Our Village

Question for Joe,
Doesn't LIV bylaws call for the canals to be kept at a depth of 6 ft? all around sea wall to sea wall corner to corner,
and not just the center or middle of the canals as it appears to be the intention of some sneaky Directors?

Question: To All Directors that have served or currently are serving (imposed by his accomplices)where were you when:

1)The parking Lots fiasco was taking place? (2 or 3 of you are Contactors some of you are doing business in the park)... we got burn not once but twice and 'apparently' as the parking lot stands today it wont pass TX DOT Code? how could it? with 1 to 2 inches of asphalt, such a quality work that even boat empty trailers are sinking in...and ladies and gentleman the sinking has begun just look at the lake in front of Maintain dept.
Why is ARAMARK responsability in this issue been ignored?

2)Where were you: when the canal lawsuit plaintiffs (2) try to sit down and reason with the BOD and find a solution but you wouldn't even let them speak... and instead you let them sue LIV.

3)Where were you a few years back? When the rental Pools was raided but a current Director and his ex-business partner, LIV rental Pool never recuperated from that blow and since then has lost 100's of thousands of dollars year after year and the people doing 'LEGIT' real estate business also suffered with unfair business competition...

Agreed 100% with the comment from before: No more re-electing Directors (Compadres) and certainly NO more electing Directors that are conducting business in the Park

To the winter texan' owners that are trying to take action and are calling for a private investigation and want to invite over the IRS for an audit on all of these issues all I can say is hurry up and do it before you leave, haven't you notice things usually get pushed and pushed so once you leave there is anarchy and chaos...

someone mentioned a SC selling for 150k I have new for you actually 2 just sold: one for 150k and one for 145k and empty lots are beign offered for under 25k

Wake up and smell the coffee!
P.D: One more thing STOP using the race card (Mex.. this, Mex....s that, everything is the Mex...s fault) or sooner or later we will have another lawsuit on our hands (there is Federal laws to that effect)... careful there the word is out!

(To your question for me) Nothing that I have read in the Bylaws has specifics for how one is to maintain our canals. ARTICLE II of the Declaration does says that “Canals or channels, up to but not including bulkheads, are included as Limited Common Elements for use by the owners of lots abutting the canals or channels including space for boat docks built in compliance with standards established by the Association.”
(My impute to Director question #2) It was made complicated and could have been handled better, but one has to look at who was President then that had what seemed full control of the Board.
(My impute to Director question #3) I vehemently disagree with your assessment that the losses from the Rental Dept. came due a Director/Partner (the raiders?) who was hired by owners to handled their rentals. First, if doing a better job at prepping and renting a property is seen as unfair competition to others and our Rental Dept. can’t recover from the poor job they did, that’s America my friend. Do a better job and people will hire you. Second, we have had substantial Rental Dept. losses from 2004 and not from just a few years back. One should feel the problem here is not from a few who get asked to renting an owner’s property, it's the owners who fail to follow the rental policies we have in the Declaration’s Article VII, which should be amended or removed.
Plus, if you eliminate electing those people who do business in the Park, then you would have to include those owners who rent their properties. Renting a property is a business activity.
Sorry I had to impose my opinion on #2 and 3, but I felt what had been expressed was not having the true context of the matter and you did asked me to answer a question.

who was the president when the lawsuit was filed

thank you joe

Minutes show that Pat Burke was President from March, 2009 until the Regular Meeting Minutes on May 26,2010 said this happened. “Montalvo-commented on the abuse of power shown by Pat Burke as President giving 3 specifics this year alone. In addition having two (2) potential lawsuits pending the outcome of this meeting. MOTION: Sec. Montalvo made a motion for the Board of Directors to remove Pat Burke immediately as President. Dir. Guerra seconded. Discussion took place. Dir. Guerra explained to the Board why he had seconded the motion. Dir. Bergsma via Skye, stated that in his past experience as BOD in other entities and given that Montalvo has pending lawsuits should meeting not go in his, favor, he suggested that Pres. Burke resign her position as President, and asked, Montalvo if this would suffice situation for pending lawsuits, and Sec. Montalvo indicated that it would. Pres. Burke boldly commented that if BOD voted her out off president seat she would resign from the BOD.
Call for the question. Gagan-abstain; Steffensen-No; Halbach-abstain; Bergsma-abstain; Guerra-yes; White-yes; Montalvo-yes. Pat Burke stated "Motion passed, I resign! Good luck with your lawsuits!" She left. (Please Note: Motion did NOT pass and there were no objections or corrections immediately after Pat Burke's resignation, but BOD focused on her resignation instead).”
The Maurice O. Berry lawsuit was filed either before or after this event, see http://www.rcclaw.com/Trial-Activity/Berry/

Joey,
Thanks for your response on #3, it's obvious to me you are not fully understanding of what transpired back then (Pool Rental depletion by an acting BOD ember and his accomplish-es), perhaps you can talk to any of the Realtors(current and past)to get a freshie on the events...
1) People selling real estate without a license (even advertising it)when you do this you are hurting legit realtors pockets...,
2) People acting as a rental agents (While BOD Directors calling on owners to give them their rentals offering lower commission than LIV Rental Pool) Huge conflict of interest...also doing this without a license (now that changed to Maintainance property agents, pleeease! we were born yesterday ha ha give me a break)
3)IRS issues
IF everything was fine and dandy how come the Director was removed...?


No more Directors doing business in the park should be allowed, no builders no rental owners no service providers ...period....

Would love to know what Aramark has done with 35 Million USD collected in the last 10 years because LIV has nothing to show for ... Having a New Auditor is what is going to take.

And one more thing:
Joey Run ...this time you have our full support and so many people fed up with the system and the recycling of Directors.
The Door to Door Bad Mouthing of your persona won't work this time.
(same people as above, don't let them fool you)

With respect I think we are thinking in two different directions. I don’t need a refresher course on a realtor's opinion or point of view. Everyone on both sides have had them and they differed. Everyone can also argue about the conflict of interest issue, but these are not the points I was trying to address because most of that argument can be viewed as conjecture.
What isn’t is the unmistakable fact that many renting owners are choosing to not follow the Declaration of Covenants Article VII and that is what’s penetrating the Rental Department numbers and not the people these Covenant breakers hire. Why do they do this? Without a doubt it’s because LIV’s Rental Office has inadequate service and high commissions.
I’ve been in sales most of my life and profit is not a dirty word to me, but me having to subsidize renting owners so they can make a profit bothers the dickens out of me. Again, let’s address what the real problem is here is in that owners need to go through the agonizing procedure to vote at ending Article VII and produce a revenue policy structure that would at least pay for the costs of the renters using our Park.
As to who can and can’t be a DIrector I feel any owner who pays a condo fee should be able to run. Any Director that could have a conflict of interest on an issue should remove themselves. Oversight of a Director doing so should be managed by the Board President. If that fails, the owners should request that the VIllage attorney bring it to light.
It’s nice to see we can agree to disagree and keep it civil. Thanks

Agree to Disagree

We are serious there is a hunger among owners for New Un-Bias Directors (No more recycling...None go home have some decency) ... Joe Run! Townhall meeting (with no directors) badly needed
All people want is transparency and answers...

New Lawyers
New Auditors

Ready for new blood! Get some decent, honest people to run no more power hungry people. some poeple want all the power and don't know its ruining our village.

I heard that since gas prices are about half of what they were when the BOD agreed to the dredging project with the current company, the BOD was considering renegotiations on price. Anyone know if there is any truth to this line of thinking?

Joe wrote, "What isn’t is the unmistakable fact that many renting owners are choosing to not follow the Declaration of Covenants Article VII and that is what’s penetrating the Rental Department numbers and not the people these Covenant breakers hire."
DOWN WITH COVENANT BREAKERS! HOW DO WE GET A LIST AND WHY DOESN'T THE BOD STOP THEM! IS THIS NOT GROUNDS FOR ALL THE HOMEOWNERS WHO HAVE LOST $ TO BRING A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT?

Response to comment if Board was considering renegotiation of dredging bid.
Yes, renegotiation of the Derrick dredging bid was addressed last month in the same fashion we have come to love with our directors. They first approved of the original dredging amount proposed, then tell the attorney to call Bellaire Engineering who had sent two of three dredging bids that were useless that they did such. Then our Board President appoints the attorney who had never read the 18 month old bid until last month along with Mary Steffensen who has since moved out of LIV, along with a new GM who didn’t appropriate the original bid, and Armando to try to renegotiate a lower bid. Good luck with that. Flat amazing!

How about a town hall meeting excluding the BOD so we can discuss this dredging! Inside lot owners should not have to pay the dredging assessment!

on the Townhall meeting (S)...
About time!

Outhouse man wrote; "Inside lot owners should not have to pay the dredging assessment!" How about changing the governing documents to reflect the reality that every time we have a storm we could have to dredge again unless we remove the mandate to keep canals at a 6 or 6 1/2 ft depth! Even some owners on the water do not use watercraft that require that much clearance (or any watercraft) and no one should be allowed to bring in a boat that requires such depth and wasn't the boat that is causing this law suit too large for the dock? I heard it was Aramark's GM that allowed it, why are we not suing them to recoup our losses as well as the $ lost on the parking lot that they were supervising, was it not their GM who paid too much out before the work was at a completion rate to be paid more? Guess it is just easier to assess owners over and over and now the plan is to raise our condo fees mid year and assess $3000 to each lot owner for infrastructure improvements. And all the while huge losses are allowed to go on all over the village. Much could be done to stop the hemorrhaging of our funds but all directors can do is line their own pockets and use our $ to fund their special interests and create a following. Why not a resolution to cut funding to loosing "amenities" and a full court press to STOP THE COVENENT BREAKERS,AS JOE AND OTHERS HERE HAVE SAID!

Everyone has a right to express his or her opinion but it upsets me when people report things that have no basis or truth. Yes, things are a mess right now but starting ugly rumors will not help.
Have you, Anonymous from 1/14/16, ever read our By-Laws, our Declaration, our Rules or Policies? If so…where does it say that it is mandated we keep our canals at 6 or 6.5 feet deep? I have read them & can’t find it.
I’ve been going to the meetings and have never heard anyone say they would be raising our condo fees mid-year or assessing each of us $3,000 for infrastructure improvements. Please cite your source. Who said it & when was it said? Since we will be electing 7 new directors in March, how could you or anyone know what will be happening mid-year??

I also agree that people shouldn’t say things that aren’t true. I am not the one who made those comments nor am I taking that person’s side. But I do recall Treasurer Weaver either in December or November when he was talking on the budget saying that it would be six months before they run out of money and have to raise the condo fees. It might have been last month’s meeting where he was happy to say that they found enough money to pay the bills for the whole year.
Mr. Waller did say at a meeting that it looked like it will cost near 4 million dollars to do the upgrades to sewer and water lines plus road repair. I don’t see what was said by this person on those two things as being incorrect.
I believe what the Berry lawsuit attorneys used as canal measurements were from the old Sea Cottage for sale advertisements.
Like you I also have never read dredging specifics in the bylaws.

So Annon.1/16/16 5:51 PM, did the post of another blogger on 1/17/16 12:06 AM answer your need for citing of source. For someone who supposedly goes to meetings, it is distressing to know you never heard any of this info! Time to turn those aids up or get a hearing test- "no basis or truth"- REALLY! Before you attack someone on things you know nothing about perhaps you could respond more like, "Gee I never heard that info, can anyone tell me more about that" rather than leap to an attack! Shame on you! Many of us heard that info loud and clear. When in doubt ask Joe as he tapes it all. This is the type of UNWARRENTED attacks we all could live without, it just causes dis-harmony among neighbors but perhaps that is what you meant to do, hope not! Apologies are always welcomed.