Wednesday, April 2, 2008

SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE WITH WPRF

Hi All,
I received the following message from Howie Silver this AM:

ON APRIL 1, 2008 THERE WAS A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH WPRF/BENENSON SUBJECT TO RATIFICATION BY THE DELEGATE ASSEMBLY ON APRIL 4, 2008. ALL DELEGATES ARE URGED TO ATTEND TO VOTE.

UCO Vice President Howard Silver
Dave

19 comments:

Mike said...

If the settlement is 1.8 or less , a movement to impeach George L should be started.

The Nutmegger said...

I'm with you Mike.
I second the motion.

Mike said...

I should have said 2.2 million or less. I forgot about the 400K lawyer bills.

Anonymous said...

Can someone post the summary of the settlement somewhere? Thanks.

Anonymous said...

I am sure that details of the settlement offer will be made available after the Executive Board meeting scheduled for Thursday. I am also confident that it will be explained at the Delegate meeting on Friday.

Guessing as to what the amount is nice but not very helpful right now. We have been addressing this issue for several years so waiting another two days is not the end of the world.

UCO President said...

Hi Peter,
The information is to be briefed to the
Executive Board on Thursday, 03 April at 9AM in the Clubhouse.

The proposed settlement will be explained and put to vote at the Delegate Assembly on Friday 04 April at 9:30AM.

Dave

Anonymous said...

Yes, the settlement may be accepted on Friday. Yes, it may bring this unhappy chapter to an end. But how long will it take the village to "heal" from this ordeal?

Anonymous said...

This village will heal when it is under professional management that leads by respecting the law. It is impossible to continue with a so called leadership that exempts itself from FS 718 and makes up their rules according to their momentary desires. The reason you have laws guiding condominium living is to eliminate the type of leadership we now have in CVWPB.

Maybe someone can explain why in the first place they would form an organization that is guiding condominium associations and then disregard condominium association laws.

Anonymous said...

Why does the Delegate Assembly have to vote on the settlement on Friday ? In a civilized society, the delegates would be informed on Friday and then be able to take the information regarding the settlement back to their associations. The vote on the settlement can occur at a later date by now-informed delegates . WHAT'S THE RUSH !!

The unit owners have a right to know what their delegate is voting for. Every time there is a rush rush, someone gets screwed. So take your time and do it right.

Anonymous said...

UCO is NOT a condominium association and NOT subject to Article 718.Some people just do not seem to understand that.

Anonymous said...

It is only common sense that UCO should follow 718 and avoid the abuses of unregulated rogue organisations. See - "Report of the
House Select Committee on Condominium and Homeowners Association Governance … it's about the fact that these associations are not regulated and everybody does what he/she wants. And for the service providers like attorneys and managers it's plainly a cash cow. The final report of the committee says so -- loud and clear:
http://www.ccfj.net/HSCFINALREPORT.html

Anonymous said...

UCO is NOT a Homeowners Association OR a Condominium Association. WPRF is NOT a Homeowners or Condominium Association.

Randall said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Randall said...

I believe that most CV'ers would like to put this chapter behind us as soon as possible. To do so would require acceptance of the offer made by Mr. Levy et al at the DA Meeting on Friday. I am not privy to the settlement details at the moment, but expect to be informed of them at the Special Meeting of the Executive Board this morning. Once I have the details of the proposed settlement, will I be able to make an informed decision? Unless the new offer is three or four times the original amount, I will have to examine all relevant factors to form a well reasoned opinion in this matter. I will also need to consult with other members of my Association to get their take on this matter. This will take time and effort on my part and am unable to responsibly complete this task in a single day. Longer notice of this very important agenda item is also of great necessity. What is also necessary is a workshop to inform us of the facts (and qualified opinions) relevant to making such an informed decision.
There are only two concerns that I have at this moment:
1) that the EB may once again (in the absence of a quorum of 141 Delegates on Friday) act for the Delegate Assembly in this matter; and 2) that should a quorum be achieved, that the DA will vote on accepting or rejecting the proposed settlement.
As for the first matter, I will make a motion at the EB Meeting this morning that the decision/recommendation of the EB in this matter WILL NOT BE THE ACT OF THE DA IN THE EVENT THAT A QUORUM IS NOT PRESENT ON FRIDAY. In this regard I will quote from Article X (D) of the UCO Bylaws as follows:
"The Executive Board shall have and MAY (emphasis added) exercise the powers of the Delegate Assembly when less than a quorum is present at regular, special or emergency meetings of the Assembly. This provision shall apply to the consideration of all matters referred to it by the Officers’ Committee, except for actions and proposals required by statute or these Bylaws”.
As for my 2nd concern of there being such short notice of the proposed settlement, a motion should be made at the DA Meeting to postpone the vote until the May meeting (which incidentally has a quorum requirement of 117 members).
A town meeting can then be scheduled and we will have then fulfilled our fiduciary responsibility to make informed decisions for our constituents.

Ken said...

In my Association, as soon as I received the phone call. I started knocking on doors and began feeling out the people as to their wishes. At this time, we, or I, do not know if this settlement is only going to happen on the Friday Vote or if as Randall suggests, it can be out off til May. My unit owners that were even interested, just want it to go away and settle, whatever the amount is. The general feeling was that it is costing too much every day to keep going on.

Anonymous said...

The word 'politics' is derived from the word 'poly', meaning 'many', and the word 'ticks', meaning 'blood sucking parasites'.
The reason you have laws guiding condominium living is to eliminate the type of leadership we now have in CVWPB.
Exactly!

Anonymous said...

Dear anonymous,You assume that I do not know that UCO is neither a condo association nor a homeowners association. I am fully aware that UCO operates under FS617. They also are not a management company. My question was, however, why in the first place they would form an organization that is guiding condominium associations and then disregard condominium law. Or in other words, if my water heater breaks, I don't call a car mechanic to fix it.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps you may want to read Bill Snyder's article in the last UCO reporter and find out why UCO was formed in the first place.

Anonymous said...

I have been familiar with this village since the mid seventies. The atmosphere and attitude of the unit owners at that time was positive, content and happy. The current settlement should make it clear even to you that UCO never was an answer. UCO leadership now is power hungry, arrogant and not too bright. People like Bill Snyder were and are part of the problem, and not the solution.