Malolo Street Bazaar

Watchdog © 2012

 

MALOLO STREET BAZAAR

 

10/13/2012 - 7a-11a

 

S. MALOLO -

Rt. off Kahakai

Best Wishes to the Malolo Street Bazaar for a successful fundraiser to support their Neighborhood Watch Group.

An ALL community Neighborhood Watch Group was organized in February 2012 and has grown monthly to include members from 2 of the communities it serves. Efforts are being made to reach out to all communities as more and more volunteers are added to the group. The group is called K.N.O.W., Kahakai Neighborhood Organized Watch Group. It serves all communities served/accessed by Kahakai Blvd.

A series of Fundraisers are being organized specifically to raise funds to replace worn Neighborhood Watch signs in some of the communities and post signs in the other communities. We have the support of the County folks who will erect the signs so long as we provide the signs. This brings us to the day's events today, Saturday, October 13 beginning at 0700 and running until 1100 in the morning. This fundraiser is a a neighborhood wide garage sale with most of the residents on S. Malolo participating. As you stroll through the various garage sales you will see typical garage sale items but you will also see vendors who exhibit their items at the Maku'u Market. Many of the participants have committed a certain percentage of their sales to the fundraiser.

Refreshments are available in the form of a donated sheet cake, cupcakes, coffee, water, muffins.

Information about securing your home against crime and other topics will be available. Please feel free to speak to any of the representatives from K.N.O.W. who will be present. There will be a community police officer present to answer questions as well.

Please come and join the Malolo Street Bazaar!

For more information please feel free to browse the website: http://hawaiianshorescommunity.com/knowcommunitywatch.html

and visit their Facebook Group: http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/389176277790579/

Hawaiian Shores -- June 2012 Monthly Meeting of the Board

WATCHDOG © 2012

Aloha Watchdog Readers,

Watchdog wanted to bring you the cliff notes on this month's meeting. The graphic may be curious to you. You had to be there! Explanation to follow later.

First of all, the agenda was not as filled with items as has been in the past. The meeting was organized for swiftness, as it should be. Members were invited and allowed to speak to Agenda items at the beginning of the meeting and during the various discussions/motions pending during the meeting. It is difficult -- as the Chair -- when your board wants to 'get through' the agenda and comments from the Members slow that process down. To her credit, she allowed the comments nonetheless. Practically speaking, to sit and discuss matters which will have an impact on the Members, like institution of user fees for the Park for events or groups of more than....; or, details of the various reports that may spark Member interest during the report;. or, clear up confusion on matters arising out of the various agenda items -- without Member input/query would not necessarily stand up to the campaign promise for transparency and accountability. Watchdog truly appreciates the Board's tolerance of the Members's thoughts. And we did see few chairs empty for this meeting.

Second, Reports were well organized and not as time consuming. There are still some rough spots on fine tuning committee procedure and reporting and Board understanding of the same but having the reports delivered and informative validated the need for Members to be present at the meetings to know what is being said/done.

One of the most informative portions actually was centered on Members who were present to discuss issues not on the agenda but of concern to them. In the community we are seeing two sides of the economic depression that has hit everywhere. We are seeing an attempt at increased crime -- mostly against personal/private property and the flip side, an increase in 'dogs' and their barking as a deterrent to that attempt at crime. The barking dogs and what can be done about them was topic one and managed to go down the road of ineffectual CCR's when 'enforcement' is bridled because of the lack of procedure or policy to do so. Currently, a 'nuisance' violation [#'s 20 & 22] cannot be addressed by the very Board the governing documents appoint to 'manage and maintain' relative to the governing documents beyond a letter being sent out by the Office to an owner requesting compliance. Watchdog believes it can be dealt with a little more forcefully by having the corporate counsel sending out an additional warning at the owner's charge, though that would need to be a policy developed and promulgated so that owner's understood their inaction will eventually require them to 'pay' when compliance may have been a lesser expensive tact. It is a topic that has been visited and has been daunting off and on for at least the last 6 years. So, what to do? There is a law on the books that allows a complaint to be made to the police of barking dogs ... but, the police have to go to the location and sit there to verify the dog/s barking for 20 minutes. While it may be a most irritating matter to have barking dogs how many neighbors would rather the police be  utilized for real issues of crime? It is apparent, no matter what rules, regulations or laws, no matter what agency, association, department and at what level...if you have no mechanism for enforcement it is an ineffective rule/regulation/law.

The other matter addressed by a member was that of owner concerns on a road where there are multiple homes but only a single owner occupant. Again, a sign of the economic times. In the instance mentioned at the meeting, the 'renters' on the road allegedly have no interest in preserving the aesthetics of the neighborhood as it relates to the road and the road shoulders. Watchdog visited the street yesterday and found there is a car parked on the road shoulder that appears to be abandoned which will likely be addressed by the foreman, but the road shoulders at a long view glance did not appear to be fraught with debris, rocks, or disrupted with gouges by vehicles doing 'wheelies' on them. Not to say a closer examination may have produced evidence of the tire impressions, but the road shoulders appeared free of obstruction, which is compliant with the CCR's. This discussion point however points up yet another long standing issue: Owned by possession! Folks through out this community, as a matter of pride in their neighborhoods, maintain the road shoulders either in front of their property or for the whole side of their street, or both sides. Well intended exertion of their energies helps that neighborhood appear well mannered. However, though it is a wise and noble venture it is of their own volition. When something happens to disrupt their sacrifice it is taken personally and sometimes erupts into a bigger issue than is necessary. No one asks them to do what they do and they cannot honestly expect the Board to discipline or punish another simply for not respecting the self sacrifice. This community is not unique to this scenario nor will it ever be absent the common issues this Board and every Board must deal with diplomatically but efficiently.

How one deals with the day to day issues, small or large, or the crisis issues as a director reflects upon that director...a position which one day may find them on the other side of the issue. Diplomacy is key to making sure the party who has vested themselves understands the Board appreciates their kind hand in dealing with their neighborhood while at the same time explaining and educating the same member as to the area or responsibility for the individual lot owner vs those of the Association. At this past meeting, the dog barking issue was dealt with partially by assigning a member in the audience with homework. The other issue was dealt with more diplomatically by the office manager. Hard call to be sure but valuing the member's concerns regardless of personal feeling should be part of the 'director's' reason to serve. Watchdog's humble opinion.

All in all, there were some moments of 'DRAMA' but the rest of the meeting should be reflected easily when the minutes are posted in a couple of months.

Hawaiian Shores -- Slow Simmer over $20k

WATCHDOG © 2012

This question was raised recently: "Why hasn’t the treasurer reviewed the invoices for previous corporate attorneys?" The answer is not immediately known. There are a couple of reasons:

1. He does not know they are in the office and can ask to review them.
2. The records are in the office and he has not taken the time to review them. 
3. The records are no longer in the office and he cannot review them.

CONTEXT: Apparently the Treasurer recently stated he'd like to review the former corporate counsel's itemized bill and phone records. 

WATCHDOG © 2012

 Obviously, the remainder of this article will cover number 3. 

Should the records be kept in the office? That is an interesting question. According to our Articles of Incorporation the business office, located at 15-2793 Honu Street,  is designated as the principal office which is generally required when forming a corporation. This is the Article:  SECOND: The location of the principal office of the corporation shall be Hawaiian Shores Recreational Estates subdivision, Pahoa, Hawaii and its mailing address shall be 15-2793 South Honu St., Pahoa, Hawaii 96778 or such other place or address as its board of directors may from time to time determine.

The Bylaws support the AI here:  Section 1.05. Principle Office. The principle office of the association shall be maintained within Hawaiian Shores Recreational Estates, Pahoa, Hawaii, State of Hawaii and its mailing address shall be 15-2793 S. Honu Street or at such other place or address in the State of Hawaii as its Board of Directors from time to time shall determine.

This is what Hawaii Revised Statutes says about the records Membership [the Treasurer is a member] can review: 

There is a larger portion than what is pasted here and it should be the responsibility of each member to review the laws pertinent to the their membership. Nowhere in the law does it say the records he is looking for must be kept in the office. Bylaw 8.08 states the Secretary must keep or cause to be kept certain documentation but again invoices are not listed.

But, Financial statements, audits, etc., are part of the documents Membership has a right to access. For a few reasons one can suppose a request to see the supporting documentation [invoices/receipts] for any financial entry could be a stretch of HRS and 'financial records' and in some instances perhaps crossing some ‘secret’ line. The annual Audit brings all the documentation and the figures into the equation [pun intended] and it may be then the Membership will be up to date on the current questionable $20,000.00 figure that is alleged to be held in trust with the corporate attorney. 

Does the President maintain any records in her residence? As of last year, the answer is yes. What records? Good question. Should she? Debatable. Here are a few reasons why. When records are kept off site from the principal office more than ‘trust’ issues arise. There is a pseudo forensic sort of violation to the keeping of the records; there is a chance the records which should be kept confidential could be digitized and retained by a Member who may not be entitled to those records in the future; someone now -- who is not entitled to view confidential information -- may view the records. Perhaps the most convincing argument, in this case, is the location of offsite storage -- ostensibly is to preserve records. The current president lives in an inundation zone and frankly if a REAL tsunami was approaching of significance to inundate the area it may not be feasible for the president to evacuate all the records she has therefore creating a void in the audit trail of any and all legal and financial activities covered in those records! 

Lastly, once digitized, any record can be altered and if the original documents are all in the same place as an altered document there could be no proof the documents were altered. This is not an accusation lobbed in that direction. However, there have been too many questionable actions and statements made to prevent such notions from being uttered. Confidence in integrity was shattered once the records were removed and in many ways since. 

The motive for sequestering these particular docs may be noble. Some will balk at the thought of noble motive and this president – for some that perception seems to be at odds. 

Is the desire to review old legal invoices a red herring? Is it relative to the apparent unnecessary expense of $20,000.00 paid to a trust for friends in case they decide to sue?  Or, paid to their friends via the trust to keep them from suing? 

If by reviewing those financial records the $20,000.00 could be returned to the treasure of the Membership, then definitely locate those records.

 

The case to which this ‘out of court settlement’ was attributed has been closed with a SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT --- now $20,000.00 more?

WHY

Hawaiian Shores Members out nearly $20,000.00?

WATCHDOG © 2012

Just when you thought you'd heard the end of the 2007-2008 'litigation' debacle...'the rest of the story' may lend itself to a sequel of unthinkable proportions!

Obviously, if you have followed this blog, you have noticed money being spent for this and that and most of it is on tangible improvements to the infrastructure long overdue! But, to just write a check for nearly $20,000.00 and hand it over to the attorney to be held in trust with NO value added to the majority of the Membership is questionable at least. And question we have!

If you haven't looked over fiscal year 2012's 1st quarter financials please do!  After the .pdf opens scroll to page 3 under 'Expenses' and look at the amount spent for "Legal Fees" line #520. 

When the Finance Committee Members met in April -- when these figures were first available -- questions were asked of the chair regarding the substantial amount. His response froze those seated in time as the reality of his answer reached deep into each of the minds. At the April monthly Board meeting right on the heels of the Finance meeting a member of the Finance committee queried the President regarding what appeared to be an over budget amount. The answer came with another shocking statement. To follow up for clarity, the same Finance Committee Member explored the comment made at the April Board meeting with direct questions to the Chair of the Board at the May monthly Board meeting. The answers to those questions astounded many in attendance who are aware of the legal decisions and the cases to which this $20,000.00 appears to have been applied. 

In April it was alleged to be an 'out of court settlement' relative to the former litigation. In May it was stated it is money paid into a trust with corporate counsel based on 'HRS Indemnification' issues and further, alleges a THREAT of litigation. 

In full disclosure, Watchdog was a party to the litigation and was part of a Board who deliberated over every single facet of the cases with as much allegiance to the Membership as a whole as could be mustered. Imagine: The check for the judgment was paid and cashed;  the court entered a judgment and satisfaction of judgment as agreed to by some of the very people who are now seeking remuneration! We all thought since the case is closed no more monies would be spent on that whole mess. 

STOP THE PRESSES! 

Let's hit reset for a moment. Let's ask a simple three letter question: WHY?

You will understand why you should ask when you follow the documents leading to the close of the court case. The following links take you to 4 documents you should read. These documents are public. These have been scanned from a hard copy here. Any Member can go to the Court and ask to see the files for case #'s 08-02-0027 and 08-01-0058 and while they are voluminous the entire case is there including the 'end' of it. For your convenience you can find the 4 documents most crucial to the finality of this case. 

1. Settlement agreement between all parties: http://hawaiianshorescommunity.com/images/Settlement_agreement_2009.pdf
2. Judge's award of Attorney Fees: http://hawaiianshorescommunity.com/images/Attorney_Fees.pdf
3. Judgment: http://hawaiianshorescommunity.com/images/Judgment.pdf
4. *Satisfaction of Judgment: http://hawaiianshorescommunity.com/images/Satisfaction_of_judgment.pdf 

You will find a brief explanation of discussions and the responses when some Members inquired about the "large sum" first quarter legal fees here:  http://hawaiianshorescommunity.com/information/why20k.html 

NOTE: * The Satisfaction of Judgment clearly spells out monies were paid and judgment was satisfied. It was signed by their attorney.

>>>If you use Mozilla and have issues loading the pages please default to Explorer it seems to not have issues.<<<

After you have read the concluding documents you may want to know the same thing other Members want to know...

WHY? 

 

 

Hawaiian Shores -- Busy Work

WATCHDOG © 2012

Aloha Watchdog Readers,

The regular monthly meeting of the Board was Saturday, April 21st. It was attended by 1% of the Membership; or a little higher percentage if you base it on those who live locally full time. Fairly traditional numbers for Board meetings. The board was comprised of 2/3rds of their membership or 6 out of 9 directors. The weather was spectacular for most of the meeting but the late morning convection moisture blew in and chilled the air, both figuratively and literally!

The Agenda was straightforward. No surprises and decisions were not unreasonable. Members commented on the use of private social media to discuss Board assigned responsibilities and the way the community is being represented by the personal bias of those who are malcontent over what they perceive as 'woes' to the Association or 'extravagant indulgences' by former directors or staff.

  The Board of Directors does not support, is not affiliated with nor directs any commentary, opinion, rhetoric, cartoons, graphics, illustrations, disinformation, misinformation, etc contained on any medium, social or otherwise, regardless of the title or topic, including this BLOG!

Now that we have the obligatory statement out of the way, which by the way the Board basically acknowledged during the regular monthly meeting, what is read here and what is read elsewhere relevant to Hawaiian Shores Community Association is really personal opinion from individual 'members' of the Association -- some factual, some conjecture, all suspect to personal bias and those that seem most outlandish likely FALLACIOUS and SPECIOUS. 

While there was business conducted most of which was just business and done well, there were a few hot button topics: 

• Financial Statements and Audit as posted on the official website
• Distortion of information via a specific Facebook Group with a dalliance in large quantities of hyperbole that has some in the community concerned about 'perceptions' from those not full time residents but who read the information.
• Cell Tower
• Bylaws

Financial Statement: Concern has grown over the first quarter Legal Fees of approximately $20k. The President stated it was anomalous due to a 'large payment' that was made, though not identified, that would not be matched for the remaining 3 quarters of the year. One member was concerned the financials reflected a trend of overspending, or over budget spending, if continued as trending may require an infusion of funding. 

Internet Distortions: While it is generally accepted that people will speak freely within the safety of their own home there was a grey area of concern for some who noted that a member who was assigned the 'responsibility' of researching alleged bylaws issues was allowing information his research discovered to be reported on group FB page [which he and his partner are members] in near 'real time' but before the entire Board of Directors could review his written report. In addition, instead of the research to determine the veracity of the bylaws from a procedural perspective it appeared a private interpretation of the information the responsible party was putting together was being shared with his partner who then appears to have engaged in extrapolation and spin apparently based on a private agenda lobbing questionable allegations and accusations which caused some to wonder if the Board might be complicit in what in the 17th century would be tantamount to a 'witch hunt'! The Board quickly moved to ally concerns by members. They denied involvement in any personal opinions expressed. They did not seem to grasp that information they approved to be accumulated and reported to them as a body was being released through a third party medium to the world before they even had a copy of the report to collectively review. 

Cell Tower: Perhaps one of the sadder parts of the day was when a member who has for years consistently expressed opposition to the erection of a Cell Tower was interrupted during his expressions of concern with insults that he was spewing 'hot air' and his opinion was not based on 'scientific' evidence. He was respectful of the floor being immediately taken from him and only responded thereafter to statements made of a personal nature at him. While the Cell Tower seems to be an inevitability and most understand the benefits to them/and the community, it is still permissible for members who do not share that opinion to express it when the topic of the Cell Tower is under discussion. It has been historically noted by regular attendees to the Board meetings that a dissenting voice is eviscerated immediately instead of respectfully acknowledging the difference of opinions. This does not promote a healthy and diverse discourse between members, directors or otherwise.

Bylaws: Finally, the big reveal! Yes, the final summation of the research into the alleged illegal bylaws stands at this:

• 2005 major overhaul passed according to report with the proper percentage though it included a conflict law #11.01 specifically which upon its passage was immediately in direct conflict with the Articles of Incorporation [written about here on this blog in a couple of articles from last fall and earlier this year].
• 2008 changes met the legal percentage of 66% to pass.
• 2009 changes -- no tally sheet discovered no 'obvious' way to tally and state emphatically one way or another if they passed with 66%. However, there may still be proof in the record box of that election year on ledger sheets. 
• 2011 changes passed with the required percentage.

The President acknowledged the 2009 changes were sealed and done. Changes were made to a couple of those bylaw changes in 2011 - especially to #11.01 to make it compatible with the Articles of Incorporation.

The bottom line is -- excepting for not having a ramseyer version of the bylaws as they existed before the 2005 changes and the proposed changes -- there was only one year that an easily accessible tally was not available to determine the percentage yet the report to the Membership noted 'passed' referencing the bylaws changes for 2009/2010. It appears, absent malice as expressed by some through personal opinion and perhaps a bit of projection, the bylaws are in order, there was not egregious usurpation of Membership rights and yes, a bylaw was rectified after being on the books for 5 years that should not have been passed without changing the Articles of Incorporation as well.  The Association has not been compromised and the lack of proof for the few changes in 2009, 2 of which were nearly identical in verbiage, has not ill affected the corporation nor the Membership never giving anyone 'power' to commit some nefarious or dastardly deed/s. 

Beyond the meanderings of a minority of members who have a penchant for dramatic license the health of this Association, at least on the 21st of April, excepting of course for the 1st quarter expenditures which as the year pans out may absolutely disappear as over budget, or not, is solid and good. Things are on path to move in healthy directions so long as members gather together during the appropriate times to observe the business of the Board on behalf of the Association. 

A side note, to the title of this article, it appears the management technique for the current leadership is to indulge the squeaky wheel with 'busy work'. The whole public display in allegations that former Boards had somehow abused power by ramming through bylaw changes for personal gain [though the wise and intelligent among the members will wonder how a volunteer gains anything unless it is through conflict issues where money is paid to the volunteer] alleging initially they were to be REGISTERED with the State Bureau of Conveyances, which was easily disproved with a series of phone calls; that there may be some 'hint of impropriety' in the bylaw changes by the same boards because the bylaws were never registered and then finally the indulgence of two members who have created a web of imagined deceit and ill gain by previous boards based on a single bylaw that was drafted and passed and not supported by the Articles of Incorporation. One of the two was discharged with the responsibility of determining whether or not there were 'real' issues with the bylaws. Busy work. The reality? Exacerbation of an already profound rift between polarized sides of issues membership who live locally are exposed to. The report was accepted and approved but no positive statement was made to overturn the suspicions cast upon certain members through the process.

To this end, the Community Relations Chair did beseech the Board on a couple of occasions to call the community to civility and healing and to lead in that direction. Time will tell if those words fell on deaf ears or will grow by nurture being revealed in future interaction with the members who take time from their Saturday morning to be responsible owners showing up and participating at the monthly board meeting.  

Hawaiian Shores -- April Bod Meeting

WATCHDOG © 2012

Greetings Watchdog Readers,

A friendly reminder this Saturday is the regular monthly meeting of the Board of Directors. The meeting should be shortened in that the only committee who met and who might have a report is the Design and Review Committee -- formerly known as Architect Committee.

With only 2 business days remaining before the Board meeting it seems nearly unconscionable that an Agenda has not yet been posted . Yet, here it is 118P on Wednesday and no way does a member who conscientiously prepares for the meeting by doing due diligence have sufficient time to do so. 

Watchdog cannot stress it enough, Members need to be involved in what is going on with their association, especially if you see your investment tied to having an 'Association'. There has been grumblings in the past about 'dissolving' the Association and for many reasons that movement has never really taken off but it is an idea whose time has apparently ripened and it may be the low hanging fruit picked up and contemplated by many if there is a continued lack luster display of leadership at least on the committee levels. 

Recently, an old complaint has begun to recycle ... the 'road shoulders' are not getting mowed!  In the past the fact that Association dues were allegedly so high and the 'services' were less and less obvious created a vacuum in the community which contributed to an outright mandate vote for 6 new directors. Here is an interesting factoid: The assessment this year was exactly the same as the year before -- $300. We are now down to 2 employees working the subdivision. The work is going to slow down. It isn't weather related because we haven't had that much day time rain. So, what is the problem? Why is one portion of the subdivision not getting the 'services' they are paying for? With the old problems still rearing its head with a 'new board' the 'dissolution' of the Association is now gaining new interest. Same problems; different directors. 

Add the surly and disrespectful treatment [pardon the redundancy] by the office manager and 'dissolution' is looking better and better. If you are really monitoring your investment in this down economy you should be attending the meetings that do transpire and making sure you have a say in the direction your investment is going. Traditionally, the Board allows Members a few moments at the beginning of the monthly Board meeting to address Agenda Items. At some point, the Agenda will be posted and when it is it will be linked here. Nonetheless, Members may wish to apprise themselves of every opportunity to share their thoughts. 

As promised: The link to the Agenda

Hawaiian Shores -- Rash of Cancelled Committee Meetings!

WATCHDOG © 2012

Hello Watchdog Readers,

Watchdog has attended each of the committee meetings scheduled in the graphic and NOT A SINGLE ONE transpired! Watchdog is even a member of one of the committees and showed up for the meeting as the only member present. 

There are a number of troubling issues for members who feel it prudent to be involved in their Association meetings as an obligation to their property and monetary investment. The idea that Committee Meetings are scheduled and even noticed on the 'COMMUNITY' calendar though cancelled with no notice to each of the members of the various committees is absolutely unprofessional and unacceptable. It shows no respect for the volunteer who is not noticed. Further, having an ineffective community calendar shows disrespect for the Membership. The 'COMMUNITY' calendar has been useless as a tool yet for months the first thing one sees upon entry to the community  is the recommendation to see the 'Calendar' at the Association's website. Watchdog has asked this question here before, "Why?" "Of what use is it if it is not current?"

The Finance Committee was the latest to not meet as scheduled on the Community Calendar. Watchdog was told by the office manager [at 3:55p] that because one of the members 'called in the morning to say she would not be attending and two other committee members would not be able to make the meeting the chair cancelled the meeting.' Of course, it was not noticed on the COMMUNITY CALENDAR! Further, apparently the actual reason for the 'cancellation' was because the chair had been hosting a party at the Stables for the volunteers and decided he could not break away to meet a scheduled obligation. ALSO, the meeting was not CANCELLED it was RESCHEDULED! That meeting too is not reflected on the community calendar! This is the second Finance Committee meeting which has not convened as scheduled and noticed on the calendar. 

The Infrastructure Committee was scheduled to meet on Monday the 26th of March. Watchdog showed up. No one else did. Watchdog received no notice of cancellation or rescheduling. Watchdog wrote a letter to the chair of the Infrastructure Committee it contained the following requests:

• ·        Copy of the report/minutes from the February meeting.
•    Notification/confirmation of the next scheduled and committed meeting of the Infrastructure Committee
• ·        Email response as to why I wasn’t noticed; why the community calendar wasn’t noticed – as to last night’s meeting.

The letter was written the 27th of March. This is the 13th of April and Watchdog has not yet received a response.

Though 2 committee members showed up for March's Community Relations Committee meeting, 1 showed up ahead of time and left a few moments after the appointed time for the meeting and another showed up 15 minutes after the meeting was to begin. Thus, no Community Relations Committee meeting.

A Board of Directors is best served and consequently serves better when the appointed committees have a function, have members and meet regularly. Communication is an essential. The lack of leadership for this year's committees bodes poorly for the community at large. Last year, the Board came in with their agenda set, adopted, executed. Not so this year. Aimless and irresponsible is more to the point.

This is what is written in Roberts Rules of Order regarding committees: "It is the duty of the chairman to call the committee together, but, if he is absent, or neglects or declines to call a meeting of the committee? it is the duty of the committee to meet on the call of any two of its members. In small special committees the chairman usually acts as secretary, but in large ones and in all standing committees, it is customary to elect a secretary, who keeps a brief memorandum of what is done, for the use of the committee. Members of the society have a right to appear at the committee meetings and present their views on the subject before it at such reasonable times as, upon request, the committee may appoint... " The chair does not serve as a unilateral member of the committee. For a committee, the chair should look for consensus between its members before making any changes. To act arbitrarily works to defeat the purpose and progress of a committee, and indirectly the Board and by default the Membership!

Watchdog is confident the attitude of the Board of Directors is to operate with transparency and as the authority over and of all Committees should require all committees to operate in like fashion!

WATCHDOG © 2012