Activists at Stillwater lakes Forum
March 31, 2020, 12:25:29 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Only registered members are allowed to access this forum. Please login below or click -here- to register an account with Stillwaterlakes.net.
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: October 4th Board meeting update!  (Read 8915 times)
THE EXPERT
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2008, 02:37:49 PM »

Read it again Mike:

22.  That at any time in the future the SELLER, its successors or assigns, shall have the right to purchase said premisses if the PURCHASER, desires to sell same.  If at any time, the PURCHASERS, their heirs, executors or administrators receive a bonafide offer for the premises and the PURCHASERS, their heirs, executors or administrators decide to accept such offer, they shall first give written notice to the SELLER and SELLER shall have the right within thirty (30) days from the receipt of such written notice to purchase said premises at the price offered the PURCHASER by such party.

Other than, “at the price offered the PURCHASER by such party.” Where do you see an exchange of money?

The fact that the Board has been able to shove down the throat of gullible owners, a scheme to make money, does not reflect on the character of the Board, but rather on the character of property owners who have exhibited a total inability, or desire to protect their property rights.

If you don’t object to your next door neighbor using your lawn mower without your permission, then the next thing that you know is that he will treat it as if he owns it!  If he goes around and mows every yard in the neighborhood and makes a bundle of money!  So what?  He did it with your implied consent.

If he sells it to someone else who is going to go around charging you a bundle for mowing your own lawn and the lawns of your neighbors.  What action are you going to take against the current owner?   Did he not purchase it legitimately?  After all he bought it from the guy with implied consent, and authority from the owner(s).

Decrying the fact that the money could be used for improving your own home, misses the point.

The clause in your deed does not provide for anyone to benefit or profit from the transaction.

Any money derived from such transaction falls squarely on the shoulders of those who decided to pay it!  You have people in this community living in three story mansions, who could give a damn less about property rights, all they care about is property values.

As long as you are dealing with people who worship property values, over property rights, you might wind up with a beautiful lawn in front of your house.  The problem is that you have to pay for it, no matter who owns the lawn mower.




« Last Edit: October 09, 2008, 04:44:36 PM by THE EXPERT » Logged
David
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 339


Taking Back our Community!...


WWW
« Reply #16 on: February 03, 2012, 06:18:48 PM »

Below is a copy of a past post by "the Expert"

To the current board members...pay close attention to the the highlighted section!

Mike:

There is no public participation. The matter will be on the agenda and perhaps two month later they will enter an order.

*******************

   Who came up with the figure of an $800.00 assessment.  Note that there are no provisions in our deeds that would provide the Seller with the right to demand “Special Assessments.”
    In addition, if there were such a provision, (under PA law) it has to be proportionate or a pro-rated share.
   If you take the proposed $800.00 and multiply it by the 997 lots in the community; you get an amount over 780 thousand dollars!  That is a heck of a pool, Ron!
   In a previous newsletter a few years ago Ron referred to the association’s financials as the “Honey Pot!”  He made the claim (at the time) that it was flat!  I suppose that since a few years have gone by, Ron needs a new metaphor.  The “Pool is flat!”  Ok Ron, let’s start cutting some costs! After all we are in an economic depression, in case you have not heard.
   How about eliminating the over one hundred thousand dollars that Thomas Wilkins drains out of this community every year!  Do you think that it might fill the pool just a little, Ron?
   Instead of high price lawyers, do you think that you, or your vice-president might have the simple level of intelligence, that is required to represent our community at the District Magistrate level?
   Instead of running your mouth and insulting members in good standing.  Why don’t you use your vociferous skills before the District Magistrate for the benefit of this community?
   Some people might just get the idea that you are just a, “Coward with Power.”
   Don’t  you remember the days of Angelo Cretella, David Weinstein, and their infighting with Theodore Bomba?  The resignation letter by Allan Price Young?  You remember; you were there!  Ask Nancy Schmerber she was the secretary!
   You now bring in the same lawyer that wanted nothing to do with this community, when you and Weinstein were in charge back in 1995!
   Thirteen year ago this same attorney resigned as solicitor for this community, stating in a letter to then “acting president  Angelo Cretella”: (an individual who did not ever own property in this community.)
   “We wish to point out affirmatively that we have made many recommendations to the Association and issued legal opinions in support of those recommendations which either have not been acted upon or have been found unacceptable by this Association Board of Directors.   As we have cautioned your Board, there may be substantial adverse consequences to individual directors and to the Association for any board member's failing to meet the legal standards of due care and to comply with the requirements of loyalty and honesty as fiduciaries of the Association. These are very serious matters.”
   So what has change Mr. Young?   As an officer of the Court you have an obligation to the members of this Community to explain to them, exactly what has changed!
   You have openly stated that you represent the Board!  As an officer of the Court you have an obligation to inform your client that it derives it’s authority, having been assigned the rights of the Seller, by way of an agreement entered into with the original developer Sun Dance Stillwater Corporation, on February 12, 1981.
   Accordingly, your client stands in exactly the same shoes as Sun Dance!  You therefore, have an obligation to inform your client that there are no provisions for mandatory membership in an association of owners, or for the adoption of arbitrary rules, regulations or by-laws! ( Not otherwise provided for in the standard deed of conveyance.)  Your client is limited to the authority granted to the Grantor! Nothing less, and nothing more!
   Any advice to the contrary will only result in this community filing numerous complaints with the Pennsylvania Bar Association which will seek to have you disbarred for malpractice.
   Mr. Young, if you think that you can just return to this community and carry on the same sham that was being perpetrated on this community back in 1995, then you had better stick the key in your Hyndai, and take a trip back to the past.



Logged

Concerned Citizens of a Pocono Community
"Raise your hands up!"
WWW.PAHRC.ORG
David
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 339


Taking Back our Community!...


WWW
« Reply #17 on: February 04, 2012, 06:54:08 PM »

That 2nd to last sentence doesn't sound like a bad idea  Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink Wink


http://www.padisciplinaryboard.org/faqs/consumers.php
« Last Edit: February 04, 2012, 06:56:15 PM by David » Logged

Concerned Citizens of a Pocono Community
"Raise your hands up!"
WWW.PAHRC.ORG
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!