GLA Board Summary for December 7, 2020
Dec 14, 2020 9:08:17 GMT -7
dorothykeeler and tubman like this
Post by Uncle Ray on Dec 14, 2020 9:08:17 GMT -7
GLA Board Summary for December 7, 2020
Glastonbury Landowners Association (GLA) President Newman Brozovsky convened a virtual board meeting on Monday December 7, 2020 with all ten board members present and an estimated eight landowners on the conference call. Problems with the phone service quality and significant background noise made it difficult to hear the proceedings.
Meeting Highlights
- Landowners will be asked to decide how to move the cancelled November 14, 2020 board election forward, given that the board been deadlocked for two and half months.
- The deadlock began when several directors called the 7-4 board vote at October 1, 2020 Special Board meeting unfair and consulted with the GLA attorney without informing the other directors.
- A motion to remove Secretary Charlotte Mizzi from her role as secretary failed when President Brozovsky ruled that Mizzi did not have a Conflict of Interest and could vote on the motion to remove her as secretary.
- Mizzi failed again in her attempt to get a back log of Minutes dating back to August, 2020 approved by the board. Mizzi insists that multiple edits requested by various directors are not factual.
- The 2020 road costs to date are about $41,000 overbudget.
- The 2020 Legal Costs to date total $24,000. $7000 was budgeted for Legal Expenses.
Landowner Input
President Brozovsky failed in his effort to follow the agenda and delay questions and discussion about the cancelled board election until the end of meeting. Landowners, who were anxious to know why the election had been cancelled, insisted that the cancelled election was the most pressing matter before the board and should be handled first. As a compromise, Brozovsky moved the election report to second place on the agenda.
Project Review
The review of a single-family residence and attached garage on Parcel SG 28D got complicated when Mizzi insisted that she had the right to interpret the covenants and that the board could be flexible in the enforcement official road and driveway width standards. Director Claudette Dirkers stated that standards are ‘black and white’ and are to be enforced as written. Board approval of the project followed the standards.
Election Committee Report
President Brozovsky read select parts of an opinion from the GLA attorney that called for a new election starting with a new nomination process. The attorney reasoned that because the 2019 Election Policy and Procedures do not state that the three ways named in the rules are the only way to submit nomination forms, the 7 to 4 board decision that dismissed four nomination forms for not following the rules was unfair, and thus there is need to start a new election process.
Note: Prior to the adoption of the 2019 Election Policy and procedures, board candidates were allowed to hand-deliver their nomination forms to individual directors or the paid Administrator. The unanimously approved 2019 Election Policy and Procedures require that the forms are to be sent to the entire board by a 5 pm deadline via three distinct methods: email, postal mail or FAX.
Four nomination forms were dismissed either because they were submitted to individual directors or the Administrator and/or because the four non-landowner nominees submitted nomination forms before they filed their Legal Representative forms with the board.
Each of the disqualified candidates are non-GLA landowers who had been recruited to run for the board by President Brozovsky and Secretary Mizzi.
Four nomination forms were dismissed either because they were submitted to individual directors or the Administrator and/or because the four non-landowner nominees submitted nomination forms before they filed their Legal Representative forms with the board.
Each of the disqualified candidates are non-GLA landowers who had been recruited to run for the board by President Brozovsky and Secretary Mizzi.
It soon became apparent that five Directors were ‘in the know’ about Brozovsky’s maneuver to seek legal advice on how to reinstate the dismissed board nominees and five were not. Those allegedly in the know’ were Mizzi, Aija-Mara Accatino, Gerald Dubiel and Ed Dobrowski. The five directors who were ‘in the dark” were Vice-President and Treasurer John McAlister, Claudette Dirkers, Jerry Ladewig, Andrea Sedlak and Tim Brockett.
Note: President Brozovsky was unanimously censured in September 2020 for repeatedly seeking legal advice and spending corporate funds throughout the year without the knowledge and approval of the entire board. The GLA Bylaws require that the board to act as a whole in all matters.
Before any significant discussion got started on the attorney’s opinion, Mizzi moved that the board follow the legal advice and call for a whole new board election. Her motion failed with a 5-5 vote. Those who knew that the GLA attorney had been consulted supported the motion. The others did not.
Mizzi’s next immediate motion to hold a new election process using a ballot that would name both the original and the disqualified nominee names failed 5-5 showing the same board division.
Mizzi’s third motion to continue the original election without any clarification about the GLC letter, also failed with the same deadlock. Mizzi stated resolutely there was no need to clarify that a letter from an ‘anonymous’ Glastonbury Landowner Committee (GLC) to members was not an official GLA notice.
Mizzi’s next immediate motion to hold a new election process using a ballot that would name both the original and the disqualified nominee names failed 5-5 showing the same board division.
Mizzi’s third motion to continue the original election without any clarification about the GLC letter, also failed with the same deadlock. Mizzi stated resolutely there was no need to clarify that a letter from an ‘anonymous’ Glastonbury Landowner Committee (GLC) to members was not an official GLA notice.
Note: Many thought that when they saw the words Glastonbury Landowners Committee on the return address that the GLA had formed a new committee.
The GLC fraudulent letter showed images of the original ballots for North and South Glastonbury with a total of five official candidate names crossed out and the names of four declined nominees written in on the right side of the ballot. The letter also stated that the names of official candidates had been removed from the ballots and would be replaced with the names written in on the right side of the ballots.
Like Mizzi, Brozovsky has repeatedly insisted that the GLC letter is a harmless campaign letter and does not need any board attention or clarification.
Mizzi also defended her position that the board does not need to clarify anything about the GLC letter because the board had not heard from any landowners who were confused by it.
Dirkers quickly stated that she knew personally of as many as 30 landowners who were confused about who were the official board candidate after receiving the GLC letter.
A landowner reported that she had personally talked to at least 18 landowners who found the GLC letter confusing and then reminded the board that she had previously emailed notice of her concerns about the fraudulent letter to the entire board. Director Brockett also emailed the GLA Board with urgent landowner concerns on October 27th, 2020.
Throughout the heated election discussion, speakers were routinely interrupted and bullied by Mizzi and Dobrowski. It was not uncommon to hear three or four individuals speaking at the same time telling each other to shut up. One landowner even asked another if he had gonads several times. Director Dubiel stated that he was tired of all the crap talk and how landowners view the board as a ‘bunch of assholes’.
The breakdown in civil debate calmed a bit when Dirkers urged President Brozovsky to bring the meeting back to order.
Like Mizzi, Brozovsky has repeatedly insisted that the GLC letter is a harmless campaign letter and does not need any board attention or clarification.
Mizzi also defended her position that the board does not need to clarify anything about the GLC letter because the board had not heard from any landowners who were confused by it.
Dirkers quickly stated that she knew personally of as many as 30 landowners who were confused about who were the official board candidate after receiving the GLC letter.
A landowner reported that she had personally talked to at least 18 landowners who found the GLC letter confusing and then reminded the board that she had previously emailed notice of her concerns about the fraudulent letter to the entire board. Director Brockett also emailed the GLA Board with urgent landowner concerns on October 27th, 2020.
Throughout the heated election discussion, speakers were routinely interrupted and bullied by Mizzi and Dobrowski. It was not uncommon to hear three or four individuals speaking at the same time telling each other to shut up. One landowner even asked another if he had gonads several times. Director Dubiel stated that he was tired of all the crap talk and how landowners view the board as a ‘bunch of assholes’.
The breakdown in civil debate calmed a bit when Dirkers urged President Brozovsky to bring the meeting back to order.
To answer the specific question of why the election was cancelled, Mizzi said that the delay was because of all the personal name calling. When asked directly if she had written the GLC letter, Mizzi claimed that she had not.
Ladewig stated the 2019 Election Procedures were used properly to review the nomination forms and that eight forms were compliant and four were not. Ladewig also reminded her fellow directors of their duty to give singular loyalty to GLA and not other institutions or personal agendas.
Ladewig stated the 2019 Election Procedures were used properly to review the nomination forms and that eight forms were compliant and four were not. Ladewig also reminded her fellow directors of their duty to give singular loyalty to GLA and not other institutions or personal agendas.
Note: Ladewig resigned her position Election Committee Chair stating that she could not support and work for an election which she believes was corrupted by five Directors who openly favored the declined nominees.
The deadlock got resolved when the board agreed (6-2) that the landowners should decide how to proceed with the election. A cover letter, to be drafted by Mizzi and approved by the board, will be sent to the members outlining the three ways to move the cancelled election forward. Mizzi said the letter would be ready in seven days.
The ‘no’ votes on Sedlak’s motion to let the landowners decide, which was seconded by Mizzi, were cast by Dirkers and Brockett.
Note: This writer learned after the meeting, that Dirkers believes that it is the board’s responsibility to resolve the election conflicts and further that many landowners would not have enough information to cast meaningful votes.
President’s Report - None
Secretary’s Report Report - None
Treasurer’s Report
After reminding the board that they had already received the end of the month financials, John McAlister said he wanted to give a ‘heads up’ notice about what he called “very significant” 2020 budget overruns for road maintenance and legal expenses. Specifically, the road expenses are about $41,000 over budget to date and legal costs total $24,400 to date. The 2020 GLA budget allocated $7,000 for legal expenses.
When Dobrowski repeatedly interrupted McAlister and demanded to know how the road costs got so far over budget, McAllister asked Dobrowski to “just be quiet and listen”. McAlister then explained that the GLA Road Contractor Chad Standish does not bill GLA for roadwork in a timely fashion and when bills come in over budget for work that is already done, the question is ‘Oh, are we over budget?, and then the issue is how can we not pay for work that is already done?
McAllister reported that the Administration costs are on budget and the Project Review revenue is close to $4,500. He also explained that the $4,500 figure does not include project impact or bond fees which are held in a separate account.
After hearing Mizzi state that past Project Review revenues were a wash-out after the Administrator’s time was paid for, McAlister stated, with obvious decorum, that Mizzi’s statements were just not true and that he had already explained these details to her with an email.
McAlister also announced that he is holding $8,800 in uncashed checks relating to Project Review applications.
When Dobrowski repeatedly interrupted McAlister and demanded to know how the road costs got so far over budget, McAllister asked Dobrowski to “just be quiet and listen”. McAlister then explained that the GLA Road Contractor Chad Standish does not bill GLA for roadwork in a timely fashion and when bills come in over budget for work that is already done, the question is ‘Oh, are we over budget?, and then the issue is how can we not pay for work that is already done?
McAllister reported that the Administration costs are on budget and the Project Review revenue is close to $4,500. He also explained that the $4,500 figure does not include project impact or bond fees which are held in a separate account.
After hearing Mizzi state that past Project Review revenues were a wash-out after the Administrator’s time was paid for, McAlister stated, with obvious decorum, that Mizzi’s statements were just not true and that he had already explained these details to her with an email.
McAlister also announced that he is holding $8,800 in uncashed checks relating to Project Review applications.
Note: McAlister has inherited this folder of uncashed checks from the GLA Administrator files after Karleen McSherry who resigned two months ago. He has since called for a Project Review Committee meeting to check the status of the projects.
When Mizzi asked for a list of the checks and the related project applications, McAllister explained that he had already sent her and the entire board a detailed spread sheet on the matter some three weeks ago. “I did not get it”, Mizzi said. McAllister then reminded Mizzi that she had previously stated she would check into things on the spread sheet. He noted that of the substantial checks are from 2019 and likely too old to be cashed.
To answer Mizzi’s repeated questions of where McAllister got his numbers, he stated that he got them from the financials. When Mizzi told McAllister that he should be using the more accurate numbers from the accounting firm, McAlister calmly replied that the accountants’ figures are only as accurate as the numbers given to them.
McAlister next asked for an update from the Legal Committee on the collection of delinquent assessments. Legal Committee Chair Brozovsky explained that he had no time to call a Legal Committee meeting and that there is nothing new to report. Ladewig’s motion to schedule a Legal Committee meeting failed for lack of a second amidst the disjointed exchanges.
McAlister ended his financial report by reminding the board that the draft 2021 GLA budget is ready and that the board will need to replenish the Road Reserve Funds because of the 2020 road budget overruns.
On a related matter, Dirkers asked if the above report would be posted on the GLA website. McAllister answered that he has provided Mizzi with web-site ready financials for each of the three months he has been treasurer. Mizzi defended and said she was waiting for the board to approve the December financials before directing Webmaster Brockett to post them. When Dirkers pointed out it has been 15 months since the last financial report was posted, Mizzi seemed flummoxed.
To answer Mizzi’s repeated questions of where McAllister got his numbers, he stated that he got them from the financials. When Mizzi told McAllister that he should be using the more accurate numbers from the accounting firm, McAlister calmly replied that the accountants’ figures are only as accurate as the numbers given to them.
McAlister next asked for an update from the Legal Committee on the collection of delinquent assessments. Legal Committee Chair Brozovsky explained that he had no time to call a Legal Committee meeting and that there is nothing new to report. Ladewig’s motion to schedule a Legal Committee meeting failed for lack of a second amidst the disjointed exchanges.
McAlister ended his financial report by reminding the board that the draft 2021 GLA budget is ready and that the board will need to replenish the Road Reserve Funds because of the 2020 road budget overruns.
On a related matter, Dirkers asked if the above report would be posted on the GLA website. McAllister answered that he has provided Mizzi with web-site ready financials for each of the three months he has been treasurer. Mizzi defended and said she was waiting for the board to approve the December financials before directing Webmaster Brockett to post them. When Dirkers pointed out it has been 15 months since the last financial report was posted, Mizzi seemed flummoxed.
Conduct Unbecoming - a non-agenda item
Brockett began his remarks by reminding the board of when, in the past, it attempted to censure a director for posting a personal opinion on the private board email system about one director allegedly having dementia and another showing early signs of dementia. “Yet what happened tonight in terms of obscenities, is far more egregious”, stated Brockett.
Brockett then reminded the board that the Bylaws allow the board to remove an officer at any time and without cause. Brockett’s motion, seconded by Ladewig, to remove Mizzi from her office as secretary failed 5-5. Heated statements that Mizzi had a conflict of interest and should not be allowed to vote on her own removal as secretary followed.
Ladewig spoke specifically of how Mizzi always dominates everything and thinks of herself as the Queen. President Brozovsky quickly dismissed the above comments and ruled that because the Bylaws read that a majority vote of the entire board is needed to remove an officer, Mizzi was correct in voting on the motion to remove herself as secretary. Several directors insisted that because Brozovsky had not voted on his censure. Mizzi should not be allowed to vote on the motion to remove her as secretary.
Those who voted to remove Mizzi as secretary were Brockett, Ladewig, Sedlak, Dirkers and McAllister. The opposing votes were cast by Brozovski, Mizzi, Dubiel, Accatino and Dobrowsky.
Brockett then reminded the board that the Bylaws allow the board to remove an officer at any time and without cause. Brockett’s motion, seconded by Ladewig, to remove Mizzi from her office as secretary failed 5-5. Heated statements that Mizzi had a conflict of interest and should not be allowed to vote on her own removal as secretary followed.
Ladewig spoke specifically of how Mizzi always dominates everything and thinks of herself as the Queen. President Brozovsky quickly dismissed the above comments and ruled that because the Bylaws read that a majority vote of the entire board is needed to remove an officer, Mizzi was correct in voting on the motion to remove herself as secretary. Several directors insisted that because Brozovsky had not voted on his censure. Mizzi should not be allowed to vote on the motion to remove her as secretary.
Those who voted to remove Mizzi as secretary were Brockett, Ladewig, Sedlak, Dirkers and McAllister. The opposing votes were cast by Brozovski, Mizzi, Dubiel, Accatino and Dobrowsky.
Road Committee Report
Road Committee member Dirkers gave an abbreviated report after being asked by Road Committee Chairman John Carp shortly before the meeting began.
Note: Carp, who is not a landowner and not a board member, told Dirkers that he needed to attend a different board meeting instead.
Speaking for Carp, Dirkers asked for board approval for an outstanding snow removal invoice of about $1,000 in North Glastonbury (NG) and another invoice for about $11,000 for grading and applying Mag Chloride to three hills in NG. She also reported that Carp said the board should expect about to pay about $20,000 for fall road work in South Glastonbury (SG) and that there was another outstanding invoice of about $6,000 for sand.
McAllister called the pending $6,000 sand invoice ‘way out of line’ based on the five year history of sanding expense history. Dirkers called the sanding invoice outrageous and stated “that she had never seen anything like this in the history of GLA”.
By consensus, the board put all road money requests on hold until Carp could attend a meeting and explain the details.
A discussion of the recently edited and updated Sanding and Snowplowing Contract with Standish, was also placed on hold, when it became obvious that Carp had sent the wrong contract to the board for review.
McAllister called the pending $6,000 sand invoice ‘way out of line’ based on the five year history of sanding expense history. Dirkers called the sanding invoice outrageous and stated “that she had never seen anything like this in the history of GLA”.
By consensus, the board put all road money requests on hold until Carp could attend a meeting and explain the details.
A discussion of the recently edited and updated Sanding and Snowplowing Contract with Standish, was also placed on hold, when it became obvious that Carp had sent the wrong contract to the board for review.
Complaint Committee Report - None
Approve Minutes
Mizzi failed to get approval for a backlog of board meeting minutes dating to August 10, 2020. The minutes, as presented by Mizzi for approval, showed that Mizzi had failed to edit and/or correct mistakes as requested at previous board meetings. Mizzi insisted that some of the edits, which she had not used, were not factual. She then asked the directors to resubmit their edits and said she would review them again. Dirkers reminded Mizzi that because the minutes are official legal corporate records and official history, they must be accurate.
Adjournment
President Brozovsky adjourned the meeting at 9:42 PM.
Meeting Documents
