The inputs from the U.O.C. to the Board represented inputs of the property owners in their neighborhood so what better input is there? (posted by Ray Eiffler)
Chip, your incomplete quote is misleading since you neglected to include my specific reference to the UOC / Unit Owners Committee. The UOC is comprised of Voting Representatives chartered by our governing documents to communicate with their residents and cast the votes of their neighborhoods.The UOC has brought to light some very important issues facing this community. Anyone attending these meetings would see the Voting Representatives of our neighborhoods seeking information and answers to important concerns. Nonetheless, this board supported the Community Manager’s decision to boycott these meetings thereby withdrawing administrative support — the manager is not even there to respond to questions that may arise regarding her “Manager’s Report”. In the past, each Advisory Group reported directly to the UOC (including Finance) — no longer the case. Formerly the UOC’s Voting Representatives were included in major decisions — no longer the case. The UOC should be voting on changes to the governing documents — the Board has skipped this step. Case in point: an October 2014 supplement to our governing documents was not brought before the UOC/Voting Representatives for a vote. Nor was it discussed or voted on by the PLCA Board during any noticed meeting. That document was signed outside of a meeting. This revealing supplement to our documents is not posted on the PLCA website, it was found via a search on the Lee County website. Perhaps you were unaware of these facts, otherwise I fear your label of my initial post as “confrontive” and ”angry” is simply an attempt to diminish the legitimacy of these facts.
chip wyser writes:
Re: “…the current board has made it abundantly clear they do not want resident input and they have made blatant efforts to squelch any resident input…” I have not seen or heard that from the Board directly. Certainly not at the Town Hall Meeting. I know they feel legally responsible responsible for the Turnover, and rightfully so, but most residents have not seen what you refer to with the confrontive, apparently angry remark above. (my understanding) The UOC has no real legal standing in the Turnover process and adding more lawyers to a problem with the expectation of getting a better result, in my experience has never been a good idea. Personally, I don’t think a 47 member Committee can be effective at anything. Respectful of your opinion though. My comments/replies/opinions expressed on this Blog are mine and mine only.
Larry Sheker writes:
It’s time to get some Board members that truly represent ALL the members, not just a chosen few.
At Turnover the board may consist of 9 members — which may or may not be unwieldy. The exact structure of the new board at turnover has not yet been determined and it may or may not include a Hyatt Board Member and Golf Course board members. Considering those entities are not involved in the budgeting decisions or the day to day operations of Pelican Landing, it does not make a lot of sense to give them a board seat. And to you point regarding input, the current board has made it abundantly clear they do not want resident input and they have made blatant efforts to squelch any resident input provided through the method intended for that purpose … the Unit Owners Committee — a forum for resident input and discussion.
Barry Stiger on February 28, 2015 said
You are correct! We need to plan. Where is there a long range planning committee? There are future issues with amenity capacities but is anyone looking into how tennis, pickleball, beach access and other future issues might be addressed?