Aruba vacation and travel information on Aruba hotels, beaches, restaurants and so much more

Go Back   Aruba Forums at Visit Aruba > Aruba Timeshare Owners' Corner > Costa Linda Resort

Costa Linda Resort This Forum is for Costa Linda Resort Owners to post/exchange information about their resort. To list PRIVATE rentals,please click here. To list PRIVATE sales, please click here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old Saturday, February 3rd, 2007, 09:29 PM
Linda R Linda R is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 2nd, 2007
Posts: 29
Linda R is on a distinguished road
I Love Aruba It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members


I'd like to weigh in on a suggestion offered by one or two folks who have posted messages here recently, to remove of all current members of the Costa Linda Board of Directors.

These are my own thoughts and do not represent the opinions of any other group or person.

It's a very bad idea, and here's why.

Getting rid of all of the nine board members is not only unwarranted, but unwise; unwarranted because there are three hardworking, competent members on the board who have opposed every bad decision made by the current leadership; unwise because in the transitional days ahead we will need the continuity, experience and good character they bring to the table
.
To be honest, I don't even know if the three competent and reasonable board members we are lucky enough to already have are all even running again. The latest chaos created by Mr. Schepps would require all board members wishing to serve to announce their candidacies and submit resumes by Feb. 22.

I certainly hope these three decide to hang in there. The record shows that Susan DeRoos, Gale Measel and Cy Holley have fought hard against the bad decisions of the board majority. Two of them were illegally kept from participating in the October board meeting where the decision was made to implement a mid-year 20 percent hike in maintenance fees.

One of them, Gale Measel, stood alone at that meeting and voted against the fee increase. He has been called a liar for saying he voted against the fee increase until more financial info and suggestions to cut the budget could be produced. To this day, four months after the fact, Chairman Schepps refuses to release the minutes to settle the dispute over how he voted.

Susan DeRoos is the most competent, hardest working board member we have -- and the most accessible. During this time, she has taken a very low key approach in trying to change what is happening on the board, attempting to work privately with her board colleagues to be a voice of reason amidst the chaos. Her reward has been to be almost entirely cut off from communication and information from the current chairman.

By overwhelming accounts, Cy Holley has been a godsend to our resort, giving endlessly of his time and personal resources to return this resort to the members after some very bad times and unsavory people. Two old sayings come to mind, here...No Good Deed Goes Unpunished and History Repeats Itself. He has and continues to be accessible to the members and his skill and knowhow have equipped him to preside over a decade of fiscal stability and blissful calm at our resort.

Anyone who thinks he deserves to be removed from the board must not be aware of the history of our resort and what he just about single-handedly accomplished on our behalf. Those who don't see what a valuable asset he has been to Costa Linda have been sadly influenced by the shameless smokescreen and systematic character assassination being conducted by Mr. Schepps.
For the record, here are some of the actions of the board chairman that these three directors have consistently opposed:

*his lack of supervision of CL management;

*his refusal to release minutes or tapes of board meetings or financial information --not only to the members but to them, duly elected officials with a responsibility to make informed decisions;

*his failure to hold CL management accountable for developing plans to address a fiscal shortfall that tripled over a period of eight months;

*his poor communication about and botched handling of a 20 percent, mid-year maintenance fee increase, which was implemented without the required approval of the members

*his censorship of our own bulletin board and blatant personal use of it to divert from his own transgressions by posting messages and allowing others filled with unseemly, undignified personal attacks against a current board member and former chairman

*his decision to provide a letter filled with personal attacks against the same board member at Friday check-in of our resort

*his lack of accessibility to certain of his supposed colleagues on the board(he has not returned their phone calls or e-mails since last fall) and to the members. Despite being at the resort, he has not attended a single GM meeting and, in fact, while he has been at the resort, those meetings have either been postponed until he leaves or have been canceled all together. He does not provide an e-mail address or respond to messages funneled through CL management

*his unilateral decision to create chaos as a way to eliminate three board "dissidents" (as he calls all who disagree with him) by defying a consensus of the board reached at its Jan. 9th meeting. That agreement was to have the lawyers work with the Aruban notary to resolve the concerns over the amendments to our bylaws and articles and resubmit the compromises to the members.

Contrary to his claim, there was no pressing need to take the drastic action of dismantling the nine-member board and there was no agreement to have members vote at the June 20 meeting for only a five-member board. And in fact, his feigned surprise not withstanding at the so-called news of the illegal limbo status of our association rules, before he was chairman, he volunteered to work with CL's counsel and the Aruban notary to resolve the concerns the government has with our rules. He was supposed to have reported back to the board on his progress.

If the unilateral action he has taken stands, we will be electing three Aruban residents and two non-Aruban residents. But if the right people get elected, that won't be the composition of the board for very long. We will need board members who, once elected, promise to reverse the bad decisions of the gang currently in charge and to immediately re-file for a nine-member board and conduct another election.

Personally, I think the ideal would be to have our experienced and reasonable board members elected for the short term. They and the aruban members who are elected would swiftly expand the board back to it's original size and would call for a second election to fill the additional slots. Continuity and new blood would be a winning combination to get us back on track, back to the resort we had before it clearly fell into the wrong hands.

Linda R
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #2  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 05:15 AM
Margaret's Avatar
Margaret Margaret is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: June 19th, 2004
Location: Mays Landing, NJ
Posts: 28
Margaret is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

One thing that bothered me about the "illegality" of the Board was that it might consist of only 5 members, and I personally don't think that would allow for a diverse enough group. I shudder to think that it could become an oligarchy.*


ol·i·gar·chy
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'ä-l&-"gär-ke, 'O-</I>
Inflected Form(s): plural -chies
1 : government by the few</I> </I>
2 : a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes</I> ; also : a group exercising such control</I> </I>


Glad to hear your opinions, Linda.


[quote] "If the unilateral action he has taken stands, we will be electing three Aruban residents and two non-Aruban residents. But if the right people get elected, that won't be the composition of the board for very long. We will need board members who, once elected, promise to reverse the bad decisions of the gang currently in charge and to immediately re-file for a nine-member board and conduct another election.

Personally, I think the ideal would be to have our experienced and reasonable board members elected for the short term. They and the aruban members who are elected would swiftly expand the board back to it's original size and would call for a second election to fill the additional slots. Continuity and new blood would be a winning combination to get us back on track, back to the resort we had before it clearly fell into the wrong hands."

Thanks,
__________________
~ Maggie Ann ~
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #3  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 12:16 PM
EDDIE1 EDDIE1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: October 30th, 2004
Posts: 84
EDDIE1 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

The problem I have with the Board of Directors is their oversite of the manager.

Either they have delegated all the resposibility to the running of the resort to the manager, or they micro manage the manager. Either way the Board of Directors has failed the resort.

I have heard that both the Doctor and the Judge gave the marching orders to the manager, if the other Board of Director members allowed either the micro managing or the benign neglect they have failed in their duty.

It is known that the Board of Directors allowed the manager to ignore her resposibilty to keep the owners informed by either the Costa Bytes or monthly managers reports.

It is known the Board of Directors have allowed censoring of the message board. in one of Ronald Reagans best speeches he said "I'm paying for this microphone" well guys the owners are paying for the Bulletin Board.

It is known the BOD allowed the manager to ignore time frames for projects, allowed issues such as the web-cam to be a showcase for incompetence.

The Board of Directors should have had goals and objectives for the manager, did they? did the manager at least give BOD monthly if not weekly updates. If not why didn't at least one member post to the web-site their frustrations, did they go along to get along.

I think the current members of the BOD have a lot of explaining to do. I'm less interested in why we have the blind sided increase in fees, than what the devil they are going to do in the future.

The fact they flew at our expense to the Dominican Republic to do their dirty work, speaks volumes of their disregard for the owners. I would think that a JUDGE from the United States, would understand the conflict of interest laws and open meeting laws, at least he should have attempted to let the sun shine in. The reason given for the junket, was that the resort was full, this is at best dumb, at worst a coverup. In one of the reasons for the lack of sales of the surplus units was the decline in tourism to Aruba, yet our resort had no rooms and they couldn't find six rooms on the island is beyond rational.

No sorry, unless the other Board of Director members start posting on the Costa Linda web-site why they have not acted to protect the owners, why they have allowed censoring, why they have allowed the Chairman to either micro manage or done nothing to oversee the manager, they should all be replaced. The silence is deafening, where are these people, why are they not coming out with the reasons for their actions, if the chairman was running ammuk why didn't they vote him out and let another member do the job.

No each member of the BOD, has alot of explaining to do, and to date other than the Doctors posts which were editted, and the Judge's diatribe on why he knew nothing and basically did nothing, even though he has been there for years. the other members have said nothing, this says volumes of their disregard to the investors in our resort.

Our resort is going thru tough times, the only way for us to go foreward is for the people we elect be honest, not only give us their resume, but tell us what they will do, to secure a bright future for Costa Linda.

To say the devil we know, may be better than the devil we don't, is the worst reason to vote for someone. I see the devil we know and it's not pretty.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #4  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 01:20 PM
leftyjy's Avatar
leftyjy leftyjy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: April 14th, 2006
Posts: 57
leftyjy is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

On Feb. 22 there will, hopefully, be some or several resumes to review for anywhere between 1 and 9 (and at this point I offer "pure nonsense" as the reason for someone else to determine how many and where they call home) candidates. WHO will be reviewing these resumes? Once reviewed and deemed acceptable to be nominated to be placed on some ballot (what ballot??) and then issued to the entire membership for public voting, WHO will assemble these selected names for nomination? Then, WHO will assemble all this stuff? Usually, all these names and resumes are made available to all the Costa Linda voting public by SOMEONE. WHO? Joy? The existing Board? Then, WHO will get it printed, bound, packed for mailing, posted, and brought to the post office? (Sorry for all the bold. It was a royal pain to keep switching as it seemed to have a mind of its own some of the time.)
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #5  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 01:27 PM
leftyjy's Avatar
leftyjy leftyjy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: April 14th, 2006
Posts: 57
leftyjy is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

I seem to remember that there were elections each of the last two years I was at CLBR. I attended both meetings. Are there not specific term lengths each of these members are to serve? Minimums, maximums? Did not Judge Schepps just be made Chairman? Anyway, we're collecting resumes. Will this be a legal election, according to Aruban Laws..... and don't blow this idea off. Aruban Laws, according to someone, have already told us that our Board and our Resort are not legal or not in compliance with Aruban Laws. Has someone checked to see if any of this election process is ok, given the status of our Resort, at least according to Aruban Laws?
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #6  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 01:41 PM
dwippies's Avatar
dwippies dwippies is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: April 15th, 2004
Age: 51
Posts: 8,821
dwippies is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

great points by both of you again. maybe a present or previous board member can answer some of the questions you have posed.

i personally think these are great reasons to have a place to post all resumes. we are not sure how else the information will get to our voters before the meetings. i also would prefer to vote for candidate #1, #2 and #3 instead of by name. i don't want to think i am swayed by anything but viewpoints.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #7  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 02:00 PM
Linda R Linda R is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 2nd, 2007
Posts: 29
Linda R is on a distinguished road
I Love Aruba Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

Quote:
Originally Posted by EDDIE1 View Post
The problem I have with the Board of Directors is their oversite of the manager.

Either they have delegated all the resposibility to the running of the resort to the manager, or they micro manage the manager. Either way the Board of Directors has failed the resort.

Eddie, I think your assessments are too black and white. Personally, I'll take micromanage over no manage any day. The six hours a week that the previous Board chair spent overseeing Joy's actitivities may not have produced a web cam or regular newsletter, but our resort was clean, wellfunctioning and we did not experience spiraling deficits.

.

It is known the Board of Directors have allowed censoring of the message board. in one of Ronald Reagans best speeches he said "I'm paying for this microphone" well guys the owners are paying for the Bulletin Board.


Great Reagan quote. But, the Board of directors you are referring to is actually the Board of Three plus our Aruban board members who have a tendency to support whatever the chair does(any chair). The Board majority has consistently outvoted Susan deRoos, Gale Measel and Cy Holley since the maintenance fee fiasco,or has not even consulted them on numerous actions...and as I said in my prevous post, Mr. Schepps has refused to return their phone calls or emails. 6-3 doesn't give you much power to stop anything. That's why were are moving to recall the bad guys and may'be their go-alongs.

It is known the BOD allowed the manager to ignore time frames for projects, allowed issues such as the web-cam to be a showcase for incompetence.

Yes, there were priorities. It is known that Aruban laws make it difficult to recruit candidates for jobs. Anyone in a volunteer position as a board chair, I imagine, would have to evaluate their standards for acceptable performance against the pool of qualified job candidates. This is where we lose sight of the realities of Aruba, the differences in Aruban culture, timeframes, etc. Personally, I'd like to see a professional management company hired to come in, but it's unclear whether Aruban law allows such a thing.

The Board of Directors should have had goals and objectives for the manager, did they? did the manager at least give BOD monthly if not weekly updates. If not why didn't at least one member post to the web-site their frustrations, did they go along to get along.

It is known that under the former chair that all these things occured. The difference is fairly obvious now that we don't have a board chairman who doesn't believe in "micromanaging." And two members did try to post their frustrations on the CLbb....You can see the posts of one right here on this public bb. I don't blame the others for not wanting to take this here. It's a shame we all have to.




The fact they flew at our expense to the Dominican Republic to do their dirty work, speaks volumes of their disregard for the owners. I would think that a JUDGE from the United States, would understand the conflict of interest laws and open meeting laws, at least he should have attempted to let the sun shine in. The reason given for the junket, was that the resort was full, this is at best dumb, at worst a coverup. In one of the reasons for the lack of sales of the surplus units was the decline in tourism to Aruba, yet our resort had no rooms and they couldn't find six rooms on the island is beyond rational.

Again, let's be mindful of the facts.Two of them, Cy Holley and Susan de Roos, did not fly to the Dominican Republic, and I'm rather glad Gale Measel did, because we had a least one forthright person to report to us what really occured. It has been 4 months and no minutes have been provided.

No sorry, unless the other Board of Director members start posting on the Costa Linda web-site why they have not acted to protect the owners, why they have allowed censoring, why they have allowed the Chairman to either micro manage or done nothing to oversee the manager, they should all be replaced. The silence is deafening, where are these people, why are they not coming out with the reasons for their actions, if the chairman was running ammuk why didn't they vote him out and let another member do the job.

You keep complaining about no manage or micromanage. What is the evidence that the former chairman micromanaged? You want board members who have moved to protect the members? What would you call hiring an attorney at your own expense to force the current board majority to stop the censoring and all moves to disenfranchise members? Mr. Holley has done all the things you say you want...spoken up, posted messages, moved to protect the members.

No each member of the BOD, has alot of explaining to do, and to date other than the Doctors posts which were editted, and the Judge's diatribe on why he knew nothing and basically did nothing, even though he has been there for years. the other members have said nothing, this says volumes of their disregard to the investors in our resort.

How can you note the unfairness of the censorship in one breath and in the next condemn the board members in the minority for not posting messages on the CLbb? Does anyone believe their posts would have been put up? And. I don't blame them at all for not going on the public bb. I wish we all did not have to. If they run for office, I'm sure they will answer to you and all of us about how they chose to fight this runaway board.

Our resort is going thru tough times, the only way for us to go foreward is for the people we elect be honest, not only give us their resume, but tell us what they will do, to secure a bright future for Costa Linda.

To say the devil we know, may be better than the devil we don't, is the worst reason to vote for someone. I see the devil we know and it's not pretty.
I would not support support people because they are somewhat better than the bad guys.These three people, in their own right, are competent and hard-working. If you are telling me that you think their experience would not be an asset in the days ahead, then I don't believe you have thought this through. This may be one of those situations where we will just have to agree to disagree. But I hope if they do run, you'll give them a fair shot at answering all your concerns.

Linda R
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #8  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 03:13 PM
Tooch Tooch is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 3rd, 2007
Posts: 6
Tooch is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

The way I remember it from days of yore:

At a Gen. Membership Meeting on May 19, 2004, Article 19 of the Articles of Association was approved by a vote of: 1240 in favor, 45 against, abstentions 0.*

Article 19 provided among other things that:**

There will be a 9 member board.
Every year, 3 board members are elected to 3 year terms.
No person is a director for more than 9 consecutive years.
The board elects its own chairman and vice chairman.
No geographic requirement.
Directors can be dismissed by a resolution of a General Meeting of Members.

As I reconstruct it:

In June, 2007, the seats held by Berger (appointed to fill Fanger’s unexpired term); Walker, and De L’Isle are up for election.

In June, 2008, the seats held by Holley, Arends, and Dupersoy are up for election.

In June, 2009, the seats held by Schepps, DeRoos, and Measel are up for election.


The 12 sections of Article 19 seem to me to be very clearly written regarding the responsibilities of the board of directors and the protection of the membership.
As I have mentioned in another post, the breakdown occurs with no communication between the board and the membership; thus the need for the board to be required to publish their minutes, and be required to establish a standing committee with the responsibility for providing a forum for member communication.

But, who knows where things stand now?

* 3/15/2005 Convocation Packet, page 20.

** 3/24/2004 Convocation Packet, page 125.


Tooch
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #9  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 03:25 PM
dwippies's Avatar
dwippies dwippies is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: April 15th, 2004
Age: 51
Posts: 8,821
dwippies is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

great info tooch!

am i not right in remembering that someone posted the vote had to be approved by the aruban legal community (not sure if it was the government per se) and it wasn't... the problem being that aruba must maintain a majority unless agreed upon by aruba.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tooch View Post
The way I remember it from days of yore:

At a Gen. Membership Meeting on May 19, 2004, Article 19 of the Articles of Association was approved by a vote of: 1240 in favor, 45 against, abstentions 0.*

Article 19 provided among other things that:**

There will be a 9 member board.
Every year, 3 board members are elected to 3 year terms.
No person is a director for more than 9 consecutive years.
The board elects its own chairman and vice chairman.
No geographic requirement.
Directors can be dismissed by a resolution of a General Meeting of Members.

As I reconstruct it:

In June, 2007, the seats held by Berger (appointed to fill Fanger’s unexpired term); Walker, and De L’Isle are up for election.

In June, 2008, the seats held by Holley, Arends, and Dupersoy are up for election.

In June, 2009, the seats held by Schepps, DeRoos, and Measel are up for election.


The 12 sections of Article 19 seem to me to be very clearly written regarding the responsibilities of the board of directors and the protection of the membership.
As I have mentioned in another post, the breakdown occurs with no communication between the board and the membership; thus the need for the board to be required to publish their minutes, and be required to establish a standing committee with the responsibility for providing a forum for member communication.

But, who knows where things stand now?

* 3/15/2005 Convocation Packet, page 20.

** 3/24/2004 Convocation Packet, page 125.


Tooch
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #10  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 04:13 PM
Tooch Tooch is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 3rd, 2007
Posts: 6
Tooch is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

I really don't have any idea of the current status.

It would be extra helpful to have an accurate scoreboard as to where we are in regard to our articles and bylaws.

Does anyone Know?

Tooch
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #11  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 09:53 PM
leftyjy's Avatar
leftyjy leftyjy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: April 14th, 2006
Posts: 57
leftyjy is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

This is mind-boggling! I'm beginning to believe that all this scheming, planning and contriving we or the 'Coalition' or whoever cares EITHER way, this is all going to be for naught. Sometime around the end of June there will be some minutes of some sham of a meeting run by a group that we have no clue whether it's legal or not. I've asked plenty of questions and Sherry, Eddie, and a couple of others have lent an opinion or an educated guess, or maybe even known fact, in order to provide an answer. But y'know what??? At this point in time, I don't think the answers are clear cut. For certain, I think the numbers of people who care are dwindling rapidly due to all the confusion and mis-understanding. So, Schepps will keep rolling along with his Board and come Annual meeting some points will be discussed and a bunch of people will hold up numbered cards thinking they are changing the conditions. Further, I think the feeling is that the way to go is just keep paying, and peace will come to Costa Linda. Joy will continue to manage just as before. The Board will do what it did or didn't do as usual. I've lost a bit of sleep thinking about what's potentially going to happen down there. I've scoped out where I'd consider getting new timeshares for my weeks 21 and 22 just in case. I've just about had it! Sorry. This is getting Mind-boggling!

Last edited by leftyjy; Sunday, February 4th, 2007 at 09:54 PM. Reason: mis-spell
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #12  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 10:02 PM
dwippies's Avatar
dwippies dwippies is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: April 15th, 2004
Age: 51
Posts: 8,821
dwippies is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

well, i'm going to voice an opinion here not a fact. feelings like that feed into the game being played. you are doing exactly what one or both of the sides want while they all play a foolish game. however, i can tell you that i have had non members scope out the lobby area of costa linda and i have been told by several that many people sit in the lobby on their computers reading this board and they are not feeling apathetic. they are angry at the situation. they are, to put it bluntly, really pissed off at what is happening. so, if you want to back away instead of working to correct things that is up to you. just don't try to convince others because both sides need someone watching them. if it isn't you then it's going to be me or someone else. you can't win if you give up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leftyjy View Post
This is mind-boggling! I'm beginning to believe that all this scheming, planning and contriving we or the 'Coalition' or whoever cares EITHER way, this is all going to be for naught. Sometime around the end of June there will be some minutes of some sham of a meeting run by a group that we have no clue whether it's legal or not. I've asked plenty of questions and Sherry, Eddie, and a couple of others have lent an opinion or an educated guess, or maybe even known fact, in order to provide an answer. But y'know what??? At this point in time, I don't think the answers are clear cut. For certain, I think the numbers of people who care are dwindling rapidly due to all the confusion and mis-understanding. So, Schepps will keep rolling along with his Board and come Annual meeting some points will be discussed and a bunch of people will hold up numbered cards thinking they are changing the conditions. Further, I think the feeling is that the way to go is just keep paying, and peace will come to Costa Linda. Joy will continue to manage just as before. The Board will do what it did or didn't do as usual. I've lost a bit of sleep thinking about what's potentially going to happen down there. I've scoped out where I'd consider getting new timeshares for my weeks 21 and 22 just in case. I've just about had it! Sorry. This is getting Mind-boggling!
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #13  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 10:06 PM
leftyjy's Avatar
leftyjy leftyjy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: April 14th, 2006
Posts: 57
leftyjy is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

Schepps isn't responding and we can't make him! Other Board members are disappearing from public view! The Aruban lawyers (are there really any lawyers working for or against..... I don't even know what anymore) and the Aruban Notaries are probably more confused than I am! Joy is sitting back taking all this in learning who was in her corner and who wasn't. Other Board members are probably chuckling at how dysfunctional the 'Coalition' movement has become..... at least in my eyes. None of the leading activists of the 'Coalition' are briefing us on-lookers out here about what is happening and what we can expect to happen. Those few who still have fight left in them, my hat is off to you. "Remember The Alamo". Unless there is a strong strategy with some strong people to put it in motion, all of this has turned out to be a fiasco that can only get worse if some rebellious movement continues to strive towards a June miracle they think they can perform.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #14  
Old Sunday, February 4th, 2007, 10:24 PM
dwippies's Avatar
dwippies dwippies is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: April 15th, 2004
Age: 51
Posts: 8,821
dwippies is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

well, if i was someone who was a board member or wanted to become one, i would be sitting back for a week or two watching what happens and finally jump in like mighty mouse to save the day. we are here posing questions. that's what i asked all of us to do. let's give them time to fomulate answers. then we get to decide whether they are full of bull or not. giving up this early in the game is like giving up in the first quarter of a football game because you are losing 7-0.

if one of the sides refuses to answer, we get out answers don't we? we then know who not to vote for. so far we have seen one side responding. i don't want to pick sides yet. we still have 18 days until the 22nd. i want to give both sides that opportunity. i want those resumes on our board. i want people to show what they are worth. those who don't bother don't get our votes. pretty simple philosophy? i sure think so and believe me, i am no an optomist. hubby and i think that murphy of murphy's law was an optimist.

however, you have to give it time. it took them months or years depending on what you believe, to screw it up. a few weeks can't cure it all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leftyjy View Post
Schepps isn't responding and we can't make him! Other Board members are disappearing from public view! The Aruban lawyers (are there really any lawyers working for or against..... I don't even know what anymore) and the Aruban Notaries are probably more confused than I am! Joy is sitting back taking all this in learning who was in her corner and who wasn't. Other Board members are probably chuckling at how dysfunctional the 'Coalition' movement has become..... at least in my eyes. None of the leading activists of the 'Coalition' are briefing us on-lookers out here about what is happening and what we can expect to happen. Those few who still have fight left in them, my hat is off to you. "Remember The Alamo". Unless there is a strong strategy with some strong people to put it in motion, all of this has turned out to be a fiasco that can only get worse if some rebellious movement continues to strive towards a June miracle they think they can perform.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #15  
Old Tuesday, February 6th, 2007, 06:20 PM
Linda R Linda R is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 2nd, 2007
Posts: 29
Linda R is on a distinguished road
Default Re: It's A Bad Idea To Remove All Costa Linda Board Members

I'd like to weigh in on a suggestion offered by one or two folks who have posted messages here recently, to remove of all current members of the Costa Linda Board of Directors.

These are my own thoughts and do not represent the opinions of any other group or person.

It's a very bad idea, and here's why.

Getting rid of all of the nine board members is not only unwarranted, but unwise; unwarranted because there are three hardworking, competent members on the board who have opposed every bad decision made by the current leadership; unwise because in the transitional days ahead we will need the continuity, experience and good character they bring to the table
.
To be honest, I don't even know if the three competent and reasonable board members we are lucky enough to already have are all even running again. The latest chaos created by Mr. Schepps would require all board members wishing to serve to announce their candidacies and submit resumes by Feb. 22.

I certainly hope these three decide to hang in there. The record shows that Susan DeRoos, Gale Measel and Cy Holley have fought hard against the bad decisions of the board majority. Two of them were illegally kept from participating in the October board meeting where the decision was made to implement a mid-year 20 percent hike in maintenance fees.

One of them, Gale Measel, stood alone at that meeting and voted against the fee increase. He has been called a liar for saying he voted against the fee increase until more financial info and suggestions to cut the budget could be produced. To this day, four months after the fact, Chairman Schepps refuses to release the minutes to settle the dispute over how he voted.

Susan DeRoos is the most competent, hardest working board member we have -- and the most accessible. During this time, she has taken a very low key approach in trying to change what is happening on the board, attempting to work privately with her board colleagues to be a voice of reason amidst the chaos. Her reward has been to be almost entirely cut off from communication and information from the current chairman.

By overwhelming accounts, Cy Holley has been a godsend to our resort, giving endlessly of his time and personal resources to return this resort to the members after some very bad times and unsavory people. Two old sayings come to mind, here...No Good Deed Goes Unpunished and History Repeats Itself. He has and continues to be accessible to the members and his skill and knowhow have equipped him to preside over a decade of fiscal stability and blissful calm at our resort.

Anyone who thinks he deserves to be removed from the board must not be aware of the history of our resort and what he just about single-handedly accomplished on our behalf. Those who don't see what a valuable asset he has been to Costa Linda have been sadly influenced by the shameless smokescreen and systematic character assassination being conducted by Mr. Schepps.
For the record, here are some of the actions of the board chairman that these three directors have consistently opposed:

*his lack of supervision of CL management;

*his refusal to release minutes or tapes of board meetings or financial information --not only to the members but to them, duly elected officials with a responsibility to make informed decisions;

*his failure to hold CL management accountable for developing plans to address a fiscal shortfall that tripled over a period of eight months;

*his poor communication about and botched handling of a 20 percent, mid-year maintenance fee increase, which was implemented without the required approval of the members

*his censorship of our own bulletin board and blatant personal use of it to divert from his own transgressions by posting messages and allowing others filled with unseemly, undignified personal attacks against a current board member and former chairman

*his decision to provide a letter filled with personal attacks against the same board member at Friday check-in of our resort

*his lack of accessibility to certain of his supposed colleagues on the board(he has not returned their phone calls or e-mails since last fall) and to the members. Despite being at the resort, he has not attended a single GM meeting and, in fact, while he has been at the resort, those meetings have either been postponed until he leaves or have been canceled all together. He does not provide an e-mail address or respond to messages funneled through CL management

*his unilateral decision to create chaos as a way to eliminate three board "dissidents" (as he calls all who disagree with him) by defying a consensus of the board reached at its Jan. 9th meeting. That agreement was to have the lawyers work with the Aruban notary to resolve the concerns over the amendments to our bylaws and articles and resubmit the compromises to the members.

Contrary to his claim, there was no pressing need to take the drastic action of dismantling the nine-member board and there was no agreement to have members vote at the June 20 meeting for only a five-member board. And in fact, his feigned surprise not withstanding at the so-called news of the illegal limbo status of our association rules, before he was chairman, he volunteered to work with CL's counsel and the Aruban notary to resolve the concerns the government has with our rules. He was supposed to have reported back to the board on his progress.

If the unilateral action he has taken stands, we will be electing three Aruban residents and two non-Aruban residents. But if the right people get elected, that won't be the composition of the board for very long. We will need board members who, once elected, promise to reverse the bad decisions of the gang currently in charge and to immediately re-file for a nine-member board and conduct another election.

Personally, I think the ideal would be to have our experienced and reasonable board members elected for the short term. They and the aruban members who are elected would swiftly expand the board back to it's original size and would call for a second election to fill the additional slots. Continuity and new blood would be a winning combination to get us back on track, back to the resort we had before it clearly fell into the wrong hands.

Linda R
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2006 -2011 - CaribMedia.com