|
|
Relax Teresa
Teresa,
The Board and associated volunteers are doing a fine job. It is VERY apparent since the only complainers are Barns, Penny Pincher and two or three others. So, out of over 500 homes, there a less than 10 people who choose to complain via this message board -- versus attending a real HOA meeting. The vocal minority.
Keep up the good work!
By Unanimus
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Complaints
How many unique people visit this site and take the time to read these threads? Do you think there might be a chance that the people complaining about this issue are actually the minority? Let's see, if 15 people are all that post out here and 10 are complaining about the newsletters, that means 67% don't like the changes that have been made.
One of the arguments concerning the minutes being pulled from the newsletter stems around the fact that the Board is relying on this site to be the primary means of reading the newsletter. Maybe they should get some stats from Neighborhoodlink on numbers of unique people that actually visit the site before deciding that this is the place to do that. If only 15 people of 500 homes visit this site that means only 3% of the community has access to the newsletter.
BTW, whens the last time you went to an HOA meeting? What about the last time you skipped work to go to an HOA meeting? Why should I be expected to skip work to go to an HOA meeting to raise some concerns and ask a few questions when this forum is endorsed by the Board for exactly that purpose?
By Penny Pincher
|
|
|
Relax Unanimus
Ok, let's use some basic statistical methods to determine support for you and the Board. For the sake of calculation we will forego the ''over 500 homes'' as the baseline measurement and reduce it down to an even 500 homes.
A review of the minutes from the last year reveals that on average there are 1.86 non-Board Member Residents in attendance at each meeting. The Feb 2003 meeting was discounted since the Block Captains were required to be there, that is called an ''anamoly'' in the world of Stats. It has a longer name to it, but I'm keeping it simple for you.
Now before we can calculate anything, we have to remove the 7 Board Members for baseline calculation since they are obligated by accepting the position to be at the meeting. That means 500-7=493.
If 1.86 residents out of 493 non-Board homes come to the meeting that shows statistically a level of 0.37728% involvement by our neighbors. For the sake of your argument, we will assume that every bit of that 0.37728% attendance at Board Meetings is there to show support for the Board. If they weren't, your claims of support would fall substantially from the already <1% it is now.
How can you claim that the Board has 90% support? What data do you use? Please enlighten us as to a new Statistical Computation method that the world is not aware of.
If the Board led by example in a constructive manner, held itself responsible for it's actions by giving a full explanation of it's decisions when asked, and did not be an active enabler of fake names postings which attack people like Barns (sic) and Pincher, then perhaps more people would be involved?
Negative leadership leads to disenfrancisement of the population in the decision making process in the short term, and is can actually be a way to consolidate power in the short run. When and how does this change in a Democracy? When the concerned ''vocal minority'' raises the conciousness of the silent majority to the level that things can be better thereby effecting change. When those changes start to take place, the in place leadership can adapt and grow in place, or it can be swept out of the way.
When will this current Board leadership be swept out of power? It all depends as to how the silent majority awakens to the non-responsiveness of this Board, and ultimately whether this Board can affect leadership changes internally for the good of the community. It may happen soon, it may be years. One thing is certain, nothing stays static and constant for long in the larger realm of things.
History is littered with formerly elected officials who becames non-responsive to their populace and lose their precious grip on power. It happens from the Community level all the way up to the National level. Teresa is the only Board Member who has been responsive in a positive manner. Thank you and nice job Ms. Traylor. Perhaps more of them will follow your example?
By nonUnanimus
|
|
|
You make a very good point
67% of the 3% that visit this site -- which equates to roughly 2% of the total development -- are not happy. Turn the numbers around and you get 98% that either are happy or don't care. It's sad, but my guess is that the majority of homeowners don't care. To them it's more of a matter of ''live and let live''. Either way, the Board, in concert with all of the volunteers, are doing a fine job. There will alwarys be the 2% vocal minority. You simply can't please all of the people all of the time.
By Unanimus
|
