subject of a recall petition) is desperate to be reelected to maintain the chaos she has created over the last 2 and half years. 3 years (the length of her term) just isn't enough time to inflict her carnage.
Here’s another tidbit I learned about this recall policy, the board thinks they can determine and control whether the lot owners in Jo Maynard’s , District 5 (subject of a recall petition) have a legitimate concern or problem with their director. The bylaw for the recall petition does not require a reason for removal, only that the petition MAY contain no more than 200 words in making their “case”. Apparently, only 1 on the board, the new Treasurer, argued that it is none of the boards business why owners in a district want to remove her. Good point.
Unfortunately, none of the other directors understood that since minds lacking any knowledge of the bylaws and possibly common sense, are easily manipulated.
1 director, Randi Larzalere, district 6, argued that the complaints on the petition against Jo Maynard, District 5 (subject of a recall petition) were lies, wrong and already resolved (I’m paraphrasing), and they could get the association into a lawsuit. Wait a minute, wasn’t that board discussion about Jo Maynard, District 5 (subject of a recall petition) and over a new board policy to “save Jo’s arse”? The same Jo Maynard, District 5 (subject of a recall petition) that has already gotten this Association in 1 ongoing lawsuit and a recently ended arbitration case (coincidentally 1 of the issues in that case was Jo’s conflict of interest which the last board in June by an illegal action, ratified)?
Here is the common sense argument that the new Treasurer tried, but failed, to make; neither the board nor the Association has any involvement in the making of any “case” against a director for a recall. They are not liable for the recall actions of members in a particular district. The only way a board could get involved in litigation over a recall is if the board itself, following it’s authority in Art. VIII, had made libelous allegations against a director in their recall effort. But again, the bylaw does not require that a “case” be made in the petition for recall.
Summing up what I know, this policy is nothing more than Jo Maynard and her devilish group of marionettes thwarting the bylaws to maintain control.
BTW, I’m gathering more information about the outrages actions this board just took.
Posts: 175
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2014
Tom.. if you have a rotten spot in an apple but need the apple, you cut the bad out or work around it. What I said seemed obvious. Not low, just truth. I heard the GM wants to spend spend spend on equipment instead of waiting for parts to be made and shipped. I'd rather wait and save $$$$$. My road is so bad whats a few more weeks. You really should read more to get the whole picture. We have 1 bad apple who want to set new policy which then the board will follow instead of the bilaws. Policy never trumps the bilaw but with this board and their ignorance, we can't expect them to do what they should.
Merry Christmas everyone and lets hope the new year is better here in HPP land.
Posts: 175
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2014
So what I am learning is that the board or GM is moving funds around exclusively for chip seal and letting road maintenance go to he_ _. Has any one driven around the park lately? I was delivering some gifts the other day and some roads are almost impassable. The board also spent almost 50 gran on 1 truck for the employees to get around the park. Who OK'd this? When was it discussed at a board meeting and approved? Do any of the board members even care to do anything right? Well that is obvious... NO!. we could have bought a couple trucks and fixed a ton of miles of our roads with what they have wasted. To bad there are not a few board members who have any understanding of the bilaws and would pull on this atrocious GM what they did to our last one and illegally fire him due to (what was the reason again)... thievery I think. I am disgusted and appalled that so many people just shrug their shoulders and pay more for less and less and less.
|
