Hawaiian Shores -- President's Report pt 2

WATCHDOG © 2011

Aloha Watchdog Readers,

The Watchdog would like to welcome those who have recently joined the readership! In the past few days the readership has doubled +! Thanks for bookmarking the blog and returning to it to read it.

This particular blog will deal with the emoticon section of the President's Report you received if you are a member.

Contained within the last paragraph of page one: 'Our 11 miles of private roads are need of repairs and improvements...Unfortunately, similar work done by previous road committee under the former board was not kept on record... {sad face emoticon placed here.}'

For discussion:

• The veracity of this statement partitioned for factual rebuttal
• The insertion of emoticon in a professional piece representing a Corporation Officer's  Report

WATCHDOG © 2011

 The Watchdog agrees SOME of our roads are in need of of repairs and improvements. Some more than others and a select few surpass the understanding of 'repair' or 'improve'! Albizia roots have grown out from properties undermining the asphalt, lifting and cracking it. The 'repair' to that portion of a road will require more than simply resurfacing or sealing, whatever the Board decides to accomplish. Repairs signals in the reader's mind something needs fixing and when thinking about roads that can create quite the impressive mental image. The reality? There are some roads which need only cracks where grass is growing to be fixed. Some roads need a lot of work done.

The Road Committee was developed in 2009 by the 2009 Board of Directors and re-constituted with some new members in 2010. One Director who volunteered to serve on the Road Committee in 2009 as the chair served on the committee both years and in fact serves on the 2011 Infrastructure Committee which includes 'Roads' as part of its purpose. In essence, he is the only consistent member of any committee whose purpose was specifically 'Roads' or included 'Roads'. In 2010, the Road Committee chose a different chair. It was their goal in 2010 to develop an inventory of all roads with specific data noted on each road that would then be used to rank roads in priority of the need for attention. Thereafter, the Board could act upon their recommendations to appropriate funds for attention to the highest priority need. The inventory was completed. Members of the Road Committee came and went changing the constitution periodically with new ideas and new eyes looking at the problem -- but no resolution recommended to the Board. By the end of 2010 the chair was relocating his family back to the mainland and gave his paperwork to the 2009 Chair of the Road Committee.

During discussion of the roads under the 2011 Infrastructure Committee the 'inventory' list was mentioned as having been done. 2 months were spent trying to locate a copy of the report. In August 2011, the 2009 Chair of the former committee, himself a director, stated that he believed he had a copy of the inventory list and would dig it up for the next meeting. Then the President's Report is written with the paragraph showing her 'displeasure' with the former Board and Road Committee.

GUESS WHAT SHOWED UP AT THE BOARD MEETING, just as the 2009 chair said it would? YES! The inventory! In this Director's possession all along! Mystery solved! It is great that he brought it forward because it saves the current committee a lot of work. But, while there was maybe 30 seconds of discussion when he let the Board know he found it there was not a single apology made from the President for the unnecessary criticism of either the former Road Committee or former Board.

As an opinion, it was inappropriate for the paragraph to be included as written in a professional piece from an officer to the Membership. The paragraph started out correctly, noting the need for attention to a substantial asset. However, rather than denigrating the work of other volunteers the President might have stayed focused on the goals and expectations for the 2011 volunteers to accomplish. We should never lose sight of this one fact: Each Director, all Boards, each Committee member, all Committees, ALL VOLUNTEERS! As such, you appreciate the work they accomplish even if it is only to create an inventory of all roads one year for recommendations and fruition in another year. Historicity has taught observers when this President is notified of an incorrect statement with a request to correct it -- that character quality is absent. Deflection, justification, further negative opinion is offered -- but no correction. Having said this, there are moments when one can see a change in behavior being developed as the magnifying glass of a constant record is kept by those who are exposing the 'patterns' of abuse of power.

Use of sarcasm in the form of an emoticon [sad face] in a professional communication. What is appropriate and what is not? Obviously, living here in Hawaii, and particularly on this island, and more particularly on the east side of this island, everything is far less formal. A 'sad face' might be considered tolerable for a cover sheet or inter-office communications within a 'County' structure, perhaps even within the setting of a middle school. However, despite the location of this Corporation, 2/3rds of the Membership live elsewhere! And there, where they do business, it is NOT acceptable practice to use emoticons of any sort in a professional piece, but especially an officer's report! Could you imagine the CEO of any Corporation sending out a message to their shareholders with a SAD FACE? Especially as punctuation? [Yes, the Watchdog is aware the 'sad face' is followed by punctuation but it is superfluous and redundant.] Even the Disney Corporation likely observes proper correspondence etiquette. They probably resist putting 'Grumpy' at the end of a sentence as punctuation. Why should the Membership of Hawaiian Shores Community Association, an Hawaiian based Corporation operating under the rules of Corporation Law, be treated as though they are mentally inferior? Of course, to be fair, not all of the Membership was exposed to this poor writing style. As it turns out, not that the non Japanese members would know this because they did not receive a copy of the translations paid for by their membership fees, but the translator, a director on the Board, unilaterally opted to not include the 'sad face' emoticon in his translation of the President's Report because quote"I did not believe it needed to be there." [Of course, one wonders what other unilateral editorial license he took while translating either of the documents.] But gladly, at least the Corporation's Board of Directors does not look as buffoonish to 1/3 of the Membership as it does to the rest! The President was informed by one Director at this last Board meeting that he did not 'approve' of the use of the 'sad face' in the Report. The President responded: "It is used in professional writing all the time." This would be her OPINION.

Next rebuttal will be to paragraph 3 of President's Report, the second page.