Favors the Investment Committee

I appreciate the letters published last week titled Information Needed by Karol Forsberg and Voice your Opinion by Sandy and Row Carlson.
Without Karol’s letter, I would not have known that two of the three Investment Committee members have resigned. That negative was swept under the rug by Board members emphatically stating that their inquiry into professional management of Lake Monticello Owners’ Association’s portfolio in no way implies dissatisfaction with the committee and they were thanked profusely for all they have done.
The Board feels it necessary to protect themselves against law suits and despite a probable cost of $50,000 to $100,000 they intend to charge ahead. I propose that the Board beg the Investment Committee to re-form for at least one more year. By doing so, they can then put the question of Investment Committee versus professionals on next year’s ballot. By doing so, I expect the membership will vote in favor of an Investment Committee and the threat of lawsuit should be alleviated.
With respect to giving the membership and all Board members six days notice of new issues prior to a monthly meeting, all I heard was criticism of the wording put forth by Ida Swenson and Charles Harrelson. No one spoke against the intent. I suggest that the wording can be simple: Just add a line that says” If a Board member that has not had six days notice of a new issue becomes a minority dissenter, that Board member has the right to table the issue until the next Board meeting. No vote required – just call it a veto.

Related Posts

dewi88 cuanslot dragon77 cuan138 enterslots rajacuan megahoki88 ajaib88 warung168 fit188 pusatwin pusatwin slot tambang88 mahkota88 slot99 emas138