|
10/31/2008
I think if anyone resigns from this
board, with elections just being completed, then the person with the
next highest votes should be on the board. That is how the community
voted. On our amenities. At one time the Tennis association, which I
don't think exists any more, would have socials and invite everyone to
attend. With this money we did improvements on the facility costing our
members nothing. Since this time our Tennis Pro chooses to do nothing
about trying to get new members or trying to improve or facility. My
point is why can't all the facilities, ie golf, swim, and tennis try and
raise money thru social events inviting everyone around the area using
the money to improve our facilities. This does work and would help our
lack of revenue and would be not cost to our members.
 The board is not
under any obligation to appoint the next highest vote-getter at the
annual meeting to a vacant seat. Don't you think, though, that
appointing Jim to vacant seat in spite of the one year rule would be
sending a message loud and clear to the membership?
|
|
10/31/2008
There are many people in our sub
division that say there is nothing to offer them. Why not ask them what
they would like to have. Maybe bingo or bridge for the people at one of
our facilities. We might even try and get some volunteer's to maybe cut
a lawn for the elderly once a month. Maybe provide transportation to a
social event at one of our facilities. If people don't play golf, tennis
or swim create something that they are interested in doing and provide
that service. I believe that is what a community should provide for the
residents.
|
|
10/31/2008
Isn't it interesting that Selena is
waiting to resign until after the election, so that Jim Moss could be
appointed to fill her place without having to be on the "slate." I
could tell you who the Improvement Movement is, but you can bet they
wouldn't identify themselves. Even Henry Lawson didn't have a sign
in his yard this year for the "slate", because he was so embarrassed by
their use of the Improvement Committee's name and their tactics.
Guess some people will do anything to get elected, but right now I
certainly wouldn't want to be on the Board. It has made very poor
decisions in the past and gotten us to where we are today. I think
they meant well, but if you neglect simple maintenance long enough, it
becomes a crisis and that is where we are today. Now they have a deep
hole to dig out of. Good luck.
|
|
10/30/2008
If the issue of revenue has to do with
the lack of capital to keep our common properties in good repair, then
it seems that an increase dedicated solely for the purpose of capital
investment funding would be the option needed. Wait, that was just
proposed and defeated by the members at large. What does that tell us?
Perhaps a better improvement plan with more details on costs would have
been more succesful. This writer doubts it. It is clear that we have
many members who bought here because of the depressed values of homes,
relative to the eastern shore, in general. With these owners, who cannot
actually afford to use and enjoy the facilities will never vote an
approval. So, the downward spiral continues. It is apparent, when
comparing our community to other associations with common properties of
similar description that ours is underfunded. Even with the thousands we
have to contribute, the money is not there to properly maintain, equip
and upgrade our common property. What is the difference in ours and
others? In most all cases, the association board has the authority to
set the dues, without membership approval. In fact, our own board did
itself and our community a huge injustice by stripping that power from
itself. That move, years ago, was improper and violated the very by-laws
the board operated on at the time. The return of that power to the
board, who is regulated each year by elections, is the only sure way to
provide continued upkeep and maintenance of all our common properties in
an acceptable fashion. In closing, the board should move forward with
using the powers that are rightly defined in the original by-laws and
consistent with the articles of incorporation of this association. Then,
if people think that the LFPOA is an unneccesary burden, they can leave
with the advantage of being able to sell their home at a higher price
because the properties will be on the way to improvement, or being
improved.
So, it is your
opinion that there is nothing that any board can do; no services that
can be provided; no value that can be envisioned, that will make the
membership agreeable to even the smallest of dues increase. Do you
think that it is remotely possible that the membership would agree to a
$1 increase in dues? Wouldn't a one dollar increase in dues bring
in more money than the swim fees that were implemented? The membership
voted in 2004 to keep their amenities even though the plan called for
reduction in dues to $17.50 a month. Why do you suppose they did
that? Could it be that it was because at that time the boards had
been trying to deliver more and better services for the basic dues and
the members knew it?
|
|
10/30/2008
Let's assume for
the moment that the new board chooses not to exercise its ability to
amend the by-laws that the previous board gained with their questionable
action last April. Let's assume, also, that sooner or later some
future board is going to have to find a way to increase revenues.
What ideas can we offer to help them find a way to do that? Can
Lake Forest do something to generate more usage and revenue from users?
Can we do something to increase the likelihood that the membership's
attitudes will change in such a way that they might be more open to a
small increase in dues? Is going public even an answer, if we were
willing to try it? That is one your old weblord is doubtful about.
When one compares the cost of using our amenities with that of the
competition, one finds that we are really not much, if any, cheaper.
No one needs to get their hopes up that the public will come rushing
into Lake Forest to lay their cash down, even if we did say it would be
OK. We expect the board to come up with answers to these
questions. Why is that? They are just regular members like
the rest of us. I don't think there is a professional club manager
in the group. So, if it's all that easy to find answers to questions like
these, then why don't we throw them a few hints?
For the record, unless that April action
is overturned either in court or in a special meeting of the membership,
I believe that some board in the not too distant future will increase
the dues and increase the cap on borrowing without asking anyone.
|
|
10/29/2008
Maybe the "Improvement Movement" should
identify themselves so that more of us could REALLY tell them how we
feel about their campaign practices.
|
|
10/29/2008
We may not have to wait for a new
"slate", rumor has it that Selena Vaughn will be resigning soon and Jim
Moss wants and expects to be elected to fill her spot on the Board. A
few years ago the Board (to keep a Director who resigned, from running
again in the next election) reinstated the clause that a Director must
wait one year before being elected to the Board again (By-Laws 5.25).
The Board must elect a person to fill a vacancy (By-Law 5.9) so by it's
own wisdom (spearheaded by the same Jim Moss I believe) does not have
the authority to elect him to the Board. But wait! The Board last year
passed a resolution that they can ignore the By-Laws and do as they d**m
well please. ;-) The honest way to fill a vacant position is to ask
one of the people who had the guts (stupidity?) to run for the Board to
fill a vacancy when there is one.
If they haven't
figured Jim out by now, they deserve him.
|
|
10/29/2008
The new color scheme is just plain
ugly.
Don't hold back.
Tell me what you really think. ;-) I was actually fond of the
gold, myself. Don't worry, though, I'm not through experimenting.
|
|
10/28/2008
Just think; the next slate of whatever
will have Jim Moss on it lol.
|
|
10/28/2008
Carl, Maybe you should call ACORN for
help in getting the vote out. The fact is that ballots are handed out at
the annual meeting as well as mailed to each lot owner/voter. Activism
in our neighborhood is a good thing. I do not believe that anyone was
coerced or intiimidated, and certainly there were no "Mickey Mouses"
that voted. All votes and ballots were validated as being eligible.
Maybe you could sit down and discuss with the "Improvement Movement"
your ideas on making Lake Forest a better neighborhood.
We did hear that
members were being given pre-filled ballots and that they were asked to
give them to the canvassing person.
|
|
10/27/2008
It has been several years since I
contributed to the “Grapevine” but I wanted to thank all of you who
voted for me in the LFPOA election. Over the years I have found that it
is impossible to win when faced with ballot box stuffing. Yes STUFFING!
The perpetrators take stacks of pre-filled-in ballots and ask unknowing
people to sign and verify them. So it has been told to me by one of
these people. Until the two main culprits are denied the privilege of
choosing our board, we will be at their mercy when they select the next
slate of ___. Those of you who railed against Purcell’s voting for
Directors and participated in these actions should be ashamed. Here is a
way to help protect honest candidates and make it more difficult for the
unscrupulous to stuff the ballot box. THE BOARD ONLY HAS TO REQUIRE THAT
A VOTE MUST BE RETURNED IN A NUMBERED POSTAGE PAID ENVELOPE TO BE
COUNTED. The Board already requires us to initial each page and sign,
date, list member number, and site/lot number. This is not a secret
ballot by any means. Again thank you for voting for me. Carl Kauffman
You should
contribute to the Grapevine more often and let everyone know what is
going on.
|
|
10/25/2008
Boy am I glad to see you and John kiss
and make up; I think you are both great guys and really do appreciate
the efforts of both of you.
Now we both get to
sit back and watch the board and wonder "What in the world are these
people thinking!" :-)
|
|
10/24/2008
I was pleasantly surprised to see the
enforcement guidelines regarding delinquent member dues with my latest
statement. This step is way past due (pardon the pun);) I am sure I am
not alone in this sentiment.
|
|
10/24/2008
Okay, time to move forward. Lake Forest
is indeed a great place with a great location and a plan for a beautiful
recreational community. Whether the buildings are old or not shouldn't
matter, right. Let's enjoy our homes and be happy. I am gone from the
board and have plenty to do otherwise. Good luck to the future board in
all their decisions. Good luck to this site. It looks like it finally
had some traffic. And Mitch, Good luck to you. - I am out- John
Peterson.
And, John, thank
you for all your work on behalf of the community. I'm not sure
that everyone knows that our board members are volunteers, not paid
staff. It's a tough job and you gave more to it than most.
|
|
10/23/2008
When is lake forest going to update all
the buildings to be with in the ADA guidelines? My daughter is in a
wheel chair and can not enter any of the buildings through the front
door. update what you have with the budget you have and quit spending
money on things that don't matter. That is what we all have to do (work
with in a budget) the POA should be no different.
|
|
10/22/2008
I feel the need to comment on some of
this. Can I start with, "Since The by-laws were changed in 1982 to allow
the membership to control costs of dues, the subdivision has seen a
continual decline. This decline stems from the underfunding of capital."
The decline has nothing to do with control of the dues. What would be
different if the dues were $100 per month? The simple fact is, Lake
Forrest is OLD. And decline happens with age. Growing up in Fairhope, I
saw downtown decline, the fruit and nut section go down...it was a mess.
But something changed. Over time, it took back the pride that it had
lost. The funny thing is, those same people who complained back then
were taking up new roots in places such as ours truly, Lake Forrest. It
was the place to be back then. Is it still? We are in a PRIME
location...our area is different from the cookie-cutter neighborhoods
that spring up in every corn field in Baldwin County. Sure our houses
are old, but with some good decisions, and involvement from those of us
who do care, this is nothing but a waiting gold mine.
Bingo!
Agreed!
|
|
10/22/2008
Interesting that you slammed my ethics
just before agreeing with many points I made. There will never be a
popular way to increase association dues, or even get it voted in. So it
appears, that by your own admission, you had to go against the member's
will to accomplish what you deemed as reasonable and prudent just a few
years ago. Now, you want to call the very same type action unethical. Is
this Obama-talk? Face it, you were too weak to keep the board with the
ability to manage the association. You cowered to an angry mob and
changed it back.
As to the ethical
issue, during your years on the board the record number of meetings held
in secret, the ignored studies and surveys, and the action in April to
use Robert's Rules of Order to change the by-laws are all pretty much
self-evident. At this point, I see no reason to continue the
subject. As far as our boards were concerned, the rules of the
association were always followed by the book. Frankly, with the
"restructuring" group standing over our shoulders much of that time, we
really did not have a choice. Don't confuse your action with
anything we did. There's no comparison.
As for as the angry mob comment, I don't
really recall one of any significance in 2003. Sure, we had a
handful of people with complaints, but no more than we heard the other
night. That year we presented a few amendments for the membership
to consider, just like the board did this year. As required, they
were submitted to the membership at least 30 days in advance. As
we usually did each year, we contacted the developer, to explain the
amendments and ask for support. The developer then, just as now,
had a large number of votes. We began getting some negative
feedback from the membership regarding the amendment to change the
section on amending the by-laws. That motion attempted to remove
some of the ambiguity about what constituted a majority vote and also
give the ability to change the by-laws to the Board of Directors.
It was that last part that was in contention. We heard the same
objections from the developer on the evening we met and it was pretty
clear that the amendment had no chance of passing. Since it was
very important that the wording of what amounted to a majority vote be
clarified, we made a proposal to the developer. If they would vote
for the amendment, we would promise that the only action the board would
take with its new authority to amend the by-laws, would be to remove
that authority at our first stated meeting. The night of the
annual meeting we made that same proposal and promise to the rest of the
membership. The developer agreed to our proposal and voted for the
amendment and as promised the board removed the offending language at
our first meeting. Now, if you believe that honoring one's word is
a sign of weakness, then maybe we should revisit the ethics issue again.
In any case, since such a vote required a majority of directors and
since all nine of them voted unanimously to keep our word, I guess you
would say that we had a whole board of weak directors. I choose to
believe that we had a whole board of honorable men and women. By
the way, the rest of the membership didn't agree to our proposal and the
only way it passed was with the developer's vote.
Speaking of angry mobs, I never found them
to be much of a problem. The chair simply has to remain calm and
not over-react, let everyone say their piece and then they can all go
home and tell their family how they stood up for their principles.
No problem. The biggest and most outspoken group, or mob as you
put it, gathered at the annual meeting the year of the "Restructuring"
proposal. Now that was exciting, although some of my directors
didn't enjoy it very much. But, to me it demonstrated how much the
membership really valued their amenities. I thought we came out of
that meeting with a real mandate, and the next year turned out to be a
disappointment, because we were unable to do anything with it.
That was the year Henry joined the board. I call it my "Point of
Order" year. We got nothing done. The last angry mob I
recall was the one you were leading in 2005.
|
|
10/22/2008
Okay . . . now here's my two cents . .
. I voted against the fee increase and the board having financial
authority because we have been in and are still in a RECESSION! I may
need all my money to put gas in my car so I can get to work, or buy
food, or put in savings for retirement, but I don't need to pay for
something I don't even use - the amenities are of NO tangible value to
me as a resident. During the past 5 years of the 16 years that I'ved
lived here, the neighborhood has been going to hell in a handbag because
of: (1) renters and (2) previous lack of enforcement of the convenants
(I have seen an increase in enforcement since I'm on one of the "drive
by" routes). It is not going downhill because of the antiquated
facilities that should have been torn down or renovated at least 15
years ago! Hindsight is 20-20; the future is here now and something
needs to be done without bankrupting residents each month for monies
that are not used wisely. And speaking more about renters, as soon as
the renters find out (becasue no one told them, i.e. the property owner)
that there are covenants, the renters want to move out of Lake Forest .
. . they are not here for the amenities . . . they just want to park
their commercial vehicles in their front yards and they do not
contribute to the neighborhood - I haven't met one that feels like this
is their home - how could it be - because they are renting and have NO
investment in the neighborhood. I am also one of the many who do not use
the facilities - I do not play golf, I do not boat, I do not ride
horses, I do not eat out - what with the prices today, who can afford to
do that, I do not play tennis and I do not swim. The one form of
exercise I do is walk - which is free. If my memory serves me, when I
lived in a subdivision in the Houston area with a country club, if you
wanted to do all those things and have the prestige of "being a member
of the country club" you had to JOIN and pay annual dues. So, those of
us who didn't want to (or could not afford to)join didn't have to come
up with dues. But as I have suggested to the webmaster before, perhaps,
if everyone has to pay for all the amenities, then start charging all
adults in a household - 1st adult=$37.50; 2nd adult=$25; and so on . . .
I just don't see how I should pay $50 or $37.50 as a single person when
the family of 4 across the street get the same amenities for the same
price! And, yes, I know that the fee is based on "per house" not per
person per household. You need to "sell the sizzle, not the steak" by
marketing the amenities as Annual memberships not only to residents, but
to outside sources, i.e., corporations and individuals who live in
subdivisions that do not provide t heir residents with amenities.
Personally, I just don't see an end to this "dog chasing his tail"
routine . . .
|
|
10/22/2008
It looks as though once again, the
members will fail to properly fund the association and its properties.
While increasing dues is distasteful, it is a necessary and needed step.
How long do we let the properties suffer? No amount of good planning or
sound management will fund building and pool improvements that so many
members want. Consider that gasoline, which is used in our carts and
mowing equipment, has been as high as $4.00 a gallon. When the current
dues were set, gas was at what? $1.15 a gallon? We also know our
insurance cost alone has grown over $60,000. These two items alone, mean
that the associa tion has nearly $100,000 less to use on improving the
property. It is clear that other costs are going up as well. Labor and
benefits escalate. Equipment costs, food costs, energy costs, and so
forth. To think that this association can continue to pay the same , and
then not expect assessments and borrowing to occur is nonsense. This
very issue has lead to the Country Club demolition debate. How can one
expect to keep this building open and operational without funding to do
so. It will now be clear that 2/3 of it must go. Even so, that will only
be temporary in nature. As inflation pressures continue, costs will most
assuredly rise. What goes next? What costs do we get rid of? The pools,
in total, cost around $140,000 grand to operate. Can we take those? How
about the Yacht Club? The golf course? The path we are on is set. As
costs continue to increase, service, upkeep, and investment will
decline. We are slowly eliminating the association by starving it to an
ugly death. To offset this challenge, the board used Robert's Rules to
change the by-laws and return them to their original form. This original
form allowed the board to amend the by-laws and basically let the board
set the dues structure as needed to properly fund and operate our
amenities and common properties. Since The by-laws were changed in 1982
to allow the membership to control costs of dues, the subdivision has
seen a continual decline. This decline stems from the underfunding of
capital. The association is ill-prepared to replace , improve, or even
maintain our many amenities at this juncture. The solution is there, if
the board will take decisive action. Our association, without a board
that can rightly set fees and dues, is on a downward spiral. If you do
not see that, you have your in the sand or stuck somewhere where the sun
doesn't shine. As the downward spiral continues, values will only stay
depressed and get further from the standards of this city. The last two
years, t hrough borrowing and assessments, the board has been able to
make some improvements, but not nearly what is needed. And these two
actions cannot continue to fund improvements. Surely a real limit is out
there as to how much debt the association can take on. And over time,
the assessments will only cover operational shortfalls. The board needs
to unilaterally act to raise the dues and test this power in the courts.
The future of our amenities and properties is clearly at stake. What
other action is there? Selling assets? Disposing of properties? We
cannot have our cake and eat it too. We either fund our properties to
the rightful level of existence, or lose them. It is that simple. Good
Luck in keeping them up and keeping them, period, otherwise. I do not
wish to say.."I told you so". Go ahead, Mitch, let's hear how glad you
are that I am no longer in a leadership role because I have it wrong.
Oh, and don't tell me where I am wrong in the process, please show me
how it is done. -John Peterson, former board member.
The by-laws do not
allow amendments through the use of Roberts Rules of Order. They
are very specific about how amendments can be enacted. When those
in a leadership position choose to use unethical measures to gain power,
then it is time that they be replaced, because whatever merits may
exist, the means does not justify the end. Yes, it is good that
you and Jim are no longer on the Board of Directors. If you resort
to a measure like you did in this instance, then what else would you do
at another time when in your opinion conditions warranted it?
Furthermore, for the Board of Directors to use its access to a large
amount of funds in order to force a handful of members to reach into
their own pockets to defend their rights is just wrong.
As far as the financial situation you
describe, you should remember that it was my board that managed to gain
a dues increase before and it was my board that originally asked for the
by-laws amendment that your group took with the improper use of Roberts
Rules of Order. So, I agree to a point with your position.
The Board of Directors needs to go back to the drawing board and come up
with a measure that will be supported by the membership. They need
to have a heart to heart discussion with someone who has influence on or
control of a large number of votes. I believe a deal can be made
that will make the situation viable. However, in order to make
such a deal, everyone needs to believe that those involved can be
trusted. If the board will take such an approach, I will be happy
to offer what little help I can.
|
|
10/21/2008
I have to disagree with you regarding
rental property. I live on a circle and there are two rentals, one has
three cars and a truck, some on the lawn. The other rental has now
populated the neighborhood with many roaming cats, three that I count
and two dogs which at times are free to roam. We have lived here twelve
years and there have been many problems with those two homes, so as I
said living near rentals is not desirable and they certainly decrease
the value of our home.
The same issues you
describe can be attributed to some homeowners in Lake Forest. If
the architectural committee would spend as much time on rentals as they
do property owners, who put their trashcans out too early, they might be
able to solve some of those problems. Also, complaining about the
rentals will not accomplish anything. They are not going away. So,
the thing to do is implement programs to encourage (force) them to
comply with the covenants and also market the amenities to them since
they have the right to use them as well.
|
|
10/21/2008
Personally I really would rather you
not encourage these people to stay who feel they want to move because
they pay $35 a month and get nothing out of it. Let them sell, the
Eastern Shore is exploding and there will soon be many who will want to
get in here and enjoy the services offered. If not, they will at least
have enough common sense to realize that they do in fact derive value
added from the LFPOA. You know as well as I that all these shopping
centers are not being built based on present population. It's coming,
and if you don't like it here, move on!!
Who's encouraging
them to stay? I agree with you!
|
|
10/21/2008
Last night's annual
meeting was a real disappointment to this writer. Instead of
interested members showing up and demanding that the Board of Directors
act in an ethical manner, while tending to the business of the
association, we had mostly those members who sing the blues about having
an association at all. They complained about having to pay the
whopping $35 or $50 a month for the maintenance of the amenities.
"We don't use the amenities", they said. So what! Whose
fault is that? These shortsighted people have no concept of the
value that the amenities offers our community, whether they use them or
not. Furthermore, if they don't use the amenities, then they
should make suggestions to the board of what services they might use.
This board, like all others, would love to provide any service, if
enough members would really use it. Oh, there were a couple of
supporters who got up to speak, but unfortunately they tended to be the
blowhards who just make matters worse. And, there was one member
who pointed out correctly that it would be a very poor decision for the
board to ignore the vote of the membership regarding this year's
amendments and increase charges anyway.
Sure, the board has made a few bad choices over the last few years.
They let some of their less capable directors make decisions for them.
They made at least one very poor choice of manager. Nevertheless,
a person would have to be a complete idiot to subject oneself to the
abuse that comes with serving on the LFPOA Board of Directors if he or
she really did not care for the community. I think they do care
and I do not think they are idiots. Hopefully, one of their own
will step forward to take the lead and actually consider that the
membership has a right to expect that their concerns be considered.
Ed Kirby and I are still considering
re-filing the lawsuit, if the board disregards the members' vote by
raising the dues and borrowing cap anyway. But, after listening to
those people last night, we are both wondering "what's the point?"
Four of us chipped in to file the original suit. Many people came
forward and said, "thanks, you guys are doing great!" But, when we
suggested that they come forward and help us by showing up at court or
helping us get the message out, well they just didn't seem to have the
time. If anyone thinks that the biggest problem in Lake Forest is
renters, he is wrong. The fact is that renters offer a good
marketing target that the association has not figured out how to tap.
The biggest problem in Lake Forest is, and always has been, apathy on
the part of those who really should be getting involved. Well,
folks, we are just liable to get the community we deserve.
|
|
10/21/2008
We were selling our home this past year
and when the market picks back up, we still plan to sell. While we love
the neighbors and area one big selling feature for us is the $35 less a
month that will be going towards nothing. We use none of the facilities
and would care less if they were there or not. Adding $15 a month only
encourages us to move more. Besides, money is tight now for everyone and
that extra cash is going to my gas tank. Do you really think that it
will increase property values to have more in fees tacked on? People
have a hard enough time buying in our neighborhood be cause of increased
insurance costs for being near the bay!
Give the board some
ideas of what they might do to provide services that you would use.
|
|
10/20/2008
Annual meeting
tonight at Daphne Civic Center - 7:00p.m.
|
|
10/20/2008
You may want to review the "Fair Credit
Reporting Act" as to whether these names can be published. The problem
stems from the distribution of our newsletter to public places, not just
to members. Attorney for the board says no, and that's good enough for
me.
Perhaps they
weren't being distributed to public places back then.
|
|
10/17/2008
If we truly need to increase dues by
$15.00 or so per month, why not allow that on a use it or loose it basis
on food and beverage, shop items, etc. I have long been of the opinion
that we do little to encourage use of our under utilized facilities by
our members. This will not only contribute to the extra $15 but will
bring people in the door who will enjoy themselves and spend even more.
|
|
10/17/2008
Our new controller has taken a more
pro-active role in collections. We are now calling members sooner and
working to get them up to date with dues, rather them sending them to a
collections agent. This seems to be working very well. As for
banks and so forth. I do not think member information like that
can be made public. Sorry.
Actually, earlier
directors investigated the ramifications of publishing a delinquency
list and found that it was OK. So, for a while the board did
publish the list, including the banks. A recent board board
stopped doing it because it offended too many of their supporters. ;-)
|
|
10/16/2008
Please list the members that are in
arrears on their monthly dues to Lake Forest in the LAKE FOREST
newspaper. We used to see where banks and real estate companies owed
thousands of dollars in arrears. How about keeping us abreast of how
much they owe and what is being done to collect these fees. If you would
collect from these people, there would be no reason to consider a dues
increase.
|
|
10/15/2008
I also attended the meeting about the
capital plan that the board is promoting and I must have missed the
people, who applauded the board's work. Perhaps they were there
and I just missed them. There were plenty of the complaining types
there, though.
|
|
10/15/2008
I just looked at the Official website
and a picture of the C.C. is ther in all it's glory ! Maybe you could
photoshop the picture with the sections eliminated and send it to them !
A before and after appraisal picture--lol
|
|
10/15/2008
I just returned to Daphne from a couple
months business start-up project. I am trying to catch up on all the
activities in L.F. before I cast a vote. Can you explain why the country
club will be halfway destroyed?? Won't this hurt the assessment of our
property holdings as an association?? Is the yacht club going to
be leased for 99yrs. and will we lose the use of the property?? I have
heard the golf course(18) looks great and the ...well sort of 9 is still
a disaster area. Is the Tennis club courts repaired and is the pool
still closed to homeowners for the next season?? Why ca n't the
association have a vote to stop this group campaigning--everyone should
run independently and on their own merits. Well, nothing has changed
here... maybe- we're sinking too?
|
|
10/13/2008
Hunter Beasley singing at the 2008
Shrimp Festival at 12:15pm on October 11, 2008.
|
|
10/13/2008
The informational meeting last went
really well. The board received input from all types of members. Users,
and non-users alike were given the opportunity to speak. The people
gracious and polite for the most part. Of course, there was some very
emotional testimony on both sides of the spending plan. There was the
users, who generally wanted investment into the facilities and applauded
the board's work, and there were non-users who wanted to still dismantle
the association in its entirety. Yes, they are still out there. All in
all, information was shared and the exchange of ideas was good for the
community. My estimate of attendance was about 80 to 100 of our 3115
members. There was one man who claimed to represent the "silent
majority" of people who despise the association, its board and all it
does, period. They do not swim, golf, play tennis or boat. Seems,
judging from his arguments and comments, that these would be people who
absolutely live in misery every day because of the dues they pay. It
must be terrible to be so taken advantage of. (note the sarcasm).
|
|
10/9/2008
Just a reminder that the Community
Informational Meeting will be held tonight in the Country Club Forest
Room at 6:30 p.m. Tonight's topic that will be presented is the 5-year
capital plan for the restoration and upgrade of our association
amenities. We look forward to seeing you at the meeting.
Members will
certainly want to attend this meeting. It will give everyone an
opportunity to find out why the board will be raising their dues and the
board's own borrowing cap next year, now that they have given themselves
the ability to change the by-laws.
|
|
10/9/2008
Congratulations, Fred Small. Daphne did
not go back!
|
|
10/7/2008
We just heard that
long time Lake Forest resident, Peter Werner, passed away yesterday.
Everyone please remember Tomasina and her family in your prayers as they
go through this sad time.
|
|
10/3/2008
Since we are talking politics and
economics, let me chime in. Our government has grown too big. It is time
that we accept that. The federal government has expanded its powers way
beyond those powers that were expressly given it in the Constitution.
Who can stop it? When we have an economic growth of 2.8% in the quarter
with unemployment at 6.1% and we are told that the economy is in its
worst shape since the Great Depression, I wonder what they are smoking.
The Great Depression saw 30% unemployment and negative economic growth.
Are they serious? Or just "talking down" the economy for political
purposes? The so-called "Credit Crisis" is nothing more than regulations
established to loan money to unworthy recipients, and its just
consequence. The problem is that lenders were coerced, threatened and
warned about pending prosecution if they refused to loan to these
deadbeats. Who did this? The Democratic congress, that is who. How many
times did Barney Frank say that these regs were necessary for fairness?
How come we don't hear that they failed us in this regard? How come they
do not admit that "affirmative action" with credit does not work. Sad
thing..these loans and actions continue, even today. Prepare for more
bailouts and even the government becoming the lender. A true socialistic
reform in the name of fairness to everyone. We are doomed by liberal
politics with failed "social justice" policies.
There's plenty of
blame to spread around. For example, how does a buffoon like
Franks get re-elected time after time? Obviously, citizens of his
State keep sending him back up there. Therefore, they are part of
the blame and, perhaps, should be required to help pay for the solution.
Our representatives were not able to make a case convincing enough to
stop the failed practices, so should we also help pay for the recovery?
Our citizens seem to vote way too often for self-serving reasons and
that is what has led to this crisis. Too many of our politicians
have used class warfare to win their way into office. They say
"I'm going to protect you from those guys" or "Don't worry, I'm
going to make those guys pay for it, not you." They use the lowest
form of persuasion to win, so what else can we expect but having it all
come back to haunt us eventually?
I listened to Senator Shelby speak to the senate before the vote.
He acknowledged that he had "no illusions" about how it was going to
turn out. However, he spoke very clearly about the attempts that
had been made to reign in Fannie and Freddie and how those attempts had
failed because of the desire of some to provide what he referred to as
"worthy" social benefits. He pointed out that while those motives
might be worthy, they could not overcome the requirement to use solid
financial principles when dealing with financial matters. One
thing that I noted in particular was that Senator Shelby did not use the
very, very low class partisan methods of the Franks and Pelosi's of the
Congress to try and place blame on the other side. He simply
pointed out that he and others in 2003/2004 had tried to pass through
reforms and had failed. He pointed out that reforms still need to
be enacted. Maybe after allowing this crisis to be heaped on the
country, Senator Shelby and other will have better luck next time.
The partisan behavior of Congress during this crisis is an embarrassment
to the country. I am proud to have watched Senators Shelby and
Sessions during the Senate debates. They behaved with class and, I
believe, if there were more up there like them, our country would be
much better off.
|
|
10/2/2008
That piece on the website yesterday was
precious. What some fail to realize is that there is no free lunch and
if you can't afford to pay for it you should not purchase it. Wealth is
not an entitlement it is an earned privilege in our society or it should
be. I have two major fears, 1., we are heading toward socialism and 2.,
the middle class is not only shrinking, but stands a good chance of
disappearilng, both send shivers up my spine.
My question is
"what did the act do to fix the problem?" If you can't pay your
bills because your income is lower than your expenses and you borrow a
bunch of money to catch some of them up, are you any better off?
No. You've just compounded your problem. An economist that I
read yesterday said that the recovery was going to be painful no matter
what option was taken. He suggested that if they reform the
financial markets and let the recovery take its own course, the pain
might last for three or four years. If they pass the big bailout
plan, the pain might be with us for ten years. Of course, one
group that doesn't have a clue says that if we do nothing, there will be
a disaster. Another group that doesn't have a clue says that if we
bail them out, there will be disaster. Note the one thing that
both groups have in common. Everything will be OK eventually, but things
don't look bright for some of us old coots.
|
|
10/1/2008
And it is SO ironic that this comes up
in a time that our whole country is facing some of the same issues.
Please relate this to Lake Forest because it shares a common theme. By
the way, I did not write this, an 'ole college buddy did today. I
thought it was great:
I am afraid nothing will change until our
politicians come clean and admit how we got into this mess. Face it, we
don’t trust our leaders to tell us the truth anymore. Washington has no
credibility anymore. Just as importantly, until the American people have
faith that our leaders actually understand how this mess was created, we
will not have any confidence they know how to fix it (and, I’m not so
sure anyone in Congress really does understand the basic economy, and
how to address this problem). I get the sense that the people on Main
Street, (who also do not understand how this happened, or the
implications of doing nothing about it) are willing to let Wall Street
implode, along with everyone in Washington, rather than continue to
listen to the political-speak / media spin / partisanship. Of course,
Main Street will get hurt in the process, but I don’t think the average
person connects those dots. Not a good situation, at all. While I fully
expect us to have a very slow growing economy for several years, we
could avert disaster by doing a few simple things. Unfortunately, our
leaders would have to come to grips with what caused the problem first,
and I’m not sure we will see that ever happen. I am fed up with all of
the politicians in Washington. Every party has failed the people. I am
not interested in who caused this, but I am interested in WHAT caused
it. And, what caused it was a failed ideology. A concept that government
not the markets, knew best. This is nothing but an example of what
happens when arrogant politicians, thinking they know best, force the
markets to do the government’s bidding in social engineering. And now,
somehow, we have to believe they are the ones who will get us out of it
all… Well, for sure, the government will either do something, and we
will muddle through for four or five years, or we may well see a true
financial disaster – the kind ou r grandparents talked about. Good will
come of all of this, but it may be painful medicine.
|
|
