Post by Enough! on Apr 23, 2016 21:36:44 GMT -7
We landowners lost so much of our limited chance to speak at the April 11, 2016, GLA Board meeting. Much valuable time was consumed during President Charlotte Mizzi’s juvenile reaction as audience members protested the board’s reestablishment of opening prayers. Last month, directors had flip-flopped, once again voting to reinstitute the religious act prior to getting down to community business. As her agitation ballooned, Mizzi with cellphone in hand dialed up the Park County Sheriff, which resulted in nothing but a wasteful interruption for both the audience and the sheriff and his deputy. Ever since January 2016 when this president took office, she has habitually mistreated landowners by her various expressions of demeaning behavior. Monthly board meeting attendees have been routinely muzzled by her angry, gavel-pounding disturbances, accompanied by her repeated screeching, “out of order, out of order.” On this Monday night, while awaiting law enforcement, an elderly and ailing attendee requested to have order throughout this business meeting. Mizzi quickly snapped at him, actually telling him to “shut up.” Mizzi’s irritation prevailed when this landowner wanted to continue speaking within his authorized three minutes. At one point, her tension visibly swelled along with the volume of her voice, repeatedly demanding that he leave the meeting. Without warning, former GLA President, Dan Kehoe, joined forces roaring at this gentleman, telling him, in no uncertain terms, that landowner input was over. In the end, Kehoe’s tantrum culminated in sticking out his tongue at this landowner. This meager three minute allowance of input time is another one of Mizzi’s constraints imposed upon landowner attendees as mandated in her unilateral “Meeting Decorum Policy.” Her ill-mannered, intolerant behavior has become the earmark of board meetings and the signature of her presidency.
At the March Board meeting, the president once again bullied landowners. One landowner started to express her opinion during her allotted three minutes of speaking time. Mizzi, not liking what was being said, rudely interrupted the speaker, ratcheted up her voice, argued, and dominated the floor. This landowner remained steadfast, continuing to simply express her thoughts. As the president became enraged, she attempted to silence this attendee by hammering her gavel and threatening expulsion. Meanwhile, this landowner stayed seated and resolute to finish what she had to say. Coming to her support, another in the audience reminded Mizzi that everyone has the Right of Free Speech, as granted by the First Amendment in the Constitution of the United States. Mizzi then stood up, marched to the door, loudly commanding that this attendee leave. The landowner remained seated. Mizzi summoned the newly-appointed sergeant-at-arms, a teenager. He had never before attended a board meeting nor had he been given any instruction about his duties. Suddenly, a former board member quickly intervened, helping subdue the pandemonium. Dan Kehoe urged the president to just ignore the landowner and get on with the meeting. Overall, Mizzi’s behavior reflects her sense of religious entitlement as an anointed minister of C.U.T., despite the fact that she claims that her roles as board president and minister are separate.
Numerous landowners have noticed that this GLA President “wears her minister’s hat” while conducting meetings. Is it any wonder that people are asking the following questions: Is this how ordained ministers of C.U.T. are trained to treat people? Is she performing the sacred duties befitting a ”woman of the cloth”? What sort of reputation is she creating, not only for herself and the Board of Directors who blindly follow her dictates, but also for the many Church-affiliated landowners? For that matter, is this how a minister of the Church represents the organization for which she a mouthpiece? Is her bad behavior also an embarrassment to the local Church headquarters? Does her rudeness and outright abuse of landowners set a positive tone for the monthly board meetings, which must be noted, are held in the vestry of St. John’s Church? Where is her respect for the sanctity of another’s house of worship? Her irreverent behavior as president is clearly conducive to other directors mistreating landowners, along with ignoring their input, meeting after meeting, after meeting. Is this any way to treat one’s constituents? Is this true leadership?
Are these the kind of representatives you want to conduct the business of your community? We are very concerned about the above. There are more issues that are having detrimental consequences. For example, a long-term Road Plan is non-existent. Residents of both North and South Glastonbury have observed that our roads have reached a critical state of deterioration. Do we have the budget to cover such a huge expenditure? We are now paying excessive salaries for an Administrative Assistant and a bookkeeper, the latter of whom is directed by an amateur treasurer unfamiliar with basic accounting practices. Additional issues include the revamping of the governing documents, lawsuits, unending fiscal mismanagement, and massive collections on past due accounts, some of which date back 21 years. Did you know that some on the Finance Committee are hastily insisting on freely giving out generous “amnesty offers,” erasing all interest and penalties on the largest delinquent accounts? All but one of these several dozen landowners, have not even had a phone call. Why are they ignoring their own attorney’s advice to systematically follow standard collection procedures for these delinquent accounts? This treasurer wants “wiggle room” to wheel-and-deal on a case by case basis as he see fit, on many smaller past due accounts. Compounding the matter is the push to slash interest rates by at least 6 percent through a governing document change. Are Montana State Laws that govern the management of corporate funds being strictly adhered to?
Financial reports are continuously erroneous, yet routinely approved by the majority of this board. How can this be legally viable? What degree of financial acumen do some directors actually have? For instance, think of the vast amount of money wasted on the paved road in North Glastonbury over the last few years. No research, no critical analysis, myopic decision-making and extravagant spending by a committee vested with executive powers. The attitude appears to be cavalier, and the deals byzantine. Rather than implement long-range financial planning, the board has historically called for a landowner vote to approve “special assessments” to cover the cost of unbudgeted expenditures, some of which are on the horizon. This puts additional monetary burdens upon the landowners.
What is happening to the overall financial health of our community? Clearly stated, spending continues to escalate on one side of the ledger while, on the other, income is diminishing by means of debt forgiveness and a continuum of imprudent decisions. The percentage rate of landowners who pay assessments has dropped to roughly 69 percent. It is imperative that we understand the widespread monetary repercussions that a select few are prearranging.
We are just seeing the tip of the iceberg.
Are the directors on the board fulfilling their fiduciary responsibilities to landowners? As evidenced, most of the directors on this current board do not have the necessary financial expertise to successfully run the business of this community. More often than not, at every board or committee meeting certain members repeat the following stock response: “We are volunteers and only have so much time to give—we have other jobs.” Regardless, volunteering as a director of this non-profit corporation does not exempt anyone from fiduciary responsibilities or from the law. Dereliction of duty is a real problem.
The difficult question is: Realistically, how can any of this be sustainable?
We need dynamic, conscientious, and responsible landowners on the board who can conduct community business in a professional manner. Landowners deserve to be treated with the utmost respect.
The majority of this board should resign.
At the March Board meeting, the president once again bullied landowners. One landowner started to express her opinion during her allotted three minutes of speaking time. Mizzi, not liking what was being said, rudely interrupted the speaker, ratcheted up her voice, argued, and dominated the floor. This landowner remained steadfast, continuing to simply express her thoughts. As the president became enraged, she attempted to silence this attendee by hammering her gavel and threatening expulsion. Meanwhile, this landowner stayed seated and resolute to finish what she had to say. Coming to her support, another in the audience reminded Mizzi that everyone has the Right of Free Speech, as granted by the First Amendment in the Constitution of the United States. Mizzi then stood up, marched to the door, loudly commanding that this attendee leave. The landowner remained seated. Mizzi summoned the newly-appointed sergeant-at-arms, a teenager. He had never before attended a board meeting nor had he been given any instruction about his duties. Suddenly, a former board member quickly intervened, helping subdue the pandemonium. Dan Kehoe urged the president to just ignore the landowner and get on with the meeting. Overall, Mizzi’s behavior reflects her sense of religious entitlement as an anointed minister of C.U.T., despite the fact that she claims that her roles as board president and minister are separate.
Numerous landowners have noticed that this GLA President “wears her minister’s hat” while conducting meetings. Is it any wonder that people are asking the following questions: Is this how ordained ministers of C.U.T. are trained to treat people? Is she performing the sacred duties befitting a ”woman of the cloth”? What sort of reputation is she creating, not only for herself and the Board of Directors who blindly follow her dictates, but also for the many Church-affiliated landowners? For that matter, is this how a minister of the Church represents the organization for which she a mouthpiece? Is her bad behavior also an embarrassment to the local Church headquarters? Does her rudeness and outright abuse of landowners set a positive tone for the monthly board meetings, which must be noted, are held in the vestry of St. John’s Church? Where is her respect for the sanctity of another’s house of worship? Her irreverent behavior as president is clearly conducive to other directors mistreating landowners, along with ignoring their input, meeting after meeting, after meeting. Is this any way to treat one’s constituents? Is this true leadership?
Are these the kind of representatives you want to conduct the business of your community? We are very concerned about the above. There are more issues that are having detrimental consequences. For example, a long-term Road Plan is non-existent. Residents of both North and South Glastonbury have observed that our roads have reached a critical state of deterioration. Do we have the budget to cover such a huge expenditure? We are now paying excessive salaries for an Administrative Assistant and a bookkeeper, the latter of whom is directed by an amateur treasurer unfamiliar with basic accounting practices. Additional issues include the revamping of the governing documents, lawsuits, unending fiscal mismanagement, and massive collections on past due accounts, some of which date back 21 years. Did you know that some on the Finance Committee are hastily insisting on freely giving out generous “amnesty offers,” erasing all interest and penalties on the largest delinquent accounts? All but one of these several dozen landowners, have not even had a phone call. Why are they ignoring their own attorney’s advice to systematically follow standard collection procedures for these delinquent accounts? This treasurer wants “wiggle room” to wheel-and-deal on a case by case basis as he see fit, on many smaller past due accounts. Compounding the matter is the push to slash interest rates by at least 6 percent through a governing document change. Are Montana State Laws that govern the management of corporate funds being strictly adhered to?
Financial reports are continuously erroneous, yet routinely approved by the majority of this board. How can this be legally viable? What degree of financial acumen do some directors actually have? For instance, think of the vast amount of money wasted on the paved road in North Glastonbury over the last few years. No research, no critical analysis, myopic decision-making and extravagant spending by a committee vested with executive powers. The attitude appears to be cavalier, and the deals byzantine. Rather than implement long-range financial planning, the board has historically called for a landowner vote to approve “special assessments” to cover the cost of unbudgeted expenditures, some of which are on the horizon. This puts additional monetary burdens upon the landowners.
What is happening to the overall financial health of our community? Clearly stated, spending continues to escalate on one side of the ledger while, on the other, income is diminishing by means of debt forgiveness and a continuum of imprudent decisions. The percentage rate of landowners who pay assessments has dropped to roughly 69 percent. It is imperative that we understand the widespread monetary repercussions that a select few are prearranging.
We are just seeing the tip of the iceberg.
Are the directors on the board fulfilling their fiduciary responsibilities to landowners? As evidenced, most of the directors on this current board do not have the necessary financial expertise to successfully run the business of this community. More often than not, at every board or committee meeting certain members repeat the following stock response: “We are volunteers and only have so much time to give—we have other jobs.” Regardless, volunteering as a director of this non-profit corporation does not exempt anyone from fiduciary responsibilities or from the law. Dereliction of duty is a real problem.
The difficult question is: Realistically, how can any of this be sustainable?
We need dynamic, conscientious, and responsible landowners on the board who can conduct community business in a professional manner. Landowners deserve to be treated with the utmost respect.
The majority of this board should resign.
