Mark Reeder Communications

Communications between the BOD and Mark Reeder

Below are the emails and other communications between the Board of Directors and Mark Reeder.

After the summary, most recent posts are on top.

Most Recent Post



Summary

1. 7/29/16. The Board reviewed Mark’s newsletter, and noted that it contains inaccuracies about what Colorado law says regarding nonprofits such as the MHA.

2. 7/29/16. Mark replied that residents shouldn’t change the bylaws before they decide what kind of corporation the MHA should be.

3. 9/10/16. Mark said that he will distribute another newsletter, one that will present “both sides” of the issues regarding Paul Keaton’s petition; the petition said the Board had to call for a vote to replace the current MHA bylaws with those written by the Bylaws Advisory Group.

4. 9/11/16. The Board replied that the statute Paul is quoting in his petition doesn’t express all the laws that apply, and that the Board cannot allow a vote on the Group’s proposed bylaws because those bylaws are not legally sound, opening the Board to legal liability. The Board asked Mark to consult a qualified attorney in order to present accurate information in his newsletter about the legal issues.

5. 9/18/16. Mark sent another edition of his newsletter to residents, about the rights of residents. Mark stated that his newsletter will print articles that are factual and unbiased. [Fact check: articles in the newsletter express personal opinion, which may qualify as bias.]

6. 10/5/16. Mark asked the Board if it wanted to submit an article to his upcoming newsletter.

7. 10/8/16. The Board asked Mark not to contribute to misinformation and confusion about the Bylaws through his newsletter. The Board encouraged Mark to again consult a qualified attorney to get accurate information about the matter.

8. 10/9/16. Mark replied that he feels residents should know what kind of corporation they can choose from, and that some residents want the Board and the Bylaws Advisory Group to sit down face-to-face for discussions.

9. 10/11/16. Mark asked the Board to submit an article for his next newsletter.

10. 10/13/16. Mark asked the Board if it wanted a copy of his next newsletter. [An individual on the Board subsequently requested a copy.]

11. 10/18/16. The Board requested that Deb or Mark disclose who the members are of the Bylaws Advisory Group, and who the Group’s leader is.

12. 10/18/16. Mark replied that he resigned from the Group in April, 2015. In an email of 10/23/16, Deb said Mark is a member of the Group.

13. 10/19/16. The Board sent an email to all residents (via CPM) stating that Mark’s recent newsletter contained errors:
a. The Bylaws Advisory Group is not a Board committee, but is a group of interested residents.
b. The residents at the Quarterly of 9/18 asked for a side-by-side bylaws comparison, not a re-examination of the type of corporation the MHA is.
c. The Board has not “declined” to reply to Mark’s requests for information, but has responded to Mark.
d. The MHA’s current bylaws are legally unsound.

14. 10/24/16. Mark asked for information for his newsletter about how to educate residents about the bylaws.

15. 10/24/16. Mark stated the submission date for his next newsletter is 11/8.

16. 10/24/16. Mark asked for information from the MHA Bylaws for his newsletter that proves the Bylaws Advisory Group is or is not a committee.

17. 10/25/16. Mark stated that his house will be ready for the Bylaws Advisory Group meeting on 10/30.

18. 10/27/16. The Board answered several of Mark’s above emails: the Board stated that it wishes to focus its communication efforts through established channels rather than through his newsletter; that “proof” of the status of the Bylaws Advisory Group doesn’t come from the MHA bylaws, but from superseding Colorado law; and that the Board wishes to respect residents’ request for a side-by-side bylaws comparison document, and not digress into a discussion about types of corporations.

19. 01/09/17. Mark distributed two editions of the “Mapleton Free Press” in December, containing his analysis of the most recent bylaws proposed by the Bylaws Advisory Group and by the Board, an analysis which contains multiple inaccuracies, omissions, bypasses, and other problems. On 01/09/17, the Board distributed to all residents a Directors’ Letter describing the problems in Mark’s newsletters.

20. 01/19/17. Mark queried the Board regarding how residents will be advised of policies they must uphold.

21. 01/22/17. The Board replied that policies are announced via meeting minutes and newsletters, and are available on the MHA web site.

22. 01/23/17. Mark responded that he couldn’t find the information on the web page, and restated his query about hard copies being given to residents.

23. 1/26/17. Curtine replied that hard copies are too expensive, and that the policies involve issues residents are not responsible for. She provided the links for the information Mark asked about.

24. 1/26/17. Mark replied asked if the additional policies listed on the main policy document were available on the MHA Web site.

25. 1/28/17. Curtine replied again that the policies Mark is asking about do not apply to residents.

26. 1/23/17. Mark sent the Board an appeal that the community work together to solve its problems. He asked the Board to do its part.

27. 1/27/17. Curtine replied that if Mark is serious about the community coming together, that he do his part as well.

28. 1/28/17. Mark emailed the Board that he believes that the new rules announced in the recent newsletter cannot go into effect, as stated, because residents must be given 60 days notice before they go into effect.

29. 2/2/17. Curtine replied that Mark’s query is based in incomplete information, and that the in effect immediately follows the law and bylaws; Curtine further stated that the BOD is very busy with other matters at the moment.

30. 2/2/17. Mark asked again is the rules are in immediate effect.

31. 1/31/17. Mark asked the Board if it will be providing advance copies of the new bylaws for residents to review.

32. 2/2/17. Curtine replied that the Board doesn’t have access to the new bylaws, which are in the custody of the attorney, and will not see them or distribute them in advance, because in the past certain residents have distributed inaccurate assessments of new bylaws, causing confusion and antagonism.

33. 3/10/17. Mark asked the Board to include another interest on its list of governing interests.

34. 3/13/17. Curtine replied the Board would take his idea into consideration.

35. 3/14/17. Mark distributed another issue of his “Mapleton Free Press,” which expressed his objections to the new anti-defamation policy.

36. 3/21/17. The Board distributed a Directors’ Letter answering Mark’s objections.

37. 11/17/17. Mark sent the Board an email objecting to the resident meeting minutes of 11/5.

38. 11/21/17. Mark distributed an issue of his “Mapleton Free Press,” which accused the Board of adopting the email rule with little resident support, of targetting Jo Morgan with the rule, and saying that the new bylaws must have a provision that requires residents to approve Rules changes.

39. 12/5/17. The Board distributed a Directors’ Letter that corrected the misinformation in the 11/21 “Mapleton Free Press.”

40. 12/11/17. The Board sent Mark an email explaining that Mark’s “Mapleton Free Press” and emails to the Board have little result.




40.

From: Curtine Metcalf
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 17:09:01 -0700
Subject: Further reviewed response to your email of 11/17/17
To: Mark Reeder
Cc: isabel sanchez, Scott Goddard, Melissa Svedlund, Sunny Shaughnessy

Dear Mark,

Thank you again for your email of 11/17.

It is unclear from your email specifically what information you feel is missing from the minutes of the Quarterly. Please see the recent Directors’ Letter for a review of the situation.

Over the last three years, through your many emails to the Board and MFP newsletters, and through spending thousands of MHA resident dollars and hundreds of hours needed to respond to them, a pattern seems to have emerged.

Above all, we, the Board, feel strongly that you and we are after the same results — that all residents be treated fairly and ethically, that residents have as great a say as possible in how the Park is run, and that we all live as freely and enjoy the highest standard of living possible.

But despite our apparent common goals, at regular intervals you direct an accusation at the Board of some kind of wrongdoing. When the Board reviews the situation, it invariably finds that your description of what happened has left out key information, or is based on inaccurate our outdated information.

This is completely understandable, since the Board has confidential and legal information that other residents don’t.

After considering your view and reviewing the facts of the matter (often in collaboration with the MHA attorney), the Board invariably finds that the accusations are inaccurate, and that it has committed no wrong.

This is corroborated by the MHA attorney, Thistle, and the City of Boulder, all of whom conduct or have conducted some kind of review of the Board’s policies and procedures and actions, and all of whom have gone on the record saying that the Board’s policies, procedures, and actions are legal and ethical, and align with the legal governing principles of the MHA.

At the same time, it appears that some residents seem to believe that your story is the whole story, and stake a similarly hostile position toward the Board, assigning dark intentions and building an even greater sense of being wronged by an allegedly corrupt Board. The long-standing us-them conflict continues, with ongoing bitterness and wasted time.

After all is concluded, any changes that you appear to have been seeking from the Board are dismissed, since there is no wrongdoing that needs to be fixed. All that effort, on all sides, leads to nothing, except that some residents’ anger and mistrust is stoked, and the ongoing conflict is perpetuated.

Important changes are needed, and being undertaken, at the MHA, but we, the Board, feel this strategy for attempting to make change is unproductive and harms residents. Rather than continuing this wasteful and unproductive pattern, the Board wishes to suggest that from here forward, if you have a concern, that you withhold your condemnation until you can gather all the information and hear the other side of the story. Then, if you feel your concern continues to be justified, work with the Board to resolve the problem without creating mistrust and hostility — through filing a grievance.

On behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


39.

12/5/17. The Board distributed a Directors’ Letter, answering the inaccuracies in the “Mapleton Free Press” of 11/21:

  • Times have changed since the MHA could get residents together at a resident meeting and make policy decisions. Laws, complexities of conditions, resident needs, among others, make this no longer practical or legally possible. This seems to dismay certain long-time residents.
  • Statistically, it is most likely that 57% of MHA residents support the email rule. The email rule infringes on no rights of residents.
  • Jo Morgan wasn’t targetted by the Board in enforcing the rule. All rules are enforced the same way: multiple violations lead to fines and other consequences, no matter who it is or what the rule is.
  • Saying that the new bylaws must contain a provision that requires residents to approve Rules changes is staking a position, is out of alignment with the interest-based approach residents are using to revise the bylaws, and dismisses some important interests residents have about how the Park should be governed. Other approaches for the Rules can meet all residents’ needs and interests.
  • The Board has had to spend thousands of MHA resident dollars, and hundreds of its hours, responding to emails and accusations from certain residents. After review by the City, Thistle, and legal counsel, these accusations have all proved false. This is not a productive use of MHA time or money.

38.

11/21/17. Mark distributed another “Mapleton Free Press” newsletter.


37.
Subject: Minutes from the November Quarterly Meeting
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 14:28:36 -0700 Mountain Time
From: Mark Reeder
Sent to: MHA Board of Directors
CC:  Jessic Miller, Kathy Lange, Mary Duvall

Board of Directors,

Please be apprised that the minutes from the MHA November Quarterly Meeting are inaccurate. The pertinent highlights and agreements at the meeting were withheld. These are agreements that Jessica Miller and Board members agreed to be part of the bylaws.

Article II. Section 2.5. Special meetings can be called by the members upon a written request of members having at least 25% of the votes entitled to be cast at meetings. This means if 34 homes sign a petition to have a special meeting, the meeting must be held.

Article II. Section 2.8. A quorum at quarterly and special meetings will be established when 25% of the households entitled to cast votes at such meetings, are present at the meeting either in person or by absentee ballot. This means 34 homes must be present either in person or through absentee ballots to establish a quorum for the meeting.

Article II. Section 2.9. Voting Rights. No proxy voting allowed. Only votes cast in person or by absentee ballot are acceptable. Furthermore, absentee ballots will be sealed and only opened at meetings where votes are called for.

Thank you for your attention to these details.

Best of luck,
Mark Reeder

The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and so is the road to heaven.
Mark Gordon Swinnerton


36.

3/21/17. The Board distributed a Directors’ Letter, answering Mark’s objections:

  • The Mapleton Free Press article contains inaccurate information.
  • The policy was adopted after lengthy deliveration, and is necessary for the following reasons:
    • Many residents have told the Board they will no longer come to resident meetings due to the bullying, hostility, and belittlement by a few residents, who also speak these things in public forums. This policy will allow the Board to ban residents acting in such fashion from resident meetings if they continue these behaviors. This is a common policy in many governing bodies.
    • The Board is in the middle of legal situations that require this policy, which the Mapleton Free Press can’t know about.
  • “Defamation” isn’t an arbitrary label. It consists of specific behaviors, which the Board outlined. Any resident can easily avoid making defamatory comments by not engaging in those behaviors.
  • Any resident with a grievance against the Board can file a grievance, in about 30-60 minutes. If the resident won’t take time to do that, it seems they won’t have time to go to the media either, which is a poor way to solve problems in any case.
  • No resident has the right to defame others. Defamation is not protected speech. Every resident has a choice: to express disagreement by not defaming or by defaming. There is always this choice. Anti-defamation doesn’t limit disagreement. Respectful discourse is not difficult or time consuming.
  • The Mapleton Free Press’s description of the role of leaders in the MHA is incomplete. Besides nurturing hope and confidence, the MHA leaders must uphold the law, protect the MHA from legal risk, and ask residents to behave ethically.
  • The Mapleton Free Press could serve residents better if Mark got more information before publishing his opinions, and refrain from jumping to conclusions, so that residents will become better informed and not more confused.

35.

3/14/17. Mark distributed a new edition of his “Mapleton Free Press,” which voiced these objections to the Board’s new anti-defamation policy:

  • Does a policy that can punish residents for making defamatory statements in public build community?
  • Who decides what constitutes a defamatory statement?
  • Will this policy keep residents from speaking freely about the MHA?
  • If a resident doesn’t have time to file a grievance about the Board, the policy might keep residents from going to the media to complain, and hence stifle the resident’s commenting at all.
  • Is the policy necessary and does it make sense?

34.

From: Curtine Metcalf
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 14:24:36 -0600
Subject: Response to your email of March 10, 2017
To: Mark Reeder
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy

Dear Mark,

Thank you for your email. The Board will consider your input and suggestions.

On behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


33.

From: Mark Reeder
Subject: Another governing interest for the list
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 13:13:53 -0700
To: MHA Board

Dear Board,

Here’s another governing interest to add to the list.

1.The Board and the residents work together to makes policies for the community (rules and regulations, codes of conduct, etc.).

Best of luck,
Mark Reeder


32.

From: Curtine Metcalf
Date: Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:37 PM
Subject: Response to your recent query about bylaws
To: Mark Reeder
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy, Josh Holleb, Kathy Lange

Hi Mark,

In the past, certain residents have released inaccurate assessments of proposed bylaws, and this has resulted in confusion and needless antagonism, and a standstill for more than three years.

To avoid this, residents and the BOD will see and review each of the new bylaws provisions at the Quarterly meetings where the bylaws will be reviewed. All of the objections and questions that have arisen over the years about specific aspects of the bylaws will be brought forward by the attorney, for her review with all attendees, at the meetings. There will also be time for any new questions that have not been mentioned in the past, to be raised and answered by the attorney.

The Board does not and will not have the new bylaws, and will not see them before everyone else does, at the Quarterlies where they are discussed. The new bylaws are in the custody of the MHA attorney, who is also leading their review by residents.

On behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


31.

From: Mark Reeder
Subject: Lawyer Bylaws
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:29:41 -0700
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Josh Holleb, Scott Goddard, Curtine Metcalf
To: MHA Board

Hi everyone,

I was wondering if the Board will be providing advance copies – either as hard copies or in a Word Doc – of the lawyer’s bylaws to the community before the February 19th Quarterly meeting. It would be nice to come prepared to ask specific questions.

Thank you for your service.

Best of luck,
Mark


30.

From: Mark Reeder
Subject: Re: Response to your query about policies
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 18:19:11 -0700
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy, Josh Holleb, Kathy Lange
To: Cutine Metcalf, MHA Board

Curtine,

Thank you for your reply. I want to make certain I understand your answer. Do you mean that the addition to the Rules and Regulations of the Board’s Policies and Processes will go into effect 60 days after the notice given in the January Mobile-izer?

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best of luck,
Mark Reeder


29.

From: Curtine Metcalf
Date: Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:41 PM
Subject: Response to your query about policies
To: Mark Reeder
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy, Josh Holleb, Kathy Lange

Hi Mark,

The issue you raise has factors not taken into account by your description and questions. The Board is addressing several significant, time consuming resident concerns at the moment, and do our best to respond thoughtfully.

The Board believes that its stand on the matter you raise follows Colorado law, and all applicable policies and regulations, as well as announced and posted within the past year, hence, the 60 day notice. We strive to maintain transparency, and always encourage every resident to read the MHA Mobile-izer, and Directors’ Letters, as well as all posted notifications.

We regret that we, Board members, are unable to commit more time to MHA Board work. At the moment, the Board does its best to address all of the individual concerns and comments presented, and works very hard to have enough time to address all the urgent matters of concern which affect a great numbers of residents.

Oh behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


28.

From: Mark Reeder
Subject: New R&R
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 15:47:09 -0700
To: MHA Board

Dear Board,

Another matter of the changing rules and regulations was pointed out to me by a concerned resident and I said I would look into it. The latest issue of the Mapleton Mobile-izer stated ‘Board policies and processes are part of the R&Rs’ and ‘They are in effect immediately.’ According to the lease I signed and have on file, ‘Rules may be modified by MHA by providing 60 days advance written notice.’ In addition, Colorado law also allows for 60 days notice, stating in part: ‘on sixty days’ written notice if the amended rules and regulations are reasonable.’

Will you be notifying residents that the new rules and regulations will not be in effect until March 20th, 60 days after the Mapleton Mobile-izer was posted on our street lamps?

Thanks you for your attention to this matter and your service.

Best of luck,
Mark


27.

From: Curtine Metcalf
Date: Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 10:11 AM
Subject: Response to your email about policies, etc.
To: Mark Reeder
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy, Josh Holleb

Hi Mark,

The Board agrees — it has a responsibility to bring the community together to solve problems and set goals.  We provide all the facts we have at the time to everyone, in an effort to be transparent and work together.  That, however, does not negate that we have legal responsibilities in how we carry out our decisions.  This is important for the entire MHA – residents and BOD.

The Board also agrees that residents have responsibilities. Among residents with special responsibilities are the founders who have been granted more trust, such as you.

The Board feels that the problems in the MHA are the result of unfortunate action on all sides, including the Board, and including the founders. The Board feels all parties need to confront and change their own poor behaviors.

The Board is making a greater effort to be more inclusive, such as starting from scratch with the bylaws and asking all residents to discuss and approve every provision.

The Board feels you, as a founder, have responsibilities as well. If you are serious about helping the Park come together and solve its problems, the Board would like to ask you to step up and do your part. Specifically:
1. Set aside a role of instructing residents in your views and asking them to adopt them. Instead,  encourage residents to think more for themselves even if it means disagreeing with you.
2. Set aside a role of fighting the Board on every issue you disagree with, and instead, lay down your positions-taking and work with the Board to understand and meet your interests, along with the many other interests that must be met at the same time.
3. Set aside a role of promoting long standing concepts and information that may be outdated or inaccurate. Instead, become the champion of asking all to get and use valid information — information from expert sources, and information that is not filtered through personal bias.

Hopefully this reflects some of our common ground and  a good place to work from, considering all things.

On behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


26.

Subject: As elected members representing our community, you
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 19:55:38 -0700 Mountain Time
From: Mark Reeder
Sent to: MHA Board
CC: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Josh Holleb, Sunny Shaughnessy, Curtine Metcalf

As elected members representing our community, you carry a responsibility to not only lead us as a community, but to bring us together as a community. Martin Luther King said, ‘a genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.’ In a community like Mapleton consensus translates into the community and its leadership setting goals and working together for a common purpose. So while the leadership must set the tone for civil discourse in setting goals and working for the common good, so must the community follow suit and reply in kind.

Achieving this takes listening as well as speaking. Listening is perhaps the most difficult thing we can do, especially when people are proposing ideas we don’t agree with or that frighten us. This is when we have to settle back and remember that listening to ideas is not evil; listening to a different POV is not in and of itself dangerous; listening is a courtesy we extend to others and which we ask others to do for us. Speaking has its own pitfalls and responsibilities. It does no good to shout angry rhetoric at others. When we speak let us extend the courtesy of honest talk without anger.

I ask this favor of the entire community – let us sit down and solve our problems together; let us set goals and work together toward a common purpose with light hearts and the knowledge we are all in this together. I ask this of the board – please, as our leaders, make the first step.


25.

From: Curtine Metcalf
Date: Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 7:47 PM
Subject: Response to your query of policies…
To: Mark Reeder
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy, Josh Holleb

Hi Mark,

The documents you reference do not apply to non-Board residents, so they are not held responsible for following them. They are only relevant to the Board. Residents are not penalized for not following the guidelines in those documents. For this reason, they are not posted to the MHA web site. If any resident wishes to see particular ones, they are free to request a copy from CPM.

Thank you,

On behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


24.

Subject: Re: Response to your email regarding R&Rs/copies to residents
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 18:01:18 -0700 Mountain Time
From: Mark Reeder
Sent to: Curtine Metcalf
CC: MHA Board

Curtine,

Thank you for the reply. It was indeed easy to find the Rules and Regulations as well as the Board’s Policies and Processes. I was concerned, however, with a list of agreements/processes that are in separate documents, which include such items as Running Elections, Board Code of Conduct, Communications Plan, etc. Is there a place on the Web site where these documents can be viewed now that they are a part of the Rules and Regulations?

Thank you for your service.

Best of luck,
Mark


23.

From: Curtine Metcalf
Date: Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 4:45 PM
Subject: Response to your email regarding R&Rs/copies to residents
To: Mark Reeder
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy, Josh Holleb

Hi Mark,

To provide residents with hard copies of all the rules and regulations and all the Board processes would result in over 4,000 pages of copies and cost the MHA over $500. The Board feels this is not a good use of money, especially because policies may be updated every few months.

Not all policies deal with resident issues, and the Board always distributes hard-copy notice to residents of any rules or policy changes that apply to them. Residents who don’t have computers receive these distributions. They can also request additional hard copies from CPM.

Below are the links to the information you asked about on the MHA site.

Current Rules and Regulations
http://www.mapletonboulder.com/2016/09/mha-rules-and-regulations/

Board Processes and Policies
http://www.mapletonboulder.com/2016/01/board-processes-and-decisions/

 

Hope this helps!

 

On behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf

Secretary/Mapleton Home Association

Former MHA Management Committee Member


22.

From: Mark Reeder
Date: Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: Response to your email to the BOD about R&Rs
To: Curtine Metcalf

Dear Board,

Thank you of the information. A couple of points. I went to the HA Web site and could not find the document containing the policies and processes you referenced. Could you please tell me how t find this document? Also, I noticed you did not answer the second question – whether the addition of the Board’s policies and processes will be appended to the Rules and Regulations and handed out to residents so that we will have either hard copies or emailed copies of the updated Rules and Regulations. This would be most helpful to residents who do not have Internet connection or do not read the Mapleton Mobile-izer. Also, it would be helpful to have the entire Rules and Regulations together in one document.

Thank you for your service.

Best of luck,
Mark


21.

Subject: Response to your email to the BOD about R&Rs
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:25:53 -0700 Mountain Time
From: Curtine Metcalf
Sent to: Mark Reeder
CC: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy,  Josh Holleb,  Race Cowgill

Dear Mark,

Since a year ago, all of the Board’s policies are gathered into one main document. This document has been on the MHA Web site for a year. Subsidiary policies are also on the MHA document and are clearly referenced.

The Board makes no policies in executive session.

The Board also advises residents of all policies through meeting minutes and the newsletter, which are hard-copied to all residents every month.

The Board follows the Bylaws, which says that a rule cannot be enforced against a resident unless the resident is notified of the rule.

The Board also follows Colorado law regarding this, through the counsel of the MHA attorney.

Thank you for your input.

On behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


20.

Subject: Mobile-izer Policies Announcement
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 10:40:46 -0700 Mountain Time
From: Mark Reeder
Sent to: bodMHA@gmail.com

Dear Board,

Thank you for all your hard work.  Per the January 2017 issue of the Mapleton Mobile-izer, which stated the Board’s Policies and Processes are now part of the Rules and Regulations, will the Board gather together all of its policies and processes, including ones made in executive session, into an easily accessible online document? Also, since these policies and processes are now part of the Rules and Regulations, will a new hard copy of the Rules and Regulations which include the Board’s policies and processes be distributed to residents of Mapleton Mobile Home Park so that residents will be able to comply with the Board’s policies and processes and therefore not run the risk of incurring fines and possible eviction from the Park through not knowing what those policies and processes are?  This will be most helpful for residents to work with the Board to make the Park the jewel of Boulder.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best of luck,
Mark Reeder


19.

MHA Directors’ Letter of 1/9/17

Bylaws: Think For Yourselves

  • If we keep doing things the same way, we will get the same results, and then complain about the results. The MHA has been doing this for many years.
  • In his recent newsletters, Mark Reeder instructs readers how to analyze the bylaws revision. Mark takes an interesting role – as the instructor of residents so that they adopt his views, rather than encouraging them to think for themselves. The Board strongly believes that this does not express an adequate belief in the residents to think for themselves.
  • The Board appreciates Mark’s efforts to assess these documents for residents. Mark’s method for analyzing the revisions is a good start, and at the same time, may not be enough.
  • Mark outlines four principles for assessing the bylaws, but he neglects to mention other critical principles, such as the bylaws must align with the law.
  • In addition, the four principles that Mark outlines are so broad, that they conflict with each other. They could be used to justify residents taking illegal action or the Board infringing on the constitutional rights of residents. As Mark applies them, they end up pointing to keeping the current bylaws just as they are, which is certainly not what the MHA’s attorney recommends.

Get Attorney’s Views First-Hand

  • Mark states what he apparently believes are the views of Jessica Miller, the MHA attorney, but Mark’s views of her views may not be accurate. It is more reliable to get Jessica’s views directly from her, rather than have them interpreted by Mark.
  • Mark’s interpretation of her views on particular bylaws provisions are not the views she has expressed to the Board. Mark may be unintentionally giving residents the impression that his views have been vetted and approved by the attorney, which certainly isn’t the case. Residents will have a chance to hear the attorney’s views directly, for themselves, in the coming months.

Mark’s Analysis May Be Incomplete and Inaccurate

  • Mark states his objections to new bylaws provisions, but he doesn’t present an analysis of the problems with the bylaws he helped write. This might appear to be a biased approach.
  • Mark’s critiques are inconsistent – he defends the statement of policy in the bylaws he wrote, but objects to it in the bylaws he criticizes. He objects to a provision that he mis-quotes in his critique.
  • The current bylaws have multiple problems, which is why the Board started an effort to revise them three years ago. The attorney will explain these in detail.
  • Mark identifies 48 problem areas with the bylaws proposed by the Bylaws Advisory Group, but he doesn’t mention an additional 75 problem areas.
  • Instructing residents in how to analyze the bylaws, using an approach that includes significant omissions and inaccuracies, may not be helping residents think for themselves, but may encourage them to agree with Mark and favor the problematic bylaws he wrote many years ago.

Five Months Later: Still No Document from the Bylaws Group

  • Five months ago, at the August 2016 Quarterly, the residents asked for information from the Bylaws Advisory Group. To date, despite several requests and providing the BAG additional resources, the BAG has not provided this information.
  • At the November Quarterly, the residents concluded that they want a clean set of new bylaws from the attorney, to compare. These are nearly complete.

Founding Principles Can Hold Us Back

  • Mark had a key role, along with others, in forming the Park. He is well intentioned, and at the same time, founders sometimes hold on too long to the past. Sometimes they want things to stay the same, even if they aren’t working that well. Sometimes, founders unintentionally present hurdles to making things better. Founders can be too close to the work they did, like the original bylaws.
  • The concepts Mark teaches to residents have pretty much ruled the Park since 1996. They have brought us here, for good and ill, and can probably not take us further. These concepts and positions probably can’t solve the problems they have helped create. We can’t solve our problems if we are unwilling to see how the old principles keep us stuck. Same approaches, same results.

New Approaches Can Protect Rights Better

  • The Board notes that there are new approaches that may protect residents’ rights better than the old concepts, that will allow the Association to make better decisions more quickly, reduce conflict, and that will improve residents’ lives more. New approaches, different results.
  • One of the patterns in the Park is that some residents base their opinions on information filtered by Mark and others, instead of getting information directly from the source. Mark sometimes provides reliable information, and sometimes it may not be complete or totally accurate.
  • The Board encourages Mark to focus on his interests and set aside his positions that, yes, brought us to a certain level, but probably can’t take the Association further.
  • The Board encourages residents to think for themselves and get information directly from sources rather than Mark.
  • And the Board encourages Mark to build residents’ confidence in their own critical thinking, rather than Mark simply telling them what to think.

The Board Is Collaborating

We, the Board, along with the MHA attorney, have worked very hard to continue to collaborate in all ways, with the Bylaws Advisory Group, and to answer residents’ questions, concerns and suggested solutions.

Come to Meetings and Think for Yourselves

Please, everyone come to meetings with the attorney to find out for yourselves, rather than basing your opinions on second-hand information.


18.
From: C Metcalf
Date: Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 7:24 PM
Subject: Response to your recent emails
To: Mark Reeder, Deb F
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughness, Josh Holleb, C Metcalf

Dear Mark,

Thank you for your recent emails.

This is in response to several of them:

1. Regarding your email of 10/24 (email #14 on the MHA web site) asking the Board to submit an article about how to make bylaws revision decision, how to educate residents, etc., the BOD has responded to your requests in a prior email (posted on MHA Web site as well).

The Board thanks you for your invitation. The Board has many communications going out to residents at this time — the Mobile-izer, the Directors’ Letter, recaps of emails with you and with the Bylaws Advisory Group, and direct emails to residents.

The Board is continuing to focus its efforts on the communications channels in place and noted above, and the respect of the request/consensus of the residents at the Sept 2016 Quarterly.

2. Regarding your email of 10/24 (emial #15 on the MHA web site), stating the deadline for your newsletter:

Please see the Board’s response, above.

3. Regarding your email of 10/24 (email #16 on the MHA web site), requesting an article from the Board of its proof why the Bylaws Advisory Group is not a “Board committee”.

The Board has provided the information to residents that you asked for, at a meeting in February 2015 with the MHA attorney, through several emails directly to residents, and through several pieces in the Mobile-izer.

The key laws relevant to this situation are not contained in the MHA Bylaws; quoting only MHA Bylaws will not give an accurate or full explanation/proof.

Again, the Board feels it is essential to respect residents’ wishes and follow this process, rather than backtrack and look for other approaches.

Thank you,

On Behalf of the MHA BOD,

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


17.
From: Mark Reeder
Date: Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:31 PM
Subject: Re: MHA Bylaws Committee Meeting Agenda for October 30, 2016
To: Deb F
Cc: Paul Keaton, Jo Morgan, Suman, Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Josh Holleb, Curtine Metcalf, Sunny Shaughnessy

Hi everyone,

Everything will be ready for the meeting. I look forward to hosting this accord at my house, #14.

Best of luck,
Mark


16.
Subject: Second Article for the MFP
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:41:47 -0600 Mountain Time
From: Mark Reeder
Sent to: Deb F, Curtine Metcalf, Paul Keaton, Isabel Sanchez, Jo Morgan, Josh Holleb, Suman, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy
CC: MHA Board

Hi everyone,

There is a lot of controversy over whether the Resident Advisory Group/Bylaws Committee is a committee or not. So far no one has actually proven one way or the other whether the Group/Committee is a committee or not. Statements such as ‘The lawyer says so’ or ‘The residents voted for us as a committee’ are not proof. These are simply opinions and do not have a force of law in our community.

So, I’m asking the Board and the Group/Committee to write articles showing why the Group/Committee is or is not a committee. As in all articles for the MFP, please make certain you stick to the facts, particularly, what happened at the November 2014 quarterly meeting and the MHA bylaws to prove your thesis. Please provide information for residents to understand why the Resident Advisory Group/Bylaws Committee is a committee or not.

Thank you for participating in educating the residents about issues facing them in the park and with the MHA.

Best of luck,
Mark Reeder
Editor MFP


15.
Subject: November Issue of the MFP
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:30:33 -0600 Mountain Time
From: Mark Reeder
Sent to: Deb F, Curtine Metcalf, Isabel Sanchez, Josh Holleb, Sunny Shaughnessy, Scott Goddard
CC: MHA Board, Paul Keaton, Jo Morgan, Suman

Hi everyone,

Sorry. Forgot to put a submission date on this. Please have your articles to the MFP by November 8.

Thanks,
Mark


14.
Subject: November MFP issue
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 13:45:51 -0600 Mountain Time
From: Mark Reeder
Sent to: Deb F, Curtine Metcalf , Isabel Sanchez, Josh Holleb, Sunny Shaughnessy, Scott Goddard
CC: MHA Board, Paul Keaton, Suman, Jo Morgan

Hi everyone,

The November issue of the MFP will highlight the bylaws revision process. The newsletter is asking the Bylaws Committee and the MHA Board to submit articles on the process and answer three questions:
1) What do residents need to know in order to make a good decision on revising the MHA Bylaws.
2) How do you propose to educate all residents on the bylaws?
3) How do you propose to submit revisions to all residents for their inspection before voting on them?

Looking forward to your responses.

Best of luck,
Mark
Editor of the MFP


13.

Subject: From the Board
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 07:47:05 -0600 Mountain Time
From: Kathy Lange
Sent to: All MHA residents who have email addresses on file with CPM

Dear residents of the MHA,

The Board supports the intention of the Mapleton Free Press to present full, objective, and accurate information. This is a difficult standard to meet, particularly when publishing information from residents who do not have full information or who do not present objective views. Articles labeled as editorials typically express personal opinion

The Board would like to help fulfill the MFP’s intention by providing some missing information and correcting other information.

The Bylaws Advisory Group is a group of residents interested in providing the MHA Board with information and ideas about updating the current Bylaws. The Group acts on their own and promotes their own views, not the views of the MHA Board or attorney or residents as a whole. The MHA Board didn’t form this Group and the Group isn’t part of the operations or governance of the MHA. The Group is not a Board committee. The Group’s recommendations are informational only. There is no obligation for residents or the Board to adopt their ideas. The Group’s views on bylaws may not reflect legal or practical reality.

At the Quarterly in September, 2016, the residents voiced how they would like to move forward in understanding and voting on Bylaws updates — by seeing the Bylaws Advisory Group’s bylaws and the Board’s proposed bylaws side by side. The Board emphasizes it is important to respect the residents’ wishes. Backtracking to a re-examination of the MHA’s governing structure is not what residents asked for and is not necessary, as confirmed by the MHA attorney in a meeting open to all residents in February of 2016.

Jessica Miller, the MHA attorney, praised the Bylaws Advisory Group’s bylaws for being thorough, and at the same time, noted multiple problems with them. The attorney’s comments are available on the MHA’s Web site (www.mapletonboulder.com) for the April 2015 meeting. [Click here for cited information –> April 2015 MHA Board of Directors Meeting Minutes ]

The Board did indeed respond to the MFP’s requests for information. These emails have now been distributed to all residents, so that residents can see for themselves. The Board also distributed to all residents an email outlining how the Board will fulfill the residents’ request to move forward with a side-by-side comparison.

The current MHA bylaws contain multiple provisions that increase the legal risk of the MHA, and produce other problems. These problems have been pointed out by the MHA attorney in April 2015 and February 2016. The current MHA bylaws are not legally sound and can not be supported.

Please come to the Quarterly on November 13, 2016, and get first hand information from the MHA attorney about these matters.

Isabel Sanchez
President, and on behalf of,
The MHA Board of Directors

 


12.

From: Mark Reeder
Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:03 PM
Subject: Re: Bylaws Advisory Group
To: Curtine Metcalf
Cc: Deb F, Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Josh Holleb, Sunny Shaughnessy, Paul Keaton, Jo Morgan

Curtine,

You’ll need to address your questions to the chair of the Bylaws Committee, Deb Feustal. She will be able to answer all of your questions since she continues as the chair of the Committee. As you may recall, I resigned from the Bylaws Committee in April 2015.

Best of luck,
Mark


11.
From: C Metcalf
Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:46 AM
Subject: Bylaws Advisory Group
To: Deb F, Mark Reeder
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Josh Holleb, Sunny Shaughnessy, C Metcalf, Paul Keaton, Jo Morgan

Dear Deb and Mark,

So that residents and the Board can know who is participating in the activities of the Bylaws Advisory Group, could you please send an email naming who the participants are in the Group? And could you also name who the Group has appointed as its official spokesperson?

Thank you for your transparency.

And on behalf of the MHA Board of Directors

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


10.
From: Mark Reeder
Subject: Mapleton Free Press
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 21:00:27 -0600
Cc: MHA Board
To: Curtine Metcalf

Curtine,

If the MHA BOD would like to have a copy of the MFP, let me know and I’ll send one to you. We’ll be publishing in a couple of days. There’s still time for the BOD to get its article on their vision for the bylaws into the next edition.

Best of luck,
Mark


9.
From: Mark Reeder
Date: Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 9:26 AM
Subject: Mapleton Free Press Article
To: MHA Board
Cc: Curtine Metcalf, Isabel Sanchez, Josh Holleb, Scott Goddard, Sunny Shaughnessy

Dear Board,

I am writing to ask if you will be submitting an article to the MFP on the Board’s vision for the Bylaws, the MHA and the Park. The Bylaws Committee will be submitting their own article and the MFP would like to present a balanced view for residents so they will be better informed about the issues facing the MHA and the Park. Please let me know ASAP if you will be submitting an article as I plan to publish by the 15 or 16 of October. Please note the MFP’s Mission Statement: “The MFP is an independent, resident-run newsletter for the objective discussion of issues and news in our community. The MFP is unaffiliated with the BOD of the MHA and any of its committees. The MFP welcomes different viewpoints and will print letters and articles submitted by residents who follow these criteria: factual and unbiased. The MFP will not print letters or articles that defame or degrade others within our community.”

Please submit the article to this email address since I no longer have an MHA email address. The last article sent to me by Isabel must have been sent to that address because I never received it. If the Board declines to write an article, then I will let readers know that you were contacted but declined the MFP’s offer to let you share your views in the newsletter.

Best of luck,
Mark


8.
From: Mark Reeder
Date: Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: Hi Mark! Update on MFP and “education of residents”
To: Curtine Metcalf, Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Josh Holleb, Sunny Shaughnessy

Curtine and the Board,

Thank you for making the effort to include residents in problem solving issues for the Park and the MHA. Residents feel that they have not been given the complete picture about the Bylaws revisions and look forward to a more balanced review of the MHA Bylaws in the coming months. Please make the effort to get all of your facts in order so that you do not send out misinformation to residents about the MHA Bylaws, the process of revising the Bylaws, and other issues facing the MHA and the Park. The residents have asked that the Board present full, objective and accurate information so that the residents will not be misinformed with one-sided and manipulative information.

Over the next few months, residents will be discussing information provided by the MHA lawyer, the Board, the Board’s consultant, and the Bylaws Advisory group, so it is vital that the Board provide complete information on every part of the process. For example:

1) Residents should know what type of corporate governances are available for them to choose and what are the parameters for choosing the type of corporate governance that is best for the MHA and the Park.

2) The Bylaws, according to the MHA lawyer, have to be in accord with Colorado law, Federal Law and the documents which were part of the sale of the Park from the City of Boulder to Thistle Communities. Residents should know what these documents contain so they understand why the Bylaws need to be crafted in a particular way.

3) The MHA lawyer stated that the bylaws should not contain policy, though it is not against the law to have policy in the bylaws.

Also, please keep in mind that some residents have asked for more than a simple side-by-side comparison of the Bylaws Advisory Group’s revisions and the Board’s revisions. They have also requested substantive discussions between the two groups. Indeed, in my opinion the MHA Bylaws issue could have been resolved by now if the Board had only listened to the residents at the November 2014 Quarterly meeting when they voted to form a committee to help the Board with this issue. The Board, in addition to asking volunteers to sit on the committee, could have appointed a Board member to chair the committee to give it guidance. Our Corporation would be $16,000 richer and and would have had complete buy-in from the residents on this matter.

Best of luck,
Mark


7.
From: C Metcalf
Date: Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 6:30 PM
Subject: Hi Mark! Update on MFP and “education of residents”
To: Mark Reeder
Cc: Isabel Sanchez, Scott Goddard, Josh Holleb,  Sunny Shaughnessy, C Metcalf

Dear Mark,

Thank you for making an effort to try to educate residents about the issues, and for giving the Board an opportunity to offer important information.

The Board feels that many residents are confused about the bylaws because they receive conflicting information. Over the years, inaccurate information has sometimes become embedded in the minds of many residents, so that it becomes truth, when in fact it is not.

The Board asks that you please help solve this problem by finding and presenting full, objective, and accurate information for your articles, so that the articles won’t be perceived as being misinformed, one sided, or manipulative.

There seems to be little accurate information in the Park about the legalities involved in the bylaws, so the Board encourages you to consult someone with a law degree and bar exam certification, in this field, to guide you in presenting an accurate depiction of the legal issues involved.

Please keep in mind that sending your newsletter via email to residents who have not asked for it is out of alignment with the Parks’ new email rule, even if you send them one at a time, and can result in a fine.

Thank you for helping bring the Park into a more informed state, in a fair and resident approved manner, as discussed at the Quarterly.

Thank you, Mark,

Curtine Metcalf
On behalf of the MHA Board of Directors

Curtine Metcalf
Secretary/Mapleton Home Association
Former MHA Management Committee Member


6.
From: Mark Reeder
Date: Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:15 AM
Subject: Mapleton Free Press
To: Isabel Sanchez, Josh Holleb, Sunny Shaughnessy, Curtine Metcalf, Scott Goddard

Would any of you be interested in penning a few lines for the Mapleton Free Press October Issue. I thought I would commend the MHA Board for including the membership in its deliberations about the Bylaws and provide some background educational material for everyone. If you are able to, please get the article/letter to me by October tenth. I plan on publishing the Newsletter a few days later.

Best of luck,
Mark


5.
From: Mark Reeder
Date: September 18, 2016 at 7:18:41 AM MDT
To: Isabel Sanchez
Subject: Mapleton Free Press Issue

Hi,

You have received this email because you are in my email database of friends and acquaintances in Mapleton Mobile Home Park who I correspond with on occasion. If you’re wondering about the opening to this email,  I am writing it because the recent rule adopted by the Board of Directors on email makes it against the rules for two or more people to correspond simultaneously about MHA issues, since it could be considered ‘unsolicited bulk email’. So I am letting you know this is an individual email I am sending you about the upcoming MHA Quarterly meeting and the email contains a PDF of the September issue of the Mapleton Free Press. If in the future would you not like to correspond with me, please reply to this email address and I will remove your name from my email address book.

With that aside, please find attached as a PDF the September issue of the Mapleton Free Press. The MFP is an independent, resident-run newsletter for the objective discussion of issues and news in our community. The MFP is unaffiliated with the BOD of the MHA and any of its committees. The MFP welcomes different viewpoints and will print letters and articles submitted by residents who follow these criteria: factual and unbiased. The MFP will not print letters or articles that defame or degrade others within our community, or wish to solicit votes for a particular issue facing the Park or the MHA. The sole purpose of the MFP is to provide a forum to help residents understand the Park and MHA issues.

The September newsletter of the MFP is devoted to the issue of membership rights and the right of the Board of Directors to govern the corporation. Park resident and MHA member Paul Keaton has written an article speaking for the rights of the MHA members. The MHA Board of Directors was contacted to write an article concerning the Board’s responsibility and right to govern the corporation, however, the Board declined to respond. The MFP supports no position in this debate.

You are free to share this email with your Park friends and fellow MHA members.

Best of luck,
Mark Reeder, editor MFP


4.
From: Isabel Sanchez
Date: Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 9:42 AM
To: Mark Reeder
Subject: Petition to amend MHA Bylaws denied

Dear Mark,

Thank you for making an effort to try to educate residents about the issues, and for giving the Board an opportunity to offer important information.

A point that Jessica made in the meeting on 4/29/16 is that one statute does not express all of the laws that apply. The statute of the 10% doesn’t express many other laws that are  relevant to the situation.

If an amendment that 10% of residents call for a vote on is approved, and it is later found to be legally flawed, and then a resident is harmed by it and sues the Board, the Board’s liability insurance may not cover it, especially if the Board knew ahead of time that the amendment was flawed and allowed the vote anyway.

Residents are not held responsible for what the bylaws say, but the Board is. This is why any amendment presented for a vote must be assessed by the MHA’s attorney before it can be voted on.

At the meeting on 4/29/15, Jessica explained in detail the multiple ways that the Bylaws Advisory Group’s bylaws are not legally sound. The minutes from that meeting enumerate many of the points she made, including that the Group’s bylaws increase the MHA Board’s liability, don’t uphold the law’s standard that there be a single final authority for organization decisions, are too complex and convoluted to be practical, etc.

The Board encourages you to conduct a credible investigation by finding and presenting full, objective, and accurate information for your article, so that the piece won’t be perceived as being amateurish, misinformed, one sided, or manipulative. The Board encourages you to consult someone with a law degree and bar exam certification, to guide you in presenting an accurate depiction of the legal issues involved.

Over the years, misinformation has sometimes become embedded in the minds of many residents, so that it becomes truth, when in fact it is myth. The Board asks that you please not perpetuate this problem.

Please keep in mind that sending your newsletter via email to residents who have not asked for it is out of alignment with the Parks’ new email rule, and can result in a fine.

Thank you for helping bring the Park into a more informed state.

Isabel Sanchez
On behalf of the MHA Board of Directors


3.
From: Mark Reeder
Date: September 10, 2016 at 7:10:15 PM MDT
To: Paul, Isabel Sanchez, Curtine Metcalf, Scott Goddard, Josh Holleb, Sunny Shaughnessy
Subject: Petition to amend MHA Bylaws denied

Paul, Isabel, Curtine, Scott, Josh, Sunny

I plan on sending out another Mapleton Free Press newsletter presenting both sides of the petition issue discussed in the agenda for the September 18, 2016 MHA Quarterly Meeting. This is an important issue that goes to MHA member rights and the MHA Board of Director’s rights.  I will present both sides of the issue so that residents can be fully informed and would like to give all of you a chance to state your views on this matter. I do have guidelines for the MFP Newsletter as follows: ‘The MFP welcomes different viewpoints and will print letters and articles submitted by residents who follow these criteria: factual and unbiased. The MFP will not print letters or articles that defame or degrade others within our community, or wish to solicit votes for a particular issue facing the Park or the MHA.’

If you do not wish to respond, then I will state that I contacted you via email and you declined to respond. My deadline is Wednesday, September 14th 2016. Thank you for your cooperation in clearing up this matter for residents and MHA members.

My investigation will focus on the following three points:
1.  Colorado Statutes: 7-130-103. Amendment of articles of incorporation by board of directors and members. (1) Unless articles 121 to 137 of this title, the articles of incorporation, the bylaws, or the members or the board of directors acting pursuant to subsection (5) of this section require a different vote or voting by class, the board of directors or the members representing at least ten percent of all of the votes entitled to be cast on the amendment may propose an amendment to the articles of incorporation for submission to the members.

2. The MHA Bylaws.  ARTICLE X– AMENDMENT PROCEDURE Amendments to the By-laws may be proposed by any member of The ASSOCIATION.  and ARTICLE VIII– EXECUTIVE BOARD AND OFFICERS Section 2. Powers and Duties: The Board has all the powers and duties necessary for the administration of the affairs of The ASSOCIATION within the laws of the United States, the state of Colorado, and these By-Laws.

3. The minutes from the April 29, 2015 BOD Meeting show the attorney has reviewed the Bylaws of the Bylaws Advisory Group. The meeting minutes of the April 2015 BOD meeting state “The attorney reviewed the Bylaws Advisory group’s Bylaws.”

I look forward to your reply.

Best of luck,
Mark Reeder


2.
From: Mark Reeder
To: Scott Goddard
CC: Curtine Metcalf, Sunny Shaughnessy, Isabel Sanchez, Josh Holleb, Kathy Lange, Race Cowgill
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 13:27:36 -0600 Mountain
Subject: Re: Your Newsletter

Scott,

I was at the meetings referenced in your email, and never were the alternative forms of governance directly addressed, except to say they weren’t possible, which is inaccurate. Moreover, the Board  has never asked the residents what it is they want to have as their model for governance. Since the MHA states in its mission statement it is a democratic run organization, it is putting the cart before the horse to change the details of the bylaws before there is education of the residents on the forms of governance available so that we can decide objectively what form best suits our corporation and the mobile home park.

As for the confusion over the newsletter, in the future, I will have people write to me using my other email address. However, the newsletter very clearly states under the title: ‘An independent, resident-run newsletter for the objective discussion of issues and news in our community. The MFP is unaffiliated with the BOD of the MHA and any of its committees.’

As for working with the Board, I will gladly do so to help educate the community on this issue.

Finally, would you please point out the inaccuracies to me in the newsletter.

Best of luck,
Mark


1.
From: Scott Goddard
Date: Fri., Jul 29, 2016, at 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: Your Newsletter
To: Mark Reeder
CC: Curtine Metcalf, Sunny Shaughnessy, Isabel Sanchez, Josh Holleb, Kathy Lange, Race Cowgill

Dear Mark,

Thank you for passing along a copy of your newsletter. We are grateful for the opportunity to give you feedback before publication.

We read it through during our meeting on Monday (July 25),  and we appreciate your desire to educate residents about the different forms of governance available to the MHA  community.

In our discussions on your newsletter, however, it was pointed out that it contains multiple inaccuracies as far as what Colorado law requires of nonprofit corporations. The relevant principles of Colorado’s nonprofit statutes were explained by the MHA attorney in the Board training sessions in September and October of last year, as well as in the February 2016 workshop with residents. At that time, the attorney directly answered the questions you raise and spoke clearly about the issue of re-examining the governance model of the MHA. From a legal perspective, our current governance model is the best system we can have.

We are also concerned that distributing an  information piece and calling it a newsletter may mislead residents into thinking that the information you are providing is coming from the MHA Board and attorney. Using your MHA email address, rather than your personal email address, can create further confusion.

We believe that residents would be better served to have more accurate information about these matters, and that this information should come directly from the attorney and/or the Board. Would you consider working more closely with the Board in putting another meeting like this together in order to further educate the community?

Let’s connect and see what we can work out to move forward on this. And thank you for your efforts.

Scott Goddard
Vice President
The MHA Board of Directors