|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 28, 2016 9:02:54 GMT -7
Finance Committee Meeting - Jan. 27th, 2016 In case you missed the meeting several handouts are attached as PDF files. You may download them as PDF files by clicking on the links below.
If you have any Finance Committee January 27th meeting related documents that you do not see here, please email them to us as a scanned PDF. Our email address is GCF Administrator <glastonburycommunityforum@gmail.com>. We will post them ASAP.
[/font] [/ul][/div] |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 28, 2016 10:11:15 GMT -7
Finance Meeting Commentary The January 27th, 2016 Finance Committee meeting was well attended and lively. Each participant or observer will form their own conclusions and I hope many will share their thoughts here. A few brief points follow from my observations:
- Our financial statements have serious discrepancies that have been dutifully noted by Regina Wunsch over the past 4-5 months. Last night was the first time some of Regina's observations were placed on an agenda. Only a few were addressed and in my opinion none were taken as seriously as they should have been.
- The Treasurer repeatedly apologized for making errors, offered explanations for his errors and continually promised to do better. It was clear to me that he was in deep water and floundering.
- Many audience members offered their expertise and a few politely asked the Treasurer to step down. He adamantly refused and stated that "I serve at the Board's discretion and if they want me to resign then they must ask". It appeared that he had the full support of all Board members present; President Charlotte Mizzi, past president Dan Kehoe, new member Dennis Riley and Secretary Charlene Murphy. None asked for his resignation and a few gave vocal support.
- The Glastonbury Community Forum was once again criticized and the administrator was personally attacked. His Board service and subsequent resignation in 2007 was questioned by the past president who also stated that he felt the Forum was full of diatribes. Charlene Murphy questioned the administrator's personal integrity because he published documents that the GLA Board discussed, displayed and put in binders at the January 11th, Board meeting. No offense was taken by the administrator who has an armor like thick skin. He realizes that messengers are often attacked by those who are held accountable or embarrassed by the message. It is all part of the job as a successful Forum administrator.
- The attitude displayed by the GLA Board members present contrasted sharply with the Board members who hosted a Project Review committee meeting on January 25th, 2016. There the Board Members clearly understood the problems, came up with ways to address the problems and repeatedly assured the audience that "we will make things right". At the Finance Committee meeting the Board Members listened to the audience, politely thanked them for their input and then mostly ignored it. One director was openly hostile to at least one member of the audience and kept interrupting that person when they spoke. One audience member passionately addressed the "Us vs Them" Board attitude and thoughtfully explained that landowners must be seriously listened to.
- I left the meeting with zero confidence that the GLA Board members present would seriously address the critical accounting discrepancies in our financial statements. Regina promised to fix them so the problem will be solved for the moment. But the errors will continue and multiply which eventually will put every landowner at risk when the state and federal authorities address the problems.
- A final thought. To solve a problem you must first define the problem, analyze it thoroughly and then debate solutions. We are blessed with numerous well educated landowners from a wide variety of backgrounds and with vast reserves of collective knowledge. They are passionate about living in Glastonbury and they want to help solve vexing problems. Some members of the Board openly disparage some of these landowners by stating that they are a minority, attacking some personally and often deriding and/or ignoring many, many landowner comments and questions. No Board member has yet been allowed to directly answer any landowner via the Forum. Some GLA Board members sharply criticize gathering places like the Forum where landowners share ideas, discuss community problems and debate solutions. This "us vs. them" attitude does not serve the community nor is it intended to. This corrosive outlook is designed to maintain personal power and deflect and diminish landowner's legitimate questions. It divides the community, creates anger, dissension and apathy amongst landowners and fosters an ever increasing authoritarian stance among power hungry and defiant directors. This attitude is at the root of many Glastonbury community problems. Addressing and solving it will be a giant step towards addressing and solving our road problems, past due assessment issues and accounting discrepancies.
Please post your thoughts below.
|
|
chris
Full Member
Posts: 175
|
Post by chris on Jan 28, 2016 10:57:27 GMT -7
I had planned to attend this meeting but was unable to due to illness. I wanted greatly to be there mainly to provide support for Regina's messages to the board over the past several months, especially as the board has not given her findings proper attention, nor do they value her expert contributions. Instead they circle their wagons, become defensive, verbally attack landowners who do not agree with them, rally the attorneys, and basically continue to show their collective ineptness. Regina holds more knowledge about the GLA finances in her pinky finger than the board does in its entirety. Shameful, but typical board behavior. it is time that the newer board members, and those with the wisdom to see through the smoke and mirrors, stand tall and demand that the board change its ways NOW! You have the support of landowners who have been observing the boards for years and who are fed up with the shenanigans. FACT: Without Regina's many hours of assistance to the Treasurers and boards these past 2-3 years, the GLA finances would be totally inaccurate and likely even be fraudulent. Regina has agreed to assist the Treasurer and the board to fix the current errors in the financials so that the board can meet the deadline of providing the members with the 2016 balanced and accurate budget. Without her assistance, it would not happen and the numbers would not be believable because of the ineptness of the Treasurer, and by default the entire board. Garbage in - garbage out.
The only way we members can be assured that the past financials are accurate, and that there has been no fraudulent activity, is to insist on an audit for the past five years, and an audit each end every year going forward. One board member has exclaimed that this will cost too much money, that the association cannot afford it. I say that the association cannot afford to not do it, that it must be done to expose any discrepancies and correct any "mistakes," and to hold future boards accountable, especially as they have been unwilling to be transparent and to police their own selves and activities.
Thanks, Tim, for your thoughtful and concise summary of last night's meeting. It will be interesting to compare the GLA "Official Minutes" with your and the GLFPC's summary of the meeting. I encourage everyone to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by leokeeler on Jan 30, 2016 20:12:04 GMT -7
I was greatly surprised to hear Dan Kehoe state at the finance meeting "Montana does not have fiduciary laws". I do not know if this is an intentional redirect and attempt to say Directors have no legal responsibilities or a simple attempt to end the subject being discussed.
Fiduciary is not a law, but a commonly accepted definition of a persons responsibilities. The most simple definition is "An individual in whom another has placed the utmost trust and confidence to manage and protect property or money. The relationship wherein one person has an obligation to act for another's benefit.
Dan has referred me to the Montana statutes in the past and I am surprised he did not recall statute 35-2-416, which is a law all Directors should keep in the front of their mind. For nonprofit corporations in Montana the "fiduciary" requirements legally placed on a member of a Board of Directors are found at 35-2-416
They read:
35-2-416. General standards for directors. (1) A director shall discharge the duties as a director, including the director's duties as a member of a committee:
(a) in good faith;
(b) with the care an ordinarily prudent person in a similar position would exercise under similar circumstances; and
(c) in a manner the director reasonably believes to be in the best interests of the corporation.
(2) In discharging the duties, a director is entitled to rely on information, opinions, reports, or statements, including financial statements and other financial data, if prepared or presented by:
(a) one or more officers or employees of the corporation whom the director reasonably believes to be reliable and competent in the matters presented;
(b) attorneys, public accountants, or other persons with regard to matters that the director reasonably believes are within the person's professional or expert competence;
(c) a committee of the board of which the director is not a member, as to matters within its jurisdiction, if the director reasonably believes the committee merits confidence; or
(d) in the case of religious corporations, religious authorities, ministers, priests, rabbis, or other persons whose position or duties in the religious organization the director believes justify reliance and confidence and whom the director believes to be reliable and competent in the matters presented.
(3) A director is not acting in good faith if the director has knowledge concerning the matter in question that makes reliance otherwise permitted by subsection (2) unwarranted.
(4) A director is not liable to the corporation, any member, or any other person for any action taken or not taken as a director if the director acted in compliance with this section.
(5) A director may not be a trustee with respect to the corporation or with respect to any property held or administered by the corporation, including but not limited to property that may be subject to restrictions imposed by the donor or transferor of the property.
(6) This chapter does not modify any limitation of liability of directors provided by Title 27. this the State's legal requirements for conflict of interest at 35-2-418 and a Directors provided by Title 27.
Add conflict of interest statutes at 35-2-418 and you have the basics of fiduciary requirements.
|
|
