Dear Mr. Walter (?)
You wrote ?“so who was supposed to abstain??” The model bylaws for nonprofit organizations (available on the web) used by most nonprofit corporations contain a strict prohibition against transactions that are not ?“arms-length?”.
You wrote: ?“i dont know what you do for a living.?” I work for IBM. I sign a code of conduct that is much stricter than that being proposed.
You wrote ?“the fact is the contractor you choose to denigrate has been outstanding over the years. have you ever written bid specs??” I did not comment on the contractor but on the actions of the board. I have written bid specifications at the UofI, at IBM, and others. Without complete specification, both the vendor and CCHOA are at risk of litigation and legal expenses over disagreements.
You wrote ?“you seem (?… to believe) there are qualified experts in ?… the neighborhood.?” Many homeowners in Circle C have the skills and knowledge to do so. Revising a bid (once it is complete and detailed) takes little time.
You wrote ?“Why dont you get your backside out and run for the position.?” I helped found the Mesa Park Neighborhood association, and was the secretary for eight years. I am not running because there are more qualified persons that have the same goals as I: management that is open and responsive to the homeowners.
You wrote: ?“i think the BOD has worked in the best interest of the HOA using good judgement. ?… and you wont hear that here becuase they could care less about this forum.?” I have heard it here, from you.
You wrote: ?“you imply in your post that hundreds of hours of service ?… should be ignored?…?” I believe that their service should be valued regardless because people that give freely of their time should be given credit for that time. I do believe it is fair to question their judgment.
You wrote: ?“a few very vocal people ?… dominate this board ?… a place where half truths and implications are twtisted into accusations and good people's characters are attacked.?” I am questioning the actions taken by the board. I do not claim to know their motives.
The election process the board proposed for the 2003 annual meeting would have reduced our (yours and mine) voting rights in violation of the bylaws and state statues governing nonprofit corporations. The board was warned that the proposed 2003 election process (reducing your voting rights) violated Texas law, but the board insisted on using it. Mr. Gammon sued them (at his own expense) to protect your voting rights. The result was that the board wasted $100,000.00 or our money defending their illegal intent (they lost of course).
At the continuation of the 2003 meeting (in February 2004) the board strongly recommended defeating a bylaw change related to the number of members required to call a special meeting.
Art. 1396-2.10. Meetings of Members (Texas Non-profit Corporation Act) states that a special meeting can be called ?“by members having not less than one-tenth (1/10) of the votes entitled to be cast at such meeting?”.
Our bylaws conflicted with Texas law. That section of our bylaws could have lead a subsequent board to deny the call for a special meeting supported by 10% of the votes of the membership, putting CCHOA at risk of another lawsuit that it would loose, costing more unnecessary legal expenses, probably including the legal fees of the plaintiffs given that the board knowingly retained a bylaw that conflicted with state law.
Are these examples of good judgment?
You wrote ?“so who was supposed to abstain??” The model bylaws for nonprofit organizations (available on the web) used by most nonprofit corporations contain a strict prohibition against transactions that are not ?“arms-length?”.
You wrote: ?“i dont know what you do for a living.?” I work for IBM. I sign a code of conduct that is much stricter than that being proposed.
You wrote ?“the fact is the contractor you choose to denigrate has been outstanding over the years. have you ever written bid specs??” I did not comment on the contractor but on the actions of the board. I have written bid specifications at the UofI, at IBM, and others. Without complete specification, both the vendor and CCHOA are at risk of litigation and legal expenses over disagreements.
You wrote ?“you seem (?… to believe) there are qualified experts in ?… the neighborhood.?” Many homeowners in Circle C have the skills and knowledge to do so. Revising a bid (once it is complete and detailed) takes little time.
You wrote ?“Why dont you get your backside out and run for the position.?” I helped found the Mesa Park Neighborhood association, and was the secretary for eight years. I am not running because there are more qualified persons that have the same goals as I: management that is open and responsive to the homeowners.
You wrote: ?“i think the BOD has worked in the best interest of the HOA using good judgement. ?… and you wont hear that here becuase they could care less about this forum.?” I have heard it here, from you.
You wrote: ?“you imply in your post that hundreds of hours of service ?… should be ignored?…?” I believe that their service should be valued regardless because people that give freely of their time should be given credit for that time. I do believe it is fair to question their judgment.
You wrote: ?“a few very vocal people ?… dominate this board ?… a place where half truths and implications are twtisted into accusations and good people's characters are attacked.?” I am questioning the actions taken by the board. I do not claim to know their motives.
The election process the board proposed for the 2003 annual meeting would have reduced our (yours and mine) voting rights in violation of the bylaws and state statues governing nonprofit corporations. The board was warned that the proposed 2003 election process (reducing your voting rights) violated Texas law, but the board insisted on using it. Mr. Gammon sued them (at his own expense) to protect your voting rights. The result was that the board wasted $100,000.00 or our money defending their illegal intent (they lost of course).
At the continuation of the 2003 meeting (in February 2004) the board strongly recommended defeating a bylaw change related to the number of members required to call a special meeting.
Art. 1396-2.10. Meetings of Members (Texas Non-profit Corporation Act) states that a special meeting can be called ?“by members having not less than one-tenth (1/10) of the votes entitled to be cast at such meeting?”.
Our bylaws conflicted with Texas law. That section of our bylaws could have lead a subsequent board to deny the call for a special meeting supported by 10% of the votes of the membership, putting CCHOA at risk of another lawsuit that it would loose, costing more unnecessary legal expenses, probably including the legal fees of the plaintiffs given that the board knowingly retained a bylaw that conflicted with state law.
Are these examples of good judgment?
