617 VS. 718

UCO is registered as a not for profit incorporation and as such is regulated by a completely different set of statutes than HOA'S or Condo associations.
Florida Statute 617 regulates not for profit incorporations, Floridas Statute 718 regulates condo associations and homeowners associations among other things.
The big difference is that under 718 there are regulators who can and do enforce the rules and provide a venue for dissatisfied owners to file complaints. Under 617 there is no such mechanism. Disputes in not for profit organizations have only one recourse to settle complaints; institute legal proceedings.
It's a glaring fault in the system of management of condo associations. Executives knowing that most people are unwilling or unable to commence legal proceedings slip through the cracks and avoid any regulation or scrutiny by the state. When bylaws are broken or expenditures are made that are questionable there is not a lot anyone can do., other than hiring lawyers and filing proceedings. The advantage in this game goes to the executives who employ defense lawyers with money gleaned from the very people who are suing them, and if there is any monetary judgement awarded to the plaintiffs the executives are covered by insurance that pays the penalties on their behalf. It's a perilous situation for owners who can be assessed legal fees for both sides if they lose their lawsuit. The result is that associations like UCO, who are governed by statute 617 have little to fear and are free to do pretty much whatever they like. 

A tempest in a teapot

The Messenger Club is under attack for purportedly throwing Barbara Cornish out of a meeting , this came about because she and her husband refused to sign in despite repeated requests to do so. What is not being said is why they refused to sign the guest sheet in the first place. Is it such a big deal ? Besides The club didn't throw anyone out. They were politely asked to either sign in or leave, when they refused to do either. Ed Grossman talked to Eva Rachesky and a few minutes later they left.
Now the Reporter is publishing a letter giving her side of the story and Eva Rachesky is doing the same. Under all the hyperbole is the underlying issue where Barbara Cornish started a disruption for no good reason, then carried on complaining and continues to do so, evidenced by her letter published in the paper.
What's the big deal? Why not just sign in like they were asked? Is it just another attempt to get rid of The messenger Club as they are seen as a thorn in the side of the people who run the village?
Eva Rachesky claims that there were others in attendance who didn't sign in either, as though that's got anything to do with anything. Everyone was asked repeatedly to make sure they signed in, if anyone managed to avoid putting their name on the guest list it's unfortunate but not intentional, and really it's no big deal.
The messengers have frequently  been accused of causing disruption at meetings. Whether that's true or not is beside the point. The point is that we have a member of the executive causing a disturbance for no good reason, and we have the village newspaper supporting her action by publishing her side of the story in the paper under a letter entitled " Shame on the Messenger club" It should be entitled " Shame on Barbara Cornish" for creating a tempest in the teapot in the first place.
Barbara Cornish is welcome to come to any of the club meetings, but she should sign in , that would be the right thing to do.

Hornswoggled again !

I guess we have all heard of the building swap being pushed forward. Let's get it straight ! The admin' is trading a building we own for one that The Levy's own. Israel wants to put Atlantic Broadband in the newly acquired building and thinks it's best for the newspaper to conduct their business in the clubhouse. Just a gosh darned minute! The clubhouse is supposed to be for recreational purposes only !  Does anyone know how much we are paying per square foot in the clubhouse? I bet it's a lot more than $1.00 a foot that Atlantic Broadband  is going to be paying for their space. Does this make sense?  Does this sound like a good deal ? NO ! it's not. 
There's something else in this mix: The realty company has been occupying our building at $1.00 a year and no one has been paying property tax on it . You see; it's registered as a common element. Therefore no taxes are payable. BUT ! It's not really a common element. IT'S A BUSINESS ! Is there something not right about this ? YOU BETCHA! 
Ergo: CV Real Estate gets our building and the land that goes with it, which is a lot more valuable than the land around the construction shack. They don't pay any tax on it if it stays under the common element designation and we pay WPRF for space in the clubhouse  for the newspaper. We get the construction shack and pay the ongoing tax on it, and we let Atlantic use it at an unheard of price. 
The dirty little secret about the whole deal is that David Israel added a clause to the Atlantic contract after the ratification vote  giving them space at $1.00 a foot. That, in and of itself, should be cause to boot him out.  If this deal doesn't work the way Israel wants to work it, he is going to find himself in a fine how do you do. Where is he going to find space at $1.00 a foot as he contracted? NOWHERE! that's where. WHAT THEN ?
The committee is dazzled by the promise of a fine new office space as promised, but it's not going to be much of an asset to the village while Atlantic uses it. 
The real reason for the swap is to give Atlantic the space Israel signed for. Now he is trying to hornswoggle everyone with proclamations announcing what a great deal it is. 
Don't get hornswoggled again. Tell CV Realty to put their business in the construction shack, they are willing to renovate it anyway, then put the paper in the building on East Drive where it belongs. 

Are you a believer?

Can you believe the things going on with the rewrite of the bylaws?
There's a few things in there that shouldn't pass unchallenged. One clause gives the editor of the paper full control over the cable channel. The editor is also a VP of UCO. The bigger picture shows the administration has complete control over the village media. That would be like Donald Trump having full control over the press and the television stations. Good luck trying to put anything on any of these info outlets, unless the few people having control like it. Needless to say nothing gets aired unless it's complimentary to the administration or is a namby pamby article about how wonderful everything is in la a land. The administration should have no say in what gets published or aired.
Then there's the amendments that pretty much shut out petitions for amendments or recall of officers. Anyone trying to present a petition is going to have a tough row to hoe in getting the hundred signatures they are going to need.

The new edition of The CV Messenger is online now. Click here to read the latest.

Who's media is it anyway ?

The village media is under the total control of a few people who determine what can and can't be broadcast over the cable channel, the village newspaper and the website
The editorial policies of the UCO reporter should also be subject to approval by the delegates. 
leaving the policy in the hands of  a few appointed editors has led CV to a situation where they have the latitude to censor material and the right to refuse to publish objections or questions regarding the actions of the administration. 

There is no policy in place defining the obligations of the administration in broadcasting material on the village cable channel.
 There should be a clear cut policy and a statement regarding this issue. At present the cable channel is controlled by Joy Vestal ( The Editor of the UCO Reporter), who decides what can be broadcast and what can be denied. No member of UCO should be denied the opportunity to present programming unless it contravenes the FCC ( Federal communications Commission) guidelines. 
The village website has been replaced by David Israel's personal blog.Objections frequently surface criticizing the way the blog is controlled and the censorship of material that the administration doesn't like.
The three communications channels should be administered by an unbiased third party. 
Leaving it up to a few people who have an obvious stake in what information is put on any of the media is unfair and should be changed.

ONLINE ELECTRONIC VOTING

Voting online is an idea who's time has come. In the electronic age there's no good reason to deny using it. Becker and Poliakoff , a prominent Florida law firm, are promoting its use for condo and home owner associations. you can read their article about it  HERE . Electronic voting over the internet and initiating one vote per unit in Century Village would bring a fresh new approach to not only the election of officers, but also to the passing of motions that are usually dealt with at the delegates assembly. In short: Electronic voting would give everyone a vote in Century Village affairs. 
We can look forward to a hearty opposition to this idea, objections are already being heard by those who want to keep elections the way they are conducted now. " Electronic voting is not fair" they cry, " not everyone has a computer, so a lot of people won't be able to vote" That's not a valid objection. On election day it would be a simple matter to put a few computers in the clubhouse and use them to allow access for those not having a computer. 
"How do we know and how do we verify the people voting over the internet, anyone could place a vote" is another objection.
Becker and Poliakoff are offering a system that is approved for voting. It has safeguards that make it just as safe as any form of voting.Though there are no guarantees , the same could be said about any system of conducting elections.
" How could you get people to vote on motions at the delegates assemblies, there's no way to see what's going on in real time." 
That's true, but initiating a live streaming broadcast , which is a simple and easy way to go live on the internet would solve that problem.It's become so easy to do that kids are live streaming all kinds of stuff from their smart phones.
We heard a lot of hyperbole about moving Century Village into the 21st Century during the campaign to get village wide WIFI .  That idea was scuttled by the delegates. Moving into the future would become a reality if Evoting  is adopted . 
The way CV elections are conducted now is not reflecting the true picture of the wishes of all residents. Just because a delegate votes this way or that way doesn't really mean that everyone the delegate represents is in agreement. Then there's the problem of absentee delegates.
 The only way to get the true picture and a real representation  is to institute universal voting,  the only way that can be accomplished is by instituting Evoting.

THANK ALL WHO CAME TO OUR JUNE 6,2017  MEETING.

WE WILL BE HOLDING   ANOTHER  MEETING IN THE NEAR FUTURE

AS WE CONTINUE MONITORING THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

Wasn't that a party !

A signing up party that is !

The messenger club hosted a meeting today to gather signatures for bylaw amendment proposals.
A lot of residents showed up to voice their concerns about the way things are going here in the village, and they weren't shy about signing in and adding their names to a long list of amendment proposals that The Messengers believe would better serve the residents than the stuff that the committee has on the table.

The attendees settled in with a complimentary cup of coffee and a biscuit or two, and listened to the speakers who object to the administration's actions  and were not afraid to speak out about their concerns. 
Ed Grossman regaled the audience with a scathing indictment of the administration and the UCO committes who are busy working to amend the bylaws. Ed informed the crowd that the re-writing of the bylaws is a scurrilous attempt by David Israel to solidify his position and to make it difficult if not impossible for residents to affect any change. He was particularly concerned with the proposal raising the number of signatories on a petition from 25 residents to 59 delegates.
Neil Moore was next at the Mike, he lamented that he is contemplating purchasing a unit here in the village, but has misgivings about the way the administration is going. One comment he made rings true. He said he is reluctant to purchase until the administration straightens out their act . "I don't want to live in a unit where I feel like am owned by others rather than me owning a home. " he said.
Dot Loewenstein spoke up and recalled her struggles with the dictatorial attitudes she endured while serving as a librarian in the clubhouse. " Stand up for yourself" she said. "I had to stand up  when Eva Rachesky removed religious literature from the library because she didn't like it." "I spoke out and I removed the poster she put on the wall warning others not to put religious material in the library."
Dot's husband George spoke and recounted the philosophy that he practiced while serving as President of UCO. He complained that the attitude coming from the administration is fascist in nature and reminiscent of the way the Nazis controlled the population.
Esther Sutofsky took her turn and delivered another scathing criticism of the Israel administration. She said that she was told by David Israel that she would never serve on anything UCO because she writes bad things about him.  
Other residents spoke out in opposition to the administration, Ray Stoeker told about his disgust with the administration and his decision to quit acting as a delegate and an association president due to the unfair practices and the frustration he endured while trying to deal with UCO.
Stew Richland spoke  about his experience as a member of the Advisory Committee, he said that he thought the people on the committee were all good , hard working people looking out for the best interests of the village, Ed Grossman became a little upset about that and a loud "debate " ensued. Though Ed thought that Stew is a good guy . he also thinks he might be a little misguided. Other audience members agreed with Ed's assessment . 
The party wrapped up with attendees vowing to work to improve the state of the village. Grievances were aired and opinions were opined, but the lasting result of the party is that seven petitions for amendments received more than the required number of signatures to go forward.
The party is not over yet. So come on in and join the club. 

Stop the Advisory Committee's lunacy

The Advisory Committee is proposing amendments to the bylaws that erode our rights as unit owners in Century Village. Read the article below then come to our meeting Thursday July 6th at 9.45 am. in the main clubhouse to voice your opinion and join the opposition. 

        Method of Amendment Article XI 
    The method of amendment proposed by the committee takes authority out of the hands of the delegates because any proposal must be approved by the officers committee and the advisory committee before it is presented to the delegates for approval. If either of  the committees do not approve it; the proposed amendment  is declared void. 
    The proposal for an amendment contains clauses that require 59 Signatures.  this is an unreasonable number of required signatories. There is no just cause to raise the number to 59. By proposing to raise this number, the committees have shown their intention to make it much more difficult for residents to make proposals. 
     There is a clause limiting the signatory delegates to one per condominium . That means that condo  complexes containing many residents have the same degree of representation as complexes containing far less.The question arises: why should a building with only 16 units, and there are many, get the same representation as a building with 82 units ?. Golfs Edge has twenty or so buildings. The buildings of Wellington, Southampton and Dover are populated by many more residents than many of the smaller complexes. Should they be limited to one delegate when they represent so many residents? 
    The historic procedure for petitioning amendments is to acquire twenty five signatures from owners of units. The new proposal says that its not just going to increase the required number  to fifty nine signatures, but those signatures must be from delegates. Effectively reducing the number of potential signatories from around eleven thousand unit owners to about 300  delegates as about forty nine delegates have been removed by the clause stating that only one delegate from each association is qualified. Then the clause giving about a dozen people on the committees the right to disapprove any proposal brings the number of people controlling the procedure much lower. It gives  the few chosen people control over a process that should be in the hands of the residents. 
Proposals for amendments to the bylaws should be presented to the delegates assembly for debate and for a vote of approval whether the committees approve them or not. 
     This is an attempt to Gerrymander the process by limiting the number of approved signatories, skewing the process and making it unreasonably difficult to propose an amendment and placing the authority to deny petitions in the hands of the committees, who we fear are populated by cronies of the administration and have shown a propensity to  act contrary to the best interests of the residents and favor measures solidifying the incumbents control over the village. 
    We must remember that what  differentiates democracy from despotism is political competition, the right to be heard and the right to speak. If we allow our rights to be hijacked we move  away from the founding ideals of our republic and move  toward the end of democracy. 
    The proposed changes in the process of making amendments to our bylaws are truly representative of the erosion of the rights of the residents of Century Village . Standing by and doing nothing, is one way to give silent approval.   
    The Messenger Club is hosting an open forum meeting on Thursday July 6th at 9.45 am. in the main clubhouse to discuss the proposals.  
An open invitation to Anita Buchanan,(Advisory Committee Chair) and any or all members of the Advisory Committee is hereby extended in the hope that they will attend our meeting to clarify their proposals to amend the bylaws in this fashion. 
This is the text of the UCO proposed amendment: 
          ARTICLE XI AMENDMENT 
A.  Method of Amendment. Amendments to the UCO Bylaws must be proposed by any of the following methods: 
1.  Amendments to these Bylaws shall be proposed by petition  of the (A) Advisory Committee; (B)  Officers Committee;  or (C) a petition  signed by of at least 59 Delegates, the equivalent of one-half  of the 117-member summer quorum for the Delegate Assembly. The  petition must be  submitted  at least five (10) business days prior to a meeting of the Delegate Assembly to allow time for verification of signatures by the  UCO Record Keeper. Only one Deleqate per Condominium Alternate Delegate  may  not  sign this petition. —In order for a proposed amendment which comes from the 0fficers  Committee  to be submitted to the Delegate Assembly, it must also be approved by the Advisory Committee and vice versa. If a proposed amendment is not approved by both Committees, it may not be sent to the Delegate Assembly for consideration. Delegates may not vote on a proposed amendment submitted as a motion from the Assembly floor if the proposed amendment has not gone through the foregoing process. 
2.  Once a proposed amendment is approved, as noted in paragraph (1), above, the following procedures must be followed or the amendment will be considered invalid: 
(a) During the meeting at which the proposal is adopted, the text of the changes will be read aloud and discussed. No vote may be taken at this meeting on the proposed amendments. 
(b) At the very next meeting of the Delegates, after the Executive Board  has approved the proposal,  the vote will be taken by the Delegate Assembly and must be approved by the affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the Delegates present at the meeting, as long as there is a quorum. 
(c) The notice of both meetings at which the proposed amendment is considered shall set forth the proposed amendment or an outline of its terms. The vote thereon shall be limited to the designated subject. 


We propose the bylaw be amended in the following manner. 
1.  Amendments to these Bylaws shall be proposed by: 
  A petition  of the (A) Advisory Committee; (B)  Officers Committee;  or (C) a petition  signed by  at least 25 unit owners.
 Once a proposed amendment is submitted , the following procedures must be followed, within thirty days or the amendment will be published in the UCO Reporter and will then be presented to the delegates assembly for consideration.

    The petition shall be taken under advisement of the Officers Committee and passed for consideration  to the Advisory committee who can make recommendations on the form and legal language of the proposal .Committees cannot refuse to bring any petition to the delegates assembly for ratification. The proposal shall then be published in the next edition of The UCO reporter and presented to the following delegates assembly for discussion. 
(a) During the meeting at which the proposal is adopted, the text of the changes will be read aloud and discussed. No vote may be taken at this meeting on the proposed amendments. 
(b) At the very next meeting of the Delegates, ,  the vote will be taken by the Delegate Assembly and must be approved by the affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the Delegates present at the meeting, as long as there is a quorum. (c) The notice of both meetings at which the proposed amendment is considered shall set forth the proposed amendment or an outline of its terms. The vote thereon shall be limited to the designated subject.  

Is this democracy ?

Something to think about on the Fourth of July.

Is Century Village a democracy?

No it's not. Check your civil rights at the gate.
How to describe the living here in Century Village ?. It's not a democracy, though most people think that the principles of freedom and the rights under the constitution and the bill of rights apply inside the gates of Century Village. They don't. Century Village is a business and the residents are the customers. The owners make the rules and whether we like it or not we are bound to comply.  though we lease the clubhouse it is governed by WPRF (the owner) they make the rules and anyone caught breaking them is subject to whatever punishment they want to impose..
All it takes is for someone, anyone, to make an accusation of some kind of breach , and whether it's true or not, Eva Rachesky will issue a warning ,and quite possibly a suspension of clubhouse privileges, especially if she doesn't like the person being accused . I can attest to that because when false accusations were made against me I had no opportunity to dispute the claims and there was no chance to face the false accuser.  Edicts are issued  without any chance of the person being accused to make any kind of defense, or face their accuser. That dictatorial form of management is absolutely contrary to the principles of justice and fair play that we are guaranteed under the American  Constitution and Bill of Rights.  It's not only dictatorial it is open and prone to abuse by people having an axe to grind. 
It's something to think about when you celebrate The Fourth of July. The day when Americans proudly celebrate their freedom and the  justice that goes with it. 
Not so in Century Village . Check your rights at the gate and pick them up when you leave.

Happy Independence day !