George, The Board discussed this at its Tuesday meeting and the next steps are as I described. Janie was on the call too.

The Board last July promised members a ‘solution’ for Timberidge with member participation by February 2021. The Board has allocated more than $7,000 for architectural concepts. These are now promised in 2-3 weeks. The Board has held 2 Special meetings on Timberidge, with no members invited. So we wait.

Correct. Each alternative will require an assessment, and members would vote on any alternative.

Let’s agree that the aim is to be inclusive of all views, and to consider all ideas. The Committee will not decide on the alternatives but provide the basis for members to decide.

Mark, you say that you are interested in hearing member views on Timberidge. Here is how i recommend the Board proceed, given the current situation. Members need to decide on the future of Timberidge. The Board’s role is to convene a Special Meeting of the Association (Bylaws Article VI, Section 3), in which members would vote (in person or by absentee ballot) on two alternatives, one would include a pool and the other a recreation area. By voting for the alternative, members would also be voting for an assessment to cover the estimated cost. The recently established Pool Committee, with participation of all interested members, would provide the background on each alternative in terms of design and cost. The Board has the right to make a member assessment for a new Timberidge pool, but given the estimated high cost, it would be prudent for the Board to get member agreement, lest the Association find itself in deep financial trouble because of member non-payment of the assessment. In the legal opinion provided the Association, the Board needs member approval not to have a pool at Timberidge.

Thank you for your message on the Annual Meeting and your description of how you view the Board moving forward. As you know well, our Bylaws govern the actions of members and the Board, with the Board serving the interests of members, which constitute Cobbly Nob. Members are accorded in the Bylaws, Article VII, Section 4.b the opportunity to present views to the Board in a Workshop prior to Board meetings. No time is set or limited in the Bylaws for the Workshop. By custom the Workshop begins 15 minutes before a Board meeting, but there is no time limit in the Bylaws on this opportunity for members. And in the past Board’s have been ready to hear from members for whatever time is needed. I trust that this is not going to change. Members under the Bylaws give to the Board a limited number of responsibilities, reserving to themselves the rest. To serve members, the Board now needs to carry out the votes of members at the Annual Meeting, including most importantly 24/7 Armed Security and the hiring of an administrator. This is how we can find a way to carry out your call for us to work together.

Mark, Rick, Putting off discussion of alcohol use in the Lodge will not change the facts or relieve you and the Board of its responsibility in misleading members as to the CNPOA liability insurance coverage. In April 2020, the Board approved a motion, made by Tony Robinson and seconded by Rick Thomas: Association members may bring alcohol for consumption at the Lodge, however, they are solely responsible for the consumption of alcohol by themselves or their guests…. The Minutes show no discussion of insurance coverage, but the motion suggests the belief that those consuming alcohol would be responsible if damages were to occur. Director Thomas in Resolution #2 on the Official Ballot: Approve the Current Policy of Consumption of Alcohol at the Lodge, stated: “WHEREAS, the CNPOA maintains insurance coverage that covers the legal use of alcoholic beverages for personal use by individual Members and their guests at the Lodge.” The background information submitted to this resolution reiterated that the Association’s insurance policy covered membership consumption of alcohol at the Lodge. We now know, from Board members, that the CNPOA insurance coverage is is for host insurance, which means only for CNPOA sponsored events, and when all CNPOA members would be invited. Members were asked to vote on a resolution based on incorrect information about the CNPOA insurance liability coverage. The vote in favor of the resolution is now in question, as are the Board’s actions. The right way ahead is for the Board to discover what insurance is available for the personal use of alcohol at the Lodge, with the costs, and bring back to members the results for their consideration and approval. Given the member votes, this is not for the Board to do on its own. Lynn

Thank you for your update on the roof and promise to members to give us the inspection report. I also appreciate your giving us your cell phone number and promise to respond to our questions. Lynn Davis

President Allen Thank you for your response. I look forward to reading the inspection report. Might I suggest again, that the report list the requirements in the Settlement Agreement with Greenbrier Builders and describe how each has been met.

Alex, I am sorry that you did not take into account my previous arguments as to how incidents cannot serve as a means of assessing the effectiveness of Security and why the number of incidents should not be used for purposes of budgeting. In brief, effectiveness can only be judged by the achievement of the goals we have for Security: providing safety, preventing crimes, deterring bear poachers and illegal tree cutting, keeping the village quiet, etc. Sometimes these goals require responses, but more often they are achieved by the existence of Security, their patrolling, the possibility of fines, and more generally their known presence. Prevention and deterrence do not have metrics. Budgeting then requires an assessment of risks and gains, across many different expenditures. We spend the most on Security because it is our priority. We can afford to keep Security functioning as in the past,under the current budget, with only minor adjustments. Taking the risks of reductions in Security staff, patrolling, and budget is shortsighted, unwise, and unnecessary. Has the Board voted on the reduciton in Security operations, and how do you intend to gain member views? Lynn