Our Village

At our last Regular Meeting we had Directors Gunderson, Pelletier, and Steffensen vote “YES” on a motion to correct the misuse of Executive Meetings. While the motion was in discussion, President Guerra freely admitted that there were inappropriate discussions during Executive Sessions and yet he voted “NO” with Directors Smetter, Vasquez, and Waller on rules that would correct this misuse. One Director even said if this passed it would tie our hands.
Using the Regular Meeting Minutes I did some research that owners might find interesting. In an eight year summary from March 2002 thru April 2011, the Executive Meeting average was one out of every three Regular meetings. Then on May 30, 2011, the Texas State Legislature revised Property Codes of the Texas Uniform Condominium Act Chapter 82 which led to retroactively adding on January 1, 2012 thirteen new provisional laws to the Condominium Act Chapter 81.
Since our Declaration of Covenants states that Chapter 81 shall be in full force, one of the retroactive Provisions that improve owner rights is what I believe Directors Gunderson, Pelletier, and Steffensen wanted our Directors to now obey.
That Provision is 82.108 section “B” which states, “meetings of the association and board must be open to unit owners, subject to the right of the board to adjourn a meeting of the board and reconvene in closed executive session to consider actions involving personnel, pending litigation, contract negotiations, enforcement actions, matters involving the invasion of privacy of individual unit owners, or matters that are to remain confidential by request of the affected parties and agreement of the board. The general nature of any business to be considered in executive session must first be announced at the open meeting.”
Am I wrong to believe our Board has neglected the Provision’s entirety? For example, before retreating into Executive Session, does this Provision’s last sentence towards what’s being discussed just ask a board to disclose the general nature of business like pending litigation or the general nature of “any” business which would need to be each lawsuit that’s in pending litigation? To this day our Board has been doing the former. A second example, while a Board is in Executive Session, does this Provision state a board may discuss pending litigation or any subject that can remotely touch on a legal matter, past, present, or future? To this day our Board has been doing the latter.
One might also be surprised to learn there’s been an Executive Meeting in each and every Regular Meeting since May of 2011. Yes, each and every meeting, a 300% increase from the previous eight years. In addition, it’s odd that since February 2013, the Minutes have not recorded what the Board was to discuss in their Executive Sessions? Technically that means either these Minutes are incorrect or our Board is not complying with Statue 82.108 section “B”.
In September’s meeting we heard certain Directors argued for examples of what issues they may have discussed other than pending litigation and personnel. So let’s go there.
First off, are these directors wanting owners to believe that while they were in their last 18 Executive Sessions that totaled 1145 minutes, they only talked about three pending lawsuits or about someone who works here? Really! Especially when there’s been little happening in these lawsuits the last 18 months and no one seems to have been reprimanded or fired in personnel.
Secondly, do these directors wanting examples need any more proof than their own Board President freely admitting he let inappropriate discussions take place? What, did he somehow misspeak in the last meeting?
If more than this is needed, we have what was recorded in the Minutes on what the Directors described as discussion topics or the Motions they immediately passed after each Executive Session......
Absences, resignations and vacancies of Directors.....Ramona’s orientation.....Security expectations on issuing passes.....Sending of a Healthcare Letter to Aramark.....The employees use of amenities.....Changing the manager’s office.....Review of manger’s credit card usage.....Seeking of new legal services specializing in real estate and litigation capabilities.....Getting a second legal opinion concerning the contract with Mr. Freeland.....Adding of “LIV manage rental property only” to a motion regarding visitors viewing rental property.....The sending of letters to the owners of lots 671 and 384 requesting that they appear before the board.....Sending letters to an individual and to Aramark because certain procedures are not being followed.....The sending of a “request for qualifications” to law firms that handle real estate and litigations......The asking of attorney Garcia to set up a town hall meeting......To award $800 net to LIV’s business manager.
Want more? OK.
President Guerra announced a Management Contract Committee and a Management Evaluation Committee had been formed while in Executive Session.
Apparent discussions to hold a future dredging meeting with Freeland.
To hire a certified peace officer.
To reallocate $120,000 from the infrastructure fund towards the purchase of a new CD and secure $120,000 from the Edward Jones account in order purchase a new $100,000 CD and transfer $20,000 into LIV’s Operative Fund.
There’s a lot more but I feel the points been made.
Comments
Read more...