To ''Facts''

I cannot believe the personal vendetta that is being played out against Steve, or that there a good folks like yourself who just don't seem to get it, and place the blame on the person who was victimized. I'll try to spell out some of the facts for you.

Here is a summary of facts: (1) members of the board went to the court house to investigate Steve and dug up what - a post card that spoke Steve's opinion; (2) an inquisition was held, Steve explained his actions and no fault was found; (3) about 30 residents decided that Steve's opinion was in conflict with their opinion and was therefore contrary to the neighborhood's opinion; (3) the board took it upon themselves (by a one vote majority) to oust Steve based upon the opinions of these 30 folks who disagreed with him; and (4) since the courthouse visit and inquisition showed nothing they could nail Steve on, they chose to oust him for ''no reason.'' Sounds like a personal vendetta to me.

Are we going to operate as a neighborhood that can throw out a president for ?“no cause?” or because his/her opinions differ from the opinions of 30 residents? I am all for anarchy and that is all right with me. Is it all right with you?

It seems to me that in a neighborhood organization, if the board has issue with what the president ?– or any board member has done ?– they can pick up their phone and call them about it. In our organization, we are handling things in a more litigious fashion. We send investigative forces out, we send letters at night, we have inquisitions, and we toss out people for ''no cause.'' Whose model of a neighborhood association is this?

At the same time we have ?“pool parties?” and act like we are neighborhood.

Now, ''Facts'' you (and others) continue to miss the point that the CVS deal was not a done-deal when Steve was ousted. At the hearing (while Steve was still president), CVS was ordered to work with the neighborhood. Everything that happened since would have happened if Steve had remained as president or not. Somehow you (and others) have bought into this vision that if Steve had stayed in, the CVS store would have been a big monster. It wouldn't have! CVS would have still had to work with the neigborhood.

So, ''Facts'' don't be a fool. Ask what was accomplished by ousting Steve? Who benefited? Follow the power - find the trail. See who won - that will tell you what was done and why.

standing firm on facts

1- no one went to a courthouse to dig up a postcard
- the postcard was not found by anyone searching for it specifically
- the postcard was not found by a member or members of the board
2- no inquisition was held- Steve was asked about involvement with the proposed development dating back to Dec. '99 and he explained his actions and admitted that in hindsight he might have done things differently for the sake of appearances
3- 31 members were very upset at Steve's conduct at the June membership meeting
3- (again)- the board carried out its duty as per the by-laws (they had no other choice) and after much discussion (observed by the press) decided that Steve should not remain president
4- he was removed from office ''without cause'' which is a legal term which does NOT mean ''for no reason''
-''litigious fashion''- Steve is the one who reacted with an attorney
- no ''investigative forces'' were ''sent out''
- Steve was not removed from office because of CVS, it was his behavior
- no one can say if the CVS project would have been adjusted the same
if Steve had remained president- maybe, probably not
- no one won

By facts

To: By Facts

Your head is in the sand.

What has transpired over the last four months has just been spelled out to you, quite nicely I might add, in the previous posting and you still lie to cover your interpretation. Greg has already admitted that he went to city hall based on evidence reportedly shown to him by two of his closest allies which I have previously posted and no one has denied it. They probably will now. But the facts remain the same. Greg and his gang have usurped all that was decent about the way things have always been done in North Shore.

For those of you who are interested, did you know that Greg Burton, our illustrious leader is running North Shore based on State Statues. Yep, he used another one on me tonight. So much for our by laws.

And it is sad. They don't write a damn thing in our newsletter for two months and throw themselves a party. Fifty seven people came. Sounds like the thirty one people who voted against me and their families. So who said the Stop CVS crowd isn't spending North Shore money on themselves. I sure do not want to party with them that is for sure.

By Steven D. Lange

to Steve

There you go throwing around innuendos about Greg and the his Board, making it sound like they did something wrong by using state statutes. What did they do? What was wrong with it? Huh? To convince me that there was something amiss with their actions I need some facts. Where are they?

By Suspicious