Post by leokeeler on Oct 24, 2015 22:14:50 GMT
I just sent the Board the e-mail below. Not sure if it should/can be broken into 3 separate items within this Forum. I expect GLFPC to post this on their site.
Moderator feel free to separate into 3 topics for readers to follow and comment on. Thanks Leo
To: GLA Board of Directors
To: Glastonbury Landowners For Positive Change
I have just begun to review the papers sent to Members to initiate the process of changing our Bylaws, Covenants, and Master Plan. The initiating letter to Landowners does recognize this will be a difficult and time consuming task. Unfortunately, I foresee major problems with the process outlined in the letter, and I do not know how many items to express concern about at this time. I hope my expressing some basic concerns now will help develop a Bylaw and Covenant review that leaves Members feeling empowered and not controlled.
I will start with my concern on how Member comments and recommendations will be handled. The letter appears to show the Board will make no effort to enable Members to share their ideas, recommendations, and concerns with other Members. I only see a one way, dead end street leading to the Board, with the Board responding to single individuals and not enabling Members to see those responses, much less the ideas/concerns expressed. I believe, and think many Members will concur, that the review process presented to Members for proposed changes shows a method for the Board to control what Members see and how they join together, or show differing opinions.
I suggest the Board develop a forum on the web, similar to what Glastonbury Landowners for Positive Change have done (http://glamemberforum.freeforums.net,) and use a GLA Board managed forum to openly interact with Members and enable Members to interact with each other, or just monitor the expression of ideas, concerns, and responses. I would like to hear/read what non-resident/absentee Members or those not attending meetings have to contribute to this process. I anticipate a response that Directors are volunteers and unable, or unwilling, to moderate a forum, but I hope I am wrong.
A second concern I have is the elimination of Members’ ability to personally resolve their concerns if such actions become necessary. Through having a similar or mirroring description of State or County requirements in our Bylaws and or Covenants, Members can go to court themselves, based on a violation of the Bylaws or Covenants. The public cannot enforce State or County laws and regulations. We can only file a complaint. The Sheriff will investigate complaints and file a report with the County Attorney, who will then decide if it is worthy of being a priority for the County to act on. In a visit with the County Attorney, she stated they were very busy, and unless there was a critical need, most citizen complaints related to land use within a development would go to and remain at the bottom of the pile.
Thus, I believe it is erroneously presented that removing the Covenant and Bylaw language that mirror or is similar to State and County requirements is beneficial, and I feel it is really harming Members to remove a power they currently have. I understand the Board’s desire to reduce liability, but offer the Board is not required to act since Bylaw Article XI (B) states “The Association shall not be obligated to take action to enforce any provision of the Covenants, Bylaws, Rules or Regulations.” To avoid getting the Board sued, all the Board needs to do is openly disclose that no action will be undertaken and Members can proceed to resolve the issue themselves.
A final concern I wish to offer at this time is that the documents presented to Members display the opinion that the Board is the Association. I am in the process of challenging that interpretation by starting a personal discussion with Dan Kehoe as a method to avoid going directly to an attorney and increasing charges to GLA. I will be sending Dan a personal e-mail today and I hope he responds quickly so I can be corrected, if necessary, and/or the Members can properly interpret the language used in changing our governing documents. Should any Director desire to become involved in this discussion, please contact me at info@akwildlife.com
I am expressing these concerns at this time because I am also sending this e-mail to Glastonbury Landowners for Positive Change with the knowledge they will post my comments so all Members can be cautioned about reading the recommended changes with an improper assumption of how the changes will impact them.
I anticipate that I will make many more comments and suggestions to the Board as this process proceeds, and I have time to digest the current proposals. I hope that there is a detailed plan or outline of the steps the Board will be following that can help determine when the proper time is and what is the proper method for all Members to communicate with the Board and with each other. I suggest that those steps be presented to the Members.
Thank You
Leo Keeler
Moderator feel free to separate into 3 topics for readers to follow and comment on. Thanks Leo
To: GLA Board of Directors
To: Glastonbury Landowners For Positive Change
I have just begun to review the papers sent to Members to initiate the process of changing our Bylaws, Covenants, and Master Plan. The initiating letter to Landowners does recognize this will be a difficult and time consuming task. Unfortunately, I foresee major problems with the process outlined in the letter, and I do not know how many items to express concern about at this time. I hope my expressing some basic concerns now will help develop a Bylaw and Covenant review that leaves Members feeling empowered and not controlled.
I will start with my concern on how Member comments and recommendations will be handled. The letter appears to show the Board will make no effort to enable Members to share their ideas, recommendations, and concerns with other Members. I only see a one way, dead end street leading to the Board, with the Board responding to single individuals and not enabling Members to see those responses, much less the ideas/concerns expressed. I believe, and think many Members will concur, that the review process presented to Members for proposed changes shows a method for the Board to control what Members see and how they join together, or show differing opinions.
I suggest the Board develop a forum on the web, similar to what Glastonbury Landowners for Positive Change have done (http://glamemberforum.freeforums.net,) and use a GLA Board managed forum to openly interact with Members and enable Members to interact with each other, or just monitor the expression of ideas, concerns, and responses. I would like to hear/read what non-resident/absentee Members or those not attending meetings have to contribute to this process. I anticipate a response that Directors are volunteers and unable, or unwilling, to moderate a forum, but I hope I am wrong.
A second concern I have is the elimination of Members’ ability to personally resolve their concerns if such actions become necessary. Through having a similar or mirroring description of State or County requirements in our Bylaws and or Covenants, Members can go to court themselves, based on a violation of the Bylaws or Covenants. The public cannot enforce State or County laws and regulations. We can only file a complaint. The Sheriff will investigate complaints and file a report with the County Attorney, who will then decide if it is worthy of being a priority for the County to act on. In a visit with the County Attorney, she stated they were very busy, and unless there was a critical need, most citizen complaints related to land use within a development would go to and remain at the bottom of the pile.
Thus, I believe it is erroneously presented that removing the Covenant and Bylaw language that mirror or is similar to State and County requirements is beneficial, and I feel it is really harming Members to remove a power they currently have. I understand the Board’s desire to reduce liability, but offer the Board is not required to act since Bylaw Article XI (B) states “The Association shall not be obligated to take action to enforce any provision of the Covenants, Bylaws, Rules or Regulations.” To avoid getting the Board sued, all the Board needs to do is openly disclose that no action will be undertaken and Members can proceed to resolve the issue themselves.
A final concern I wish to offer at this time is that the documents presented to Members display the opinion that the Board is the Association. I am in the process of challenging that interpretation by starting a personal discussion with Dan Kehoe as a method to avoid going directly to an attorney and increasing charges to GLA. I will be sending Dan a personal e-mail today and I hope he responds quickly so I can be corrected, if necessary, and/or the Members can properly interpret the language used in changing our governing documents. Should any Director desire to become involved in this discussion, please contact me at info@akwildlife.com
I am expressing these concerns at this time because I am also sending this e-mail to Glastonbury Landowners for Positive Change with the knowledge they will post my comments so all Members can be cautioned about reading the recommended changes with an improper assumption of how the changes will impact them.
I anticipate that I will make many more comments and suggestions to the Board as this process proceeds, and I have time to digest the current proposals. I hope that there is a detailed plan or outline of the steps the Board will be following that can help determine when the proper time is and what is the proper method for all Members to communicate with the Board and with each other. I suggest that those steps be presented to the Members.
Thank You
Leo Keeler
