CAMS' "friendly reminder" about tonight's board meeting

The Summit's HOA office has sent out a "friendly reminder" that you'd better stay away from tonight's meeting. Don't let them scare you off.

The first paragraph read, "This is a friendly reminder that due to recent events that have prompted the Board of Directors to conduct a comprehensive review of their operational processes. In alignment with their commitment to adhering to the governing documents, they have resolved to restrict participation in the Monthly Open Board Meetings exclusively to Voting Members, Alternates, and Committee Chairs as outlined in the governing documents."

I'm laughing out loud. Join me.

First of all, look at the construction of that first sentence. It doesn't make sense. It is incomplete. Who wrote that? It's over the Property Manager's name. Did she write that???

"recent events"? At the last meeting a homeowner complained that Treasurer Vernell Butler had referred to her housemate (me) as a squatter. And a Voting Member asked about the integrity of the bidding process for the management contract.

Bad, embarrassing question, Danny. I noticed you didn't get a good answer.

"comprehensive review"? Seriously? When was that?

"operational processes"? You mean those that have resulted in bad debts of $432,483.29  (6/30/2023)?

"commitment to adhering to governing documents"? Is this something new? You mean like having a legitimate "duly-elected" board of directors? There is no legal BOD.

"restrict participation"? You don't mean "participation"; You actually mean "attendance". Otherwise, Members could sit in their chairs and watch; just not "participate".

"Monthly Open Board Meetings"? What is "Open"?

"exclusively to Voting Members, Alternates, and Committee Chairs"? Then there won't be anyone there, if you mean "legitimate" Voting Members, Alternates, and Committee Chairs. And no Directors will be there, if you mean "legitimate, duly-elected" Directors.

"as outlined in the governing documents"? Nothing in the Governing Documents allowed you to restrict "attendance". There is a restriction on participation by Voting Members; they must first be recognized by a Director's invitation, before speaking. That's not even new; it has never been enforced.

The Board is making up rules out of thin air. 

The Voting Members, who aren't even legitimate Voting Members, should speak up and protest this closure. Do they represent the homeowners in their Neighborhoods or are they just lackeys of the Board? I know that a few of them are not lackeys. The others? Not so sure.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What? No trampolines?

OK, you trampoline fans. Are your rights and privileges being tramped on by your Board of Directors? The office sent out an email just before 2:00PM threatening you with a dreaded violation notice and the possibility of fines, if you dare to put a trampoline in your yard.  This is what the email from the office said,  " Please be advised that, pursuant to Section 13, Page 22, Article XII of the covenants, no structure of a temporary nature shall be placed upon any unit or any part of the properties. This includes, but is not limited to, tents, temporary gazebos, shacks, trailers, and any other structure of a temporary nature.  "Kindly note that trampolines are classified as temporary play equipment and, as such, are not permitted within the community. We ask that you ensure there is no trampoline present on your property to avoid receiving a violation notice and subsequent fines." What do the Covenants say? "Section 13. Tents. Trailers and Temporary Structures. Exce...
Read more

Open Letter to Barony Place "Voting Member"

An open letter to the "Voting Member" of Barony Place Neighborhood. Good morning, Billie, If you and/or an Alternate attended last night's board of directors meeting, will you please send out a recap of the meeting to Ann Stirlen and me (and to all the homeowners and residents in Barony Place)? About a dozen homeowners from throughout The Summit showed up for the board meeting  at the church  last night, only to learn from one person that it had been switched to Zoom, which allowed the board to meet in secret. Many of them had not received the email from the office that the board was (illegitimately) closing the meeting to homeowners. There are only about 1,800 (73%) email addresses of the 2,480 Members in the website database. I attempted to join the meeting on Zoom, as I am Attorney-in-Fact for Ann Stirlen, but I was not admitted to the meeting. The HOA's attorney has quoted a section in the By-Laws that she believes allows the Board to close the meetings. That spec...
Read more

Pet Peeve #1 - Tinted License Plate Covers

Image
  AO(Q?)H 152 My #1 pet peeve is heavily-tinted license plate covers. These are prohibited under South Carolina law (and by laws in many states), but my belief is that these drivers are seldom stopped.  These drivers can run red lights, speed, tailgate, even cause hit-and-run accidents, and witnesses can only say, "I couldn't see the license plate number." My solution? Troopers, deputies, and cops should stop these cars. Ticket the driver. Remove the license plate frame, tinted cover, and license plate as evidence. This will force the driver to have his car towed, because he cannot operate a motor vehicle on the roads without a license plate. Make it inconvenient and expensive. Drivers KNOW they are violating the law. They expect to get away with it, and they do. It's time for this to stop! Pet peeve #2: heavily-tinted front windows.
Read more