http://marinasecurity.mylifeinsa.com/2008/08/19/letters-of-demand/ marina da gama Sat, 27 Aug 2011 21:06:34 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 http://marinasecurity.mylifeinsa.com/2008/08/19/letters-of-demand/#comment-350 jt Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:50:47 +0000 http://marinasecurity.mylifeinsa.com/2008/08/19/letters-of-demand/#comment-350 a member of Excom serves as debt collector for the association? uh hallo conflict of interest? i have specifically requested details of related party payments - alas the mdga/excom refuse to comment. we're still denied access to the association's records contrary to the mdga's constitution (which you can now view in all its discriminatory glory on the mdga website). why? the appointment of this debt collector, the related party relationship and its contractual terms & conditions should have been formally approved by members at an agm, and should have been reassessed at each subsequent agm as part of the budget process - with comparative quotes of course. as for the subscription now being demanded of us, i didn't receive the proposed amendments before the agm (after I'd requested this timeously) and the new subscription was approved without any budget. excom maintained at the sahrc mediation session that subs are not intended for postage & stamps. so i ask with tears in my eyes why must i pay money to an association that can not or will not produce a detailed budget with full disclosure at the appropriate time and has little appreciation for the fact that postage & stamps is one of the MAIN reasons for raising subs? why should i contribute to the mdga's coffers when excom maintained at the same sahrc mediation that a mere 2/3's constitutional vote is STILL all that is required to kick-start the exorbitant levies and marina-wide security scheme? a legal opinion holds that a reasonable interpretation of the preface page to its amended constitution is that 90% of ALL MEMBERS must VOTE in favour of any proposed levy/security scheme (take a look and see for yourself). worried about being sued for subs? not at all. concerned about an association that doesn't understand and abide by it's own constitution? absolutely. a member of Excom serves as debt collector for the association? uh hallo conflict of interest?
i have specifically requested details of related party payments – alas the mdga/excom refuse to comment.
we’re still denied access to the association’s records contrary to the mdga’s constitution (which you can now view in all its discriminatory glory on the mdga website). why?
the appointment of this debt collector, the related party relationship and its contractual terms & conditions should have been formally approved by members at an agm, and should have been reassessed at each subsequent agm as part of the budget process – with comparative quotes of course.
as for the subscription now being demanded of us, i didn’t receive the proposed amendments before the agm (after I’d requested this timeously) and the new subscription was approved without any budget.
excom maintained at the sahrc mediation session that subs are not intended for postage & stamps. so i ask with tears in my eyes why must i pay money to an association that can not or will not produce a detailed budget with full disclosure at the appropriate time and has little appreciation for the fact that postage & stamps is one of the MAIN reasons for raising subs?
why should i contribute to the mdga’s coffers when excom maintained at the same sahrc mediation that a mere 2/3′s constitutional vote is STILL all that is required to kick-start the exorbitant levies and marina-wide security scheme? a legal opinion holds that a reasonable interpretation of the preface page to its amended constitution is that 90% of ALL MEMBERS must VOTE in favour of any proposed levy/security scheme (take a look and see for yourself).
worried about being sued for subs? not at all.
concerned about an association that doesn’t understand and abide by it’s own constitution? absolutely.

]]>