For much too long now I have been reading comments on Free Speak concerning the process followed by the Manager Selection Committee and the Board Chairperson in finding and “appointing” our new Operations Manager.
It is my opinion that the Manager Selection Committee followed the procedure stated in our procedures. They requested resumes to be submitted and received at least a dozen from interested applicants, including at least one, and I believe two or more from residents of The Cove and some from an outside search firm. They studied and reviewed, and rated each of the candidates’ resumes. They then interviewed the two finalists and reached a consensus to make a recommendation to Joan Fletcher. The Manager Selection Committee’s choice was Butch Price.
The comments made on Free Speak seem to miss the mark entirely. First, POASC is a business, a corporation. The directors are the corporation. No one living in The Cove is a stockholder in the corporation. They have no rights or say in the management of the corporation and outside of having an opinion cannot affect the hiring or firing of any employee. Does the sports fan have the right to tell the “corporation” who should be hired or fired? I can just see the public telling the University of Alabama what criteria are to be followed in selecting its next coach.
It is the Manager Selection Committee and Board Chairperson’s responsibility to determine what qualifications and expertise the position requires. Comments about a background check are valid, however the results of any such check are confidential employee records and any job offer can be and frequently is, made subject to a background check.
I cannot understand why individuals think they have a right to question the procedure the Board had decided to follow or has followed. I have read many comments concerning this aspect. Unless the comment is coming from a board member, it is out of line. In this regard, all of the comments are anonymous, so no one knows who is making them—nice protection, huh? If any of the remarks posted come from an individual board member, or members, I am extremely disappointed that the person did not have the guts to stand up and be known. A board member has the ear of the Chair, and therefore the opportunity to express his or her views. An anonymous posting on a blog meant as an outlet for opinions in just plain wrong.
Tags: comments, corporation, Free Speak, hiring, Manager, POASC
Hey Rita
Nice to hear from you again!
Just because you don’t see me on this blog every day, doesn’t mean I’m not reading it. when I have something to say I will enter my comments.
Amen Dave.
This is a cut and paste that I just posted on Free Speak in answer to many recent comments there. Including one wanting to know how long Sally was operations manager.
Sally was never the operations manager. She, John Lucas, and Dave Ives handled the responsibilities of the position after the Board fired Mike LaChance. At the time Sally was Board Chairperson, John Lucas was the Vice Chairperson, and Dave Ives was chairman of the PDM Committee. They handled the responsibilities while the Board reviewed their options regarding the Operation Managers position. This was a lengthy duscussion as there were many thoughts concerning the direction to be taken. After several months it was decided that Roger Flack, who had been Maintenance Manager would act as Acting Manager. He was subsequently hired as the Manager and filled that position until Charlie was hired. None of the Board members were paid while filling in during the period we did not have a manager.
The Board, the Communications Committee and the Manager should not be blamed for POASC not maintaining the list they were given since Sally always willingly provided the communications services. There came a time when the “hate Sally crowd” decided that is was wrong for Sally to send out official Board communications and said “the office should do it”. For the Board to do it requires either volunteers or money, just as publication of the phone book does. I dont see anyone raising their hand to volunteer, do you. I guess we could hire someone…oh no i hear the growing cry, my assessments are going up. All POASC wants to do is collect as much money as they can. Spanish Cove once existed through volunteerism that is why we have so many of the things we love. Has anyone noticed Channel 86 which was updated by volunteers for more years than I have lived here is no longer updated? No more volunteers. In their place a new feature to our life has been born. The feature of selfishness, and condemnation of those who volunteer to try and provide for all. Thank you Board, Careforce, all Committee Members, Sally for keeping us up to date concerning our neighbors and POASC doings, Meals on Wheels, Social Club, Bingo Callers, Exercise Group Leaders, and all those that I have forgotten to mention, unintentionally, for everything you do and have done to make Spanish Cove what it is, a great place to live.
I can see the need to post anonymously in a country where human rights or freedom of speech are censured. However, we’re living in America where people have the right and do speak freely.
Everyone on Free Speak has the right to say and comment upon anything they want, it’s an inherent right.
What I don’t like about some of the comments and the overall tone of Free Speak is that under an anonymous setting and behind Google’s firewall individuals misuse it without any repercussion or consequences.
I have no problem maligning “Free” Speak. It doesn’t take a scatologist to identify most of the contents posted there. I’m truly sorry you’re unable to see that the site is much less an exercise in free speech than it is a forum for wild accusations, speculation and emotional venting of some pretty vile stuff. If that’s your idea of the proper application of the freedoms upon which this country was founded, then by all means, take your comments over there. You’re still welcome here, I’m sure, but don’t expect folks like me to sit here and take it when you inpugn our motives or somehow imply that this site doesn’t measure up to the stellar values of Free Speak. I’m more than happy to share my views with the “mere handful” of folks on CC, thank you.
Ron, I do not see where anything I said comes close to maligning the Free Speak Blog. The Blog is just an available tool for people to comment, you do not kill the messenger for the message. Reading the postings allows one to see that many of the people posting comments do not understand their position within Spanish Cove. From your comments here it appears that you do not understand the purpose of this blog too. There are usually many aspects to a discussion, CC tries to provide a format and place for the exchange of ideas in a polite meaningful respectful manner without the intolerence of others thoughts and name calling that all to often prevails on Free Speak. You may feel that the quantity of comments made on Free Speak indicates approval, unfortunately all to often I get the feeling that instead it proves the old addage that an empty barrel makes the most noise. CC gives the residents a place to go where they can get current information on the place they live, research the documents under which they live, read informative thought generating articles, and also post something if they so desire. I fail to see where any of your comments were received without dignity and respect. Just because someone does not agree with you does not mean they are wrong, or stupid. It means that there is a difference of opinions which need to be discussed so that the other persons thoughts are more fully understood. As you know I read the postings on both blogs daily, usually. I also, like you do here, post my opinions when I desire. Both Dick and I have been called all kinds of names that obviously make the poster happy. Say what you want, even stop reading or posting on CC, that is your privledge, but I defy you to give one instance where you were called a name, or treated with lack of respect. Think of that and compare that with what to frequently occurs on the Blog you so strongly support. It is your choice of what you. do
DJ, if you will read the title of the article Mr. Danson Wrote that you are now commenting on it saya “Property Owner Comments on Comments”. I would have thought you could have at least gotten that much correct. Limited rights of property owners were part of his associated commentary but not the subject of the article.
The blog as well as its bloggers that I responded about appeared to me to be the primary things that Dave was maligning. It is titled FREE SPEAK. I don’t see that as much of a stretch to the rights associated with the First Amendment to the Constitution.
I said nothing even remotely related to any matters being neglected here. As I told you earlier my comment was addressed to Dave on his comment.
In my opinion the continual misguided attacks made here primarily by yourself and Dave have succeeded in reducing the number of people who comment here to a mere handfull while at the same time Free Speak enjoys hundreds of comments on single headings. Frequently several days pass with no comments even being made here at all.
I now join the exodus. I just don’t need this crap.
Ben and Ron….. Spanish Cove was not a partner in any suit against the sewer company. The testing is done by either the County, the State, our the Corp of Engineers. It is done to monitor the Sewer Company’s effluent treatment released into the bay
My best recollection is that the POASC was not a party in the Peterson Branch lawsuit. It was brought by several individuals against Baldwin County Sewer and settled out of court. I forget who does the sampling, but the Cove is not involved. Volunteers?
Implication, Ron. Implication. You recommended that Dave read the Constitution and Bill of Rights, in response to his posting about the limited rights of Spanish Cove property owners. One can easily infer that you believe that the Constitution and Bill of Rights are somehow being neglected here.
Sally, again, I made no mention of “constitutional rights”.
If you believe I did , point it out. Or perhaps you had reference to a comment made by some other person.
Many years ago we were sued and lost. It had to do with when an addition on a home in Land Harbor was begun. It involved the Grandfather Clause. I believe the insurance covered it.
Yes, I don’t understand this talk of constitutional rights. No one has taken away any constitutional rights. Our documents give the board certain rights and duties. However, to protect other people’s rights and to avoid law suits, they don’t have to reveal everything that has been done. That is why Robert’s Rules allows for Executive Sessions. Persons may be punished under disciplinary procedures if he or she violates the secrecy of an Executive Session. Our Bylaws specifically state when an Executive Session may be used: appointing various committee chairmen; approving or disapproving the Chairman’s selection to fill a vacancy on the board and committees; planning, establishing and assigning projects and discussing personnel matters. It should also be used in planning to purchase or sell property and discussing litigation.
DJ, my comment was in response to Danson’s initial comment. I made no mention of “constitutional rights”.
Ben, was POASC not involved on the class action based upon sewage releases? And then as a result they were forced to sample the outfall fron Perterson Branch on a daily basis?
My information came from the Friends of Perdido Bay.
Yes, the POASC has been sued. Unsucessfully is more accurate. Copies of the suit are included in the Covenant Documents Book. I believe it was McCrary et al vs. POASC. McCrary sued 2X concerning the same issue and lost both and the appeals.
What’s all this about suing and infringement of constitutional rights? What in the world has POASC done that is even worthy of that discussion?
It could happen.
I understand that the POASC has been successfully sued both by individuals and in class action based on rights, property and otherwise, granted by the aforementioned documents.
I may not be a “stockholder” but as an owner do care about the people we hire, that my $$ are not wasted, that the place is kept up, that the people hired, do their jobs. I still work full time and most of my time is spent on staffing issues, work perfomace that needs to be improved, etc. As part of manangement and as an Administrator, I take time to listen to the rank and file about concerns and ideas they may have (may be better than mine – even after 26 years). But that does not mean I pit people up against each other, tell half the truth or talk to lower ranking staff about disciplinary actions on employees.
Why don’t you see if they will hear your case, Ron
Dave, those two documents represent the highest law of the land.
They are based upon the Magna Carta, centuries of English common law, the Pinkney Principles, a relative of mine, and the collective wisdom of our founders. They render null and void all opposing positions taken in lesser documents such as municipal, county, state and federal legislation.
They also over rule conflicting positions in even the POASC documents and even your personal opinions as difficult as that may be for you to believe.
Ron, I believe very strongly in both documents you referred me to. Please enlighten me as to where either of these documents give a non-owner any right to make decisions concerning the running of the corporation. Please show me also where any resident of Spanish Cove has or is entitled to any ownership of either the Corporation or any of the assests. No where have I said now, or in the past, that any citizen of the United States is not entitled to have their own opinion, and to state it publically. In fact I would go so far as to say they have an obligation to make their opinion made known, even if anonymously. I feel strongly however, that in this country where individual rights are protected by both the Constitution and other laws that one who is afraid to let others know who thinks something lacks both guts and possibly real belief in what they say. This is especially true of a person who has sought and serves in a position of leadership, such as our Board. If one is not proud enough to attach a name, or face, to their beliefs they lose my respect. They earn my doubt concerning sincerity and desire to do anything more than inflame, insite, and hurt.
Dave, you might try reading also the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Thanks, Jenny
Dick, I do not really disagree with your thought that members have the right to question Board procedures. They do not have the right, however, to vilify the Board as a whole or individual Board Members. That is what I see happening. In addition I find the comments posted regarding both Mike and Gretchen to be obnoxious, irrelevent, and in general the lowest of the low. Respectful disagreement can be and should be learned from. Hateful, hurting comments have no place in this or any situation.
PS: It’s very sad!
Dick, I’ve been concerned about the impact that FS will have on prospective property owners too.
I’ve been surfing the Internet for a long time, I haven’t seen a blog quite like it in that anything and everything is allowed regardless whether it’s defamatory, libelous or harmful. In a small community it can be devastating.
I fail to understand why anyone even bothers with that “other” site. Please leave it where it belongs. What is the old quote about never arguing with a fool, onlookers may not know the difference? Read the Rules and Covenants and hope that sooner or later they will do the same. Dick, none of this is meant to castigate you. By now you realize that the BOD does listen to the residents. I have witnessed them listening to you and you do well. Keep up the good work. Ben, Thank you.
I understand and agree with most of what you wrote, Dave. However, I believe individuals DO have a right to question Board procedures and actions. What seems to be missing here is an understanding of the relationship between the Board and the Membership, and the extremely limited role the Membership has in the operations of the Board and the Association. What’s also missing, apparently, is the exercise of responsibility in the way those questions are being presented, especially on the “other” site, where lies, accusations, innuendo and crudeness often seem to rule the day. I hate to think outsiders, especially potential property owners, are judging the Cove based on the muck I see posted there.
I’m certain I’ll be promptly castigated, anonymously of course, by the keyboard cowards who write their filth then hide behind their “right” to be unnamed. So be it. I stand behind my opinion, as you stand behind yours. I don’t expect everyone – or anyone for that matter – to agree with me (and it’s good that I don’t expect it, since it doesn’t happen that often anyway!)
A little recognized fact regarding our Covenants, is that the POASC has a “maintenance and utility easement” over the geographical boundaries of the Cove. Directors are Officers of the Corporation and take an Oath to uphold the rules and regulations. The Corporation owns the amenities(roads, CCH, Pool, tennis courts, etc.)and manages the Cove. Individual properties are privately owned and basically pay a fee(assessment) to “enjoy” the amenities.
This referred to on page 1 of the Covenants in a lot of Legalese.