UN Resolution, HOA Dues, and other things. A letter to Carol Bruner from Sherry Rose

> Carol, I have followed your writings with interest since arriving in VE as an owner in 2013.  I have never met you personally but recognized your astute mind and writing skills.  I looked forward to meeting you one day.  However, I am really astounded by the recent UN dialogue being bantered about by you and your continued advice against paying the mandatory HOA dues.
>
> You, and all of us, had our opportunity to exercise our rights to refuse to belong to a HOA by NOT buying a home situated in a community predicated on the HOA system.  We were free to make that choice BEFORE buying into VE!  There are many free standing homes just outside the gate and we all knew BEFORE we purchased in VE that it is a community predicated on a home owners association and a developer's resort property communal existence model!
>
> Human rights are for everyone, but you are insinuating that certain human rights trump others rights - for instance the Developer's rights to purchase acreage, to take the risk to develop that acreage, and then to OFFER some of that developed property with unique amenities for sale within the communal living concept.  Human rights issues can not mean that you achieve your rights at the expense of someone else's rights!  You were not forced to buy into the HOA concept, you had a choice of where to buy!  Additionally, Panama City would collapse as all those high rises, town house communities, and condominium complexes have some form of a HOA business model in place in order to operate!  Panama would be off the list of places to retire in a heart beat!
>
> As we all exercised our free choice rights to purchase in VE and knew that a form of an HOA model was in place, our human rights have not been violated!  Okay, you now own within the gates and you must pay your pro-rata share of the communal dues for your right for communal services!   Please refer back to the former SC directive of September 30, 2014, wherein your SC issued the broadcast that HOA dues are MANDATORY and then listed the seven penalties for non-payment.
>
> What has changed since then other than the names of the HOA governing body?  The same former SC members who issued this directive, collected dues, and spent the funds are NOW advising members not to pay their dues!  This is dangerous and can certainly have unintended consequences for the members who listen to your advice.  The non-related excuse of UN human rights issues is beneath your powers of reasoning!

> Your opinion that the current governing body was illegally elected and, therefore, not empowered to collect the necessary dues to maintain all our lifestyles while continuing to work on the pertinent issues of our community is just that - your opinion!  It is also unfounded in truth or logic!
>
> I certainly feel that with your intellect and your protracted tenure within the HOA structure of VE,  you became aware that the HOA documents you were operating under had not been properly filed within the appropriate governmental agency.  However, instead of confronting that problem head on, ya'll obviously accessed the likelihood that you would not come through that process without a new election of all members and a rewording of some of the CC&R language.
>
> I note that your website is constantly demanding answers from the newly elected HOA governing body.  There have been many questions asked of the former SC members that have been ignored or ridiculed.  Therefore, indulge me to ask the most pertinent ones on my mind now.  

What did your SC accomplish during your reign of absolute power?  Yes, the former wording of the CC&Rs ( now modified within the election of January 2015 to provide membership oversight ) allowed you to do ANYTHING without membership approval except increase the dues more than 10% per annum.  Why did ya'll suggest a budget increase of 20% in our dues last year until the push back from the residents?   Why didn't ya'll do a Security Survey BEFORE arbitrarily breaking a legally binding contract to replace the existing security service?   Why didn't your recent SC provide the membership with the "actually spent " 2014 budget figures?   Who chose to withhold the information regarding the privately owned website ( posing as the official HOA website )?  Who chose to launch a campaign of ridicule and hate of both the Developer and of the HOA members who opposed the SC's tactics while still supporting the issue of the asset transfer?  Who is investigating the "Enemies List"?  
Why are ya'll so desperate to prevent the funding of the new HOA governing body to pay our HOA obligations which directly effect everyone's lifestyle within our community?
>
> The recent former SC members are now alleging that they didn't get to vote in the January 2015 election.  They were notified just as we were of the election and even invited to run their slate of candidates.  They not only chose NOT to participate but used the privately owned website to broadcast their directive for the community to boycott the meetings and NOT to vote!  That was a total disservice to our HOA and it really didn't really work out as you had intended, did it?
>
> We have paid our dues for the privilege of using our vacation villa a few weeks a year.  It is time that the residents realize that it is an obligation each condo/villa/homeowner chose to assume and committed themselves to pay when they, of their own free will, purchased in VE.  If you and the other former SC members keep handing out the advice to not pay dues we won't be discussing the type of security we want - there will be none!  We won't be discussing sewage treatments and water chlorine levels because there will be sewage everywhere and the water will not be safe to drink!

> How can your group be so blinded by anger to wish these circumstances on everyone?  The current actions of the unseated SC group are detrimental to all of us but some resident members who take your unsolicited advice and then incur consequences ( see your seven items of the penalties of non-payment on the above referenced directive ) may just decide to hold you and your former SC members ( who only identify themselves as the SC on the privately owned - NOT by the Association) personally liable for their predicament!

> Sincerely, Sherry Rose

The stupid runs deep with Bruner and gang.. They declare that Valle Escondido has been annexed and now is part of German Pacific Islands

As per an email recently sent to the homeowners from Bruner and gang it is their belief that the UN is now getting involved in VE business. Here is the exact quote:

" United Nations resolution 21, to which the Republic of Panama is a signatory, is that no one can be forced to join an association."

Ms. Bruner please clarify how UN resolution 21 applies...and exactly when we become part of the German Pacific Islands. How clever of the UN to think of VEHOA back in 1947.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolutions_1_to_100

United Nations Security Council Resolution 21, adopted unanimously at the 124^th meeting of the Security Council on April 2, 1947, placed the former German Pacific Islands north of the Equator, which were formerly mandated to Japan by the League of Nations, under the Trusteeship System. The Security Council declared 16 Articles under which it had approved the terms. It declared the United States to be the Administering Authority and gave it permission to militarise the territory.

Ms Bruner and gang, you have no legitimacy. The SC concept has been ruled illegal by the Panamanian Government. Please, you are making yourselves look like the fools you are. Don't go away mad, just go away!

If you insist on continuing then please address the following that has been asked of your group over and over. How can any of you be in any way legitimate based upon these undisputed facts presented below?

-Carol Bruner, self-appointed President of the previous SC, who has not stepped foot in VE for well over a year and a half, has admitted that she was appointed to an SC position where the person she replaced (Michael Burd) never resigned, nor was any resignation for that person ever accepted. By their own rules, you can only be appointed to that position if the resigning member votes with the majority for his/her replacement. Michael Burd never knew anything about Ms. Bruner's appointment to replace him and has signed an affidavit to these facts.

-Mary Jean "Jeanie" Bell has resigned on at least three separate occasions, with a copy of her most recent resignation available for all to view in an earlier blog post. Once you resign, you cannot just come back as you wish. There is a process and that process did not take place. Also note, that Ms. Bell has her property for sale and had indicated in emails that she wants out of VE as quickly as possible.

-There is the appointment of Pat Mains where the previous SC admits in writing that they took the vote of an SC member's spouse because they were "trying something new." They also admitted using the vote of Michael Traynor as an alternate to elect Pat Mains. The use of an alternate, or a spouse, is not contained in any of the CC&Rs, whether it be Deed 1937 or the 2010 document.

-Then there is the appointment of Larry Thompson. This same SC determined that Larry was not an HOA member and was not eligible to vote on VE issues because his condo is not titled. If you are not a member, how can you be a representative on the SC?

Blue helmeted UN troops patrolling VE and accepting homeowner dues!

Thank you Ms Bruner for the proof all residents of VE need to see just exactly what a joke you and your group have become:

You are now invoking the UN to assist you in your efforts?

Given that I am traveling internationally right now am I in danger of being arrested at a border by a blue helmeted peace keeper?

Is the UN General Assembly going to delay their efforts in Syria, Iran, Iraq and other hot spots to draft a new resolution condemning the VEHOA Steering Committee?

Perhaps they can send Jimmy Carter here to oversee the March election you failed to call?

I am certain I have read they have a commission on skateboarding. Please ask them to include some officials that can help us with this crisis.

Perhaps we now understand why there has been no ruling by a Panamanian court on the legality of the Jan 12 election – the lawsuit was filed with the UN.

And yes, this is exactly the kind of response your post deserves.

Dennis Griffin

PS: If you really want all of this openness why not post full details, dates, court, attorney and other pertinent facts of the lawsuit you keep referring to? Actually, you really do not need to answer this question, we all already know the answer.

If the Tadasly trust is such an egregious crime, why have previous SC's only talked about it and not filed lawsuits to correct the injustice? We have all heard for years of this great Panamanian fraud but you chose to ignore it when you were in position to do something about it. Was the UN to busy to offer assistance?

Answer to Deb's email. Lets Focus on Solutions

Dear Deb,  ( I hear you go by Deb)

We have never met and as a fellow neighbor surely we are all entitled to our opinions as we all should be as owners in VE. Based on your quote below from your email received, which was sent to me and it seems most owners.....I wanted to respond to you personally and hope the rest of the community can view my response if it makes sense and they like. 

Here is your quote.........…..

"As homeowners, we moved here to lead a more relaxed life, not one filled with strife; with worry about home values or infrastructure; or concern about a developer fulfilling promises s/he made: these concerns are the real job of a proper Steering Committee; that is a Steering Committee  properly appraised and elected by all the homeowners.  Once the homeowners get a Steering Committee representing them, residents of the Valle Escondido can proceed to live the promise of a life they believed brought them here in the first place."

My family and I ( like most owners in VE) also did not move or invest here per above for "strife" and surely we are looking for this place to change for the better.  

BUT, can we be objective.....I have never taken a side with any party in VE, yet I have been accused by many of doing so; many by owners I have never met.  I speak my mind with complete objectivity and honesty, I try not to offend anyone and I have never attacked anyone unless I am defending myself from anyone who may have misspoken or been out of line about me or regarding what I know to be truth.

So, can I ask a few questions of you and hope you can agree to answer me objectively in an effort to help get us to that place we are all looking to go. Please answer and do not think I am in anyway attacking you, I would not do that.  I am just confused sometimes as to what the arguments in this community are anymore. They seem to either get lost in grey or deflected away by future arguments. 

So here we go with some questions.........…

* The SC members in the email sent from above, which of those were elected?  Fact…None

* Where is a copy of the filed lawsuit they keep telling us about that confirms the recent election to be a fraud, etc and it will be ruled on shortly?  Please email me and or the community a copy of that suit for review.  Can you?  

If they cannot produce it with a file & recorded date of over 30 days ago, well then, sorry, where I come from, that is a lie, that is what they have been telling the community for at least 30 days.  Agreed?

* The SC members mentioned above, Did any of them resign?  Yes, Jeannie Bell 4 times that we know of.  So, they can legally just jump back on and off whenever they want? is that in any by-law of VE? 

* Did that SC take our funds last year out of our HOA account and not tell the community it represented or ask? 

Fact! Yes they did, and no they did not ask. It was about $30K, It still has never been given an accounting of the funds spent and or who was in control of them, I personally asked many times, no one would answer me.  Not nice, wouldn't you agree?

* Was that SC ever "elected"? NO, Never, only self appointed!

*  Was there ever an election where a POA confirming a legal representative of a property was the only permitted one to vote prior to the 1/12/15 election? If no, that means every election in VE to date has been essentially illegal. Wouldn't you agree? Otherwise we are just trusting anyone to say they own a property, seems odd or illegal to me.

* Did that SC and its advisers spend close to $100K of our money on legal fees and advisers without our permission or vote to do so in the past 2 years?  Fact, Yes! What did we benefit from it?  Fact: Nothing but heartache and divide. 

* Did that SC ask the community to fire BCS last year, than buy them out of its contract and waste another $6K to $8K of our money to terminate them just to get rid of them early? Fact! They did, and no, they never asked us! 

Have you compared the Apple to Apple expenses?  I have. Golf cart purchase, plus owners having to purchase the gas each week, plus a gas cart that signals its travels 1/2 mile away to any would be burglars....Hmmm. does not seem to smart to me. How does this help our security?

  * Is the VEHOA blog a community blog or a private blog like VE neighbors?  Fact! 100% private as well!  We do not have an unbiased/objective community blog. Shouldn't we have one?

* Are you aware that the HOA computer has countless emails (I am told in the HUNDREDS) from this past SC members mentioned and its advisers with countless emails attempting to lie, make up stories, fabricate histories of other owners in an effort to destroy and even blackmail those in VE who simply disagree with them?  

Are you OK with this?  Would you still support these folks if we get the proof and show you?  This seems absolutely horrendous if you ask me. How could any human being be so hateful towards others over an HOA and or its issues?  Very sad, I think!  I was on the list!

* Are you OK that this group prepared a list titled "The Enemy List" of 60 property owners?  What? named us enemy's!  Very sad!  This is who we are as fellow neighbors? 

* Are you aware that their own "hired" assistant signed an affidavit to the fact that she had to be a part of the above 'illicit" activities and feels horrible about it now? Are you OK with this?  Is this who VE is as a community?

* Do you think it is OK for this past appointed SC to tell VE owners not to pay their dues which is clearly an effort to further damage & help destroy our community. What will happen when it runs out of money, goes dark and turns into an abandoned rundown community?  Are you OK with that? Do you not care that it could further destroy your property values?        

So Deb, can I talk about possible solutions ( the community is really good at talking about fighting and creating massive dissension with each other ) maybe you and I can start some dialog which is focused on trying to acquire the peace you mention above.(I think we both want it. Agreed? )

How about this.......

1) Anyone who believes for any reason they have a legal issue with the developer for any reason agrees to form an independent party of owners who feel the same way and (I.E.) file a collective class action suit or take other action as they desire against the developer.  This group can then share the legal expenses and they share in the outcome either in victor or defeat. But respect and keep us out who do not want to be part of it. What do you say?

2) Lets encourage and have every owner agree to pay their dues and obligations proportionately as required and all of those funds budgeted to be used 100% for our community where 100% of us benefit; such as roads, security, maintenance, upkeep, maybe a new entrance etc. Whadda ya say?  Lets approve a budget.

3) Lets create a true HOA website independent of a private owner and agree it is for solutions, activities and other subject matter that is constructive, free from attack demonizing our neighbors.

4) Election? I am certain the recent election held in January was the most legal ever held in VE for a number of reasons and the BOD is registered with the Panamanian government to confirm so.  Why would any owner oppose it and if so, what is the desire and the objective of those against with an alternative plan where the community would benefit?

   

5) No SC member or its adviser(s) can overtly or clandestinely attempt to hurt or injure any other owner for any reason simply because they disagree with them on community issues. 

6) Maybe we look at hiring a community manager & adminstrator to oversee running our community, done properly it is a part time job and not to hard to manage.

7) We focus on coming together as neighbors instead of being divided. Get to know others where we do not and maybe form a different opinion of each other without the preconceived dislikes, what do you think? 

Please, lets give this new SC a chance, I assure you they will sign a pledge to never attack, hurt, defame or injure another owner in VE,( unless they are biting back). 

They simply want to help restore our community from the pain it has suffered. They are doing their best for free and quite frankly we do not have many left who wish to serve.  So lets try and be less critical and more supportive.

Please encourage others to agree to this little outline of solution, we all win, no one suffers and we can move forward for all.   Whadda ya say? 

I personally think no owner has any right to complain unless they want to be part of the solutions.  We have plenty whining about the problems or checked out completely as this place is falling apart. That is sad!

We have all suffered enough. Lets all empty the bullet chambers and focus on a better tomorrow!

Life is Short, lets make it better!

Will you help?

Anyone is free to send this to other owners who want to help solve our problems.

Mark 

Community Unity!

As we begin April, 2015, with the admitted expiration of the old Steering Committee and the communities vote and acceptance of the new Board of Directors and their approval for the newly elected Steering committee to represent us, it is now time for all owners to put the past behind us ( as many owners already agreed to do) and focus on our budget along with insuring each and every homeowner pays their dues so this community can get back on foot for a better tomorrow; 
So please, encourage your fellow neighbor to put the past behind them and support this new SC, support your property, and pay your dues. 
Stay tuned, good things are coming for all owners of VE. We encourage all owners to put their past differences behind them for the good of all. Lets get Valle Escondido back on track with positive talk to restore our friendships and property values.

Your Neighbors

Offer to shut down VE Neighbors "Trash Site"

Our Commitment:

A few VE "owners" have asked for the VE neighbors blog, or "trash" site as some regular readers call it, to be made private.  This is not possible as it would require a password and we have not wanted those who wish to speak their minds to live in fear of others who might threaten or intimidate them.

We now have clear evidence the VEHOA.com blog is not, nor has it ever been a community blog, but rather it is a private blog solely for the benefit of its owner John Good and his "previous SC" conspirators.  We will gladly post shortly and validate our claims that Mr. Good penned his own writings and put SC name's on such writings. 

There is clear evidence that confirms all subject matter was / is 100% controlled by Mr. Good and was only for the benefit of the past SC and advisers hell bent on harming fellow neighbors and fostering lies about any person or entity they are not in agreement with. Many legitimate VEHOA members have been denied access to the VEHOA.com website and others have had their comment and posting privliges suspended by Mr. Good.

So here is our commitment.  we will terminate and turn this blog off once Mr. Good either shuts off and terminates his private blog or turns it over in its entirety to the community for the benefit of the entire VEHOA. No more writings should be tolerated in this community to harm or injure fellow neighbors.

Contrary to some opinions,  VE neighbors exists solely to have a voice to defend against those who could not get their voice on the VEHOA private blog.  So this is our solution for our community.


Mr. Good? We challenge you to do what is right!     

Carol Bruner says Charbit bribed local officials!

To Our Neighbors,

Once again, we are sorry for the continued "Chatter" by some in our community creating the disharmony. It does nothing to help us for a better tomorrow.  

However, below is an email of serious consequences that could affect each owner in VE. Mr. Charbit's friend, supporter and previous colleague tells the whole story in this email; It needs no clarification of facts and deflection(s) by them should not be tolerated.

By their own admission, these individuals have possibly endangered the Valle Escondido community while then conducting themselves as leaders in our community. Is there criminal implications affecting all owners of Valle Escondido? We do not know. But, we should take these charges serious. We will get this to the proper authorities to insure the individual owners in our community are not liable for any of these potential charges should there ever be an investigation. We cannot take this matter lightly, given the state of Panama as it relates to public officials accepting bribes and the current news surrounding officials being sentenced to jail. 
     
We have had enough of this groups devious actions. The deceptions should never be tolerated again by them in our community. To insure there is no deflection(s) this email breaks no confidentiality. It was passed along innocently over an unrelated, unresolved water issue in VE. The missed and deeper conversation in the email speak volumes in its content.

 The recent, Poor Ole Me and my family as some kind of victims and "Ugly American" game of sympathy must come to an end. The entire community knows the truth!  Also, email them and ask them if you made their "Enemy List". Yes, that is correct, the prior SC created a formal "enemy list" of around 50 owners. They actually titled it "Enemy List" and was found on the VEHOA computer. Unbelievable! Anyone that even questioned their actions was an "enemy". Enough said!   

The contents of this message requires no author, harassment or deflection due to its truth.  Do not let any party avoid its implications.

On Dec 30, 2014, at 11:12 AM, Carol Bruner <carolbruner@cox.net> wrote:

xxxxxxxxxxx,

xxxxxxxx,

I am so very sorry.  You know that the SC  authorized the funds to install the booster pump and that Analia and Thalia NEVER  responded to our requests for permission to install the pump.  Given the history, don't you think  they would have sued the VEHOA if the SC had initiated work involving THEIR  water distribution system?  Please remember that the water system has not been transferred to the VEHOA as required.

Now, Richard Charbit had Olga ask the SC members to "chip in" to his bribery fund.  She said he had already paid $1200 in bribes to officials and it was not time for us all to "chip in."   I, and others, were quite flabberghasted by that request.  Isn't bribery part of the reason Richard was convicted for stock market fraud?    Anyway,  we asked him to resign and while Jon may want to blame the booster pump lack on that,  the primary problem was that we could not obtain permission.  I offered my land for the booster pump. 

And, while you are attacking the SC, let me point out it was the VE Neighbors' and Richard  Charbit's cohort, Julio Brown, who made it impossible for us to pay for the booster pump installation, if we had wanted to do it without authorization.   When Richard resigned, he not only threatened to sue Jeannie and me, he also said that he "will bring you down."    His ability to control Julio Brown's actions from behind the scenes is not obvious to some.  Yesterday the guards reported that Julio, Richard and Olga drove up to the guardhouse area, parked, Julio got out and walked some distance to the VEHOA office which he entered and then exited.  We are wondering what he was doing there and why.  We know that Olga gave him the password to the VEHOA computer minutes, urging him to get into the computer before we changed the password. That was immediately before she resigned.  We have her email to him.

It may now be the time to bring in IDAAN to study the problems with water and sewage.

How much more criticism do you want to throw at us, XXXXXXX?   It appears that you are still quite angry about how they dumped you.  I was not a part of that and don't want to be a recipient of your anger.  I don't think you fully appreciate how insidious the VE Neighbors are.  This morning I was called psychopathic along with everyone else by an anonymous letter writer.  It's not much fun.

Happy New Year,


Carol

Homeowners Views. Clear, concise and accurate

I agree with Dennis that engaging with the former SC and their cohorts is more than a waste of time!  

They are NOT policy makers nor the voice of the majority of the residents as much as they want to be!  Our legally elected SC is too busy getting necessary work done for the benefit of the community to waste time responding to ridiculous challenges.

Did I miss the Security Survey sent to residents when the former SC was in the process of replacing BCS with Blasco?  NO. There was no survey or conversation; it was a unilateral and secretive selection process without bids to break a legally binding contract without concern for the resident's wishes or the law of Panama.  Now they want to champion their choice!  

Did the former SC accomplish their primary goal to transfer the infrastructure?  Even when they offered to take it  "AS IS", they couldn't get it done.  There were certainly enough legal fees billed to the HOA to accommodate that activity.  

Our new SC is too busy cleaning up after the old illegal group to respond to their vapid and inconsequential challenges.  Our new SC has not only produced our 2015 budget with HOA dues invoices,  but is doing the 2014 "actually spent" budget close out.  

Our new SC is working on the transfer of the infrastructure which was left dangling by the former illegal SC although that was their stated primary goal.  

Our new SC is busy writing criteria for bids for an apple to apple comparison of security companies to retain a vendor who meets the needs of our community.  

Our new SC is busy acquiring an official HOA website for our community that can not be hijacked by individuals for a propaganda site of hate and bigotry.  

Our new SC is busy doing what the community elected them to do:  restoring legitimacy, trust, and services to our development that affords the residents confidence and retained property values in their community!  

Our new SC is on the high road as there are no achievements on the low one! 

The former SC has taken the low road with lies, threats, and continual complaining, and absolutely nothing to show for it except all our money spent on attorneys!

Thank you, new SC and Dennis, for walking where the air is thin but the rewards to our community are thick with hope and achievement!  

Sherry Rose 

Update from your Steering Committee - March 15, 2015

First, a note from me directly:

I have been pressed by several persons to be a bit harsher on some of my updates. I have also seen several emails addressed to me but sent to the entire community with questions and statements that are not intended to benefit or advance VE in anyway. I am saying no to both requests. 

I shall not answer any email / question that is only being sent to spread confusion and misinformation. Also, I do not intend to post anything in an update that does not further homeowners understanding of any given situation.
And to preempt the response I know is coming, there was one post by me personally a few weeks ago that was rather harsh. That post was in response to a blatantly racist post. I do not apologize for that strong response.

Dennis Griffin

---------------------------------

Good Day All.

Several updates, the big one being invoices will be out either today or tomorrow.

Office and new Administrator:

We have the HOA office back in operation. It is all clean and shiny and even had a vase of flowers. Thank You Antonieta. We also have a new part time administrator to help out. Many of you already know her, Beverly Pineda who used to work at the hotel. I hope many of you will stop by the office and say hello. She is very eager to meet one and all and I believe is going to be a great asset to the HOA.

For those who wish to discuss anything with a member of the SC we will be in and out of the office at irregular times. If you see one our cars stop by, we will try to keep the coffee fresh.

For the short term the general hours of the office will be 9-12, 1-4. Once some of the back log is caught up we will probably cut that down to three days a week. Do be aware Beverly does run some errands for the HOA so the office might be closed occasionally while she is away.

On the subject of administration we do have a bit of an issue with getting the books correct for 2014. Using broad accounting adjustments we now have the bank accounts in balance with the statements we received from Global Bank so the 2015 started correct and it will be auditable. 

As you may recall a new accounting system was purchased and installed last year by the previous committee. The conversion from Quickbooks to Peachtree was started last April or so but never completed. As an example, Peachtree was used to record checks but no receivables were ever entered. There are other similar type issues that will make getting 2014 books in order a challenge.

Security:

As was included in an update on February 10^th and repeated a few days ago, our former security company, Blasco did not have the proper permits to carry firearms. We attached a copy of the license that is required of an individual to carry a firearm. We got that from one of the BCS guards. 

When Blasco departed we did have them sign a hold harmless agreement. That agreement stated that the lack of proper licensing was a prime reason for not renewing the contract. They signed that statement.

As I have repeated several times there will be a short survey put out before we sign any long term contract with any security company. It will be a legitimate survey that will have as it's only goal to get realistic feedback from the community as to what is desired and expected from our security company.

I have also seen or heard several comments from owners about partnering with the developer on security. The reality is the contract we are working on makes this an equal partnership. If the developer and the HOA cannot agree on a joint company we simply each hire our own company again. Neither group controls the gate. We both do. Exactly as was happening for years prior. Los Molinas has a similar situation, resort and homes, and they have successfully used this team approach for several years.

Bank, Dues:

The promised invoices will be out either today or tomorrow. One reason for the delay is trying to get the credit card system in place. We are still working on this but will include on the invoice multiple payment methods. There are several very quick methods for cc usage but they tend to be very pricey. Paypal in Panama is pricey but it solves all of the international transfer issues. Paypal in the US is about 40% less but comes with a serious side issues of moving the money to Panama. We are working on a third and better option but it will take a bit longer to get set up. We requested the password for the lower cost processing site that had been setup and used in the past however…

This year we will be accepting US checks, Panamanian checks, cash (you have to deposit that yourself) and wire transfers and hopefully credit cards.

Attached on the email sent directly to each homeowner is a copy of the government stamped Board of Directors registration, a copy of the sequester release as well as a copy of a deposit made a few days ago into the VEHOA account at Global Bank by one of the homeowners.

Other News:

There seem to be repeated emails regarding the legality of the January 12^th election and the corresponding legality of the Board of Directors. You can see the government stamped attachment to this update that was sent to your email, or come by the office and see the original. 

Also, if you are not receiving these emails to your own email address, please send your correct email to veneighbors@gmail.com, and we will make sure you are on our lists. We don't want to miss anyone. You might also check your spam folder. 

Steering Committee 2015

Antonieta

Dennis

Joel

Sandy

Stan

TIME FOR TRUTH ABOUT THE JANUARY 12 ELECTIONS

To the authors and the "previous" SC who sent out this "reply"  I must point out the clear untruths and lay out the facts of the January 12, 2015 election. I have no problem signing my name and giving background and knowledge of the issues raised in the their "Initial Reply to Paz Moreno" below.

I have lived in Valle Escondido for over five years and have invested more than $800,000 in properties in this development. I currently am the legal representative of numerous corporations that own properties in Valle Escondido with full membership and voting rights as verified by the Public Registry. My points listed in RED after each of the numbered issues raised below are based upon extensive review of the facts and consultation of no less than 4 different Panamanian attorneys in regards to the legality of the January 12^th  election. The question I need to ask is if the "authors" of this are going to truthfully address the points I bring up or will they deflect with attacks and deflections?

Your mixed messages as a group are completely hypocritical as I will point out in this email; Your own SC Chairman called you illegal ( see below). So what is it, you cannot have it both ways.  Your own SC Chairman called all of you unflattering names ( see below) Your own SC Chairman called for an "Emergency Election " because you were illegal (see below), We had one. Your call as to defining who is a homeowner via POA etc.(see below), by your own definition, validates that your "appointments" by your own words were completely illegal.  Please once and for all get your stories straight as one and tell the community by law not emotions what legal grounds you stand on.  We are proceeding as a community without your further dysfunction and disruptions.  Surely you must see how embarrassing you look collectively to our VEHOA membership.  It is now time to stop!  Support this legally elected Board of Directors working with the “elected SC” for the best interests of all property owners, the continued noise you offer has very very little support in Valle Escondido. 

If you feel that your legal challenges has merit then file a suit accordingly but stop lying to the VEHOA community that there is some kind court ruling forthcoming that will invalidate the January 12 election results.  If you objectively look at the facts I present in RED, the VEHOA membership will quickly realize that it is the “authors” of this reply that have acted “illegally” and until they are willing to address each and every point made in RED they just need to accept that the VEHOA membership has spoken.

I have the right to speak out for the truth as I have been the primary target of your lies, falsehoods and deceptions.  

Ralf Henrich

MY Replies are in RED!

Initial Reply to Paz Moreno

Lic. Paz Moreno Notification to some Home Owners of Valle Escondido/Notificacion a Residente de VE. (March 2nd, 2015)

Dear Lic. Paz Moreno,
We will send a more formal reply but let me correct some assumptions in your letter sent 02 de marzo 2015.
The alleged "election" held 12 enero 2015 failed to consider the following:

1. As Lic Julio Brown can confirm to you the Valle Escondido Asociation de Propietarios (VEHOA)  General Assembly  and election for a new VEHOA Board of Directors  was held in mayo 2014.  Many more homeowners voted in this election than in the 12 enero 2015 election and a new VEHOA Board of Directors was elected to serve our community.  Each of these new BOD members have two (2) year terms that expire in mayo of 2016.  That means their terms continue for another year. The May 10, 2014 election/vote was not valid as insufficient notice was given of the meeting (per both Deed 1937 & the 2010 CC&R's) and insufficient delivery of the supporting documents was provided. Furthermore, advance notice was provided in writing to SC of same & they proceeded with the meeting regardless. At least one attorney present at the meeting notified the SC that it was conducting an illegal meeting according to Panamanian law. also Deed 1937, the only valid governing document, as per MINGOB, clearly states that a board of directors must be elected by 51% of the entire VEHOA membership which for the May elections would have been 76 votes in the affirmative which was not met.

2.   

We have had two resignations from this VEHOA BOD.  According to the 1937 Deed, the By-laws for the VEHOA created by deceased Developer Samuel Taliaferro,  the remaining Board of Directors members would vote on the replacements for their Board, not the VEHOA.  Please read the 1937 Deed.  Your position appears to totally disregard the stipulations in this document. See above as to why your May election failed to properly elect the BOD you reference. Please also explain how Antonio  Palacios , Olga's "husband" and Richard Charbit's employee, got on the BODs as he was never elected in the May election nor was he ever on the ballot. Also, why did the SC chairman at the time write: “With no Board of Directors, as we only have 2 active members and 1 will resign soon, and no valid SC I am calling an Emergency Homeowners Election.” (a full copy of the blog post this was taken from is below). Are you calling Richard Charbit a liar? Once Javier Espinosa, the President of the VEHOA, as per the public registry, was informed that MINGOB ruled the SC concept invalid, he did the proper and legal thing based upon the VEHOA's lawyer's advice of calling for a new BOD election, which met all the legal requirements, so he could subsequently resign.

3.  Furthermore, the "election" held 12 enero 2015 failed to consider that there were two terms on the VEHOA Steering Committee that do not expire until 31 marzo 2016.The people who were "elected" were not designated as to which terms they would be serving:  i.e., one or two years. Once again, MINGOB ruled, in a notarized Government resolution,that the 2010 CC&Rs, the document that "created" the SC concept was never submitted to them which is in direct violation of Deed 1937. VEHOA can only legally operate under Deed 1937. On top of that, even if the SC concept was legally recognized you refuse to accept the fact the none of the existing members are in any way legal based upon the 2010CC&Rs you still claim, contrary to a Panamanian Government Agency ruling, as the governing document. Here are the facts of the SC you claim is legal and please address these facts once and for all. This was taken from the VEneighbors blog:

We wish the past contentiousness was over and that the community could move forward together. However, we must pose a few important legal points and questions to them and request, for once and for all, an answer to the entire community. Honest answers will provide clarity as to the illegality of the previous SC.

-Carol Bruner, self-appointed President of the previous SC, who has not stepped foot in VE for well over a year, has admitted that she was appointed to an SC position where the person she replaced (Michael Burd) never resigned, nor was any resignation for that person ever accepted. By their own rules, you can only be appointed to that position if the resigning member votes with the majority for his/her replacement. Michael Burd never knew anything about Ms. Bruner's appointment to replace him and has signed an affidavit to these facts.

-Mary Jean "Jeanie" Bell has resigned on three separate occasions, with a copy of her most recent resignation available for all to view in an earlier blog post. Once you resign, you cannot just come back as you wish. There is a process and that process did not take place. Also note, that Ms. Bell has her property for sale and had indicated in emails that she wants out of VE as quickly as possible.

-There is the appointment of Pat Mains where the previous SC admits in writing that they took the vote of an SC member's spouse because they were "trying something new." They also admitted using the vote of Michael Traynor as an alternate to elect Pat Mains. The use of an alternate, or a spouse, is not contained in any of the CC&Rs, whether it be Deed 1937 or the 2010 document.

-Then there is the appointment of Larry Thompson. This same SC determined that Larry was not an HOA member and was not eligible to vote on VE issues because his condo is not titled. If you are not a member, how can you be a representative on the SC?

4. The people who were "elected" were not designated as to which terms they would be serving:  i.e., one or two years. The Board of Directors elected are serving their terms as per Deed 1937 and the "new SC members" are serving informally with the approval of the BODs until such a time that the 2010 CC&Rs, with the amendments, as approved by MINGOB as required under Panamanian law is appeoved. All legal decisions for the VEHOA are only valid with the approval of the elected BODs. Once the SC concept is approved, the terms for SC members,as designated in the proposed new CC&Rs, will be announced to the VEHOA membership.

5.      The Steering Committee has a legitimate claim that the VE Neighbors and Lic. Julio Brown who orchestrated the 12 enero 2015 "election" selectively disenfranchised many property owners in Valle Escondido.  Many of us were not notified about all of the aspects of the purported "election."  We were not included in their mailing list.  That is fact. Julio Espinosa Brown has already provided evidence that proper notification went to all homeowners as per the VEHOA email list he had from when he was hired. On top of that he, as well as numerous individual VEHOA members, requested that the "old SC" in power and in control of the VEHOA email account anf the VEHOA.com website make proper notification and you refused. The "authors of this "reply" actually did everything they could to prevent notification. Here is a sampling of Blog Posts on our VEHOA.com community website which made notification of the elections and were "REMOVED BY YOUR STEERING COMMITTEE", now these same individuals are trying to claim now that property owners were disenfranchised by the actions of others? Really?

Notice from Election Inspectors

Posted on December 9, 2014 by Jerry Maesky

REMOVED BY YOUR STEERING COMMITTEE DUE TO FALSE AND MISLEADING INFORMATION

Considerations for Upcoming GA

Posted on December 8, 2014 by Bill McAbee

REMOVED BY YOUR STEERING COMMITTEE DUE TO FALSE AND MISLEADING INFORMATION

Call for General Assembly

Posted on December 8, 2014 by Caesar Sherrard

REMOVED BY YOUR STEERING COMMITTEE DUE TO FALSE AND MISLEADING INFORMATION

6.  Note well that several of these excluded, disenfranchised  property owners are owners of multiple properties, thus disenfranchised multiple times. (por ejemplo, 10 votas para 4 propietarios). See above. Also know that the "YES" vote for the CC&R changes and the Board of Directors was 59 legal members which is higher than the "YES" vote for the BODs at the May election you reference.

7. Furthermore, this was the first time that property owners were asked to provide, on very short notice,  a notarized proof of title to their homes or a notarized Power of Attorney from their corporation or foundation enabling them to vote on behalf of their property or properties.  This has never been required in previous VEHOA elections.  This was a serious disservice to absentee property owners and effectively disenfranchised them from voting in this 12 enero 2015 "election. This should have been a requirement all along and through this process, in which VEHOA members were verified by the election inspectors through the Public Registry, is was discovered that people who had previously voted in the May election were not legally affiliated with the properties they claimed to represent. It was actually the "old SC" that previously announced that all votes, after the budget vote would require, verification of membership. Now you same people have the gall to say that this was never required when you yourselves made it mandatory? Here is the VEHOA notification with some excerpts taken from it:

Definition of Property Owner.

Posted on September 19, 2014 by Olga Caridad

What defines you as an Owner of Property in Valle Escondido, Powers of Attorney, Proxy Forms, Good Standing Letters... To Vote you will need 1) Unlimited or General Power of Attorney by the Legal Representative of the Corporation assigning the majority shareholder or an individual unlimited powers over the property and decision making. PROXY FORMS NEED TO BE ISSUED AND SIGNED BY THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CORPORATION, NOTARIZED BY A PANAMANIAN NOTARY IF THE PROPERTY IS OWNED BY A PANAMA CORPORATION OTHERWISE THEY WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Please understand that this is not a matter of politics. This is a matter of knowing the rightful owners of the properties so that communication is effective between the VEHOA and the membership, voting rights are exercised, dues are correctly billed and allocated and better safety and security is applied to all just by knowing who your neighbors are.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Steering Committee and
Board of Directors
VEHOA

8.  In previous VEHOA General Assemblies held in 2013 and 2014, the Steering Committee has enabled Skype connections so that absentee property owners could attend the General Assemblies. Deed 1937 is explicit that voting must be in person or via proxy. Skype is not a requirement to having a legal meeting or vote.  

This was not provided for the 10 and 12 enero General Assembly meetings and effectively prevented many of our VEHOA members from participating in those two meetings.  We know that the Bambu Room has the capability to set up Skype connections as we have arranged that several times before. The January 10 & 12 GA meetings/election were called by the VEHOA President, Javier Espinosa, who followed the legal meeting requirements as recommended by the VEHOA attorney. Skype attendance would not have met the legal requirements of verifying a quorum and voting as one needed to provide legal proof of membership as mandated by the "Old SC".

9. Why are you, as a licensed attorney  not concerned about these facts?   Do you believe in the democratic process?  Or is democracy in Panama limited? Democratic process? The full membership was invited to attended a meeting and election in which the "old SC" was ask to participate in and run for election on numerous occasions yet all you did was obstruct and deny notification. What is more democratic than getting elected by the membership one claims to represent, especially in light of the fact that none of the members of the "old SC" were ever elected as demonstrated above. Why if you felt/feel that the VEHOA membership supports you platforms and actions did you just not run your own slate of candidates. Why are there still only 4 "old SC" members? Why was Dennis Griffin turned down for a position on the SC after Bill Day interviewed him yet one position still remained open?

10.Valle Escondido contains many citizens of the United States, Canada, and England.  We revere our right to vote.  We respect the rule of law.  And we will stand up for our rights to vote in legitimately called VEHOA General Assemblies. The January 10 & 12 GA meetings/election were legitimately called. As stated earlier no less than 4 Panamanian attorneys, including Juan David the attorney Bill Day and Paul McBride hired, that any member of the VEHOA membership can call a meeting. This meeting and election was called by Javier Espinosa, the legal President of the VEHOA BODs in light of the fact that MINGOB issued a resolution which clearly demonstrated that under Panamanian law the VEHOA's 2010 CC&Rs were never submitted and approved leaving us under deed 1937.

11.I do not find an attachment re: Parks with your email.

12.Our VEHOA Steering Committee and VEHOA Board of Directors understand that the Garanty Tadasly Trust must be nullified, dissolved, revoked, in order to achieve the transfer of the VEHOA infrastructure assets.  What steps have you taken to accomplish this goal?   We understand that you as the Promotora cannot transfer the Valle Escondido infrstructure assets that are vested into a trust instrument

13.         I am forwarding your letter under blind copy  to many homeowners who appear to not be included on your mailing list. Who is I?

Regards,

VEHOA Steering Committee
Bell
Bruner
Mains
Thompson
BELOW ARE BLOG POSTS FROM THE SC CHAIRMAN IN REGARDS TO THE “OLD SC”

Response to Steering Committee’s email.

Posted on October 28, 2014 by Richard Charbit

 (Title edited by John Good, WebMaster)

Julio Espinosa was hired by a unanimous vote of my SC. His contract calls for a retainer of $850.00 a month for 17 hours and $50.00 an hour after that plus unlimited emails and phone calls and his presence at 2 meetings.

The contract was approved at the time by al least a majority of SC members. It was in replacement of Juan David Barcenas which charged us over $10000.00 for the first quarter of 2014. The Agreement with JDB had been negotiated by Rod Parker and Carol Bruner and called for a retainer of $2000.00 a month for a few hours a month plus $175.00 an hour for the extra hours plus reimbursement of all traveling expenses every time he flew to Boquete.

Julio’s $4000.00 bill that included 2 overdue invoices for $1000.00 each for the months of August and june 2014 and the current invoice for $2000.00 for October. These invoices were approved by 3 members of the SC including me.

The so-called SC composed of only 1 legitimate member only (unable to fulfill her function) has made some very bad decisions:

-Taking the funds out of the VEHOA bank account, for some stupid reasons, and putting those funds in their personal lawyer’s account.

-Pretending to be capable to run the SC without the presence in country of any legitimate member.

-Delegating power to accept and approve payment on all bills by Bill Day (not a member or official adviser of the SC).

-Allowing Mike Traynor to run the legal side of the Association without a Panamanian law license.

The list goes on and on….

Richard Charbit

78/105/147

SC coup

Posted on October 27, 2014 by Richard Charbit

Steering Committee Coup  The Steering Committee is trying to screw the VEHOA by following Bill Day´s private agenda once again!

This Saturday I was asked to resign by Jeannie Bell and Carol Bruner stating I am unable to perform my duties due to fact I am not in the Panama. I refuse to resign as we are in the midst of negotiations and the dissidents of the SC which comprise of Carol Brunner and Jeannie Bell met at Bill Day's house illegally and voted Pat Mains in the SC, they are conspiring to fire Julio Espinosa which will cost the VEHOA money since he has a 2 years contracts and have excluded Olga from all communications, they want to hire a new lawyer that is not qualified, so that he and Bill Day can negotiate a deal privately and without the involvement of the VEHOA, It seems like in a corrupt switch they are attempting to negotiate the return of their memberships and the cancellation of their lawsuits against throwing the home owners under the bus.

With no Board of Directors, as we only have 2 active members and 1 will resign soon, and no valid SC I am calling an Emergency Homeowners Election.

I am appalled by these dishonest backstabbing maneuvers and will resign as Chairman of the SC as soon as the special meeting is legally called.

Best regards

Richard Charbit

Response to Steering Committee's email.

Posted on October 28, 2014 by Richard Charbit

Response to Request for VEHOA Members' Indication of Support or Nonsupport....

It seems like Mr. Mike Traynor, self proclaimed lawyer in Panama and unlicensed to practice law in this country, and continuosly offering advise that could hinder the VEHOA and SC and writing documentation such as this, could once again harm the VEHOA.

This is as low as they can go to protect their private personal agendas. This is a SCAM. This has been designed by a hand few who are affected by loss of memberships and personal lawsuits, who are too affraid of any personal actions and now want to use their stay in the SC to protect themselves and have now endorsed Ralf who they were highly critizing before in order to protect themselves.

This is a lie..... Marguerite Heffner did not vote on anything. There was no 3 people vote and how can there be an SC vote without a formal meeting with all members invited. Furthermore, we have written proof of the Heffner´s disagreement with the SC and their non vote.

The acts of Jeannie Bell and Carol Bruner together with Bill Day and Mike Traynor, who had a secret meeting and had Mike Traynor vote as an alternate, where he was not, he had resigned (see below), in order to meet quorum and VOTE OFF Marguerite from the SC without her knowledge or consent, and further conspire to change legal representation which will financially hurt VEHOA and stall the negotiations with the Developer in order to protect their own personal interests are despicable.

This communication is full of lies and misleading facts. I have been opposed to the fact that the dropping of personal lawsuits against Jeannie Bell and Carol Bruner and the reinstatementes of QBCC memberships are made part of the TOA negotiations and this of course, brought me enemies. I do not have a hidden agenda, they obviously do. I called for elections.

There is no SC at this time. There is no legallity to Pat Mains in this SC. The legitimate SC is comprised of Marguerite and Richard, and this phony SC created ilegally by these people for their own personal grain, throwing the VEHOA under the bus with that.

We want and demand elections whether they approve of these ilegallities or not. We want a new SC who is not fraudulent, who will move with the TOA transfer in a fair and open way, without hidden agenda, and we want a VEHOA that is legally within the laws of Panama, with a full Board of Directors as required by law. Right now you have 2 members, one of which will resign the day of the elections, therefore, please, lets see through these few, who are known in VE to put their personal interests before anything else.

I will resign as soon as the elections are properly and legally organized not like this pathetic message with anonymous Inspector.
I urge the whole community to demand the resignation of these people who will not hesitate to push all the home owners under the bus to further their own financial interest

All the best to you all,.

Richard Charbit
SC chairman

January 10 Election.

Posted on December 24, 2014 by Richard Charbit

Dear Homeowners:   There have been plenty of speculations and attacks from both the SC and the VEneighbors in regards to the upcoming call for a General Assembly to elect a new Board of Directors and Steering Committee.

Many of us want an end to the ongoing fighting, character assassination, unnecessary expenditures of Homeowners funds and of course, the long overdue transfer of the assets and infrastructure; however, I feel much of the essence and important issues are lost in a power struggle between two groups.

Let´s analyze this on a cool head and see the pros and cons of this January election and why I strongly oppose we participate.

1.       Deed 1937 has been deemed the ONLY governing set of bylaws for the VEHOA, according to the Ministry of Government of Panama. This letter puts to rest the ongoing debacles whether the Steering Committee has authority over the Board of Directors, and the powers of each entity. Simply put, the Steering Committee DOES NOT exist and DOES NOT have any authority under Deed 1937, therefore any and all decisions must be made by the Board of Directors and all Homeowners must adhere to any decision they make

This raises a HUGE RED FLAG. We have a Board of Directors now, that in essence has resigned for the most part, however, I am sure, will assist in a transition to a either a new set of legally registered and government approved bylaws or a dissolution of this HOA.

Who are these people on the suggested new Board of Directors ballot and why no explanation or background is given to the Homeowners who must vote for them? Do the Homeowners realize that if we install a new Board of Directors, whom we know nothing about, we are handing out on a silver platter all decisions and power of the VEHOA to a group of virtual strangers, whom we know nothing about or what their availability, intentions or purpose is. Why is the new or temporary Board of Directors not composed of 5 Panamanian Homeowners of property in Valle Escondido? We know for a fact, there are more than 5 homeowners who are Panamanian nationals who have vested interest in Valle Escondido.

2.       If it has been determined that the Steering Committee is not a legally recognized decision making force in Panama, and has no validity because the 2010 CC&R´s are not registered with the government, the question is, WHY ARE WE ELECTING A NEW SC? Many homeowners do not know the 6 suggested members and no explanation, background or qualifications is offered. Who are they? Are they full time residents? How long have they lived in Valle Escondido? Are they title holders of their properties or at least have a legally notarized Power of Attorney signed by the Legal Representative of the corporation that owns their property

What should be voted upon and installed is a temporary committee who will oversee that a new set of bylaws is drafted, voted upon and approved by the majority of the Homeowners, which will then be duly registered and presented to the Ministry of Government for the required approval. Then and only then, you may call for elections of a formal Steering Committee who will have some kind of authority, always keeping in mind, that in Panama, the Board of Directors is the main authority in any corporation.

Given the many disagreements over transfer of assets and bylaws, it is in the best interest of all Homeowners to dissolve the VEHOA and either incorporate to the municipality or create an entirely new entity with a complete new set of governing rules, where the Resort and all commercial lots are a part of, paying their corresponding dues and assuming responsibility and liability, just like any other Homeowner, on assessments and other matters.  Why is there a permanent exemption of dues on lots owned by family members of the Developer? Why is there a permanent discount for condo owners of their yearly dues, yet Boca Rio condos pay the same amount as everyone else? Or better yet, why even have an association? It has been proven over the years that all residents and homeowners of Valle Escondido never agree on matters that the ongoing fighting and character assassination has been a patter for nearly 10 years.

So, the solution is simple. Hire an experienced lawyer, who will draft a brand new, from scratch set of bylaws, taking in to consideration the approved 2010 bylaws, the new amendment suggestions, the approved Rules of May 2014, and the new issues we face; present it for Homeowners review and approval and get it duly registered with the Panamanian government or complete dissolve the VEHOA and become a co-op or integrate to the municipality of Boquete.

3.       Transfer of Assets and Infrastructure: the main goal and long overdue responsibility and obligation of the Developer. There are many discrepancies with the master plan and how the valley was developed, missing permits and concessions such as ANAM and MIVI, the issue with Union Fenosa where the original plans were not approved and shortcut was taken in order to not meet their requirements, which has turned in to a disaster that costs all Homeowners nearly three times what their regular electric bill should be on a monthly basis, plus many deficiencies in the overall power supply of the community. Unmetered areas that the HOA gets billed for, municipal water being used for years without paying a penny to the municipality of Boquete, no concessions for ANAM, no control over the WWTP, no sidewalks, no street lighting, deficient roads not built to standard or according to the approved Master Plan, unfinished roads…., and the list goes on. Somehow, between all the fighting and division amongst Homeowners, the main objective has been lost in translation. Why are not fighting together to get a commitment from the Developer on how these impending issues will be resolved. Although they can allege a thousand times there is wear and tear, the deficiencies, faults and non-completions are undeniable. Where are the sidewalks? Where are the missing roads and the repairs to those streets not built to standard or according to plan? Where is the required law compliant signage? Where is the street lighting? Do we have a financial commitment to bring up the electric in the valley to Union Fenosa standards, even if it’s a portion of the costs? Where are the ANAM concessions and why do we continue to illegally take water from Boquete´s municipal source?

In conclusion, let us sit back for a minute, read, think, analyze……….Do we want the main legal authority for the VEHOA in the hands of strangers? Do we want to continue electing Steering Committees that have no legal muscle? Do we want to continue to live divided into factions, getting nothing accomplish but to dislike our neighbors? Do we want to continue living with outdated bylaws that do not conform to our needs? Do we even want to be part of the VEHOA? Would we rather dissolve the VEHOA and start from 0 with an entirely new set of governing rules or better yet, be totally independent? Do we want to continue with poor infrastructure that does not meet guidelines? Do we want to continue without sidewalks or street lights that comprise our safety?

Let us put our differences aside, stop the division between the owners and concentrate on real issues, this is long overdue.

We need to use this scheduled election date to choose what we really want to do as an Association, and decide if we start from 0 and dissolve VEHOA, or if we amend the current bylaws. We need to appoint not a new Board of Directors, but we need to select a group of 3 Homeowners, who have lived in Valle Escondido long enough to know the real issues at large and who spend more than 60% of their time in Panama in order to steer us in the right direction. If the Homeowners choose to keep the VEHOA intact, then, once a new set of governing laws is approved by the government, a new Board and Committee can be elected to assure the infrastructure and asset transfer is completed, or this temporary group can lead the Board of Directors, with Homeowner´s approval into a dissolution of the Association.

Please, reflect on this, and comment on whether you support the path we are on, or if you are pro a REAL change and want to make either a new set of bylaws or dissolve the VEHOA altogether like many Homeowners have expressed. Please note, this is not an anti-developer, anti-SC, anti-VEneighbors post, but rather a reflecting note and what the real issues are and the focus shift of Homeowners.

I will boycott the upcoming vote because it has been prepared inefficiently, in a haze, with possible gave consequences for all homeowners.

Richard Charbit