Monday, October 30, 2006
Would you operate a business without liability insurance?
At the March Assembly meeting, the membership voted to "authorize the administrator to purchase a general liability policy for $800 for a two million dollar coverage." We have just received word from Lic. Juan Chong that La Marina has "no coverage for liability, no coverage for the building." This is totally unacceptable and subjects us all to great and needless risk.
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Legal Matters
On 10/14/06 11:35 AM, "Carlos Laguette wrote:
On April 2006, I requested from a Notary Public, to notify the Administrator that the resolutions of the March 9 Assembly, based on less than 75% favorable votes for a new pool to be paid equally by 103 units, were illegal and invalid, based on Article l9 of the Condominiums Law of the State of Sinaloa. He (the notary) refused, stating that it was not in his position to notify anyone of a violation to Laws and that besides the legal term for declaring the Assembly nullified, had probably expired, and recommended a Lawyer I could consult this with. I phoned the Lawyer and he said that, based on ŒMerchandise Associations Laws‚ the legal term was 15 days. The Notary Public was Humarán Castellanos and the Lawyer Rodrigo Llausas. The very same that are now the present legal advisors to our board and for which we are paying a monthly assessment on which we were not consulted, just charged without any votes taken.
I then summoned the services of Lic. Juan F. Huerta Robles to proceed in the courts against the resolutions. He agreed that they were illegal and invalid and that there was no expiration date. Only a dozen co-owners responded to my request for funds to proceed with a suit. The funds were returned to owners by Adriana because we considered that at least 25% of owners should be acting together so that in case of losing the suit we could proceed with a Special Assembly.
I respectfully submit that the November l4th Assembly be limited to a resolution on the name change only and for questions and answers on what the lawyers have concocted for us with the support of the present board and administrator on which I do not have any confidence at all. Several months should then be allowed for proper appraisal and decisions on the course that La Marina should take in the future including correction of malfeasances.
On April 2006, I requested from a Notary Public, to notify the Administrator that the resolutions of the March 9 Assembly, based on less than 75% favorable votes for a new pool to be paid equally by 103 units, were illegal and invalid, based on Article l9 of the Condominiums Law of the State of Sinaloa. He (the notary) refused, stating that it was not in his position to notify anyone of a violation to Laws and that besides the legal term for declaring the Assembly nullified, had probably expired, and recommended a Lawyer I could consult this with. I phoned the Lawyer and he said that, based on ŒMerchandise Associations Laws‚ the legal term was 15 days. The Notary Public was Humarán Castellanos and the Lawyer Rodrigo Llausas. The very same that are now the present legal advisors to our board and for which we are paying a monthly assessment on which we were not consulted, just charged without any votes taken.
I then summoned the services of Lic. Juan F. Huerta Robles to proceed in the courts against the resolutions. He agreed that they were illegal and invalid and that there was no expiration date. Only a dozen co-owners responded to my request for funds to proceed with a suit. The funds were returned to owners by Adriana because we considered that at least 25% of owners should be acting together so that in case of losing the suit we could proceed with a Special Assembly.
I respectfully submit that the November l4th Assembly be limited to a resolution on the name change only and for questions and answers on what the lawyers have concocted for us with the support of the present board and administrator on which I do not have any confidence at all. Several months should then be allowed for proper appraisal and decisions on the course that La Marina should take in the future including correction of malfeasances.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Questions about Assembly of November 14, 2006:
All La Marina owners were sent notice of an Assembly meeting being called on November 14, 2006.
According to information we have received, these meetings are necessary in order to bring our condominium into compliance with the Mexican Law.
However, how are we, the Owners, to have sufficient knowledge of all the facts involved in order to make wise, and informed decisions at these upcoming meetings?
How many owners will be able to make last minute plans to journey to Mazatlan in order to participate fully in the decision making?
How many owners will give their proxy to friends, and not know exactly what they are voting for, or why?
Actually, there are 2 meetings being called--the first under the name of Don el Guia, with an Agenda, and the second under the name of La Marina Tenis and Yate Club, A.C., with its own separate Agenda.
The Don el Guia Assembly Agenda calls for “Election of Board to conduct the meeting”. I am wondering how this will be accomplished? Will there be nominations from the floor? Can anyone throw his or her hat in the ring?
Then there will be an analysis of the legal status of the Condominium Regime. Again, how many Owners have enough knowledge in order to make a decision? In this matter, perhaps we must depend upon the expertise of the attorneys involved.
Then there is an appointment of Support Committees………I am wondering what this means? Who can be on these committees?
Then we Owners will establish the fees for Administration and Maintenance and the Reserve Fund.
Our Reserve is to be at least $100,000. The Balance Sheets that are prepared monthly do not give a clear picture of the exact financial status of the condominium. Perhaps we will be asked to replenish the reserves? How much will that be?
Next, because of our present financial predicament, perhaps there will be an additional assessment asked for, to make up for the shortfall?
Then, we will appoint Legal Representatives and grant power to pursue actions for the benefit of the condominium. Who could that be?
Then there will be General Matters. Who will present these General Matters, and what will they be?
This meeting will then be adjourned.
The next meeting, that of La Marina Tenis y Yate Club A.C. will be called to order.
Again, another Agenda…………….
When it comes time to appoint Directors, may any Owner be nominated? How many will there be?
Then the Agenda indicates “Corporate Bylaws, changes and corrections.”
Will the Owners be asked to vote on bylaws, without previous knowledge?
The by-laws committee of 2005-2006 was reviewing carefully the changes that were previously made, and were making corrections and changes to be presented to the Owners to review. This committee was never given a chance to finish its work.
Aside from that, all Owners should have the right to review and discuss any changes that might be made to the By-laws. The committee would be even more effective if there were Owners represented according to their various differences in residence at La Marina, and with the advice and council of the Notary Public.
In addition, By-law # 60 is clear on how the voting is done on by-law changes. It is more stringent than other voting requirements.
To push changes through at this meeting, which already will be long and tiring is an unwise decision, would you agree?
What will be covered under General Matters? Can anyone bring up items for vote?
Why is the notice ended with a seemingly self-appointed Administration Council, comprising of only the current President, Vice-president and Treasurer?
Perhaps we Owners deserve to have more information before we are asked to vote upon all of these important issues?
Your fellow Owner, Barbara Richard #701
All La Marina owners were sent notice of an Assembly meeting being called on November 14, 2006.
According to information we have received, these meetings are necessary in order to bring our condominium into compliance with the Mexican Law.
However, how are we, the Owners, to have sufficient knowledge of all the facts involved in order to make wise, and informed decisions at these upcoming meetings?
How many owners will be able to make last minute plans to journey to Mazatlan in order to participate fully in the decision making?
How many owners will give their proxy to friends, and not know exactly what they are voting for, or why?
Actually, there are 2 meetings being called--the first under the name of Don el Guia, with an Agenda, and the second under the name of La Marina Tenis and Yate Club, A.C., with its own separate Agenda.
The Don el Guia Assembly Agenda calls for “Election of Board to conduct the meeting”. I am wondering how this will be accomplished? Will there be nominations from the floor? Can anyone throw his or her hat in the ring?
Then there will be an analysis of the legal status of the Condominium Regime. Again, how many Owners have enough knowledge in order to make a decision? In this matter, perhaps we must depend upon the expertise of the attorneys involved.
Then there is an appointment of Support Committees………I am wondering what this means? Who can be on these committees?
Then we Owners will establish the fees for Administration and Maintenance and the Reserve Fund.
Our Reserve is to be at least $100,000. The Balance Sheets that are prepared monthly do not give a clear picture of the exact financial status of the condominium. Perhaps we will be asked to replenish the reserves? How much will that be?
Next, because of our present financial predicament, perhaps there will be an additional assessment asked for, to make up for the shortfall?
Then, we will appoint Legal Representatives and grant power to pursue actions for the benefit of the condominium. Who could that be?
Then there will be General Matters. Who will present these General Matters, and what will they be?
This meeting will then be adjourned.
The next meeting, that of La Marina Tenis y Yate Club A.C. will be called to order.
Again, another Agenda…………….
When it comes time to appoint Directors, may any Owner be nominated? How many will there be?
Then the Agenda indicates “Corporate Bylaws, changes and corrections.”
Will the Owners be asked to vote on bylaws, without previous knowledge?
The by-laws committee of 2005-2006 was reviewing carefully the changes that were previously made, and were making corrections and changes to be presented to the Owners to review. This committee was never given a chance to finish its work.
Aside from that, all Owners should have the right to review and discuss any changes that might be made to the By-laws. The committee would be even more effective if there were Owners represented according to their various differences in residence at La Marina, and with the advice and council of the Notary Public.
In addition, By-law # 60 is clear on how the voting is done on by-law changes. It is more stringent than other voting requirements.
To push changes through at this meeting, which already will be long and tiring is an unwise decision, would you agree?
What will be covered under General Matters? Can anyone bring up items for vote?
Why is the notice ended with a seemingly self-appointed Administration Council, comprising of only the current President, Vice-president and Treasurer?
Perhaps we Owners deserve to have more information before we are asked to vote upon all of these important issues?
Your fellow Owner, Barbara Richard #701
Some Thoughts on the November Meeting
Since receiving my notice of the upcoming November meeting I have been thinking of what I could say on this blog that would be meaningful while still being respectful to the members. This is easily the most important event to take place since I became an owner in 1998. We will have the opportunity to determine our future for many years to come or we will fall back into the same mistakes which have brought us to the brink of financial ruin and to our current legal difficulties.
We need to fix the problems which have created these crises. We must become completely legal in the eyes of Sinaloa Condominium law and we must address our financial problems. The two are not unrelated. We have financial problems from poor budgeting and because the George's are not paying. They are not paying because our association has been operating out of compliance with Mexican law. Fix this problem completely and their grounds for withholding payments will be removed, thus helping our financial situation.
This brings up a second, and more delicate point. If you took your car in to be serviced and it came back to you in worse shape, would you go back to that mechanic again? If you received a bad haircut, would you return to that barber or stylist again? If you owned a professional sports team and that team kept losing, would you have the same coaching staff back the next season? If a business in which you owned shares kept losing money, would you want the same management team running that business? If you bought food from a market and that food made you sick, would you buy from that place again? The answer to all these is probably not. Why then should we even consider placing the same people who led us into this mess back into office after we become "legal"? I do not question their love of LaMarina or their good intentions and dedication. I do, however, question their ability to handle the problems we now face. They were warned repeatedly over the last three years that our legal standing was in question and that our finances were in disarray. We are where we are now because of their leadership. We are making a new beginning and we need new leaders to take us there. Leaders who are familiar with Mexican law and speak some Spanish. Leaders who are willing to fairly and openly consider all points of view. Leaders who have business management experience. Leaders who are willing to devote many hours to the task including during our busy season, the summer months. We need new leadership.
Steve Richter, 503
We need to fix the problems which have created these crises. We must become completely legal in the eyes of Sinaloa Condominium law and we must address our financial problems. The two are not unrelated. We have financial problems from poor budgeting and because the George's are not paying. They are not paying because our association has been operating out of compliance with Mexican law. Fix this problem completely and their grounds for withholding payments will be removed, thus helping our financial situation.
This brings up a second, and more delicate point. If you took your car in to be serviced and it came back to you in worse shape, would you go back to that mechanic again? If you received a bad haircut, would you return to that barber or stylist again? If you owned a professional sports team and that team kept losing, would you have the same coaching staff back the next season? If a business in which you owned shares kept losing money, would you want the same management team running that business? If you bought food from a market and that food made you sick, would you buy from that place again? The answer to all these is probably not. Why then should we even consider placing the same people who led us into this mess back into office after we become "legal"? I do not question their love of LaMarina or their good intentions and dedication. I do, however, question their ability to handle the problems we now face. They were warned repeatedly over the last three years that our legal standing was in question and that our finances were in disarray. We are where we are now because of their leadership. We are making a new beginning and we need new leaders to take us there. Leaders who are familiar with Mexican law and speak some Spanish. Leaders who are willing to fairly and openly consider all points of view. Leaders who have business management experience. Leaders who are willing to devote many hours to the task including during our busy season, the summer months. We need new leadership.
Steve Richter, 503
Monday, October 09, 2006
November Assembly
According to a statement from the Administrator in the LaMarinaville just received (actually, we didn't receive it, but someone forwarded it to us), there IS to be a homeowner's assembly November 14. We are told it is important because we must legally change our condominium name as a first step to resolve the Jeff George issue. We are given no further information regarding the agenda which must be sent to us 30 days in advance of the meeting. This is BARELY more than 30 days away.
There is also a statement at the end of the newsletter encouraging communication; quote "if you have questions or concerns... We believe communication is important." This strikes me as one of those statements that is made to be politically correct, but is really hollow when it comes to reality. Last April I sat in on a meeting with the Administrator and 25-30 owners communicating their concerns and absolutely nothing changed. In fact, the concerns the owners expressed have all come to pass, i.e. financial difficulties, legal difficulties, inadvisable expenditures, improper procedures, etc. Owners have been asking for information on financial records, voting procedures, decision making regarding expenditures; making suggestions regarding planning for the building, and on and on. The only responses have been to deny access to information, ignore the requests/inquiries or to make assurances that all is fine and there are just a 'few disgruntled owners" causing trouble.
The President sent out an email last April 13 with assurances that the By-laws were followed, and procedures at the March meeting were proper according to the by-laws, etc. This was reported as the opinion of an expert attorney who spent 1.5 hours examining the meeting minutes and whatever else was provided by the President and Administrator. How does that reconcile with the current situation? Did the attorney actually have all the information needed to render an opinion? Apparently not. We are not even legally registered in Mexico!
It is fine to make statements about communicating, but 'the proof is in the pudding,' as they say. Why were we not forewarned about this meeting. Were we given an opportunity to contribute to the agenda? The by-laws require the agenda to be set 30 days prior to the meeting. Is this a good way to avoid allowing homeowners to add agenda items that concern them? Does anyone believe that the name change is the only reason for this meeting? What about the financial crisis caused by poor budgeting and financial mismanagement? If this meeting is important enough to call, it should be used as an opportunity to take La Marina in a new direction including operating properly and wisely.
I am formally requesting that the following items be added to the agenda of the November Assembly meeting.
1. Financial record keeping/reporting, budgeting procedures, and planning input.
2. Structuring the association according to Mexican condominium law; establishing a Committee of Surveillance, etc.
3. Replenishing the reserves required by law.
4. Report on the pool project; why it is different from what was approved; deck furniture, shade, etc.
There is also a statement at the end of the newsletter encouraging communication; quote "if you have questions or concerns... We believe communication is important." This strikes me as one of those statements that is made to be politically correct, but is really hollow when it comes to reality. Last April I sat in on a meeting with the Administrator and 25-30 owners communicating their concerns and absolutely nothing changed. In fact, the concerns the owners expressed have all come to pass, i.e. financial difficulties, legal difficulties, inadvisable expenditures, improper procedures, etc. Owners have been asking for information on financial records, voting procedures, decision making regarding expenditures; making suggestions regarding planning for the building, and on and on. The only responses have been to deny access to information, ignore the requests/inquiries or to make assurances that all is fine and there are just a 'few disgruntled owners" causing trouble.
The President sent out an email last April 13 with assurances that the By-laws were followed, and procedures at the March meeting were proper according to the by-laws, etc. This was reported as the opinion of an expert attorney who spent 1.5 hours examining the meeting minutes and whatever else was provided by the President and Administrator. How does that reconcile with the current situation? Did the attorney actually have all the information needed to render an opinion? Apparently not. We are not even legally registered in Mexico!
It is fine to make statements about communicating, but 'the proof is in the pudding,' as they say. Why were we not forewarned about this meeting. Were we given an opportunity to contribute to the agenda? The by-laws require the agenda to be set 30 days prior to the meeting. Is this a good way to avoid allowing homeowners to add agenda items that concern them? Does anyone believe that the name change is the only reason for this meeting? What about the financial crisis caused by poor budgeting and financial mismanagement? If this meeting is important enough to call, it should be used as an opportunity to take La Marina in a new direction including operating properly and wisely.
I am formally requesting that the following items be added to the agenda of the November Assembly meeting.
1. Financial record keeping/reporting, budgeting procedures, and planning input.
2. Structuring the association according to Mexican condominium law; establishing a Committee of Surveillance, etc.
3. Replenishing the reserves required by law.
4. Report on the pool project; why it is different from what was approved; deck furniture, shade, etc.
Monday, October 02, 2006
Special Assembly?
We've heard a rumor that a Special Assembly may be called for November to be held in accordance with Sinaloa Condominium procedures. If that were to happen, it would be extremely important for as many owners as possible to get to the meeting. Unfortunately, many of us need more than 30 days to make plans to get to Mexico. Does anyone know anything more about this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)