Post by Admin on Nov 17, 2017 9:19:05 GMT -7
Administrater's Note: Sally Muto asked us to post this Open Letter to the GLA Board.
Dear Board-members,
Why am I getting the feeling the governance of this Association is being dragged back to the “bad old days?” I have seen over the last 3 years this Corporation come into the professional realm of best and standard business practices, and leaving behind “situational ethics.”
Covenants are finally being applied in all areas equally, favoritism banished but a lot more work is needed to be done, and finally, to some extent, educating board members on what their fiduciary responsibility requirements are. I know there is still ignorance and confusion over what “conflict of interest” is and how it should be handled. Board members need to educate themselves or continue on violating your duty. Do your due diligence and do not leave it up to other Board members and landowners to educate you.
Overall, I thought we were becoming a professional board with open dialogue with landowners and becoming “transparent” and owning up to mistakes, irregularities, sloppy and at times illegal bookkeeping practices, voting practices that were not “secret” and illegal, etc..
And now, by Charlotte’s wanting to allow landowners to be able to vote that are not in good standing (my son included) and change the definition of assessments / interest that has no basis in reality or best business practices, here we go again back to the bad old days. You can’t as a Board start manipulating procedures for the error of one Board-member’s thinking. I heard Newman at the last BOD meeting saying his objections on the draft road policy were not dealt with or incorporated. Where would Newman get the idea that a change should be made on his sole objection when he had plenty of time to submit his objections? You see what I mean?
Landowners have a “right” to ask questions of their “representatives” in “their” Association to which they belong as a member and are invested. Regardless if Charlotte, or any other Board-members, do not like answering questions or give an explanation of their reasons for their vote, to bad. Some other Board-members have also picked up this “bad habit” of thinking they do not have to explain their actions when asked by the landowner(s).
You all are on notice that landowners have a “right” to ask questions and it is YOUR FIDUCIARY DUTY to respond, without denigrating the very people YOU REPRESENT. You as a Board are not above reproach or responsibility. If you do not like this may I suggest resigning or do not run. And saying your a volunteer does not absolve you of your responsibilities. Likewise, landowners need to be respectful, whether or not they think it is deserved, and state facts and questions clearly and responsibly and not use personal attacks, as was a result by the recent court hearing. Charlotte lumping all other audience members, at the hearing, in the same category I find personally offensive and disingenuous in the extreme!
I have also heard that things are being manipulated for the up coming election, if true, when as a governing body will you finally adhere to your own votes in a professional manner and stop with allowing a few dinosaurs of the “old non-professional” board(s) ideas of running a Corporation stop??
I sure hope Charlene has not bought into this shenanigans? And anyone else on the Board? We will see at tonight’s Election Committee meeting.
Best Regards,
Sally Muto, representing Jeffrey Muto
Dear Board-members,
Why am I getting the feeling the governance of this Association is being dragged back to the “bad old days?” I have seen over the last 3 years this Corporation come into the professional realm of best and standard business practices, and leaving behind “situational ethics.”
Covenants are finally being applied in all areas equally, favoritism banished but a lot more work is needed to be done, and finally, to some extent, educating board members on what their fiduciary responsibility requirements are. I know there is still ignorance and confusion over what “conflict of interest” is and how it should be handled. Board members need to educate themselves or continue on violating your duty. Do your due diligence and do not leave it up to other Board members and landowners to educate you.
Overall, I thought we were becoming a professional board with open dialogue with landowners and becoming “transparent” and owning up to mistakes, irregularities, sloppy and at times illegal bookkeeping practices, voting practices that were not “secret” and illegal, etc..
And now, by Charlotte’s wanting to allow landowners to be able to vote that are not in good standing (my son included) and change the definition of assessments / interest that has no basis in reality or best business practices, here we go again back to the bad old days. You can’t as a Board start manipulating procedures for the error of one Board-member’s thinking. I heard Newman at the last BOD meeting saying his objections on the draft road policy were not dealt with or incorporated. Where would Newman get the idea that a change should be made on his sole objection when he had plenty of time to submit his objections? You see what I mean?
Landowners have a “right” to ask questions of their “representatives” in “their” Association to which they belong as a member and are invested. Regardless if Charlotte, or any other Board-members, do not like answering questions or give an explanation of their reasons for their vote, to bad. Some other Board-members have also picked up this “bad habit” of thinking they do not have to explain their actions when asked by the landowner(s).
You all are on notice that landowners have a “right” to ask questions and it is YOUR FIDUCIARY DUTY to respond, without denigrating the very people YOU REPRESENT. You as a Board are not above reproach or responsibility. If you do not like this may I suggest resigning or do not run. And saying your a volunteer does not absolve you of your responsibilities. Likewise, landowners need to be respectful, whether or not they think it is deserved, and state facts and questions clearly and responsibly and not use personal attacks, as was a result by the recent court hearing. Charlotte lumping all other audience members, at the hearing, in the same category I find personally offensive and disingenuous in the extreme!
I have also heard that things are being manipulated for the up coming election, if true, when as a governing body will you finally adhere to your own votes in a professional manner and stop with allowing a few dinosaurs of the “old non-professional” board(s) ideas of running a Corporation stop??
I sure hope Charlene has not bought into this shenanigans? And anyone else on the Board? We will see at tonight’s Election Committee meeting.
Best Regards,
Sally Muto, representing Jeffrey Muto