Misinformation

Lets set the record straight on some of these issues.

This issue is the most unfair.

4) The thought that once a board member of North Shore hears of a possible redevelopment, new construction, addition etc. in North Shore, that Board Member is supose to discloe to North Shore what that Board Member has heard is impossible.

First, many of the board members are working profesionals. They do the North Shore work on a voluntier bases. On our board, we currently have an Attorney and a Realtor. Both of these individuals are true profesionals in their respective fields. Either one of these individuals could have received calls on this possible project. Had they received a call and met with someone at the site and then notified North Shore of the meeting they could have lost their ability to continue to practice law and sell real estate.

If this is a subject that you still find troubling, then I would recomend that you make a motion that prohibits any board member from doing any business on projects or with people that live within the boundrys of North Shore.

I personally would not support such a motion. This would mean that Steve Lange could not be an architect on any project in North Shore. Show me a home that Mr. Lange was the Archetect and I will show you a home that looks better than it did before, a home that is now drastically more valuable and aesthetically more inhancing to our neighborhood.

This would also mean that a very accomplished Realtor could no longer list and sell homes in North Shore and an Attorney could not take a case because someone in North Shore may have a conflict or differing openion.

Please note: Steve Lange is not and was not chosen as the Architect for the Watson's redevelopment. Mr. Lange was not and will not be compensated in any way on this project.

People can CURRENTLY be on our board and work in our neighborhood.

If you do not like that possibility, make the amendment to the by laws motion I mentioned. If enough people agree with you, then the motion will pass and any member of the board will need to decide if they can afford to give up the ability to do business in North Shore or not.

It is not as simple as a disclosure.

For some people, a disclosure of a conversation to the membership will eliminate the conflict and not place that person in violation of loosing their license. However, for others, such as a Realtor or Attorney, the disclosure of the conversation could end their respective careers.

5) I do not know everything that was said by a board member to our former president. What I do know is the comments were from someone AGAINST the redevelopment of the Watson's and the resignation took place within Hours of that conversation. The words were harsh enough to also cause the person that said the ....... unkind words, to apologias and send flowers.

I have never made a comment that was so cruel that after an apology I still needed to send flowers to show my remorse.

I will let all of you decide, if the comments were true, there would be no need for an apology. How mean would any of you need to be in order for you to send flowers after you had verbally apologized for the comments.

What is not a preaty picture is that there ARE FACTIONS within our neighborhood. That was proven by the letter from some of the board members. This is suppose to be a neighborhood association working for the common good of the neighborhood. NOT running off one volunteer president after another just because they do not personally agree with your view of what you believe is in the common good of the neighborhood.

Everyone is intitled to their own openion. The constitution gave us that. If this bothers you, you are in the wrong country.





















You accused Steve Lang of having secret

By dw

Whoa !!!

Nice try. you sound like an attorney.Stop sending up smoke screens and using intimidation and blowing everything out of proportion.

4- there is a very big difference between getting "A call" or having "A conversation" and at least SIX MONTHS of conversations with a developer, people selling properties in the bundle, and city staff

further, these meetings were obviously going to affect many people that the board member had been elected to represent- we're not talking about a remodeling job here

further, the board member should have chosen between playing developer or being president of a neighborhood association. He could have recused himself from speaking about the project instead of being a proponent to this very day- it takes no rocket scientist to figure this out

further, by remaining silent HE DID NOT REPRESENT THE MEMBERS, he made a clear choice to play developer- he could have made a choice then to resign

Further, he then sprung a series of surprises on an unsuspecting board starting with the intro of Nadine Smith at the April board meeting as someone "who wanted to help clean up the neighborhood"----- all the way to the May board meeting when the board walked into a room filled with CVS people (not routine procedure!) and he warmly shook hands with the developer's attorney and knew everyone by name and was an obvious proponent --- whoops!deceived the board as well as the members--- and don't forget the anger at the NDR meeting when the CVS folks blurted out "you were supposed to deliver"

this was NOT the sale of a home or advising a resident as an attorney when there would be no great impact on the neighborhood

Do you really want to go where this is leading? The writing is on the wall and if you are confused as to why the board feels betrayed and the members are livid, you just don't get it.

setting it straight

Let me set you straight on some of these issues:

if you are not privy to the conversation how can you characterize it as "cruel" ?
How can you make the leap from this conversation to it being the cause of the resignation?

you are admittedly speaking from ignorance and, yes, I am sure from reading your letter that you would never be sensitive enough to send flowers no matter what you did because you would not even realize you might have spoken too strongly

in a civilized world people apologize and do nice things when they have erred-
and, guess what? it can be a small error, too

Nope

"If the comments were true then there would be no need for an apology" HELLO!
How can you make such a statement????

I have apologized to friends of mine many times, and yes, even sent flowers, when my tone was wrong, not necessarily my facts

your posting is full of suppositions and holes everywhere

you left it for us to decide- I decide that you are clearly not on the right page (this is not a literal statement, it is a reference to state of mind, just in case you do not understand the saying)