At last week’s Board meeting, our property management company, Stratus Management, announced that they are resigning at the end of this month. Let’s hope the Board is already interviewing other companies.
As a minor site update, we have added the newsletters for April, May and June.
This entry was posted on Monday, June 9th, 2008 at 1:03 pm and is filed under Community News, Site Updates. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Asked why Cathy McVey still appears on Newsletters as actively holding the secretary position, Manager Sue Besek responded at the May 4, meeting that “it is a mistake.”
Cathy McVey’s resignation was announced during the March meeting, by the board’s president. The Playmor Terrace HOA BOD has been functioning for quite a while with only four members and not five as required by our Bylaws.
Only one out of the four directors supported the recall in November. I assume that many major decisions voted on passed with the other three’s votes – choosing the management company, the law firm, the fire reconstruction contractors, the inspectors of election. It is easier to single one out of four than one out of five, especially when as much as 50% of the voting pool voted in November for this board’s recall.
Just a correction to my previous entry: Newsletters’ error in depicting the current board constituency was discussed at the June 4 meeting. (not May 4) The June 4 meeting was the “late-agenda-meeting” held in the interval between the annual meeting and the adjourned annual meeting.
June 10, 2008 at 9:29 pm |
Asked why Cathy McVey still appears on Newsletters as actively holding the secretary position, Manager Sue Besek responded at the May 4, meeting that “it is a mistake.”
Cathy McVey’s resignation was announced during the March meeting, by the board’s president. The Playmor Terrace HOA BOD has been functioning for quite a while with only four members and not five as required by our Bylaws.
Only one out of the four directors supported the recall in November. I assume that many major decisions voted on passed with the other three’s votes – choosing the management company, the law firm, the fire reconstruction contractors, the inspectors of election. It is easier to single one out of four than one out of five, especially when as much as 50% of the voting pool voted in November for this board’s recall.
June 12, 2008 at 6:47 pm |
Just a correction to my previous entry: Newsletters’ error in depicting the current board constituency was discussed at the June 4 meeting. (not May 4) The June 4 meeting was the “late-agenda-meeting” held in the interval between the annual meeting and the adjourned annual meeting.