Lake Holiday News

Everything you need to know about Lake Holiday ...

You are here: Home / Archives for Lawsuit

Lawsuit

What You Weren’t Told About the Utility Sale

By

From the very beginning, LHCC members have not been told the whole truth about the Utility sale.

Chris Allison has led members to believe that we are trying to block the sale of the Utility. That’s simply not true. We do not believe it is good business to invest nearly $1.5 million in an asset and then shortly thereafter sell it for much less. Unfortunately, although we believe it is a bad deal, it also a done deal. There is a binding contract in place between the parties. It’s informative to look at some important provisions of this contract to see just why it’s such a bad deal as it is currently proposed.

In February of 2006, Chris Allison wrote that the utility sale “results in nearly 2 1/2 million to LHCC….” But he omitted that almost 50% of this amount is contingent on an aggressive building program and therefore may never be received at all.

[Read more…] about What You Weren’t Told About the Utility Sale

All 3 Proposed Documents Were Rejected By Wide Margins

By

Approval of the Chris Allison-crafted governing documents – the declaration, the articles of incorporation, and the bylaws – failed. It took the board until Monday, June 19th – 9 days after the election – to announce the results. The graph below summarizes what many suspected:

June 10, 2006 Voting Results

With respect to the vote on the Declaration, we deducted the reported 641 Miller & Smith “Trust” lots from the reported Yes votes for the Declaration to present a fairer picture.

In the end, more than the approval of documents failed. Chris Allison and the board failed to make a genuine effort to promote democracy by adopting voting standards different from recent Lake Holiday elections. Chris Allison and the board failed to listen to widespread discontent in the community, evidenced by the numerous “Vote No” signs on Redland Road and at all of the mail stops. They failed to sell the community on their documents, despite their free Miller & Smith hot dogs and other aggressive sales efforts that continued right through the meeting of members on June 10th.

[Read more…] about All 3 Proposed Documents Were Rejected By Wide Margins

Chris Allison Admits He Was Wrong

By

In February, Chris Allison wasted Association funds to send around a 3 page personal attack letter targeting the principals of Ogunquit – the “Mr. Murray” letter. In it Chris Allison falsely claimed that the first communication the Board had with Ogunquit was a letter from our attorney claiming that we suffered $4 million in damages, followed by a lawsuit for the same $4 million. He falsely alleged that the claim for damages was “payable to him.” He left a link to this personal attack letter on the Association’s website for many weeks. Chris Allison’s attack had a fundamental flaw: it was not true.

[Read more…] about Chris Allison Admits He Was Wrong

Why Is Some Stranger Mowing Our Lawn?

By

Because you’ve been Individually Assessed!

For those who weren’t able to attend the 5/20/05 meeting at Reynolds Fire Hall, we offer up another little gem – the devilish concept of Individual Assessments.

Let’s listen to Wayne Poyer attempt to explain away Individual Assessments.

[Read more…] about Why Is Some Stranger Mowing Our Lawn?

Welcome To My Condo

By

We mentioned in our post on Chris Allison’s broken promise that there was an excellent article on The Summit Advisor that provided a powerful recap of issues at Lake Holiday. That article prompted us to do a little more research on the adoption of Goldberg’s Rules of Order by the Chris Allison-led board in October of 2005. Previously, the Associated conducted meetings under Robert’s Rules of Order. Just a minor change, right? Not by a long shot. Choose the rules and you control the outcome.

[Read more…] about Welcome To My Condo

Questions Chris Allison Should Answer for Members

By

1. Chris, why let Miller & Smith vote the Trust lots when the owner of these lots is not a member and is not paying dues?

FYI: This was not clearly disclosed to members, especially when one considers that Chris Allison and the Board expressed exactly the opposite position last spring. This seems to put the interest of a non-dues paying entity which is not even a member for those lots ahead of the interests of dues paying members whose interests the Board has a fiduciary responsibility to protect.

2. Chris, why is the 6/10/06 vote on the new declaration at large instead of section-by-section?

FYI: Section 6A has 259 lots, and none of them are owned by Miller & Smith. Chris Allison and the Board’s decision to vote on the declaration at large, instead of section-by-section, means that non-owners will be voting to amend another owner’s declaration. Combining at large voting with allowing Miller & Smith to vote over 700 non-dues paying lots means that voters in every section will be swamped! In Section 4B, there are only 16 lots. How will these lot owners have any chance of a fair election?

[Read more…] about Questions Chris Allison Should Answer for Members

It’s a Different Tune, but the Same Old Song

By

We’ve received a number of phone calls from members about the complete reversal of LHCC’s position on voting policies applicable to the upcoming vote on proposed governing documents. For the vote currently scheduled for 6/10/06, LHCC plans to:

  • vote for the new declaration at large, instead of section by section
  • allow M & S to vote lots for which it is not paying dues

Combining at large voting on the proposed declaration with allowing M & S to vote its over 700 non-dues paying lots, if allowed to take place, would determine the outcome of the election. For example, it would mean that the declaration for Section 6A with its 259 lots, a section where M & S owns no lots as of 4/30/06, could be amended even if every member in that section voted against the proposed declaration, because of the impact of M & S voting its over 700 lots. The impact on approval of the proposed Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation is even dramatic.

The directors and management of LHCC were adamant in public meetings in the spring of 2005 on 2 points: that any vote on the proposed declaration would be section by section, and that M & S would not be allowed to vote lots for which it is not paying dues, including voting its lots in an election on the new governing documents. This is a change of course if ever there was one.

[Read more…] about It’s a Different Tune, but the Same Old Song