January 28, 2007

From: Chuckster
Date: 1/28/2007 9:52:26 PM
To: Gene Richards; Harold L Harkins Jr
Subject: Informing all board members of actions
President Richards,
According to the bylaws (old & new) and Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised, an election to office becomes final immediately. So Rob Mills and myself are active members of the board . If you are signing letters to attorney Harkins on behalf of the board, you should be confering with us not the former vice president or former director. Until someone can prove the election was illegal it is deamed legal and Rob and I are official members. I ask you at the meeting what the procedures are for taking office and I trusted you to give me the correct information, which you did not. We do not take office on the First of February or at the next meeting. According to the rules we did take office IMMEDIATELY. Just as you did last year at the annual meeting. I am sending a copy of this to Mr Harkins for verification. This being correct the board was not completely informed of your actions. Rob Mills and I are members of the board until someone can prove it was an illegal election. James Sikes and Ann Hendricks can not vote on board matters. It is on the tapes and in the minutes. Lets hear from Mr. Harkins.
Chuck Premorel

January 28, 2007

From: Don Buchan
Date: 1/28/2007 9:29:44 AM
To: Chuckster Premorel; Masaryktown News
Subject: Masaryktown Community Center Annual Meeting/Election of Officers
Chuck, here is a copy of the e-mail I sent Mr Harold Harkins. You may post this on the Masaryktown news site.
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Buchan
To: harold@harkinsoffice.com
Sent: 1/27/2007 4:12:16 PM
Subject: Masaryktown Community Center Annual Meeting/Election of Officers
Dear Mr. Harkins,
I'm writing in response to your letter addressed to Mr. Gene Richards, dated January 23, 2007. I am a member of the MCC, Inc. as is my wife Sharon, and my Mother. We did attend the annual meeting on January 21st. 2007. I feel you may not have been given all the information of what took place at this Annual meeting, nor the events leading up to it. For two, possibly three weeks prior to the January 21st meeting I was informed by my wife Sharon, who volunteers to work bingo on Wednesday nights, that Sheila Hart, one of our Board of Directors, was soliciting members at bingo games to fill out "Proxy" votes, which were then given to Sheila. None of the votes seen being given to Sheila Hart were sealed. They were simply put into a manila folder, similar to the one used for the upcoming Marathon Bingo Games.
Approximately one week prior to the Annual meeting, I received a Notice of Annual Meeting, post marked 12 January 2007. In this Notice were listed the two Board of Directors positions that were up for vote (Vice President and Director). Also listing those candidates who were running for those positions. In addition, The Notice also stated, " Members can vote by proxy. Forms are available at the Post Office or at the Community center, or a written submission will be accepted. All proxy submissions should be enclosed in an envelope, with the member's name and signature for verification from their Membership Application. Any proxy submitted without a signature, or one that is not legible for verification purposes, will not be accepted". Signed Linda S. Lovelady, Secretary.
President Richards set the agenda for the meeting by announcing the vote for Vice President and Director positions would go first, followed by a discussion and vote on the proposed Bylaws. Just prior to the vote on Vice President, I was recognized by President Richards. I posed the following question: When did the Board vote on excepting proxy votes, and could I see the Minutes of that meeting? That it was my belief that proxy votes were being addressed in the new proposed Bylaws, but had not yet been voted on. So, therefor should we go by the current Articles and Bylaws, which state, You must be present to vote? President Richards then had a discussion with other Board members and the Secretary, who searched for that information. President Richards then read the Bylaws, openly stating you must be present to vote. President Richards then said " The proxy votes will not be counted" There was some discussion to except the four proxy votes signed by members who were present, but had to leave do to tripping out front, and had to be looked at. It was decided to accept those four votes only, because they were physically present at the meeting and signed in at the door. Discussion then took place to decide whether to delay the vote or to vote today. Jane Cole then made a motion to put it to a vote of the members present, whether to delay voting or vote today. A vote of the members was then conducted by President Richards, who then announced the vote will be done today. It is my opinion, that those present did constitute a quorum and did in fact hold a properly conducted meeting, where discussion, and decisions were made, and voted on. If the President or Board had decided to except all of the proxy votes there would have been other objections filed. To include: How those proxy votes were not mailed to each member. That not all members go to bingo or the post office. That the Post Office closes at 1 PM. and that the community center is only open for bingo on Wed. and Saturdays. Also How those proxy votes were solicited by a Board Member at Bingo. Which at the least is unethical, if not illegal. Plus, that some members were actually telling other members that if they did not vote for certain people that there would be NO BINGO. In addition, I and several other members witnessed, prior to the meeting being called to order, several members literally paging through the proxy votes, without any supervision of the Board or the Secretary. Access to the proxy votes were in the open for anyone to handle prior to the decision to eliminate them by President Richards. I and other members have been told by the Board, at numerous meetings that you represent all the members and the Board of Directors. A question that comes to mind, after all that has taken place over the past several years is, If this action between the Board of Directors and the Members would go to court or before a Judge, Who would you be representing?
Don Buchan

January 26, 2007

From: Chuck Premorel
Date: 1/26/2007 11:16:00PM
To: Harold Harkins
Subject: Letter
Mr Harkins,
Who contacted you? (Point of order) Are you representing Mr. Richards, the Board of directors, the members, or everybody involved? I am a member and I was declared the winner of the vice president position. I was not informed you were going to be contacted. Do you represent the candidates or should I have my attorney contact you? At the Feb. meeting of 2006 President Gene Richards stated that the board would follow the Roberts Rules of order Newly Revised. Below are pages from the book. The so called proxy votes they want to count were obtained without the proper procedures or paperwork. I was under the impression the votes were to be accompanied by a letter or a power of attorney. Also is it legal to solicit for votes at a bingo game? Votes were being solicited at the bingo game before the membership received the information in the mail. The bingo game is were several of the so called Proxy votes came from, and can a board member be the power of attorney for more than one voter at a time? or at all? Alot of questions have surfaced because people from outside our community were upset with the outcome of the election. Why are they so upset? I thought I have good ideas for the improvement of the center? Why don't they want somebody new on the board? I don't believe you have all the facts.
Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised Pages 414, 415, 409
William Premorel

January 26, 2007

From: Harold L Harkins Jr
Date: 1/26/2007 11:07:55 PM
To: Masaryktown News
Subject: Letter re Annual Meeting 07.01
I'm attaching my letter regarding the annual meeting which you may
post on the web site.
Harold
Harold L. Harkins, Jr.
Attorney at Law
2803 W Busch Blvd # 112
Tampa FL 33618-4517
813-933-7144 Fax 813-933-6393

January 26, 2007

Harold L. Harkins, Jr.
2803 W. Busch Blvd., Suite 112 Attorney at Law & Personal Trustee P.O. Box 274121
Tampa, Florida 33618-4517 813 / 933-7144 v Fax 813 / 933-6393 Tampa, Florida 33688-4121
Sharon Scarinci Adria Beenhakker Dickey Bill Rogers
Office Manager Attorney at Law George E. Fahrenkopf
Alder Allensworth Patsy L. Aaron
Administrative Assistant Administrative Assistants
January 23, 2007
Mr. Gene Richards, President
Marasyktown Community Center, Inc.
PO Box 9280
Masaryktown FL 34604
Dear Mr. Richards:
I’m writing to clarify the legal issues arising from your recent annual membership meeting. I understand the meeting got off to a bumpy start with a challenge by a member to the proxies and the provision in your bylaws regarding a quorum. As I understand it, that challenge was that proxies should not count toward a quorum because that provision in your bylaws says “[At] any meeting of the members, the registered voting members present shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, and unless otherwise required by the Articles of Incorporation or in these Bylaws, a majority thereof shall be sufficient to take an action appropriate for such a meeting.”; and that members represented by proxies were not “present” and should not count toward a quorum or apparently be allowed to cast a vote on issues before the meeting. That interpretation unfortunately reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature and purpose of a proxy. My law dictionary gives two definitions for proxy: 1) a person who is given authority to act for another; and 2) the actual document used to grant this authority to act for another person. Using the term in both senses, proxies are commonly used to allow the shareholders of corporations to cast their vote at the annual corporate meeting. The whole point of the proxy is to give a person who will be physically present at a meeting the authority to cast the votes of shareholders who cannot be physically present at that meeting. Any of your members who own stocks will no doubt be familiar with proxy voting for the election of directors and other corporate matters in the stock corporations they own. Proxy forms usually grant to the proxy (person) the authority to vote as they think best on issues that arise at a meeting, but a subset of proxy documents sometimes referred to as an absentee ballot allows a member or shareholder who is unable to attend a meeting to give the proxy authority to vote his or her shares, but in a specific manner designated in the proxy/absentee ballot. A member or shareholder who gives a proxy is considered to be physically present at the meeting by virtue of the proxy and in fact the language of a standard proxy document typically says something like “The undersigned member appoints [the proxy] to vote as my proxy at the meeting … and to act on my behalf as fully as I could if I were personally present.” So, legally all those persons who submitted proxy or absentee ballots are deemed to be physically present at the meeting; and have given their proxy person the authority to cast their votes just as if they were actually physically present at the meeting. A quorum, by the way, is simply the number of members of an organization who must be present, in person or by proxy, in order for the organization to transact business, that is to take formal action such  January 23, 2007Mr. Gene Richards / Masaryktown Community Center, Inc. Page 2 as voting on and approving or rejecting motions and resolutions. A quorum sometimes requires at least half the members of the organization to be present but more often simply stipulates, as your bylaws do, that whatever number of members who show up constitute a quorum. But in either case, all members who have signed a broad general proxy or a more limited absentee ballot are counted as being physically present. Some of your members may wonder that there is nothing in your bylaws or articles of incorporation about proxies. Unless the bylaws or articles specifically address proxies, Florida Statutes § 617.0721 provides that any member entitled to vote in person may also vote by a written proxy. So the Center has good authority under state law to honor written proxies. Having cleared up these points, it is my opinion, under the provisions of the Florida Statutes and the Center’s articles of incorporation and bylaws that the members who submitted their votes by proxy are entitled to be counted as present at the meeting and their votes are entitled to be counted in the election of officers and directors of the Center and any other matters which came before the meeting. I suggest that you share this opinion letter with your members and that you authorize me to submit it electronically (as a pdf file) to the community web site so that all interested parties with internet access can read it.
Sincerely,
/s/ Harold L. Harkins, Jr.


January 23, 2007

From: Ronald L Hollar
Date: 01/23/07 20:23:36
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Cc: harold@harkinsoffice.com; loweangel3372@yahoo.com; lovelady@atlantic.net; sheila1553@aol.com
Mr Dodson,
If you had taken the time to first of all read my letters you would see that the outcome was not my concern but the process itself. You continue to quote Roberts Rules but fail to remember that they are there simply as a guideline for the Board to use.
As the President, my father as you so clearly put it, stated: We will run the meetings as per Robert's Rules allowing each member 3 mins to speak after recognized by the board. He never said that we will follow the Roberts Rules in it entirety. I am not sure why you are making reference to "stuffing the ballot box" and to whom you make that reference towards. Each board member did as they agreed on doing & even stated they can be done at the Post Office. Seems to me though, that is exactly what happened at the annual meeting when the ballots/proxy's were not accepted. Clearly the board had their agenda but so did others. As to your signature reference, please take another look at the note sent in apology. I asked the editor not to print the first one sent in error due to my own mistakes of not canceling my spell check prior to sending. You are a smart man and I don't have issues with you personally or anyone else. Simply stating my opinion. I have work along side you during the Halloween event and Christmas event and enjoyed every minute of it. I even look forward to new events and improved events as you stated you are working on.
James A Richards

January 22, 2007

From: Larry
Date: 1/23/2007 10:08:34 AM
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Subject: Roberts Rules
Mr. Richards,
In response to your follow-up correspondence;
1. Motions are NOT Limited to Members Of The Board- Ref: Roberts Rules.
2. Motions are acted upon in the Order they are Received - Ref: Roberts Rules.
3. No question every Member has a right to vote, however, only as the Bylaws in force allow.
4. There were NO, NONE, NADA... Proxy's on behalf of any Member received by the Secretary. Ref: Roberts Rules, or Fl.State Statue 617.
5. NO PROVISIONS WITHIN THE BYLAWS ALLOWED FOR THE USE OF EITHER A PROXY OR ABSENTE BALLOT.
It appears to this Writer that your only true complaint is that you are dissatisftied with the Elections outcome, and the manner to which certain representations of the voting process as made to some members.
When the Original Bylaw governing the election process was instituted, it was done so to prevent any one person, or group , from having a unfair voting advantage over another.
An example of their logic would be: one or more members, or Board Members, that would have an unfair access ahead of time to the members voting list, thusly allowing them to hand deliver a Absentee Ballot and exerting undo influence in the members choice of candidate in an attempt to "Stuff the Ballot Box" and influence the Organizations election outcome.
Respectfully,Larry (DoDo's) Dodson

January 22, 2007

From: Guy & Dian
Date: 1/23/2007 1:18:18 AM
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Subject: In reply
Hello,
Regarding the replys to Mr. Richards letter:
I believed the four votes counted as "Proxy" were given to the board just prior the vote.
I had witnessed the women who had fallen and did get up, sign in with her friend and they did vote before leaving.
I was under the impression that these four votes were given just prior to our meeting and vote that day. I was chosen by one of the candidates running to view the count in his behalf, Linda Lovelady was present from our board as those votes were entered, maybe she could shed some light on the origin and acceptance of those four ballots. I was under the impression these voters did sign in but were unable to stay. Maybe we should find out the nature of these votes before we continue to assume they were not properly cast.
Regarding Mr. Richards response to me personally, I have never insinuated to" know you personally, who you are or where you come from" If I have misjudged you as a dedicated and intellegent member of our community, please accept my apology. I am looking forward to a positve productive year for our community all working together.
Dian M. Stokey

January 22, 2007

From: Ronald L Hollar
Date: 1/22/2007 10:02:17 PM
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Cc: harold@harkinsoffice.com; loweangel3372@yahoo.com; lovelady@atlantic.net; sheila1553@aol.com
Subject: Fw: In response to Mr Dodo's observations
Mr Editor,
Please forgive the errors in the spelling of Mr. Dodson's name and not print the first version of my response to him. I have an automatic spell check on my computer & when I sent this I left the room to go outside and smoke. Not realizing the name was changed when it went out. I have corrected them below & send my sincere appology for this error.
Thank You,
James Richards
rhjrdfw@juno.com>
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Cc: harold@harkinsoffice.com,loweangel3372@yahoo.com, lovelady@atlantic.net,sheila1553@aol.com
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:31:32 -0500
Subject: In response to Mr Dodson's observations
In response to your observations, Mr Dodson, you state that there was a motion on the floor that was identified by the Chairman. I am not sure of the exact wording but I do believe that Members of the Board are the only ones who can make a motion and second it. I ask that you show me where in writing, if you have it, where it states that a general member can do this. I do recall hearing the Secretary make a motion to table the vote & a second come from 2 of the Directors. Is this the motion your are referencing? If not then I am not sure what motion you make reference. Even if the motion, you say I reference, was made out of order it two was second by a board member & therefore should have been discussed (which it wasn't) and voted on by the board.
You are right in saying I was in attendance at last years meeting. Unfortunately, I have not had the opportunity to live within the boundaries, as described, for more that 30 years as you have, but I am still entitled to my opinion. I am still entitled as a card carrying member to be heard and I am still entitled, as were the other uncounted members, the right to vote. I do remember discussion at last years annual meeting on the issue of proxy/absentee vote since members of the community were concerned with those homebound or hospitalized. There were other discussions on this at adtl meetings during the year as well, which I believe, you were not in attendance of. In any case not everyone was in attendance at every meeting including myself but this does not make it right to take away something from a member that was given to them and then told in writing how to use that right.
I too agree, when you say, "It takes a Right and Justice person" to acknowledge their mistakes. It needs be done again. Using mistakes to correct mistakes does not make it right or lawful.
If I am wrong in some of my observations, then I will stand corrected. But if you truly believe that the adtl card carrying members that were advised in writing that they did not have to attend this meeting will roll over and play dead, You're sadly mistaken.
James A Richards

January 22, 2007

From: Ronald L Hollar
Date: 1/22/2007 9:19:51 PM
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Cc: harold@harkinsoffice.com; loweangel3372@yahoo.com; lovelady@atlantic.net; sheila1553@aol.com
Subject: In response to Mr Dodo's observations
In response to your observations, Mr Dodo's, you state that there was a motion on the floor that was identified by the Chairman. I am not sure of the exact wording but I do believe that Members of the Board are the only ones who can make a motion and second it. I ask that you show me where in writing, if you have it, where it states that a general member can do this. I do recall hearing the Secretary make a motion to table the vote & a second come from 2 of the Directors. Is this the motion your are referencing? If not then I am not sure what motion you make reference. Even if the motion, you say I reference, was made out of order it two was second by a board member & therefore should have been discussed (which it wasn't) and voted on by the board.
You are right in saying I was in attendance at last years meeting. Unfortunately, I have not had the opportunity to live within the boundaries, as described, for more that 30 years as you have, but I am still entitled to my opinion. I am still entitled as a card carrying member to be heard and I am still entitled, as were the other uncounted members, the right to vote. I do remember discussion at last years annual meeting on the issue of proxy/absentee vote since members of the community were concerned with those homebound or hospitalized. There were other discussions on this at adtl meetings during the year as well, which I believe, you were not in attendance of. In any case not everyone was in attendance at every meeting including myself but this does not make it right to take away something from a member that was given to them and then told in writing how to use that right.
I too agree, when you say, "It takes a Right and Justice person" to acknowledge their mistakes. It needs be done again. Using mistakes to correct mistakes does not make it right or lawful.
If I am wrong in some of my observations, then I will stand corrected. But if you truly believe that the adtl card carrying members that were advised in writing that they did not have to attend this meeting will roll over and play dead, You're sadly mistaken.
James A Richards

January 22, 2007

From: Ronald L Hollar
Date: 01/22/07 18:03:10
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Cc: sheila1553@aol.com; lovelady@atlantic.net; loweangel3372@yahoo.com; harold@harkinsoffice.com
Subject: Respectfully Responding
Hello,
First of all, let me thank those who responded to my letter. I was hoping it would generate interest and it did rather quickly.
Given a moment, I would like to respond to the letters addressed to "My Opinion".
I want all who reads this to know that I have no issues with who is placed in the positions of office. That is not my concern and if you knew me or even heard me at any of the meeting you would know this by now. The Board members have always been trying to correct their wrongs & make good for the community & I suspect that anyone that takes interest in those positions would take the same stand. So, don't get me wrong in stating or implying that I have problems with who takes any position of office. I DON'T.
Also, I am glad that people are gaining confidence in the board & believe they will do the right thing. I too feel this way & hope the board will do right by all members, present or not.
The first letter sent was my view & opinion of the meeting that took place. I was told that the editor would print anything signed & glad he did. If you agree, disagree, understand or simply dislike my opinion is not a concern. We are all entitled to that & this was mine. I stand by it.
In response to Mrs Stokey: It's not up to you, personally, to understand my opinion or know who I am or where I come from. I haven't understood many of the members for some time now, but always kept it to myself. (My fault for that.) You state it was incorrect to accept the proxy votes yet 4 of them were counted. How can you then consider this a fair & legal vote when there was picking & choosing of what to count. You cannot say no proxy's, then count some. I too understand mistakes were made. However, adtl mistakes were made in attempt to correct them. You read my words but misunderstood them. I stated "a select group" meaning the 70 plus people in attendance. We all had a hand in wronging those who were told they could vote this way. Never once did I point fingers at any one particular person.
In response to Mrs Simpson-Premorel, "Bylaws have to be followed each & every time." When convenient to who? Nothing legal or proper was done. We made the mistakes but used mistakes to fix it. You too are saying proxy's are not acceptable but are ok with the 4 that were counted. Why? I question that, because none of the members present signed their votes. X's and checkmarks were used. How does that make any of them legal? Just because you signed in as a present member? If you counted 4 proxy's that were signed on the day of voting, you should have counted the rest. The were submitted no different than the 4 only not on day of meeting. You are adding statements about Bylaws & Roberts Rules as a point of reference, but have we followed them all the time even as members. No! Not even this annual meeting. Since when can a general member make a motion on something and demand action on it? Even a board member that can make motions was ignored during this meeting.
Lastly I will end by saying for the past year I have listened to demands for corrections on issues & problems to be done. These were brought up by many members & demanded immediate response. The board has continued to respond with "We need time to fix things. It will not happen over night." The only thing I am concerned with is (Issue of Voting) was not allowed the time it deserved. People were promised a vote (in writing) and then it was taken from them without any notice . You ask that we all see this as a positive direction, then we need to make it a positive one. That much I do agree with. But, this is not starting out positive in my opinion regardless of who is sitting on that board.
James A Richards

January 22, 2007

From: Larry
Date: 1/22/2007 5:37:20 PM
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Subject: Annual Meeting / Richards
Mr Editor,
In response to Mr. Richards letter regarding his Point Of View of the Annual Meeting, I would like to attest to a few observations of my own. The Board Of Directors followed the "Letter Of The Law" as outlined by the Governing Authority, aka,The Bylaws, which, have been in existence since 1983-4. Prior to the ByLaws existence, the Community Elections were conducted in pretty much the same manner as they were yesterday. I have attended 30 or so Annual Meetings during my tenure as a resident, and during that time, I can not recall ANY Votes ever being counted towards any Candidate or Amendment, at any Election, that was cast by, or on behalf of any Member who was in fact, NOT IN ATTENDANCE at the Annual Meeting, including Last Years, which I believe, Mr. Richards, you were at. Your correspondance fails to note and mention that The Motion to Table the Annual Meeting / Vote that you reference was a motion that was made out of order. To refresh your memory, a previous motion was on the floor and already acknowledged by the Chairman as having been made and seconded which in essence stated; to allow only the members present at the meeting to decide as to whether any Vote would take place today, and, whether to allow any of the so called Proxy votes from absent members to be considered, which, were contrary to the Bylaws. On a further note, both the Secretary and Chairman acknowledged the Bylaws had not been amended by the Board prior to the Annual Meeting being convened. It takes a "Right and Just Person" to acknowledge their mistake, specially in a Public Forum, The Board of Directors, as a whole, did that, regarding the so called Proxy voteing scenerio, and I feel your accusation directed towards the Members of the Board of their "unlawful injustice" incited by their deriliction of duty, is in my opinion completely and Legally Unfounded. The New Bylaws ratified yesterday afford both the protections and options you seek for those members who will be unable to attend any future annual meetings, unfortunately, for those members not in attendance yesterday, those safeguards were not availble. It is a prime example as to why New Members should be furnished or request a copy of the Organizations Rules and Conduct (Bylaws) when they join. On a further note, when your Father, (The Chairman), appoints the members of the Future Election Committee, I am confident that the distinguishing difference between an Absentee Ballot and that of a Proxy will be made.
Respectfully,
Larry Dodson

January 22, 2007

From: Guy & Dian
Date: 1/22/2007 1:47:02 AM
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Subject: In Reply
Hello,
I would like to reply to the letter sent by Mr. Jim Richards.
First let me start by saying I have always found Mr. Richards a dedicated and intelligent member of our community. I really don't understand his take on the vote today. The board made a mistake regarding proxy votes, they are only human and mistakes happen to us all at one time or another, however it was incorrect to accept the proxy vote. The statement on the mailing was incorrect according to the bylaws that governed us at the time of this vote. The agenda was set by the board. The voting for open seats took place first with the vote on the new bylaws after. There for the board was correct in not allowing these votes. It was not the doing of a select group in the community but a competent board. Had the new bylaws been voted in first the issue would be moot. The board handled a very sensitive issue properly and should be applauded, they followed the old bylaws and conducted the meeting properly. Attacking members of our community is uncalled for. This is not the act of a select group and this thinking perpetuates division, this must stop!! We have two new board members and it is time to move forward positively for this community.
Dian M. Stokey

January 22, 2007

From: Ramona Premorel
Date: 1/22/2007 12:52:27 AM
To: masaryktownnews.com
Subject: Response to Letter to the Editor
Mr Editor:
I am addressing this response to James A. Richards letter regarding the Annual Meeting voting policies.
Just because "thats the way we have done it in previous elections" doesnt make it correct or proper. You can keep doing things the wrong way or you can correct your mistakes and apologize for them and move on. That's the responsible and professional way to handle the error. As President Gene Richards stated at the meeting, we made a mistake and we will have to send everyone an apology letter. I commend him for having the courage to do things the right way. I don't think it made him or anyone else look like idiots. What it did do, was to help us gain new respect for the board for doing what was right even if it wasnt what some people wanted. The issue could have been prevented if the Bylaws were reviewed prior to the letters being sent out. Those bylaws are the foundation on which the Centers rules and regulations are built. They have to be followed EACH AND EVERY TIME. Not just when its convienent ..!!! Now that the new bylaws have been adopted, the issue is moot. For the next election the "proxy" or "absentee" ballot will be implemented. But, for this election, its a done deal. Obviously the residents in attendance today were ready for a change and they stated so. Evidence showed that there was more than "a small group of people that wanted to take power over the community" that wanted things done legal and proper. The voting at the election was LEGAL and PROPER, according to the Bylaws and Roberts Rules. There just wasnt any other way to do it. Like it or not. If you read them you will see that fact. As President Gene said at the beginning of the meeting...we are going to work together to make our Community Center the best it can be for all our citizens, and we will do it with respect for all. Lets make this a great year for our community center and try and work together without animosity or hostility towards any one. I also think that saying that a "small group of people wanting to have some power in the community" is an insult to the intelligence of the citizens of Masaryktown, as well as insulting that group of people that want things done the right way. Anger and hostility are not productive energy's, so , lets get POSITIVE and have a wonderful year.
Mona Simpson-Premorel

January 21, 2007

From: Ronald L Hollar
Date: 1/21/2007 8:44:02 PM
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Cc: loweangel13372@yahoo.com; lovelady@atlantic.net; sheila1553@aol.com
Subject: Annual Meeting A Joke

Dear Masaryktown News,
This letter goes out to you to post on your site. It is for all of the Members that were shafted by the small group of people in your community. Rights were taken away and unfairly tossed aside like old bread. Letters were mailed out, to all Members, stating and I quote: "Members can vote by proxy. Forms are available at the Post Office or at the Community center, or a written submission will be accepted. All proxy submissions should be enclosed in an envelope, with the Member's name and signature for verification from their Membership Application. Any proxy submitted without a signature, or one that is not legible for verification purposes, will not be accepted." My experience with this center, in the past years, is that this has always been the case when voting. Suddenly a group comes along wanting power in the community and votes are tossed aside. No consideration was allowed for the written letter sent to each and every member. Nor, was any given to those who are currently hospitalized or homebound. It was my understanding, along with may others, that you could either attend the meeting or vote via proxy, better known now as absentee ballot. This process was totally disregarded and a vote happened anyway without counting the proxy's that were received. I am sorry, there were 4 that were counted. The four that were given prior to the meeting start were considered. What was the difference if given prior to the meeting on that day or a week before? The process was the same. The Member came signed, voted and left. Yet theirs were counted. I attended this annual meeting, as I have for several years, & heard a motion by board members to "Table the vote" and seconded. This did not happen. Members rights to vote were unlawfully taken from them. Basically saying, "You don't matter unless present". You should all be ashamed of yourselves. One day, you may be homebound or hospitalized and is that what you want to be told? "You don't matter unless present." This election process was a joke to this community and once again made the board look like idiots. When we stood to say the Pledge, did you remember what country you were in? I did, and the last time I can recall America has a fair and impartial policy when it comes to this kind of thing. You wouldn't have know it by attending this meeting. I know several members that will be very disturbed when they find out they were disregarded. Most will probably be in attendance at the next meeting demanding to know what & why. How can you send out letters to the general membership, clearly stating in black and white on the voting process then take it away from them for your error. The entire process needs to be reviewed & made fair to all members. NOT, just a select group. As many members will, I expect to be granted a revote & will expect a letter of notification when to come vote since this vote is clearly NOT legal. To the editor, the last I remember, you said you would post any letter received with signature. Well this is my opinion and I hope you do post this.
My Opinion,
James A. Richards

January 17, 2007

From: Niksgoingpostal
Date: 01/16/07 11:41:40PM
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Subject:*(no subject)

Holding the position of postmistress of Masaryktown I am exposed to many of our citizens on a daily bases. Community members have questioned me about the new candidates and their positions on Bingo. It seems that many are under the impression that some candidates wish to remove bingo from our community. It is important to me that these citizens who trust my opinion are not deceived in any way. People from inside and outside our community, are Insulting our intelligence and disgracing our community by using scare tactics on our elderly. How on Gods green earth can you continuously lie to the people of this community and bingo players by telling them the candidates that are challenging the incumbents, are going to "do away with Bingo" THIS IS A FALSE STATEMENT, How ridiculous! The challengers have posted their positions at the post office and on the web site. Please ask at the annual meeting to speak directly to the candidates that are running for any positions available. Please review the new bylaws in depth and do not be afraid to ask questions!! In fact "DEMAND ANSWERS IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED. WE ARE A COMMUNITY!! NOT ONE, NOT TWO,OR TEN!BUT ALL MUST AGREE!! DO NOT BE DECEIVED ANY LONGER!!

Postmistress

January 16, 2007

From: Dee Mills
Date: 01/16/07 16:34:47
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Subject:Back Ground Checks

I would be interested to know if the current board members who are running for board positions have followed the same rules requested of new candidates. If they have not had a back ground check before the deadline date they shouldn't qualify to run. Would you please respond to the voting membership.
Dee Mills

October 29, 2006

From: Mary Bash
Date: 10/31/06 17:04:05
To: masaryktownnews@tampabay.rr.com
Subject: Masaryktown's History
Dear MasaryktownNews,
After reading your editorial, (Oct. 30, 2006) " *Thomas Masaryk set it up to be*"* *and the "History Of Masaryktown", I felt it important to submit to you the real History of Masaryktown. Too many times, on many websites, I have read the wrong information. I feel it is important for the members of this community to have the facts and truth about the community they live in and admire. (I have gotten permission from Robert Petrik to reproduce his artical.)
Sincerely and respectfully submitted, Mary Bash

*/CZECHS AND SLOVAKS IN FLORIDA/* *By* *Robert Petrik* /Delivered to the Czechoslovak Society of Arts and Sciences on June 27, 2003, at Coe College, Cedar Rapids, Iowa./ /Source: /http://acscc.org/Papers/svu_062703b.html / / *_The History Of Masaryktown as told by Robert Petrik_**__* / / *Masaryktown, Florida* In 1924 *Joseph Joscak*, editor of the New Yorksy Denník, a daily Slovak newspaper in New York City, began writing a series of articles about the wonderful State of Florida where it was reported that it was possible to grow as many as three crops annually due to the warm climate. These articles appealed to many Slovaks laboring in the coal mines, steel mills and other industries in the North. In September 1924, 60 Slovaks and one Czech formed the Hernando Plantation Company. Its purpose was to buy land in Florida. They bought 10,000 acres in Hernando County in Central Florida north of Tampa. Later another 14,000 acres was added in adjoining Pasco County. Three months later about 135 shareholders left Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey but mostly from New York for what they called "*Joscak's Paradise."* Thus was the start of Masaryktown, *named* *in honor of* Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk, first president of Czechoslovakia. They named streets running north and south after American presidents and named east to west streets after Czechoslovak poets, writers, patriots and national heroes. The original plan to earn money was to raise oranges. Thus many orange groves were planted. However, two consecutive winters with hard frosts occurred and wiped out all the trees. Many had to abandon their farms. Some borrowed money from relatives in the North while some husbands moved back to the North to find work and sent money back to their families left behind. Those who stayed in Masaryktown started to grow onions, sweet potatoes and cucumbers. The problem was that a steady market could not be found and this type of farming failed. Small poultry farmers formed an egg producers' cooperative. The eggs were successfully sold in the Tampa and St. Petersburg markets. This cooperative was at one time the largest such cooperative in the Southeast and made Masaryktown the egg capital of Florida. Today Masaryktown is a sleepy little village without much evidence of its rich Slovak heritage. However, there is still a library containing books in Czech and Slovak, and a small museum is housed in the community center. *__***NOTE:* There is also another source of vital, historic information at the Masaryktown Post Office that you can read. Please be courteous and respectful and leave it there for all to read. Also, I do not have the facts pertaining to the existance of the library and/or "small museum" in the Community Center, so if anyone can elaberate on that, please let The MasaryktownNews know. My opinion: Joseph Joscak deserves his recognition for starting this community.