By Greg Demko

After the last open meeting on July 21st, it has become apparent that opinions between the Board and the present residents were very vocal.  It seems that this will continue until one side or the other comes to grips with their responsibilities.  Since the Board has taken the stance that they run the Ranch, (not our General Manager), the first step is with them.  They seem to constantly cause negative responses from the residents by their own actions.  For example, why do they and their supporters at every opportunity put down past Board actions?  Just move on and keep the atmosphere positive and move on with TRANSPARENCY.
We all moved out to Holly Lake Ranch because we loved the atmosphere, the people, and the amenities.  The present Board is micro-managing all aspects of Ranch policies and management.  That’s their job.  But, they are finding out we do not have many problems on the Ranch.  They are specifically targeting legal documents in accordance with Title 209.  As we all know, the law can be interpreted to satisfy a specific need or desire.  In the end, it is probably not a bad thing, but, what about all the concerns of the residents who are not being addressed?  Without the TRANSPARENCY between the Board and the residents, many things are falling between the cracks.  If this Board thinks for a minute that they are hearing from all the residents, they are  WRONG.  Thee is a major wall between the two.  They are only hearing the responses from the residents on issues that the Board has created, not the little things that the residents see daily.  Thank goodness our General Manager is visible and receptive to these resident comments and reacts to them.
In my last article, Part III, I mistakenly said, “This email was sent from the personal website of Jay Blint.”  I was wrong, Mr. Blint does not own any website.  Mr Blint has, with the Board’s approval, agreed to pay $30.00 a month for the services of Constant Contact to distribute the Board’s information.  I hope this clears up any misinformation on the subject.
I have mentioned before that we need to agree to disagree.  The more negative, NON-TRANSPARENT items that the Board puts out, the more negative feedback they will receive.  This table was set a few years ago when present Board supporters disrupted open meetings and now non-supporting residents are doing the same thing.  The Board has taken offense and is reviewing a new procedure to stop this practice.  How can you have TRANSPARENCY between the Board and their residents if you try to stop the communication between them?  Instead, the Board needs to become more available to the residents who will communicate with them if they feel the Board will actually listen and react to them.  Do not even say that we can be reached by phone or email. The Board has not shown much concern to listen except to their own supporters who they surround around them.  The last open meeting may have opened a crack in the relations door with the extension vote to keep the restaurant open until January 2nd if an agreement can be reached.  Let’s hope this trend continues and we can get back to some form of harmony at the Ranch.