(001) Vol. No.1, Issue No.2
(002) We ask you to read this issue!
(003) We ask you to show up for the Association Meeting on 08/11/07, starting at 9:30 a.m.
(004) The Property Owner's Forum.
(005) There are several inconsistencies at RRLE.
(006) The latest set of By-Laws, approved in 2003, includes various "Rules" governing our park.
(007) Every member of Wisconsin's RRLE Homeowner's Association should be allowed to vote on all rules when they're changed, not merely the one or two rules selected by the BOD.
(008) "Permanent Living on RV" Lots - Park Models are not RV's.
(009) Once Park Models, with or without Room Additions, were allowed into RRLE, the "RV" status of sites was not applicable.
(010) Park Models are taxed as dwellings.
(011) They're connected, permanently, to utilities, telephone and cable TV.
(012) In winter, the gate is open more often than not.
(013) Thousands of members, guests, and families are here during the summer months.
(014) They're all using everything at RRLE - pools, roads, water, sewer, gate and park utilities like electric, water and sewer at guest campsites!
(015) "4-Month Vacancy" Rule -- If Fulton Township or Rock County or the State of Wisconsin had such a rule, which they don't, it could not govern privately-owned home sites.
(016) Vacation Cottage Sites, by virtue of their identifying title, are certainly not considered Permanent Home Sites, are they??
(017) Regulation & Enforcement Committee - The Committee is authorized to deal only with the Common Properties at RRLE.
(018) Please look this up in the 2003 By-Laws.
(019) Common Grounds - All members should be notified of a vote concerning additions or deletions to facilities or amenities at RRLE.
(020) This BOD and former BODíS have continued to make all of our decisions.
(021) Many have been illegal.
(022) We've allowed it to happen.
(023) All Voting Procedures at RRLE need to be more closely monitored.
(024) Committees should change, annually, not by BOD appointment.
(025) Election Committee members should not be re-appointed, year after year.
(026) Observers should be able to volunteer if they wish.
(027) They should not be appointed by a Chairperson or the BOD!
(028) Questioning any matter at RRLE - if a member wishes to see anything at our office during normal business hours, it should be available.
(029) This is clearly printed in the 2003 By-laws.
(030) No where in any of the Articles of Incorporation, Covenants, or Board Policy Guidelines, (even the most recent By-laws filed in 2003), does it state an owner's request to see information can be refused.
(031) Now a member must put their request on a form at the front office.
(032) The request must be signed by the manager.
(033) It may be approved by the BOD.
(034) The possible wait-time may be 48-hours.
(035) In some instances, requests go unanswered.
(037) No where is our publication, The ReView, mentioned in Covenants or Rules.
(038) Yet access (to articles and paid ads) has been openly censored by the BOD.
(039) Columns expressing thoughts, ideas, or information about many matters, can be refused by the BOD.
(040) The BOD is making decisions on what you know - and don't know - about RRLE.
(041) Newer buyers are influenced by blatant untruths - at RRLE rumors spread like wildfire!
(042) Rumors have been occurring far more often, lately.
(044) When and where are these rumors originating?
(045) What could motivate someone to spread gossip and lies?
(046) We are the problem at RRLE.
(047) Most of us want to enjoy our time here.
(048) We don't want to be "bothered."
(049) BOD's have become "ultimate" authorities.
(050) But they're not!
(051) BOD members want to address certain rules or policies, only.
(052) "Violations" have been enforced for some individuals.
(053) Others, flagrantly violate rules and it's allowed.
(054) Does it depend on who's doing the violating?
(055) There are more volunteers now than ever.
(056) What is the problem?
(057) Contrary to many, in our opinion there's enough money to maintain the common properties, our facilities and amenities.
(058) Perhaps we need to apply our funds more judiciously.
(059) For the good of all rather than just a few!
(060) RRLE is a small community.
(061) A system of checks and balances for funds should be in place.
(062) Several years ago, a BOD paid out approximately $4000 for a formal audit from an outside source.
(063) Our funds deserve a formal audit, at least every couple of years.
(064) We're spending too much on some things, not enough on others.
(065) We all need to investigate what's happening at RRLE ..
(066) These are our funds.
(067) We have a right to valid information about how our funds were actually spent during a past year if we request it.
(068) Why aren't those figures available to everyone?
(069) Why all the secrecy?
(070) We believe several current BOD members should be more aware of their Oath of Office and the Conflict of Interest form which they signed!
(071) Some BOD members appear to seek popularity through their votes and decisions.
(072) We don't need popularity at RRLE, we need action!
(073) People owning here need to pay more attention to actual facts.
(074) One of the Co-op meetings was very well attended by the membership.
(075) Everyone voted upon which individuals should serve on the Co-op BOD.
(076) The vote taken was considered null and void.
(077) Some members of the Co-op BOD refused to be bound by the peoples' vote.
(078) Interesting isn't it?
(079) A motion was made, and seconded, to allow the Co-op to move their meeting to a date other than the Association meeting date.
(080) Two RRLE BOD members, also Co-op BOD members, didn't like the idea.
(081) There was a tie.
(082) The new President of the Co-op had to break that tie.
(083) Unfortunately, the Co-op meeting will continue to follow the Association meeting each month.
(084) The Co-op was run, smoothly and in good conscience, by a five-person BOD without Association BOD members.
(085) Ask yourself, why do we need one, two or three Association BOD members on a 5-person Co-op BOD?
(086) And why is a "temporary" increase of that fee now a permanent increase?