Letters on leadership, Eagle-Vail | VailDaily.com
YOUR AD HERE »

Letters on leadership, Eagle-Vail

Now we are told that Social Security and Medicare are in trouble but the government sees fit to spend $100,000 every minute on the Iraq War ” very curious, if not disgusting. Maybe think about this the next time you make a decision on voting for who our next leaders are going to be. It seems to me like a very easy choice: Either continue the waste of our resources and the senseless slaughter of innocent people or return to a more reasonable way of treating our fellow humans. Anyone with even a slight bit of intelligence can see that there are many different alternatives that we should be pursuing to preserve our environment and way of life. Thanks for listening.

P.B.Billings

Aspen



I am writing to you as a representative of the green industry to urge you support the discharge petition on “Save Our Small and Seasonal Businesses Act of 2007” (H.R. 1843). My business is already suffering as a result of Congress’ failure to renew the H-2B returning worker exemption. Without immediate Congressional action, my economic losses and the impact on my American employees will continue to multiply.

My business and my American employees cannot be sustained this year without at least a short term extension of the H-2B returning worker exemption. The H-2B program provides a vital and legal source of temporary, seasonal labor for the landscape industry and other industries that cannot fill their labor needs with American citizens. Unfortunately, the program’s congressionally mandated cap of 66,000 is inadequate to meet the needs of seasonal employers.



Millions of dollars worth of contracts and hundreds of American jobs in the green industry have already been lost without this necessary H-2B cap relief. As each day passes without an extension, these numbers continue to grow. Without these tens of thousands of workers installing plants into landscapes, demands for plant material produced by nurseries will plummet, and the inventories of retail centers and industry suppliers will experience a tremendous backlog. During a time of economic peril, where the construction market is failing and many areas are experiencing drought conditions, the green industry’s stimulation of the American economy is already greatly hampered.

The viability of my company, the green industry, and the American economy is dependent on an immediate extension of the returning worker exemption.

Please support the discharge petition and work with Congressional leaders to pass an immediate and clean extension of the H-2B returning worker exemption.



Please also oppose any efforts to place new burdensome provisions on the H-2B program. This program already has numerous safeguards in place to ensure that no American workers are displaced and that the H-2B workers are paid and treated well and will return home at the end of their seasonal assignments.

Again, thank you for your consideration of this important issue for my business and for other businesses with seasonal labor needs. My company and other green industry employers are dependent on Congress acting immediately to extend this expired provision of law.

Martin Jones

In regards to the Colorado State Patrols tactics on how to slow down drivers I have to object. I have like many others witnessed, as well as been part of, the State Patrol exercising this method of controlling traffic and have to say it does nothing but make things more dangerous for the traffic behind them. People start hitting the breaks, which multiples the further back from the patrol car one travels. This is not a resolution but just another hazard and, in a sense, harassment.

State Patrol should actually be out there making sure that the left lane is not blocked. And those who are in the left lane and not moving past the right lane should be ticketed. This is a simple way to keep traffic moving as well as safer. Breaking that causes the problems.

Tom Hudson

Pursuant to my letter to the editor dated March 19, this is my second of three letters seeking to explain the events regarding the Eagle-Vail Property Owners Association from a Colorado lawyer’s perspective. Again, I am only representing my own views, and not those of the association or anyone else.

For those readers who read Janet Stevenson’s recent letter, but not my earlier letter, let me reiterate the early history of the prohibition against short-term rentals.

In 1989, the Denver law firm of Collins and Cockrell sent two letters to the Eagle-Vail Metropolitan Board and the Eagle-Vail Property Owners Association. Those letters stated that if certain language, which had been included in the draft of the amended declaration that was recorded in 1992, was included in the final draft, it would serve to prohibit short-term rentals on nearly all of the lots in Eagle-Vail. As that language was included in the 1992 declaration, and as both boards were informed that including that language would prohibit short-term rentals, we do know that this was the intention of both boards. It is true that the sections of the declaration, which prohibit short-term rentals, were not written very clearly, and I pointed out that several sections of the new declaration were not very clear to Collins and Cockrell in a five-page letter written in about 1990, but I received no response and, as far as I know, no further changes were made. However, this doesn’t really matter at this point in time: As lawyers sometimes say: “The document speaks for itself” and it either does, or does not, prohibit short-term rentals.

The real purpose of this second letter is to address the recent election, where a lot of misinformation was presented, mostly by or attributed to attorneys for people with a vested interest in short-term rentals, so it was hardly unbiased.

With respect to removing Jeff Layman, the Colorado Revised Non-Profit Corporation Act provides, at Section 1 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) 7-128-108, as follows: “Directors elected by voting members of directors may be removed as follows:

(d) A director elected by the voting members may be removed by the voting members only at a meeting called for the purpose of removing that director, and the meeting notice shall state that the purpose, or one of the purposes, of the meeting is removal of the director.”

As the notice of annual meeting did not state that purpose, the vote to remove Jeff Layman was invalid.

The members of our association should also know that Section 2 of Article II of our amended declaration provided as follows: “No person may vote more than one proxy.” Accordingly, Mr. Carter could only vote his vote and one proxy, and the other proxies could not be voted by him. I believe that properly counting the votes will result in a different result than that announced at the annual meeting.

I am told that if Mr. Carter’s extra proxies are invalidated, as they must be, Paul Hields was re-elected to the board before his resignation.

If that is correct, Section 4.07 of Article IV of the Association’s Bylaws provides:

“Vacancies in the board caused by any reason shall be filled by election of (sic) replacement director by the remaining directors … to serve until the next annual meeting…”. Accordingly, if Paul was re-elected, his vacant board seat is required to be filled by a vote of the board, and not by the vote of the members, at the annual meeting.

I would also like those members who signed proxies solicited by Mr. Carter to be aware that they signed “general” proxies, rather than “directed” proxies; but for the provisions of Article II of the Declaration, these general proxies would have allowed Mr. Carter not only, at a properly noticed meeting, to vote to remove any or all of the board members, he could also vote the proxies on any other issue on which the members are entitled to vote, for a period of eleven months.

It is my understanding that many of the grantors of the proxies believed that Mr. Carter would only be able to vote in favor of allowing short-term rentals, which is not the case, so those members might wish to be sure only to grant a “directed” proxy in the future, which directs how the proxy holder may vote.

Also, as short-term rentals are prohibited in the declaration, as we shall see next time, that vote would be meaningless, since the only way to change the declaration is by amendment or replacement of the declaration.

Finally, for those of you, like Ms. Stevenson, who would like to read the Eagle-Vail Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agreement, it is part of the Eagle-Vail Property Owners Manual found at EVPOA.com.

It is my hope that as many members as possible will attend the next meeting of the Board of Directors, on Monday, April 7, to find out how the board is going to resolve all of these issues.

Brian O’Reilly


Support Local Journalism