Repeating this entry as it left it unclear what my response was to the HOA'S accusations against me.
They said they hoped that the words of me, an UNHAPPY RESIDENT, didn't color any readers' view of the Ruskin Hills Home Owners Association.
If anything should color your view of them it should be my revelation that not only did the misappropriate funds they are accusing me of lying when all I did was reveal/offer proof of the truth. And also that they care nothing about me as a resident, they just care about whether or not their lies and misuse of funds gets exposed.
MY RESPONSE DIRECTLY TO RUSKIN HILLS HOMES ASSOCIATION IN WHICH THEY DENY MISUSING FUNDS.
I am offended at your dishonesty and attempts to malign my name by suggesting that I am being biased and unfair. You might want to look in the mirror to see the real person guilty of what you say that I am.
I can prove you are wrong and that I'm not lying quite easily. There is a record of the truth that exists in the Jackson County Advocate the first of this year. Let me quote for you two of the most salient quotes. It's an article from Ruskin Hills Homes Association.
The first verbatim quote is an explanation of the purpose of the article:
"Many of our residents wonder where their dues money goes and how it is used. After administrative costs, all funds are spent to improve the homes and to better the lives of the residents of our neighborhood."
Here is the second quote. It finally, after much sidestepping (giving examples of things done or provided by the Association all of which were no-cost items) got around to giving the information residents have been asking for:
"We closed the year by providing each of the students at Symington a small sack of goodies when they were dismissed for winter vacation. In addition we adopted 7 homeless students, providing clothing, shoes and toys to each."
I don't provide the entire article because I have to type it in myself and frankly since I'm not the liar here why should I spend my time doing that?
If what I am saying is untrue then provide the article so that we can see that it says the purpose of the disclosure is to reveal what board members PERSONALLY contributed to charities. I know what the article says but for anyone (including you) who wants to know and/or be reminded its public record.
Let's use some logic here. For the most part private individuals who make charitable contributions, if they are sincere, keep their contributions to themselves, otherwise their motivations might appear more aimed for receiving recognition and notariety than to actually be charitable. So logic dictates the purpose of the article I reference was to provide an answer to a question rightfully asked by residents. It casts doubt on your claims that the funds you wrote to residents about were in reference to charitable contributions made by others and not with association dues.
You claim you came here to "correct" the opinion of any readers mislead by my earlier posts here. If so, you have failed unless your purpose was to reveal to anyone reading this that not only is what I said the truth, that funds were misused, but also that you self-servingly present false allegations against me in order to clean up your own image. The truth is you have further destroyed your credibility because I have presented verifiable facts. You on the other hand obviously have no problem making me appear the bad guy.
To address another of your statements, I agree it is true that many HOA's charge more dues than does Ruskin Hills. However they also do a lot more as well.
I have retrieved a copy of the original papers filed with the State of Missouri setting up the association. Here are just a few of the things listed that the Association will take care of:
provide suitable recepticles for trash and rubbish;
impose traffic regulations and safety signs and include a watchman if necessary;
to provide for plowing and removal of snow from SIDEWALKS and STREETS;
to care for, spray, trim and protect and replant trees on all public places where trees had once been planted
plant shrubbery, resew grass in the parks
to mow, care for and maintain vacant property and remove weeds.
Those things are no longer done. Most likely they are the kinds of services provided by the associations with higher fees. So if you are going to point to the lost cost of the fees then its only fair to point out the deficiencies as well.
You reference a flower giveaway - "first come first serve". When they are gone that's it, don't get there early enough - you lose. Obviously you know there will not be enough for everyone otherwise there would be no need to say "come early".
The benefits the residents protested against losing several years ago are the ones we really want, those being an extra trash pickup per week and/or free trashbags. Why not provide the benefits we said we really wanted?
I see other homes associations having neighborhood picnics once a year or providing additional yard waste pickups. I really like that last idea because it is easier to keep up appearances in the neighborhood if we can get rid of branches, etc. which are always coming down during storms as well as other yardwaste. That does something which conforms to the purpose of the HOA.
Now let me say its interesting you never once comment on the problems I commented on, i.e home breakins for example. Not only do you not mention any of the complaints that might make me an "unhappy resident" you obviously could care less about me, one of the residents.
While charity is all well and good, it does not make sense to in essence neglect my own needs while seeing to the needs of others. I'm sorry I'm just not that careless with the limited funds I have. And, as someone else earlier pointed out, it isn't charity if you are taking someone else's funds to give away. I will say that I am a very caring person in actuality and not at all the ogre you would like to paint me to be.
One of my neighbors never mows or cleans their yard at all unless I call the city to complain. You aren't helping me in any way to preserve my property values or provide for my safety and security. You don't even care about those things.
All you are doing is trying to make me look like a liar when you are the person guilty of lying. You should be ashamed of yourself but I doubt you have the character to do so. No doubt you will continue to blame be and never acknowledge the truth.
Some people are like that. When they get into postitions of trust they tend to take advantage, as you've demonstrated.
In closing, I urge anyone wanting to know truth to contact the advocate for the text of the article and the answer will be clear.