JT Said:
Somebody, please correct me if I’m wrong, but it is my understanding that the scope of an association and method of recovering costs can not be summarily changed by constitutional voting requirements alone. With a voluntary association maybe, but not when the membership is a captive audience and comprises an entire suburb. The association’s own legal opinion would seem to express similar reservations.
Our Excom have been particularly high-handed bordering on deceptive in the manner in which they’ve pushed through the 2006 amendments without any consultation process whatsoever (and I mean ‘consultation’ in the true sense of the word). This can only serve to undermine the relationship of trust that should exist between any association’s Excom and its wider membership.
I have withheld my subs since that awful letter was published in the Marina News. I was and am still embarassed to be associated with an association that is so unprofessional and lacking in dignity and regard for its membership. An attack on one is an attack on all and I take every exception to the manner in which this Excom have consistently sought to undermine this once-happy community. To my mind, the Excom and its Chairman have acted in bad faith and continue to do so. The fact that no forum has been initiated with the necessary professionals in attendance to address members’ numerous and varied concerns speaks for itself.
I will continue to withhold my subs until I am satisfied that the MDGA, its constitution and the actions of its Excom are lawful. And I won’t support a small group of individuals to use (abuse?) the association to recover the costs of some hairbrain security scheme by way of a levy against my property into perpetuity. If I am to even begin considering such a drastic step, the Excom would do well to enrol for a few business courses starting with Majors in Law, Ethics, Accountability & Transparency (incl. Purpose of Audits) plus extras in Basic Manners, How To Engage ‘Headless Chickens’ in Meaningful Dialogue & How Not To Treat My Neighbours.
For some reason the Excom believe that the association is so ‘private’ that they the Excom are not answerable to anyone but themselves. The blatant misrepresentation of facts and withholding of basic information, be it direct or indirect, has astounded me beyond words. A drive around the Marina clearly evidences the fact that the Excom have neglected their principal lawful object in favour of doggedly pursuing an expensive, idealistic notion for which it did not and still does not have a clear, express mandate. Instead of focussing on the fact that so few ‘objectors’ turned up to vote against the amendments to the Constitution, the Association would do better to take cognisance of the fact that so few members turned up at all let alone to vote in favour of the amendments – amendments that serve to change the ‘foundation’ of the association. In context, so few yay’s effectively mean NO. Or if I am missing something here will somebody please enlighten me with a FACTUAL argument that lends credence to what the Excom are doing in the name of the association.
4 users commented in " Another Resident puts ExCom to task "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackI stood up and applauded when I read JT’s comment (then sat down quickly as my wife thought I had gone bonkers.) I could not have said it better; in fact, I could not have said it at all. Thank you for speaking my mind, JT. I think you echo many a Marina resident’s thoughts.
Since buying my house in the marina in 1997 I have spent many months out of the country each year, so was a bit hazy on what the status quo was in the marina. In Nov 2006 I attended an AGM to try and get a better grasp. During the meeting I was horrified at the way the chairman treated a resident who asked a reasonable question on the content of a recent press article. The chairman exhorted the resident, in a condescending and patronising way to “don’t believe everything you read in the newspapers.” Really? Normally if one wants to verify the veracity of a statement or “newspaper” article one would go to the best available source of information, and at an AGM that would be the chairman of the Association. Instead this resident did not get an answer whilst being treated like a child.
This opened my eyes and I started reading whatever I could, including that awful letter. My initial perception of the attitude of the chairman and excom towards the residents was steadily reinforced. This research has brought to me the point where I can wholeheartedly endorse every single word of JT’s comment. Well done and thank you.
Hey, Excom. The Marina is waiting with bated breath for your comment on Anita’s letter. Don’t tell me that the Chairman’s report is not the official view of the Excom. What utter rubish. If it’s not the official view, let us know what is and give this terrible charirman the sack.
So by the way, who is this Toni fellow and where did he get off the bus? What’s wrong with san marina that we don’t deserve our verges serviced. And if so, why are subs demanded of us?
I don’t want to be funny, but I think it’s time we get rid of this association once and for all.
How about it, Marina Da Gama, are you ready for it?
Stuart
Leave A Reply