To start a comment thread on this blog, first click on the blog Title. Please enter any comments or start dialog regarding the November 6, 2023 Newsletter. All comments are welcome, provided they are courteous and truthful.
Don't you get it? The lot issue is not a case for ignoring the covenants, it is a difference in interpretation. As for breaking the rules, the SIP is not suggesting ignoring the covenants. In point of fact, it is the current and previous board that has most likely broken the rules. The SIP gave several examples. More can be found in my operational audit proposal. See the full text of the audit proposal posted under
Don't you get it? The lot issue is not a case for ignoring the covenants, it is a difference in interpretation. As for breaking the rules, the SIP is not suggesting ignoring the covenants. In point of fact, it is the current and previous board that has most likely broken the rules. The SIP gave several examples. More can be found in my operational audit proposal. See the full text of the audit proposal posted under
https://www.tolomatoowners.org/index.php/island-news/tipoa-board/regular-financial-audits
The newsletter appropriately notes that the Board is in error when the Board stated that “several members have requested” that a financial audit be performed. A “proposal” for an “operational” audit was presented to the board at the June 2023 board meeting (see attached). I authored and presented the audit proposal. As such I would like to address this item in more detail.
I did not request a financial audit be performed. With a minimum fee of $15,000, financial audits are not cost effective for small organizations and are typically done in house.
I did submit a “proposal” for an “operational” audit.
The proposed investment in an operational audit was made for the purposes of producing a “policies and procedures manual” not simply because TIPOA has not been audited in 20 years.
I requested that the board review the proposal, attach the proposal to the minutes so that the membership could review and weigh in on the proposal, and include the proposal on the agenda for the next scheduled board meeting.
What I anticipated happening at the next meeting was for a director to make a motion—maybe to implement the proposal or to put the proposal on the agenda for the annual association meeting where the entire membership could weigh in. Instead, the Board ignored the verbal presentation and the text of the proposal. At the Sept. board meeting the President announced that she was in the process of securing bids for “financial” for a single year (2023) and that it would be necessary to adjust committee budgets to fund the audit. I informed the President that we did not submit a request for a single year financial audit. My objection was ignored. Furthermore, the Board continued to misrepresent our request in the “Official Notice of Dues Increase for 2024”. Finally, the Board used the budgeted amount for an audit we did not request to gut the roads budget. There are other ways the Board could fund this audit, including skipping the budgeted contribution to the $400,000 cash reserves.
In my opinion, the Board’s blatant misrepresentation of the operational audit proposal and the Board’s actions with respect to budgeting is designed to cast the 30 members who submitted the proposal and the candidates they have endorsed as a “raucous minority” or “cult” bent on imposing their “self- interests” on the “silent majority” and attacking the fiscal performance of TIPOA with their “big spending” initiatives. (See Jeffrey Long’s '24 Board Candidate Resume).
This is just another example of you must go along to get along and another reason to vote for a complete change of the Board.
The newsletter appropriately notes that the Board is in error when the Board stated that “several members have requested” that a financial audit be performed. A “proposal” for an “operational” audit was presented to the board at the June 2023 board meeting (see attached). I authored and presented the audit proposal. As such I would like to address this item in more detail.
[list=1]
[*]I did not request a financial audit be performed. With a minimum fee of $15,000, financial audits are not cost effective for small organizations and are typically done in house.
[*]I did submit a “proposal” for an “operational” audit.
[*]The proposed investment in an operational audit was made for the purposes of producing a “policies and procedures manual” not simply because TIPOA has not been audited in 20 years.
[*]I requested that the board review the proposal, attach the proposal to the minutes so that the membership could review and weigh in on the proposal, and include the proposal on the agenda for the next scheduled board meeting.
[/list]
What I anticipated happening at the next meeting was for a director to make a motion—maybe to implement the proposal or to put the proposal on the agenda for the annual association meeting where the entire membership could weigh in. Instead, the Board ignored the verbal presentation and the text of the proposal. At the Sept. board meeting the President announced that she was in the process of securing bids for “financial” for a single year (2023) and that it would be necessary to adjust committee budgets to fund the audit. I informed the President that we did not submit a request for a single year financial audit. My objection was ignored. Furthermore, the Board continued to misrepresent our request in the “Official Notice of Dues Increase for 2024”. Finally, the Board used the budgeted amount for an audit we did not request to gut the roads budget. There are other ways the Board could fund this audit, including skipping the budgeted contribution to the $400,000 cash reserves.
In my opinion, the Board’s blatant misrepresentation of the operational audit proposal and the Board’s actions with respect to budgeting is designed to cast the 30 members who submitted the proposal and the candidates they have endorsed as a “raucous minority” or “cult” bent on imposing their “self- interests” on the “silent majority” and attacking the fiscal performance of TIPOA with their “big spending” initiatives. (See Jeffrey Long’s '24 Board Candidate Resume).
This is just another example of you must go along to get along and another reason to vote for a complete change of the Board.
Comments
JimandGinny
on Thursday, 09 November 2023 12:36
Don't you get it? The lot issue is not a case for ignoring the covenants, it is a difference in interpretation. As for breaking the rules, the SIP is not suggesting ignoring the covenants. In point of fact, it is the current and previous board that has most likely broken the rules. The SIP gave several examples. More can be found in my operational audit proposal. See the full text of the audit proposal posted under
https://www.tolomatoowners.org/index.php/island-news/tipoa-board/regular-financial-audits
JimandGinny
on Saturday, 11 November 2023 18:13
The newsletter appropriately notes that the Board is in error when the Board stated that “several members have requested” that a financial audit be performed. A “proposal” for an “operational” audit was presented to the board at the June 2023 board meeting (see attached). I authored and presented the audit proposal. As such I would like to address this item in more detail.
What I anticipated happening at the next meeting was for a director to make a motion—maybe to implement the proposal or to put the proposal on the agenda for the annual association meeting where the entire membership could weigh in. Instead, the Board ignored the verbal presentation and the text of the proposal. At the Sept. board meeting the President announced that she was in the process of securing bids for “financial” for a single year (2023) and that it would be necessary to adjust committee budgets to fund the audit. I informed the President that we did not submit a request for a single year financial audit. My objection was ignored. Furthermore, the Board continued to misrepresent our request in the “Official Notice of Dues Increase for 2024”. Finally, the Board used the budgeted amount for an audit we did not request to gut the roads budget. There are other ways the Board could fund this audit, including skipping the budgeted contribution to the $400,000 cash reserves.
In my opinion, the Board’s blatant misrepresentation of the operational audit proposal and the Board’s actions with respect to budgeting is designed to cast the 30 members who submitted the proposal and the candidates they have endorsed as a “raucous minority” or “cult” bent on imposing their “self- interests” on the “silent majority” and attacking the fiscal performance of TIPOA with their “big spending” initiatives. (See Jeffrey Long’s '24 Board Candidate Resume).
This is just another example of you must go along to get along and another reason to vote for a complete change of the Board.