12/01/21 BOD MEETING: SYNOPSIS AND COMMENTARY BY VICKI ROBERTS WITH ASSISTANCE FROM ARTHUR ANDELSON
Posted December 4, 2021. Your Editor provides the following synopsis of the December 1, 2021 Board meeting, with assistance from your Roving Reporter, and with commentary and satire indicated in bold blue and pictures.
SPECIAL NOTICE:
All synopses and commentary are the property of your Editor and your Roving Reporter, Vicki Roberts and Arthur Andelson, are our independent work product, and are not affiliated with the HOA. Redistribution or republication of cartoons is strictly prohibited and may subject you to legal liability for copyright infringement. Bizarro cartoons are courtesy of Dan Piraro, www.Bizarro.com.
Thank you, and you may now enjoy the show.
Editor’s Opening Monologue:
This edition is entitled:
“Secretariat and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse”
(including explosive information concerning the Office of Secretary, inter-Board nasty politics, Misogyny on the Board, the decision on the vacant Board seat, and other juicy stuff! It also includes an important PICKLEBALL COMPROMISE presented by your Editor under New Business, Item #2.)
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse:
|
Definition per Dictionary.com: four allegorical mounted figures, commonly identified as Pestilence (or Conquest), War, Famine, and Death, whose arrival heralds the end of the world, as described in the biblical book of Revelation. Usage: used to refer to people or phenomena seen as agents of imminent catastrophe.
Secretariat:
|
Secretariat (1970 – October 4, 1989) is widely regarded as one of the greatest racehorses of all time. Also known as Big Red, Secretariat was a champion American Thoroughbred racehorse who is the ninth winner of the American Triple Crown, setting and still holding the fastest time record in all three races. In the List of the Top 100 U.S. Racehorses of the 20th Century, Secretariat is second only to Man o' War.
According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the derivation of the word “secretariat” is “office of secretary.” Likewise, a “secretary” is a “person entrusted with secrets.”
|
With the resignation of former Board member Alan Silver, there became vacancies in the office of Secretary as well as one Directorship.
Regarding the Directorship, your Editor sent an email to the Board requesting that they not fill the seat and to instead allow the residents to fill the seat at the next election, which is only several months away.
We felt this was the fair thing to do, because appointing someone creates an incumbency and gives that person an unfair advantage over others who may wish to run for the Board. We wanted to have the residents decide whom they wanted to represent them, as opposed to the Board appointing someone.
There is still a quorum, and the majority amount does not change: four votes are still needed with six Board members, just as it was four with seven Board members.
As you will see below, the Board voted to leave the seat vacant. This required a slight tweaking of the By-Laws, and a Section J to Section V (page 3-6) was agreed upon to effectuate that requirement. Therefore, the seventh seat shall remain open until you, the residents, choose whom you want to represent you at election time in March 2022. This is a victory for you.
|
The Office of Secretary does not have to be occupied by a Board member. Any member is eligible to serve in that capacity. Your Editor offered to take up the task on condition that the Board not fill the vacant Director’s seat. We wanted the residents to vote for the seat at the next election cycle which is only four months away.
Your Editor sent a confirming email to the entire Board on November 19, 2021 of this conditional acceptance of the position of HOA Secretary, that is to say, that your Editor would consent to the appointment on condition that the Board not fill the vacant Board seat and allow, instead, the residents to choose that position in March 2022. Here is the text of what your Editor sent to all Board members on this subject:
“Here’s what I think is fair to the residents: The elections are only four months away. If you appoint someone to the board, that person has an unfair advantage as an incumbent. That seat should remain empty. If you are agreeable to that, to not filling that seat, then I am agreeable to being the secretary which is not a board position. You still need the same number of people for a majority vote, four, so nothing changes. I just want fairness for everybody and for everybody to have an equal chance at the March elections, whoever is running...”
It would require a simple tweak of the By-Laws; Director Sue and your Editor along with your Roving Reporter worked on the language.
Therefore, Sue and Linda recommended your Editor for the position of HOA Secretary to the rest of the Board, and everyone seemed fine with that recommendation. There was a “gentleman’s agreement” among the entire Board that your Editor would be nominated for appointment at the next Board meeting.
At that point, it appeared that the matter was settled. Or was it?
|
On Wednesday, November 24, 2021, your Editor suddenly out of nowhere received an email from Jeff Green, Director (who also currently occupies the office of president), which stated, in pertinent part:
“I want to thank you for your offer to take the minutes, however Bob Dingee has asked to take on the responsibility…”
Now let’s parse this outrageous email.
1. First, this email was sent without authority. Jeff has no right to unilaterally send an email to a resident without the advice and consent of all Board members and he would never get that, because there was no open Board meeting where a vote was taken that would legitimize such an email.
2. Second, your Editor did not “offer to take the minutes.” The offer was to take on the responsibility of HOA Secretary, of which taking the minutes is but one of a number of responsibilities: see HOA By-Laws, pages 3-2 (Section III, Subsection C) and 3-10, (Section VIII, Subsection G, subsection 3).
3. Third, if Bob Dingee “asked to take on that responsibility,” that does not automatically mean that your Editor’s offer or impending nomination is dead; that’s not how it works. Anyone can ask for anything; that request doesn’t vitiate another member’s offer and in fact, the request and the offer don’t match: the request by Bob was to take the minutes; the offer from your Editor was to be the HOA Secretary.
4. Fourth, offering to take the minutes is not the same as desiring to be the Secretary. A resident’s offer to take the Minutes (in this case, Bob Dingee’s offer) is of no force and effect because only the Secretary can take official Minutes of Board meetings.
So, if Bob Dingee wants to take the minutes, he like any other resident may do so, but those minutes can never be the official Minutes of the HOA and can never be approved by the Board, since only the Secretary is authorized to create official HOA Minutes.
In any event, this email from Jeff to your Editor was quite odd, because the actual appointment of officers must take place at an open Board meeting after nominations are duly made. This email from Jeff was also not cc’ed to any other Board member. And yet, in this email, Jeff is definitively indicating to your Editor that she is no longer under consideration because Director Bob Dingee according to Jeff is going to take “the minutes.”
This email was sent without the knowledge of at least two Board members, Sue and Linda, thus ambushing them. How rude and despicable. In addition, Jeff had absolutely no authority to do this. This is exactly the kind of back-alley machinations that are strictly forbidden by Florida statute and the HOA’s By-Laws.
|
There is a nomination process for a purpose; it is done at an open Board meeting for a purpose. During the meeting, if there is more than one nomination, a discussion can be had, and then after careful contemplation a vote is to be taken.
Telling a resident in advance of said Board meeting and without the knowledge of other Board members “Thanks, but no thanks” as a fait accompli, is wrong, plain and simple. Needless to say, there were certain individuals who were rightly incensed when word of this outrageous maneuver got out, and we’re talking about the two women on the Board, Sue and Linda.
In addition, it appeared that while Bob Dingee was suddenly going to be taking the minutes, he was not in fact going to be the official Secretary, since that office requires a lot more than just taking Board minutes and Jeff’s email made no mention of the office of Secretary.
Unofficial minutes taken by a resident, regardless of their Directorship status, are just that: unofficial. That is contrary to the By-Laws and forbidden, and any such minutes are, by definition, not official. Such minutes prepared by a resident are no more official than the synopsis and commentary you’re reading right now.
|
Unofficial Minutes are void ab initio – from the beginning; they have no force and effect. They are the equivalent to no Minutes.
At the Board meeting, Jeff stated: “Bob Dingee will be doing the Minutes.” Sue objected because only the Secretary can take official minutes, and then nominated your Editor. Bob Dingee went ballistic, said “I’m getting sick, I’m leaving,” and stormed out of the meeting when he found out that he would have to be Secretary under their little scheme just after Sue nominated your Editor. Jeff then nominated Bob and Richard seconded that nomination.
Linda seconded Sue’s nomination of your Editor. Sue said to text the votes to the property manager. Sue asked if Bob were accepting the nomination of himself or not, since he left the meeting and had not yet returned.
Jeff telephoned him and begged him to return. Bob ultimately returned and remained out of control for the rest of the meeting, cursing, grumbling, at one point looking upwards with hands together in prayer, and having a hard time taking the Minutes. He ended up abstaining from votes because he was too busy writing notes for the Minutes.
The votes were cast: two for your Editor, and four for the apoplectic Bob. Jeff announced that Bob is the new Secretary. Bob’s out of control conduct continued to the end of the meeting where he stated he would not be at a Town Hall Meeting where the Board would be present at which point your Editor suggested that if the Secretary did not want to attend as required, he should resign. Bob’s tantrum throughout the meeting was unbecoming to say the least.
Now let’s review what happened here: Jeff did an end-run around and ambushed fellow Board members Sue and Linda, who were going to nominate and second your Editor for the office of HOA Secretary and for which initially everyone supposedly had a gentleman’s agreement as to that preferred outcome.
One Board member, Harvey, who initially purportedly supported the idea, suddenly flip-flopped without so much as a text or telephone call to either of his colleagues, Sue and Linda, or to your Editor, demonstrating his disdain for common courtesy. That goes for the rest of the men as well. Ambushing the ladies was not nice.
Common courtesy is just a by-product of common sense. So, we don’t understand why both would be absent here, and yet that’s what happened.
|
The “gentlemen’s agreement” with the two women Board members was broken. The other four Board members never even consulted them or asked their opinions. They just blind-sided them.
This also adds to the growing list of bad behavior on the part of Jeff Green. Ladies and Gentlemen, once again, meet Jeff.
|
More on him in future reports, because frankly there’s a plethora of jokes and cartoons applicable, and they would take up way too much space here.
Now let’s talk about Director Richard Greene, who also happens to be the Treasurer. The office of Treasurer has nothing to do with being a Board member. What exactly has this Director done to earn your vote other than replace Harvey as Jeff’s wingman?
This is the same Director, Richard, who was afraid to break a bad contract with a fence vendor before any work had commenced because he feared that the community would get a bad reputation. Nonsense: the contract was rescinded, and everything was fine, and you all saved over $60,000 on that impending fiasco.
This was also the same Director, Richard, who claimed that there was no need to get a breakdown of parts and labor from a vendor because no one else is doing it. Nonsense: demand it and the vendor will comply in lieu of losing a million-dollar contract.
This Director, Richard Greene, at this Board meeting when discussing the Town Hall for residents to ask questions about the residents’ survey ahead of its release, referred to the proposed Town Hall as a residents’ “bitching session.” That’s what he thinks of your concerns. Is this acceptable to you, residents?
And when asked to revote during the Round Table Discussion on a town hall community meeting prior to the community survey going out, he was the only Board member who voted no.
And this is why he can’t stand your Editor: because we are exposing this type of condescending and demeaning behavior and the residents are taking note. This is not leadership, and frankly, this type of mindset has no place on the Board of Directors.
This Director, Richard, is up for re-election in four months. Residents: what say you? Who wants to replace him? Start preparing for Candidates’ Night right now.
|
Director Harvey: you’re on the precipice here. It’s time to decide whether or not you want to be your own man or someone’s else’s lap boy. We actually like some of the actions you’ve taken at our suggestion: message board suspension’s statute of limitation of two years instead of forever, and no more lending of broken equipment, to name two that come to mind immediately. These rulings are tremendously beneficial to the members.
And Harvey appears to do a fair amount of research and preparation prior to Board meetings, which is great. He seems open to alternate opinions, which is also a great trait. And he is clearly willing to listen and to be flexible. These are all great traits. And it is true that sometimes whatever you do or don’t do, half the community is happy, and the other half is sad.
|
But this is really your last chance, Harvey, as far as we’re concerned. We’re leaving the door open a crack. You get to choose whether you want us to open it more or to slam it shut. You can choose to be first mate to the captain of the Titanic and go down with that ship, or you can choose to take the life jacket we’re throwing to you and save yourself, if enough residents will still permit it.
|
Harvey: we hope you will “unconjoin” yourself (your Editor has coined that word) from your attachment to your male colleagues, their outsized egos, their emotional baggage, and their misogyny. If you did that, you might be a great Director.
Director Bob: what the heck are you doing? This is not an old boys’ club where a few of you get together, ambush your colleagues, and continue with business as usual.
|
It was not appreciated that when we contacted you, Bob, while you were up north, on the irrigation issue reported in our October 20, 2021 synopsis entitled The Lawyer and The Shakedown, and tried to resolve it because Jeff was wastefully siccing the HOA lawyers on us with HOA money, you stated that Jeff was the “site manager” while you were away.
No, the property manager is Deborah; Jeff is just another equal Board member. If you are not willing to understand that fact, Bob, why are you a Director? We don’t get it. Either be a Director, or don’t.
It is wholly inappropriate to cede your authority to another equal Director, Bob. You were apparently too busy to deal with an issue while you were up north, but you’re apparently not too busy to create unofficial Minutes every two weeks no matter where you are. Duly noted.
|
And when suddenly faced with the reality of what it actually means to be Secretary, a position you never wanted, Bob, you threw a two hour tantrum, cursing, grumbling, praying, and sweating your way through the entire meeting, and abstaining from votes because the task of Secretary was overwhelming to you (“I’m writing; I’m abstaining” is what you said in exasperation at one point), thus making the exact point that the Secretary should not be a Board member.
And Bob, screaming “THIS IS BULLSHIT!” during the Round Table Discussion is evidence of your lack of fitness to govern in our opinion. Or maybe you just don’t like it when ladies make suggestions.
Bob suggested he wouldn’t go to the Town Hall so as to eliminate the possibility of a quorum, but one absent Board member might not do that, and at that point your Editor stated, “the Secretary needs to be there to take the Minutes; you can resign if you have a problem with it.” He then begrudgingly stated, “I will be there.”
And furthermore, you’re supposed to be there to hear the residents’ input. By golly, you might learn something. How much more disrespectful to the residents can you be?
And by the way, Bob, it’s now your job, among other things, to send out all the meeting notices and agendas: read the By-Laws, page 3-2 (Section III, subsection C) and page 3-10 (Section VIII, subsection G, subsection 3). We will expect you to fulfill all your Secretarial duties as you are obliged to do. Have you picked up the Corporate Seal yet as required?
|
It’s clear that Bob didn’t want the job of Secretary. But he wasn’t bamboozled into it. The other guys are already Officers and can’t hold more than one Office per the By-Laws, page 3-10, Section VIII, subsection F, so he was the only one left in their little wrecking crew available. If they were so desperate not to have your Editor as Secretary, why didn’t one of them give up one of their current Offices and nominate themselves?
Jeff, how about you resign from the presidency, become the secretary, and let somebody else be the president, like Sue, who follows the rules and listens and responds to the residents.
And Bob, you clearly want nothing to do with secretarial functions, so instead of cursing, screaming, sweating, praying, and storming out of the Board meeting like a petulant child, why don’t you just resign, too? What exactly did you think would happen when you four concocted this ill-thought-out scheme? To paraphrase Shakespeare’s Hamlet, you were hoist by your own petard.
And so we say for the benefit of all the fans of the TV shows, The Bachelor and The Bachelorette: sorry, Bob, you don’t get the final rose.
|
Welcome to politics, Bob, the mother of all blood sports. You showed the emotional maturity of a two-year old. The “terrible twos” are now expanded to grown men in positions of authority at Cascade Lakes. That’s frightening.
What really set Bob off? Here’s your Editor’s take on it: he agreed to take the Minutes, but he didn’t want to be called “Secretary” because in his mind, that’s a woman’s job. Nothing else plausible explains his meltdown when Sue advised that you can’t take the Minutes without being the Secretary.
Bob was ok with “doing the Minutes” but he went nuts because he didn’t want the label of “Secretary” because of some old school outdated sexist notion that the word in his sexist mind connotes a woman’s job. Make no mistake about it: that’s why he had a meltdown, plain and simple. It was the title of the job.
And that’s why Jeff said that Bob was going to “be doing the Minutes” and he specifically did not say Bob would be the Secretary: he didn’t say it in his email to your Editor and he didn’t say it at the Board meeting.
These guys knew exactly what they were doing and now you all know why. Perhaps Bob only agreed to take the Minutes on condition that he not be named “Secretary” and then Sue came along and rightly forced the issue, and that’s when he lost it and had his painful and public meltdown.
As you’ll see below under New Business Item #4, an item seeking to formalize best Board practices which was instituted to try to ensure ethical practices for Directors to adhere to, among other things, was defeated because while Sue and Linda voted for it, the boys all turned it down except for Bob, who was so overwhelmed with trying to take the Minutes that he blurted out, “I’M WRITING! I’M ABSTAINING!” Way to go, guys.
So, fellas, here’s the deal: you can either act like professionals, or you can choose not to. You can follow the rules, or you can choose not to. You can treat your fellow Board members and all residents with respect, or you can choose not to.
How you act will be reported and circulated to the residents. They will then decide what to do about it. We think that’s abundantly fair. And as far as we’re concerned, our fealty is and always will be to the members.
|
Lest there be any confusion and misconception, let us be clear: this is not about your Editor and the office of Secretary. It’s really not that important to your Editor and it’s in fact a lot of additional work actually.
Your Editor was only agreeable to it if the Board held the empty Board seat vacant to allow you, the members, to choose your next Director, and your Editor made that crystal clear in her offer because we wanted the residents to vote to fill the vacant Board seat.
This is about ambushing fellow Directors; this is about breaking gentlemen’s agreements; this is about a failure of trust, honesty, transparency, congeniality, and good will. This is about character, or the lack thereof. This is about honor and integrity, or the lack thereof. This is about very bad and very unprofessional behavior on stunning display at this Board meeting.
The women Board members were the only ones who didn’t break the gentlemen’s agreement. How ironic is that. These so-called “gentlemen” all showed complete disrespect for their two female colleagues. There is no place on the Board for sexist, misogynistic behavior.
Richard: Referring to residents’ questions and comments as a “bitching session” which you did during this Board meeting is condescending and demeaning to the residents.
|
In our opinion, this is just and valid cause for Richard’s removal as a Director this coming March at election time. Residents: you don’t need someone representing you and making decisions for you who thinks you are garbage and not worthy to be listened to.
Bob: Cursing, screaming, storming out of an official meeting, and then coming back and continuing to carry on like an out-of-control toddler because things turned sideways on you is childish and boorish, shows a complete and total lack of emotional intelligence, suggests strongly that you are unfit to serve, and is grounds for removal when you are up for re-election if you don’t resign sooner. Your behavior was shameful and embarrassing.
Jeff: Telling a resident “Thanks, but no thanks” before the official and proper nominating process is an abuse of power, contrary to the rules, and the opposite of leadership, and this is after a long list of misbehavior that we have documented in past synopses. You should be shown the door when you are up for re-election.
This entire debacle was a disgraceful display of ineptitude, watching these clowns contort themselves into a twisted panic after having been outplayed.
Now fellas, this is what happens when you don’t come prepared and especially when your motives come from a place of ill will and you backstab your fellow Board members. I always said that litigation was like a slow-motion chess match, and this is a good example of that concept. You were played like a Stradivarius violin in the hands of a mistress virtuoso. Thank you, Ladies.
All Four of You Fellows: Reneging on your agreements and sideswiping and actively sabotaging your colleagues is reprehensible and grounds for removal because you have destroyed all trust that was graciously bestowed upon you by the residents.
The residents may decide that all of you should be shown the door when your terms are up. In any event, guys, feel free to pontificate about it on your own time.
|
So, there you have it, folks: Secretariat and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. That’s a total of five horses: one champion, and four horses’ asses.
And no, I shall not go gentle into that good night. (“Do not go gentle into that good night” – by Dylan Thomas)
As a postscript, on our BOD 2021 Elections page under our HOA Issues page we have posted our rescission of our March 2021 endorsement of Director Bob Dingee based on his outrageous, inappropriate, and reprehensible behavior as displayed in this Board meeting. And lest anyone get the wrong impression, there is no rejoicing over at our house at what happened at this Board meeting. It’s ultimately quite pathetic.
And now on to the Board meeting led by the Misogynist-in-Chief, Director Jeff Green.
Board Meeting: Audio and Video Up and Running; Zoom meeting online starts at 9:30am.
Board Members Present:
Jeff D. Green, President (Equal Board member)
Harvey Ginsberg, VP (Equal Board member)
Richard Greene, Treasurer (Equal Board member)
Linda Arbeit (Equal Board member)
Bob Dingee (Equal Board member) [reluctant and overwhelmed Secretary who doesn’t want the job and definitely doesn’t want the title, but only took it because the male Board members are petty, immature sissies.]
Sue Schmer (Equal Board member)
Call to Order: Jeff D. Green.
[Editor’s note: Jeff called the meeting to order.]
Pledge of Allegiance: led by Bob Dingee [Jeff held the flag].
Jeff’s Opening Remarks and Announcements:
[Editor’s note: Jeff announced that Bob would be taking the Minutes. Sue made a Point of Order and reminded her colleagues that that’s illegal and that only the official Secretary can take the Minutes. Then all hell broke loose.]
Jeff: Bob Dingee will be doing the Minutes for the meetings.
Sue: Jeff, I need to raise a Point of Order because what you are doing… is incorrect. Secretaries take Minutes. It is so stated in our By-Laws; it is so stated in Robert’s Rules, and it’s stated in our own FirstService Residential website… The Secretary is an Officer.
[Bob is leaning his head back looking up at the ceiling.]
You have to have nominations. You can’t take the Minutes without being the Secretary…it’s against all rules and regulations and statutes, so, we need to nominate people...
[Bob is now shaking his head from left to right as if to suggest “no” which is wrong, because Sue is correct and the documents are clear and unambiguous.]
[Bob is seen and heard sighing in frustration and/or disgust.]
FirstResidential [recommends not having a Board member or the property manager take the Minutes because] … “Otherwise, they won’t be fully engaged in the meeting…” You can’t have a volunteer take the Minutes without that person being nominated and approved as an official Secretary…which may or may not be a member of the Board according to our own documents. So, we need to have nominations for the position before you go any futher.
[Bob again looked up to the ceiling.]
Bob then threw a hissy fit (at having to do things legally? What’s up with that?) and then announced in a major huff, “Jeff, I’m getting sick, I think I’m going, I’m leaving the meeting. This is ridiculous.” [How is following the mandatory rules ridiculous?]
Jeff: no, stay, Bob, I’ll nominate you for Secretary right now, and if we have to, we’ll assign someone to the Board eventually as we can do as a Board.
[Jeff is erroneously conflating directorships with the Secretary office because he already knows that Bob didn’t want to be entitled the formal “Secretary.”] Richard seconded.
Sue nominated your Editor. Richard made a nasty face. Bob then yelled, “That’s it; I’m done! You’ve only got five people.” Sue continued with her nomination of your Editor; Bob got close to the camera on his computer and angrily stated again, “I’m done.” And with that, Bob was off the Zoom meeting! Gone, in a poof!
Linda then seconded the nomination of your Editor. Sue then moved to have the vote private and sent to the property manager. Linda seconded that motion. The property manager told everyone to text her cell.
Richard: [grumbling under his breath] I don’t believe this. [Why not? It’s the only proper procedure. You don’t believe in following procedure?]
Sue: What about Bob? He left the meeting. I don’t know if he’s accepting, wants his name in nomination, or is voting. [Deborah said she’d call him as soon as she finished tallying the texts.]
Sue: the question remains; you put Bob’s name in nomination; he left the meeting, so I don’t know if he’s… Deborah: I’m going to call him right now…
[Jeff desperately tried to get Bob to come back.]
Jeff to Bob on his cellphone on screen: c’mon, come back on. It’s starting now. Ok? Bob is coming back on.
Jeff having nominated the absent Bob, we ask: can you nominate an absent person who leaves just when the process starts? Does that sound like he wants to serve? And who took the Minutes for all this chaos? How can Bob take the Minutes if he’s not there?
This was pre-appointment, so it would have been the perfect time to start practicing, but Elvis had left the building.]
|
[Meanwhile, Deborah was trying to receive Linda’s text.]
Jeff: I don’t see where Bob is. He was supposed to come back.
Sue: you know, if he doesn’t, then his nomination cannot stand. Either he’s part of the meeting or he’s not part of the meeting and there are two names in nomination. He left the meeting.
[Jeff gets on his cellphone again.]
Harvey: it doesn’t matter if he’s there or not.
Bob returned. Bob: I don’t text.
[Votes were texted to the property manager except for Bob, who is textually challenged. So, Deborah called him, and he took the call off screen per Jeff’s instruction to him. The property manager announced the vote as 4 for Bob (the Guys) and 2 for your Editor (the Dolls).
Bob was appointed despite the fact that it was probably the last thing he ever wanted to do in his life, and he certainly didn’t think he was going to be Secretary before the Board meeting started.
You four guys all got what you deserved: the disgust of the community at large. And how exactly did your shenanigans, your poor sportsmanship, and your disgusting display of misogynistic immaturity help the residents?]
First Residents’ Input Session:
Raise your hand please.
|
1. Chris Gavatt: [Editor’s note: this resident was disgusted with the Board’s flip-flopping on motions such as the invisible dog fence and the virtual guard. He lamented that the Board should plan ahead, hold a town meeting, and an open forum. He stated that the Board looks indecisive and incompetent, and it is embarrassing.]
2. Lillian Astrachan: [Editor’s note: this resident was not happy about the secret ballot for Secretary; please note that this is allowed by Florida statute. She was concerned about Amazon getting in during the early morning hours.]
3. Kathleen Spence: I’m in agreement with Chris… get resident input before you make a decision… protocol on how you treat each other…disappointing about not understanding your own Rules and Regulations, it’s disturbing, and then members become upset …you have to follow procedures…it looks incompetent.
4. Chris Gavitt: [Editor’s note: Chris referenced the resignation of the Long-Range Planning Committee and was concerned about the Board micromanaging and lack of respect and how the Board is “now making recommendations to themselves.”]
Approval of Minutes: November 17, 2021 Board meeting: Linda Arbeit
Linda: Motion to approve the Minutes of the November 17, 2021 Board meeting. Jeff: seconded by Harvey. Jeff: All in favor? Unanimous.
Property Manager’s Report:
|
Deborah: …mow… today and tomorrow and the 15th and the 16th…
Committee Reports:
1. Entertainment: [Editor’s note: seats are still available for New Year’s Eve; 2022 show series tickets are available.]
Old Business:
[Editor’s note: Many important items are still being ignored. Details are found on our page entitled “Agenda Items.”]
NEW ENTRIES ON THE LIST:
[none at this time.]
1. Update on Clubhouse Hours - Harvey Ginsberg
[Editor’s note: Harvey moved to amend the clubhouse hours based on a review of usage as follows: close at 4pm Friday through Sunday, opened for special events as necessary; fitness hours remain unchanged. Sue seconded. It passed unanimously.]
2. Update on Gatekey Training - Harvey Ginsberg
[Editor’s note: there are three sessions and will be more depending on the response.]
3. Format for 2021 New Residents Meeting- Jeffrey Green
[Editor’s note: Jeff moved as follows: new resident meeting will begin with three Board members at a time, “each will spend five minutes explaining their responsibilities as a Board member.”
Note to all of you: you all have the same responsibilities. This is separate from Officers. Try to understand that please. Are you each going to say the exact same thing for five minutes? That sounds a tad repetitive.
Continuing with the motion: Board liaisons will be stated. There will be a question-and- answer time and then light refreshments. Linda seconded. It passed unanimously.]
New Business:
1. Filling Board Vacancy - Sue Schmer
Sue: Due to Alan’s resignation leaving a board position vacant and since his term would exceed one year, it was of the opinion to involve the community in the selection of who will represent them. Therefore, I would like to add section J to Article V (page 3-6 of our bylaws) as follows:
“J. Notwithstanding anything stated in the By-laws to the contrary, the Board may elect or choose not to fill a vacancy, so long as there remains a quorum, and instead have that directorship position filled via general election by the members at the next annual members’ meeting where elections are duly held. That term shall be for two years.”
[Editor’s note: Harvey made a friendly amendment to this motion to state that “if the remaining term is 6 months or less the Board may choose to appoint.” This amended motion was passed.
During the discussion Sue stated, “without rules and regulations you have chaos.” Bob grumbled angrily and nastily. Why? You don’t like to follow the rules, Bob? Resign.
Bob didn’t like the positioning of the paragraph; he wanted it as part of the paragraph above it.
Bob has no clue about what he’s talking about because your Editor as part of the Legal Advisory Group worked on the language of the new Section J as well as its positioning in the By-Laws, which matters because it comes after other sections in the By-Laws which might otherwise be in conflict, which is why I specifically added the first phrase, “Notwithstanding anything stated in the By-laws to the contrary” to cover and resolve that issue.
Bob again approached his screen camera, came in real close, and argued with her. Sue tried to explain it to him. Jeff said, “it’s our By-Laws, we can add it anywhere we want.”
Bob: ok, I’ve had it again, Jeff.
Bob was so frustrated that he stopped writing as new Secretary, put his hands together in a teepee formation and then he clasped his hands together. Then he put his hands in prayer and looked up to the ceiling as if some divine intervention would rescue him from the hell he perceived he was in and stated, “I’ve had it.” Then he let out a disgusted sigh of exasperation. He remained in this prayer position the entire time Sue spoke at this juncture.
Jeff called Sue’s original motion without Harvey’s amendment. Sue voted for it, Harvey and Jeff opposed it, and the rest abstained. Then Harvey moved to accept it with his amendment, Linda seconded that, Harvey said to use “may or shall” and Sue correctly said you can’t have both, it’s either “may or shall.” At that point, Bob snickered and again said, “I’ve had it.”]
Harvey: may.
Bob: repeat your motion.
[Editor’s note: Bob is clearly struggling to take the Minutes. We don’t feel for him because this was a set-up that he, along with his male colleagues, pulled on the two female Board Directors, and he/they also reneged on a gentlemen’s agreement of which not one of them acted as a gentleman. This is what you get when you act like a male chauvinist.
|
The motion passed 5-0-1 with Sue abstaining. Harvey’s amendment is what we call in the legal profession surplusage; it was completely unnecessary. It is subsumed in Sue’s original motion based on the original language provided. This entire discussion and the chaos on the tape about it was completely unnecessary.
Perhaps in future Board meetings you should leave the legal advisor’s microphone unmuted to allow for clarification and correction; that’s why the Chat function is so critical, too.
Sue then made a motion for filling liaison vacancies due to a director’s resignation; Linda seconded it. Jeff Green will take over as Fitness Center Liaison and Harvey Ginsberg will take over as C.I.T. liaison until the next Board election is held in March 2022. Harvey asked about the Long-Range Planning Committee. The motion passed unanimously.]
Jeff: there is no committee, so there’s no Board liaison. Harvey: the Board is running the survey.
2. Resident’s Survey -Jeffrey Green
[Editor’s note: more chaos ensued. Jeff mentioned that costs or approximations were added to the survey by the Board and that’s why the Long-Range Planning Committee resigned.
Richard made comments regarding the dissolution of the Long-Term Planning committee and how his Budget committee did not quit after being disappointed about having something rejected.
Linda commented that this discussion was inappropriate; that whatever the reasons the Long-Term Planning committee had for dissolving itself, those reasons had to be respected and it was now time to move forward and end this conversation. Linda is correct.
Richard wanted the survey to go out by January 6th; Linda did not see the rush to get it out. Linda stated that some of the reasons why many of the proposals that this Board and other boards (in the past) have failed to get through is because they have been rushed through, not thoroughly thought out, and not explained adequately to the residents. (No one commented on that, but she’s right again.)
Linda said that we should take it step by step and that was exactly why we should follow the process that other communities in South Florida followed with success and that meant having a Town Hall meeting before the survey went out to the residents. Richard said that Linda was comparing apples to oranges. How so?
The proposed survey was shown on the screen. They still have one question which lumps together different legal issues: the percentage required for a community vote to pass (75 vs. 66 2/3) and the percentage of the budget where if exceeded the matter goes to a community vote (1% or ½ %).
It failed the first time, and it will fail again in its present state, as your Editor commented in the Second Residents’ Input Session. This issue was later revisited during the Round Table Discussion and a re-vote was taken approving the splitting of the question into three questions; see below.
There is a question about whether or not the HOA should take possession of the mailboxes. This is illegal and irrelevant. You cannot properly ask a community to vote on an illegal act. The mailboxes belong to the residents as appurtenant to their property and arguably part of their warranty deed. Even if they weren’t, you can’t agree to take your neighbor’s property. Putting this on the survey is improper.
Pickleball Compromise:
Questions about the pickleball court on the survey: should the community invest in hard courts or leave the clay courts which are softer. Jeff mentioned that some on the Board like the softer courts because if one falls, they won’t get as hurt. Chuck Cramer, the president of the Pickleball Club, disputed that in the Second Residents’ Input Session below.
Here is an idea that no one has ever mentioned, and your Editor throws it out there as a potential compromise concerning the pickleball courts:
There are four pickleball courts. Make two hard surface; leave two clay surface. Having two hard courts will allow the community to host league play, because you just need two for that. Those who are afraid to play on hard courts can play on the clay courts. Scheduling for each should be separate.
The hard courts should be closest to the utility building/parking lot to minimize clay dust from being brought onto them from the clay tennis courts and the remaining pickleball clay courts. There should also be a barrier between the clay and hard courts.
How about it? Would that work? Perhaps the survey should be reworked, and a question of that nature be added.
The motion to accept the resident survey as presented was made by Jeff and seconded by Harvey and scheduled for the first week of January and giving everyone 14 days to respond. It passed 5-1 with Sue opposed. The survey was later slightly amended in the Round Table Discussion below.]
3. Town Hall Meetings Regarding Resident Survey - Linda Arbeit
Linda: My motion is to have a Town Hall meeting to enlighten and educate the community as to what the purpose of the survey will accomplish prior to the survey being released to the community and another Town Hall meeting to be held after the data is collected and reviewed by the Board. The results will be shared with the community at a Board meeting.
Why a Town Hall meeting before the survey goes out to the residents: The community must be educated as to the need for the survey in order for the community to move forward; to add amenities; to upgrade what we have and to make this a Community of Choice. The community has to understand what is needed for these changes to happen.
The Board has to understand what the residents want and are willing to support and finance. Yes, costs are involved and must be clearly spoken about so there are no misunderstandings.
This must be done before the survey is in the hands of the community. A Town Hall meeting is where the survey will be explored and explained. Questions are asked; suggestions are made.
When the survey is finally in everyone's hands it will have been explored, explained and hopefully fully understood so when residents fill out the survey, they do so with a full understanding of what they want, what they can have realistically. Their answers, hopefully, will reflect what can be done successfully.
The costs of the amenities are based on what other communities paid- it is not what the actual prices would be. They are ballpark figures that allow residents to make a realistic decision of what they are willing to spend on an amenity.
This is what will be discussed at the Town Hall meeting so that the choices residents make when filling out the survey are based on reality- what they are willing and able to support and finance.
After the first Town Hall meeting the survey will be distributed, studied, tallied and the results will be reported to the community.
Another Town Hall meeting will be held to discuss the results and which amenities, upgrades and changes will be proposed to be pursued.
It's time to take action- it's time to move forward- this is NOT up to seven people on a board. It is up to ALL of Us to speak up be proactive.
This is OUR community-if we want it to move forward and get what we want; what we need; what is realistic then WE need this Town Hall meeting.
We need this Town Hall meeting to listen, to hear, to ask questions and to SPEAK UP!
[Editor’s note: Bob was heard grumbling during Linda’s speech. He did the same when Sue spoke earlier. He never grumbled when any of his male colleagues spoke. This misogynistic disrespect needs to be called out so we’re doing it here: knock it off, Bob. You’re embarrassing yourself and the residents are disgusted with your behavior. Resign.
Linda’s motion was to have the town hall meeting before the survey; Sue seconded it.]
Richard: I disagree with having the first [town hall before the survey]. It’s gonna be a bitching session…it’s just gonna be a bitching session. [He said it twice during his lengthy speech.]
[Editor’s note: who wants to join the Bad Bitch Club?]
|
Linda: …you want to call it a bitching session, call it what you want. If you don’t let residents get up and talk about what they want and how they feel about it, then you’re missing the point. The Board doesn’t take over the whole responsibility of running of the show here.
Bob: yes they do.
Linda: you have 600 homes, 1200 residents, who are entitled to get up at a town hall meeting and say what’s on their mind and to ask questions and to have things explained to them... it’s not a bitching session; it’s a learning session; it’s a process. The residents have to voice their opinions… and if you want to add things to the survey...
Bob: we’re not gonna add things.
[Editor’s note: really? So, for you, Bob, the matter is set in stone regardless of what the residents want. Good to know. You actually sound like a nasty tyrant. Resign.]
Sue: I support Linda… I think it is exceedingly demeaning to say –
[Richard abruptly got up and left at this point presumably so he would not have to listen to Sue’s remarks.]
-that at a Town Hall meeting, to say residents are going to bitch. I find that word usage very disturbing and very demeaning to the people that we were elected to serve…and things were changed…the virtual guard… what we did afterwards was survey the community which is something that we should have done before. And we should have listened to them… we are here to serve the residents.
[Richard returned. Are you residents seeing a pattern here in how some of the male Board members act when the female Board members have the floor?]
Sue: We work for them. We don’t work for ourselves. And I think a town hall meeting explaining things, people may have questions, I don’t consider that bitching; I consider that listening. And maybe if we did a little bit more listening before we were so anxious to get stuff out without resident input, we would have made decisions that we wouldn’t have to have rescinded in the first place.
Jeff: We’re not making any decision here… after the survey, we’ll see what the people want. I agree with Harvey and Richard.
[Editor’s note: Jeff called the motion. Linda and Sue voted for it; Harvey, Jeff, and Richard opposed it. Bob abstained again. The motion failed. Then Richard made a motion to have the town hall meeting after the results come back, Harvey seconded that, and it passed 5-1 with Sue opposing.
This issue of also having a Town Hall before the survey was later revisited during the Round Table Discussion and a re-vote was taken approving the motion; see below.
But it bears noting that during the Round Table Discussion, Bob offered not to go to the Town Hall so that there would not be a quorum of the Board there (and then he wouldn’t have to take the Minutes).
He missed the whole point that the purpose is for the entire Board to be there to hear the concerns and questions of the residents, and the insights and recommendations that the residents may provide because, believe it or not, Bob, there are a lot of people with a lot of experience that are among us. They’re trying to educate you, not the other way around. It is the height of arrogance to think otherwise.]
Linda: two separate issues. I’m not against that. But before the survey would be appropriate and helpful. Harvey: that motion has been voted on, defeated… Linda: I think we made a mistake.
4. Discussion and vote to formalize best Board practices - Sue Schmer
[Editor’s note: as stated in the Editor’s Opening Monologue, only Sue and Linda voted for this agenda item and so it failed. Sue made the motion; Linda seconded it.
Let’s look at what was included that the boys on the Board rejected and don’t want to be held to (Bob abstained again because he was too busy trying to take the Minutes and could not do so and pay attention to what was going on, i.e., participate in the discussion, at the same time; time to resign).]
Sue: BEST BOARD PRACTICES – Introduction. At our April 7 board meeting we unanimously agreed that a code of conduct for board members which evolved into best practices for board members was needed. Three board members, Alan, Richard, and I were chartered to draft one. We also passed Committee Interaction procedures on June 2, 2021. As there was no formal vote taken on this, I will do so at this meeting.
There are several sections as follows:
- Decision making tenets
- Activity in preparation for board meetings
- Behavior at board meetings
- Activities outside of board meetings
- Defined responsibilities and authority of all board members not previously defined in writing
- What to avoid.
I make the motion that the Best Board Practices document and the Committee Interaction procedures, which were agreed upon at the June 2, 2021 meeting, be approved as written, that it will be maintained by the secretary and available to the community. They will be updated as required by board action.
[Editor’s note: Linda seconded the motion. Harvey said, “we’re pretty much doing this” and that it was unenforceable. He said, “there’s no sense in having this… and these are common sense behaviors… no means to punish… it’s an exercise in futility…” Richard complained, “it’s been discussed so many times, just call the question.”]
Linda: I think this is an ethical and moral document…not can you enforce it or now… the Board members should read… and keep in their minds and hearts… and remember what these tenets are…that’s why I support it… no punishment involved…
Richard: call the question… if you look at the document, there are question marks in there, that’s why I think it’s not a complete document.
[Editor’s note: We have it; this is an extensive 11-page document and we counted seven question marks. But if you were interested in it, Richard, you could have said you found it of interest, but some areas needed clarification, and you could have discussed those areas, and then resolved them.
If you needed more time, you could have asked for it to be tabled and for it to be brought up at the next Board meeting. But you had no intention of pursuing it further, plain and simple.]
Jeff: all in favor? Linda and Sue. Opposed? Three. Bob? Bob: I’ll abstain. I’m writing; I’m abstaining.”
[Editor’s note: Bob abstained again because he clearly could not focus on Board business and be the Secretary at the same time, which is exactly what was discussed in the literature Sue quoted from at the beginning of the meeting. Resign.]
Second Residents’ Input Session:
1. Barbara Appleby: [Editor’s note: this resident asked about the plantings on both sides of the Boulevard. The property manager said she would look into it.]
2. Eileen Olitsky: As a previous Board member and listening to this Board meeting, I’d like to say kudos to some of the Board members for putting residents before their own personal opinions as Board members.
The rules and regulations are put in place not necessarily always to follow them, there will be mistakes, but as a guideline. It is a fiduciary responsibility of Board members to be aware of the desire of the residents.
I find it terribly offensive to be referring to residents as a ‘bitch session’ – it’s rude, it’s disrespectful. And I would hope that this Board would take that into consideration at future Board meetings. Board members don’t leave, and committees don’t resign because they’ve been treated well. They resign because there are problems.
If you look internally and examine the behavior of the Board, I think that you can come to a better understanding and not be arguing at a Board meeting and listening to what residents have to say. Thank you very much.
3. Shelly Andreas: regarding Barbara Appleby’s question… new plants… yes, we are planning on doing both sides of where the ficus was removed, not to replace the arboricolas…going to be done little by little, cover those dirt areas with either ground cover, sod, or new plantings… going to enhance the area.
4. Judie Delman: [Editor’s note: this resident questioned why after seven to nine months the shrubs in the back of the homes are not evenly cut and also asked again about the design of the front lantern post. Deborah stated that the pavers have been ordered and she will check with PBB to see why the back shrubs are cut the way reported.]
5. Steve Schlosser: [Editor’s note: this resident asked if it would be appropriate for management to send out a blast that residents are responsible for their guests at the pool area, and he mentioned issues including ball playing in the pool, eating, changing diapers and disposing of them in the garbage, and bringing glass on the pool deck.
He also stated, “residents should not have to go over to people on the pool deck because that doesn’t end well… have an attendant… during the holidays.”]
6. Arnie Green: question about the survey: the 75 vs. 66 2/3 and the 1 percent to ½ percent, two separate questions or one answer? Harvey: one question with two parts. [Editor’s note: that’s not a clear answer; it’s rather deceptive.]
Arnie: two separate answers? Jeff: no, all one question… Arnie: you’re trying to fool us… you’re forcing us to vote for something they don’t want… the public should know. Sounds a little deceptive to me. Harvey: it goes hand in hand. Arnie: no, it does not. [Editor’s note: of course, Arnie is correct. See your Editor’s comments below as Resident #13.]
7. Chuck Cramer: president of the pickleball club, the question about pickleball play is unfair… how can they comment intelligently on a question. Jeff: you approved that question; you were on the committee.
Chuck: I didn’t, and the committee voted… the Board interjecting their comments… is tainting the whole survey… [he’s referring to the reference to fear of falling on the harder surface] … spoke with Perry Sinett…provides tennis management to more than fifteen 55+ communities risk for injury is quite likely similar… Rescind it…attempt to modify these questions…
8. Barry Gordon: I agree fully with Arnie Green; split it.
9. Marion Weil: I also agree with Arnie and Barry; should be two questions.
10. Kathleen Spence: price ranges…display? Hard to vote; don’t know what I’m buying for each. If the lesser than two… fall apart, or more money, higher quality.
11. Mark Goodman: I agree with Arnie, Barry, and everyone else… the utility boxes were taken care of.
12. Lillian Atrachan: [Editor’s note: this resident wanted to know if the item that gets the most votes in the survey will be done first; she did not like that her cleaning lady would not be let in before 8:00am and she (the cleaning lady) doesn’t make noise; she stated that if the first person on Amazon’s list lets them in, they remain in the community for all their deliveries, and that it is not a safe situation.]
13. Vicki Roberts: The 75% - 66 2/3% issue and the 1% to ½% issue are two separate legal issues. Again, you’ve conflated them. It failed the first time you did this, and it will fail again. Thank you.
14. Chris Gavitt: Best Board Practices: it’s very sad when the Board can’t even agree that they should have a code of conduct for themselves. Unbelievable.
15. Judie Delman: I agree 100% with what Arnie said. Keep the items separate and 100% have a town meeting to get the opinion of people…elderly people want to speak before voting…
Round Table Discussion:
|
Harvey: the survey is January 6th; perhaps we can meet and discuss the concerns about separating the question and maybe bring it up at the next meeting… a lot of good points have been made and they’re well-taken.
Sue: separating the two… I brought this up not only at this meeting… it is confusing… I told you it was confusing, I said that we should have it separated, and at least I’m not alone; I feel validated.
[Editor’s note: we believe most of the voting community supports you, so you’re definitely not alone; there’s a crowd behind you in support of you!]
Sue: …and two words: saddened and disappointed that we cannot even agree on a code of conduct. It isn’t a question of enforcing. Because if you want to enforce it, you censure members who don’t adhere to them. It is exceedingly disappointing that we don’t have respect for residents.
[Editor’s note: you really mean others on the Board besides you and Linda; you’re just being diplomatic.]
Sue: We seem to be more concerned with our own individual desires than that of the community. This is sad. How many times have people in this meeting said those things.
I’ve said it, I said it the last meeting: we need to, we can do, and we must do better, and the mere fact that you are reconsidering questions on the survey that I raised, that other residents raised as well, should lead you to the fact that we need to revisit it, that we should have town meetings before, and that nothing is irreversible when it comes to decisions of the Board. We have made corrections before, and we need to see a bigger picture, guys…
Linda: fencing along the pickleball courts is low, an accident waiting to happen… spikes… Lee said we can use the noodles, cut in half, or buy foam rubber covers, add to the agenda next meeting or before…
My second comment is, after listening to people react at the Second Residents’ Input Session, I, too, believe that a town hall meeting is necessary to educate them and make them understand what this survey entails, and I don’t think the Board should worry about the comments people make at the town hall meeting because that’s what the town hall meeting is all about.
We should do it, face it, and go forth with it and be as proactive with the survey as possible. Thank you, and Happy Chanukah to those who celebrate.
Richard: I said enough. I pass.
Bob: Happy Holidays everybody and no further comment.
Jeff: thank the Zoom operators…next Board meeting…
Deborah: Jeff, would you like to call the question to change the question to two questions so you don’t have to wait to January to do so?
[Editor’s note: and then we all went back into the agenda items and more voting ensued as to the community vote question on the survey and as to whether or not to have a town hall meeting before the survey. Bob was heard grumbling, “oh, gee.”]
Harvey: makes sense. I’ll make the motion that we separate the motion into two questions: 77/ 66 and 2/3 and the other part, 1% to ½ %. Linda: second. Richard: also, the question approving the amenity, the third part…Bob: yeah, make all three separate.
Harvey: three questions: 77 to 66 2/3, 1% to ½%, and requiring community vote… Linda: second. Jeff: all in favor? 4-0-2. [Editor’s note: Jeff and Richard abstained.]
Jeff: have to check the legal; I don’t think everyone understands… the consequences of breaking it out but it’s only for survey purposes right now anyway, so that’s fine. Deborah: I’d like to ask Linda to make the motion again about a town hall meeting prior; all Board members do not have to attend, it could just be two or three…
Linda: motion to have a town hall meeting as to the purpose of the survey prior to the survey…and after…a second town hall meeting is held to discuss the results… Second: Sue.
Harvey: we need to listen to the community…I think we’d be shirking our fiduciary responsibly if we didn’t listen to them… can be a power point and Zoom meeting in the evening… Jeff: Harvey, I think you’re right… Harvey: it’s not a Board meeting. It’s not a Board meeting, and residents will be able to ask as many questions as they want…
Bob: we already voted for the second half of this motion [town hall after the survey] … we just need the first half [town hall before the survey] … I added town hall in person or Zoom, and you guys can figure out the logistics… Jeff: all in favor? 5-1. [Richard voted no.]
Jeff: ok, with that, can I have a motion to adjourn.
Linda: Vicki has a question. [Your Editor had typed it into the Chat function, which is why the Chat function is so important. Otherwise, your Editor would have had to text you all except for Bob because he announced he doesn’t text, although he has a cell phone so what the heck, I’ll text him, too. If he chooses not to read it, that’s on him. A better idea is to leave the legal advisor’s microphone unmuted.]
Bob: Vicki? [Bob asked incredulously as he looked closely into the camera. Yes, Bob, a member of the Legal Advisory Group is giving a legal advisory and being recognized specifically for that purpose. This is a serious legal issue raised by your discussion. Why are you so stunned?]
Jeff: we just voted for it.
Sue: no, I think it’s a question of… Harvey: legality. Sue: … that you may have to make this a Board meeting because you’re discussing business.
[Editor’s note: thank you Linda, Sue, and Harvey because your Editor was, in fact, concerned with the legality of the town hall meetings being Board meeting, so thank you all three of you.]
Jeff: Harvey? Anyone want to make a motion to adjourn?
Harvey: well, no, I think we need to answer the question that Vicki’s poses. If we’re all there, it becomes a quorum, and if it’s a quorum, it becomes a Board meeting.
Bob: I won’t be there. I’ll help you out, I won’t go.
[Editor’s note: helping out whom? Yourself? Certainly not the community whom you represent. You have a moral obligation to be there to hear residents’ concerns and answer their questions and be receptive to their suggestions. And there still might be a quorum even without you, so who’s going to take the Minutes?]
Jeff: it will be an evening Board meeting with one item on the agenda to discuss the survey. [Bingo! Correct!] Sue: [nodding] yep.
Harvey: exactly, we’ll give 48 hours’ notice… [um, Bob, that’s your job, to send out the notice, as Secretary; read the By-Laws.]
Jeff: and if any Board member doesn’t want to attend, they don’t have to because we’re not going to vote on anything at that meeting.
[Editor’s note: the Secretary has to be there regardless of whether you vote as it is a formal Board meeting where HOA business is discussed, and Minutes must be taken and officially reported. And the residents want you there, Jeff, all of you, so that you can hear their concerns.
If you are telling your colleagues not to show if they don’t want to, that’s a dereliction of duty and is totally irresponsible. These residents may have information that you didn’t think of that is critical. This is another example of your utter contempt for the residents who elected you to represent them. And some of the Board does not want to hear them and one considers it a “bitching session.”]
Harvey: yes, but I think it is a formal Board meeting. [yes!] Jeff: it’s an informational meeting only; it is not a meeting to be voted on, and anything that comes up will come back to the Board. Sue: you do not have to have a vote to have a formal meeting. A meeting to discuss business is when it’s an open meeting. Harvey: all we need to do is give 48 hours’ notice.
Vicki: excuse me. Harvey is correct. Excuse me. Harvey is correct and Sue is correct. Now if Bob is not going to be there, then you’re not going to have a Secretary to the meeting. But this is a Board meeting regardless of whether or not you vote. You’re meeting on business. It’s a Board meeting if there’s four of you there.
Bob: This is bullshit.
[Editor’s note: really? You think having an open Board meeting is bullshit? Perhaps you should take that up with the Florida Legislature, because they’re the ones that wrote the statute that requires it, and they did it for the protection of the members of the HOA.]
Vicki: well then you can resign if you have a problem with it. [silence ensued.]
Harvey: all right, so we will fulfill the legal responsibility, the legal requirements, that we will publicly notice it, put out an agenda with that being the only topic, and we will be 100% legal whether we have four, five, or six members there.
Vicki: then you need to have a Secretary to report it. [silence again!]
Sue: that’s correct, Harvey. Secretaries take Minutes.
Linda: Bob, will you be the Secretary?
Bob: [very angry] I will be there. I only said I wouldn’t be there so you wouldn’t have a quorum so you wouldn’t have to have one.
[But a quorum is four, and you’re one of six, not five, Bob, and clearly you have just admitted that you would rather not have a quorum than listen to the residents.
And we’ll say it again: Bob, you missed the whole point that the purpose is for the entire Board to be there to hear the concerns and questions of the residents, and the insights and recommendations that the residents may provide because, believe it or not, Bob, there are a lot of people with a lot of experience that are among us. They’re trying to educate you, not the other way around. It is the height of arrogance to think otherwise.]
Vicki: you seem very upset about having to be the Secretary. If you’re not happy, resign.
Bob: I said I will be there…
Vicki: your actions during this entire meeting were disgusting.
Jeff: you’re out of order; would you please…
Mike: Jeffrey, I’m going to mute everyone if we’re going to have a free for all like this.
[Editor’s note: please be quiet, Mike, no one called on you and you’re not running the meeting and you’re not even on the Board. You should wait for directions from the Board. To the contrary, I was recognized by the Board.
However, Jeff is correct in the last thing he said, that I was out of order concerning my last comment, because that was off topic, so I apologize, not for the content of what I said, because I believe it is true, but for where I said it in the meeting. I should have said it in the Second Residents’ Input Session. Mea culpa.
Harvey then moved to adjourn; Linda seconded it. Deborah stated it was 11:39am.]
Jeff: all in favor of adjourning? Unanimous. Thank you all; the next meeting is December 15th at 9:30am. Thank you all for attending. [Richard leaned forward on his desk with his face downward and covered his head with his hands.]
[Editor’s note: A big shout-out to Zoom operators Mike Blackman and Arnie Green and, as backup if needed, Anita Goodman, for doing a great job administering the Zoom meeting. We thank them for their continued service and volunteerism.]
|
And so concludes the Board meeting of December 1, 2021; next meeting: December 15, 2021 at 9:30am.
Thought for the Day:
It’s important to make sure that you get a vision check every couple of years.
|
Special Reminders:
1. Don’t forget to join the community on the Cascade Lakes Boynton Beach Facebook Page, a place where you can interact and communicate! Click here:
Cascade Lakes Boynton Beach
2. Let’s congratulate our December Resident of the Month! Click here:
Resident of the Month
Cheerio until next time!
|
|