Excuse me if I ramble a little but I've never been sold out for a wall before.
When we had our first big meeting on this issue, we were told by our president of the homeowners association that she wanted to try and get a better lease. We deserved better because people in other areas were getting more. Which sounded good, especially when at one point in the meeting she declared ''share and share alike''. Remember that the original offer had provisions for the people with only half their mineral rights - they were going to get a full signing bonus but only half of the royalties on production.
Thirty-five people signed up to be on this lease committee so I thought everything would be handled in an efficient and fair manner. Instead I got another life lesson - never trust people to do the right thing.
The committe dropped down to 13 people but there was never a call for more volunteers. Of those 13 people 12 were outside the area where there was only 50% mineral rights. There DEFINITELY should have been a call for more volunteers who live in the affected area.
According to the information I gathered at the meeting, the lease committee wound up with three options on the signing bonus. First, accept 10,000 per acre for those with full mineral rights and half that for those with half their mineral rights AND get a wall. Second, accept 8,000 per acre for EVERYONE whether or not they had full mineral rights or not AND get a wall. Or third, accept 10,000 per acre for EVERYONE whether or not they had full mineral rights AND NOT get a wall. Needless to say, the 12 voted for their best interests and the 13th (the person that SHOULD have represented those in his area) voted along with the crowd. So much for ''share and share alike''. Shouldn't such a radical change to the original deal have been at least MENTIONED on the website so folks could have known something about it. Heck when someone ASKED about it on the website before the signing date, nobody answered.
And speaking of only having half our mineral rights, the representative of the gas company TOLD me that the reason that they didn't know whether or not a house was in the zone was because the home owners association insisted on a quick date for the big meeting and the gas company did not have time to research the mineral rights. That's why everyone had that big $1000+ or so total on their paperwork. But a lot of folks are going to get a SUPRISE when they only get HALF that (or even less).
Who REALLY wants a wall besides a select few? Who does it benefit? Thousands of families have lived here over the years, was there a wall here THEN that I didn't notice? The lack of a wall didn't stop YOU from moving here, did it?
Speaking of the wall, its going to cost about $450,000 (the number I was given on Sat). That is about $300 per person. Wouldn't you rather have that $300 to spend on your own needs and wants than to have a wall around the neighborhood? Or what about using that money to get us some play equipment in the park? That would benefit FAR more people than a silly wall. In fact, wouldn't a nice park BENEFIT the neighborhood more than the wall? Wouldn't that be a selling feature to get people to move here? I know that in MY mind that would attract families here.
By Betrayed
When we had our first big meeting on this issue, we were told by our president of the homeowners association that she wanted to try and get a better lease. We deserved better because people in other areas were getting more. Which sounded good, especially when at one point in the meeting she declared ''share and share alike''. Remember that the original offer had provisions for the people with only half their mineral rights - they were going to get a full signing bonus but only half of the royalties on production.
Thirty-five people signed up to be on this lease committee so I thought everything would be handled in an efficient and fair manner. Instead I got another life lesson - never trust people to do the right thing.
The committe dropped down to 13 people but there was never a call for more volunteers. Of those 13 people 12 were outside the area where there was only 50% mineral rights. There DEFINITELY should have been a call for more volunteers who live in the affected area.
According to the information I gathered at the meeting, the lease committee wound up with three options on the signing bonus. First, accept 10,000 per acre for those with full mineral rights and half that for those with half their mineral rights AND get a wall. Second, accept 8,000 per acre for EVERYONE whether or not they had full mineral rights or not AND get a wall. Or third, accept 10,000 per acre for EVERYONE whether or not they had full mineral rights AND NOT get a wall. Needless to say, the 12 voted for their best interests and the 13th (the person that SHOULD have represented those in his area) voted along with the crowd. So much for ''share and share alike''. Shouldn't such a radical change to the original deal have been at least MENTIONED on the website so folks could have known something about it. Heck when someone ASKED about it on the website before the signing date, nobody answered.
And speaking of only having half our mineral rights, the representative of the gas company TOLD me that the reason that they didn't know whether or not a house was in the zone was because the home owners association insisted on a quick date for the big meeting and the gas company did not have time to research the mineral rights. That's why everyone had that big $1000+ or so total on their paperwork. But a lot of folks are going to get a SUPRISE when they only get HALF that (or even less).
Who REALLY wants a wall besides a select few? Who does it benefit? Thousands of families have lived here over the years, was there a wall here THEN that I didn't notice? The lack of a wall didn't stop YOU from moving here, did it?
Speaking of the wall, its going to cost about $450,000 (the number I was given on Sat). That is about $300 per person. Wouldn't you rather have that $300 to spend on your own needs and wants than to have a wall around the neighborhood? Or what about using that money to get us some play equipment in the park? That would benefit FAR more people than a silly wall. In fact, wouldn't a nice park BENEFIT the neighborhood more than the wall? Wouldn't that be a selling feature to get people to move here? I know that in MY mind that would attract families here.
By Betrayed
