Tony Thompson Rebuttal #2

Mr. West, May 20, 2014
Your “assurance” that the petition submitted to you requesting a special meeting be held for the purpose of voting on the removal of Rich Kelley as a director not conforming to our Bylaws is not very reassuring to me. The only thing you have stated of which I agree with is in requesting the members read the Bylaws and the petition and decide for themselves.
As for the number of signatures on the petition, there are indeed at least 24 votes on that petition but only 16 were introduced to the board by Al Duff as that was more than a sufficient number to meet the requirements of the Bylaws. A fact you must have forgotten for I was told you were present at the meeting when this was explained. The point is, a sufficient number of votes were presented to you requesting a meeting. An explanation for why these voters requested the meeting was also provided to you. You have made that explanation into an “excuse” for dismissing the petition. You are stating you don’t like the wording of the petition. I don’t know how I can make it any clearer to you sir: “Over 10% of the eligible votes have indicated the people want a meeting”. You can criticize me all you want but the fact remains this petition is a simple request and you are making it into something much more. In regard to your reference to the laws giving the Board of Directors the right to sue people without informing the members of the POA or asking for their vote, I did not mean to refute those laws sir; I was only trying to question the morale implications of what you were saying. It was in direct parallel with your reluctance to allow the vote this petition requests. I hope this answers your question of “what the lawsuit has to do with the petition”. For you to accuse me of being part of a clique to stop a lawsuit is utterly absurd!! If you are indeed planning to sue people involved in the purchase of that grader it is none of my business. I was against the grader purchase from the very beginning. If you plan on suing anyone on behalf of the POA, then I feel it is the business of all POA members. My wish would simply be that any involvement you have with lawsuits should be done on your own accord and not involve the members of this POA unless you inform us of the facts and allow us our right to vote. Do not misunderstand me Mr. West: I am speaking of voting rights here and the right to assemble. There is no conspiracy that I am involved with. The only “clique” I am aware of is that in your mind. Is this why you are against this petition? You think a bunch of “radicals” are trying to take over the POA? It’s the only thing I can imagine that would explain your fear of the members given the right to vote.
You suggest I write another petition that would follow the “rules”. What “rules” Mr. West? Those of the Bylaws have been followed. If you don’t approve of the wording, or if you think the author has to be identified, or if you think a liability risk may exist because the members might not approve of the actions of a director… I can’t help that. I can only abide by written laws. I did not begin this petition as a debate nor did I ever intend to get into a mudslinging series of correspondence. I submit to your decision to ignore the petition. I apologize for expressing frustration at times and I appreciate the fact that this board is liberal enough to allow a member the freedom of speech.

Respectfully Submitted By: Tony Thompson, Lot 231