OPEN LETTER TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE MARINA DA GAMA ASSOCIATION:
MEETING HELD ON 2 FEBRUARY 2008 BETWEEN MYSELF AND 3 EXCOM MEMBERS

Thank you for the invitation to meet with you to discuss my objections. I was pleased to see that ExCom was well represented by Bob Craske, Tony Joubert and Elaine Meyer. As ExCom finally admitted that there is a large number of objectors, I was surprised that I was the only objector approached by you. Thank you though for agreeing that my brother attend the meeting with me. I believe that he was a stabilising factor as there is a general lack of trust from both parties.

As agreed, I enclose the list of shortcomings I identified in the constitution. This list was handed to Council, but a copy thereof had been forwarded to ExCom as early as October 2006. I would also suggest that you read some of the other objector’s letters to Council, as they contain other shortcomings which I had not picked up on. I look forward to receiving copies of all the minutes of the AGMs of this association as promised.

It is important to note that our objections were levelled at the changes to the constitution and that the security scheme as such played a very minor roll in what has transpired over the last nearly two years. I am therefore disappointed that you refused to consider the two major objections we have:

1. Legality of the constitution.

From our research, this constitution was never legally adopted or approved by the authorities which explains why it is so one-sided and dangerous with little or no protection build in for the homeowner. Although ExCom have been asked for proof that the constitution is valid, you were unable to do so. Neither Council nor Province has any record of the constitution or that it was approved.

2. Even in the unlikely event that you are able to prove of the legitimacy of the Constitution, the changes thereto were not voted in lawfully.

This is not only our view, but was echoed in the Council resolution that a proper public participation process should be followed before the changes are ratified. They even offered you their assistance to rectify this situation. You however state that Council does not have the legal capacity to tell you what to do. Regardless of Council’s legal capacity, the findings of the Sub-Council Committee were still fair and reasonable. The public participation process and advertising of the meetings were seriously lacking and should have been corrected before the changes were adopted.

I believe that the next step forward should be that ExCom adhere to the Council resolution and that the people of Marina Da Gama should be asked what they really want. Neither you nor I can say for a fact that either one has the majority of the owners support as the home-owners in Marina Da Gama have not been asked. I believe that a referendum, as recommended by Council, is in order, as a proper public participation process is vital.

You stated that the articles written by Peter Harrison in the Marina News headed “Chairman’s Report” does not necessarily reflect the views of ExCom as a group and is the opinion of one person only. You also advised that the rest of ExCom often do not even see these reports and articles before they go to print. My brother explicitly asked whether you agreed or disagreed with Peter Harrison’s views, but you refused comment. As we were under the impression that these were the Executive Committee’s views, you must agree that our mistrust of ExCom was well founded. The articles have, at times, been hurtful, inciting and misleading. In the interest of mending bridges and in order for there to be complete transparency, it is necessary that ExCom explain its views to me and the rest of the Marina Da Gama home-owners. We would therefore appreciate ExCom’s official comments on the following statements made by individual members of the Executive Committee:

1. The free-riders will be obliged to pay in due course, but the more we can bring on board in the mean time, the easier that transition to the comprehensive scheme will be. A little peer-pressure to persuade them to pay voluntarily, would be appreciated.
Peter Harrison – Chairman: February 1007 Newsletter

Does ExCom feel that the people of Marina Da Gama must put peer-pressure on their neighbours?
Does ExCom feel that people who do not belong to the voluntary schemes are free-riders?

2. The time has come to expose those claims for what they are; a worthless charade devised by misguided people, intent only on mischievously obstructing the democratic process.
Peter Harrison – Chairman: April 2007 Newsletter

Does this statement reflect the opinion of ExCom?

3. The newspaper report was accurate, as was its report of the rumour of my intended resignation as chairman of the Association. I have now received a draft of the minutes of the hearing from the council, which paints an entirely different picture. Far from rejecting our proposals, and giving the victory to our opponents, the Council now appears to accept its own legal advice, that the Association does not require Council approval to amend its constitution. … How these changes came about, is just as perplexing to comprehend as was the original version of the council decisions. … You can be sure I will be there to see that this happens.
Peter Harrison – Chairman: September 2007 Security Bulletin

Did the Executive Committee support this attempt by Peter Harrison to have Council adopt admittedly incorrect minutes?

4. (Litigation) was particularly likely to happen, had we deviated in any way from our constitution. None of the objectors has suggested that we did so.
Peter Harrison, – Chairman: November 2006 Security Bulletin.

Members had objected to not receiving notices of the meetings. Does ExCom hold the view that this does not deviate from the constitution?

5. Talk of a ‘Public Participation Process’ is misplaced; the Council itself accepts that changes to our constitution are a private matter between members, so there is no public to be consulted. There will be no referendum, and we don’t need any further interference from Council in our internal affairs.
Peter Harrison – Chairman: September 2007 Security Bulletin

Does ExCom support these views?

6. Excom is aware that members and others have used the media to air their alleged grievances in public. It does not want its communications with members to be the subject of public debate, when the ill-informed or those with an axe to grind can indulge their flights of fancy.
Peter Harrison – Chairman

Does ExCom see us as ill-informed individuals with an axe to grind or indulging our flights of fancy?

7. Sending information to any address other than the Marina property should be viewed as a courtesy and service to all.
Elaine Meyer – Street Representatives Coordinator: Undated Security Bulletin 1/2006

Is this ExCom’s official view, or just that of an individual member?

8. And when I had meetings with the proposers (sic) of these changes to the constitution and I asked by they had seen the need to dispense with the financial safeguards outlined above, their reply was ‘We want to run this association professionally, and we do not want to be tied hand and foot and obliged to answer to the members at every turn. We want carte blanche to do as we see fit. That is the beginning and end of the matter.’
Extract from a letter from an objecting member to Council dated 31 March 2007

Is this what the ExCom wants?

9. And when I explained that the opinion they had received from Adv Burger spelt out in words of one syllable that what they are proposing may well be challenged in the High Court as such changes could NOT have been in the contemplation of the framers of the original constitution, their reply was simply. ‘We are banking in the hope that no-one objects enough to go that expensive legal route, so we will take our chances on the general lack of interest amongst the residents of the Marina and if we win we win and if we don’t win so what, it has not been our own money that will have been wasted.’
Extract from a letter from an objecting member to Council dated 31 March 2007.

Is this ExCom’s official view?

10. We will continue to deal robustly with any and all objections. Some members have asked why we have not attempted to refute publicity made against us in the media. We may have to do so – but not by engaging in a public debate with a few misguided individuals, who are not interested in the facts and whom we will never convince otherwise.
September 2006 Security Bulletin

Is this ExCom’s official stance?

11. It has been customary for the association to copy to the council with any proposed changes to our constitution, and we have duly placed before them the changes made, both at the 2006 AGM, and the recent OGM.
September 2006 Security Bulletin.

Has Council been copied with every change ever made to the constitution?

12. It is a great pity that despite all the hard work by many people involved in trying to make the Marina more safe, just two individuals can hold up the process of implementing the Marina wide scheme.
Mario Rosingana – Treasurer: February 2007 Newsletter.

Does ExCom also feel that there are only two objectors?

13. Alas, in the Marina we have a very small but effective few who will not accept the outcome of the democratic process For reasons known only to themselves they have gone to extraordinary lengths to stop/delay things from happening.
Mario Rosingana – Treasurer. April 2007 Newsletter

Is this ExCom’s official viewpoint?

14. These 100 “Pied Pipers” have no difficulty in getting significant minority support from “free riders” who are happy to be subsidised by others.”
Mario Rosingana – Security Bulletin – September 2007

Does ExCom support this remark?

15. It was decided by Toni Joubert not to service un-kept verges in San Marina, for fear of residents expecting further service.
ExCom minutes 13 August 2007

Can ExCom please explain their views on this matter to the San Marina residents?

16. The fuss has not died down however; if anything it has intensified, because the objectors are not interested in the facts, and continue to charge around like headless chickens, throwing out wild accusations and engaging in personal abuse.
Peter Harrison – Chairman’s Report November 2007.

Does ExCom support this statement and if so, kindly give us examples of the personal abuse referred to in this statement.

17. I have refused to engage in a public debate with them, because they have known all along that they could not win the argument fairly and will stoop to any level, to keep the pot boiling, including the leaking of draft documents to the press.
Peter Harrison – Chairman’s Report November 2007.

Does ExCom agree with this statement made by its Chairman?

I suspect that these are merely the ranting and ravings of a few “ill informed”, “misguided individuals”. In most cases, a simple “Yes” or “No” answer will suffice in order to indicate what ExCom’s views actually are. Should ExCom fail to reply to these questions, we will have no choice but to assume that the views printed are actually the views held by the Executive Committee of the Marina Da Gama Association.

I would also like to thank you for the invitation to write an article in the Marina News. As you gave me the assurance that this article will be printed, I will take you up on this offer and let you have my article in due course. I must admit that I was surprised to hear from you that ExCom has as many as 400 members’ postal addresses outside of the Marina.

As these matters concern the entire Marina Da Gama, I will forward this letter to the administrator of the website: marinadagamasecurity.co.za for posting. If you wish, you may use either this forum, or the Marina News, as a way of replying to the queries. Alternatively, you may contact me directly and I will see to it that your views are made public.

I hope that I was wrong, but I walked away from this meeting feeling that this was an attempt by ExCom just to appear to be engaging in a public participation process and that you were actually just putting up a front. Your response to this letter is therefore eagerly awaited as it may clear up some of our misgivings.

Yours faithfully

Anita Koetsier.