Conservative PSJ, US: November 2004 PSJHOA Meetings

Conservative PSJ, US

Where people come before trees, animals and incorporation.




Pages

November 2004 PSJHOA General Membership
and
Board of Directors Meeting

Links, etc.

NOTE: Not all links work at this time.

Home

New!

Mims: Don't Incorporate Due to Annexation Scare

Contributors to Amy Tidd's D4 Commission Bid

The Bare Facts 4 by B'Ann

The Bare Facts 3 by B'Ann

The Bare Facts 2 by B'Ann

The Bare Facts 1 by B'Ann

Scott's Shots 1

PSJ Community Center Updates

PSJ Library Events

Toilet Paper Swipes 2

Parks and Rec Updates

Toilet Paper Swipes

August 2004 PSJHOA

Who I am.

My Writing

MY PSJ HOA

Favorite Websites

Government Links

Recommended Books

Truman Scarborough Quotes

Rumor Mill

Warning! If you are easily offended you may not wish to read further. I tell you THE TRUTH here and I have the PROOF to back up what I say. So, if you think the world should be nicey-nicey and we should "all just get along," tell that to the liars who are out there slandering me. This is just the beginning of my fight. There is more that I will not yet disclose. I'll let them sweat a bit first.


The PSJHOA Newsletter that covered the events of the November PSJHOA meeting are, in my opinion, incomplete. It mentions the PSJHOA Christmas Party. It mentions the Christmas Parade. It mentions the $100 gift to the Four Communities Fire Dept. And, it mentions the decision not to release the PSJHOA membership list to Pete Costello so that he can send out Christmas Cards.

It does not mention the fact that the Treasurer, Olson, assaulted four people -- scratching (and drawing blood), stomping feet, hitting and pushing them -- in the effort to keep the public (Pete Costello, Brandon McKinney and I) out of the public meeting room of the PSJ Library. (Just preventing someone from entering the room without it being rented for the occassion breaks Library policy and Dezendorf was told about this by Dave McMurrin, Library Manager. Can you imagine how much assault breaks Library policy?) No, all the PSJHOA newsletter says is the "positive" stuff the PSJHOA is doing so that those who don't attend the meetings will think well of the PSJHOA. I hope they are told about this website so that they will see the truth.

The PSJHOA Newsletter does not mention the fact that the membership voted to open membership meetings to everyone; regardless of membership status. It does not mention the fact that this motion was strongly contested and loudly protested by Dezendorf, President of the PSJHOA. Which, to tell you the truth, I don't really understand. Consider the fact that State Statute says that it is illegal to kick us out. The statute, State Statute 617.0601(7), is clear about that. The PSJHOA Board -- every member -- has a written copy of this Statute. But is the leadership of the PSJHOA interested in obeying the law? All of the Board members who were there that evening apparently supported Dezendorf's dislike of the idea because no Board member supported the motion to open the meetings. Despite the leadership's objections, the motion did pass.

It was at this point in the meeting that Treasurer Olson decided to leave in a huff and puff, muttering beneath her breath. At this time, Pete Costello, Brandon McKinney and I entered.

Something else the PSJHOA newsletter does not mention is the fact that there was a motion to retroactively reinstate the membership status of Pete Costello and Linda McKinney. This motion was also hotly contested by Dezendorf. After much ado, it was also passed by the membership, overturning the PSJHOA's Board of Directors and their totally illegal vote to revoke our membership.

The newsletter does not mention the fact that there was a motion made to "request that the Officers and Board Members of the PSJHOA resign immediately." This was not a welcome motion. A lot of discussion was made about it and during this discussion, Dezendorf made the point that Linda McKinney's membership had expired during the time when they had illegally (although Dezendorf didn't say that part) revoked my membership. More on that later, but the motion requesting the immediate resignation of every Officer and Board member of the PSJHOA passed with a 20 In Favor to 14 Against count. Too bad it doesn't matter what the membership wants. The Officers refused to resign, with Dezendorf protesting that it is also a matter of financial import because she is one of the people who signs PSJHOA checks. This alarms me because of her apparent continued lack of respect for the law.

Here's the "more on that later": my membership had expired during the illegal membership revocation. So I wrote a receipt for my membership fees and, in front of the entire meeting, asked Dezendorf to sign my receipt and accept my ten dollars cash. She looked at me blankly and said, "That's not my job." I turned to the membership and asked membership if she could accept my money and sign my receipt. At this time, Rodriguez reached over, took my receipt, signed it and gave it back to me. I put my ten dollars cash on the table in front of Dezendorf. So then I was (and am) a bonafide member in good standing again and I received a membership newsletter for December of 2004 with the label stating that my membership expires in September of 2005.

The newsletter did not tell you that Dezendorf stated once in August and again in November that their legal advisor was the County Attorney's office and that the County Attorney had advised the PSJHOA that they were not subject to State Statute 617.0601(7). I decided to call and find out about that. So I spoke to County Attorney, Scott Knox's Assistant, Marcia Day, about that question at 11:08 a.m. on November 12, 2004. She said that she was not aware of the County Attorney's office ever advising the PSJHOA about anything. When asked if that could be a conflict of interest, she said that it could be. When asked if it was possible to have happened, she said it could only happen if one of the Commissioners had asked the Attorney's office to do so, but she wasn't aware of that happening, either. After I spoke to Ms Day, I called Comm. Scarborough's office and spoke to Rene Davis. He said that they had not requested the County Attorney to get involved; that he was, "not aware of it if it had happened." Mr. Davis knows everything that happens in that office. So I decided to go straight to the person who would know for certain: Scott Knox himself. I sent him this e-mail and got this response (read bottom to top) which proves that Dezendorf's claims that the County Attorney's office had advised her and the PSJHOA regarding the State Statute (or anything else) are totally and provenly false!

Dezendorf tried in August of 2004 and again at this meeting to make this all seem as though the fault is all in me and that it all started to go bad between the PSJHOA and I in February of 2004. She portrays herself as an innocent victim of my vindictive, evil, hateful nature. Guess what, folks. I dislike dissuading any of you of your disillusions, but, there is proof that it's not me who is the liar. In fact, I have this e-mail to Peggy Busacca, forwarded to Rene Davis (Scarborough's Assistant), dated July 17, 2003 in which Dezendorf lies in saying that I called the Commissioners, County Staff and PSJ Advisory Board members "everything from 'crooked' to 'stupid.'" Dezendorf also says that I have "distinctly anti-government tendencies". How would she know in such a short period of time? She had only worked with me as VP since April, spending a total of what, less than ten (10!) hours with me at the time? Remember, I have recordings of PSJHOA meetings. I know what I said and I have proof that I didn't call people "crooked" nor "stupid." Does she have any recordings of me doing so? If so, Dezendorf, I know you read this site, bring your recording of me doing so forward. Let's hear it. I challenge you to provide proof of your words, or stop slandering and libeling me! As I told Rodriguez (and he couldn't deliver either), put up or shut up!

There was ample discussion as to what to do about the Board and Officers but none of them seemed interested in doing what the membership had voted. So, the meeting ended at 9:10 p.m. when the librarian kicked the meeting out.

November PSJHOA Board Meeting

Rodriguez was elected as the substitute Chairman since Ed Warner had resigned.

Dezendorf explained that the membership had "voted out" the Board, and they acknowledge that vote, but it will be brought to the next business meeting and publish it in the next newsletter. Anyone see it mentioned in the next (December '04) newsletter? Of course not!

Dezendorf said that Tim Bradley is the "Attorney of Record" for the PSJHOA and that she spoke to him at length and that he said no members can get rid of the Board. I wonder what would happen if I called and asked Tim Bradley about this newest assertion of legal advice being given the PSJHOA; would it prove true or not?

Dezendorf said that there were two Board positions and a Secretary needed due to resignations. Interested parties must show up at the January meeting and say you are interested. Remember, if you want to be a Board member, you will have to live by the rules others apparently don't.

Then every Board member present was asked if they had anything they wished to discuss. Olson had nothing. Lewis had info on the West Connector and some scare tactics on the Willow Creek development. Dezendorf had more scare tactics on the Desalination Study. Keebler had nothing. Rodriguez reminded the Board and attendees about the Christmas parade (which I never knew until recently that he does as a money making venture, not as a nonprofit thing, which I assumed was the case). (Dezendorf put in that there would be no HOA float due to lack of interest in helping put one together.) Rodriguez also mentioned that the FPL Customer Relations person was no longer there; and that fireworks left over from the rained out Fourth of July were to be set off on December 31st. McComas had something about the Desal issue. (Deputy Sepulveda entered the room at this time, 7:35 p.m., just to check on the meeting.)

Ms. Maureen Rupe (hello, Rupe, I know you read my site, too!) spoke more scary stuff about the Desal Study. No surprise there.

Dezendorf asked about a website update. McComas said there was none.

Dezendorf asked how much of the PSJHOA's business do they want the whole world to read? My comment: the whole world is not interested in PJSHOA business; just those people who live in this area and they have the right to know how the PSJHOA is impacting the area in which they live. It has been truthfully and expertly demonstrated on this website that the PSJHOA newsletter is very selective and exclusive in what it reports (as very well demonstrated by the fact that Pete Costello and Linda McKinney's membership revocation was reported, but not the fact that their memberships were reinstated by a majority vote of the membership). The people of PSJ need to know what is going on in the PSJHOA. If they want to join, they need to be able to read the bylaws first and to have the truth about the PSJHOA's activities exposed so that they can know what kind of organization they are getting into. They need to be able to see what the truth is and which side they will support instead of walking into a hornet's nest unprepared. This website provides that service; a service the PSJHOA should be providing on their own website openly, honestly and truthfully, but does not.

A County Budget meeting for Thursday, December 18th at 11 a.m. was announced.

After requesting a motion to adjourn the meeting from Rodriguez and receiving one from Dezendorf and seconded by Olson, without opening the meeting to comment from the regular members who had attended, Randy closed the meeting (A little pre-planning there? Just asking the question.), but received a suggestion from Mr. Pete Costello, to open the meeting to the attending regular members (non-Board members) for comments. Rodriguez didn't prevent it.

A member who was assaulted by Olson stood and asked if the Board was aware that meetings held in the Library are supposed to be open to the public. Dezendorf said that "Linda said that that's what Mr. McMurrin told her," (that sounds as though she's implying a lie on my part; but she knows better) and Dezendorf holds meetings for the AARP Tax Aid and they (the meetings) aren't open to the public. However, according to Dave McMurrin, any meeting held in the meeting room is open to the public unless that room is rented for the purpose of the meeting. Then it's closed to only the members and attendees of that meeting. The member who stood also asked for an apology from Olson for the abuses and asked for Olson's resignation. The member pointed out that Olson had drawn his wife's blood with one of her assaults (see pic). Olson refused to apologize and refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing. Her defense (exact quote): "I was being goaded by you all night long." Then she said (exact quote), "You don't get my resignation." This is an unacceptable response. Assaulting anyone is not an option; goaded or not. Ever heard of the childhood saying, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me"? The PSJHOA is responsible for the actions of its leaders. Assault on a member by an Officer should not be tolerated under any circumstances; much less with the defense of being "goaded".

Dezendorf tried to put it off on the membership that "You realize that, of course, that until that meeting, that we, as a Board, and our membership, because they were aware of it, was feeling that they had the right to keep two people out. And in our endeavor to do that [something] discipline most of those things happened. Now you all voted and I've said it nineteen times now, I'm going to say it one more time, that that motion has passed and it will not be happening in the future." Defending Olson does the PSJHOA no good, but it doesn't seem to matter. And, I've got news for Dezendorf. First of all, kicking us out was a totally illegal move in the first place and when you and the other Board members were notified, in writing, of the State Statute that says so, you and the rest of the Board chose to ignore the law. Second, you did not let the membership vote on whether to kick us out or keep us in; that was purely a Board decision done in a secret meeting at Olson's house when the Board was supposed to be meeting at the PSJ Community Center. Two of your Board members didn't make the meeting at Olson's house because they didn't check their e-mails in time to know to go there instead of to the Community Center. We know that for a fact. So when the membership did get a say in it (after only four months!) they voted to not only let us back in, but to make our membership retroactive. So all those months you had "Katie barring the door" (AKA Mrs. Warner and Olson), you were keeping members in good standing out of the meeting. Do you realize how illegal your leadership has made this organization, Dezendorf? I have an idea as to when your total disregard for the law started, but when will your total disregard for the law end?

Then the highlight of the evening came when Dezendorf asked, "Anyone else?" (Perfect setup?) From there, the meeting went as written below. This is a verbatim record of what transpired for the rest of the meeting. Most of the words are discernable on my recording, although I think I missed one or two. Ms. Maureen Rupe (hello, again, are you printing this one for your libel records, too?) stood up to speak. And, folks, all those elipses (dot-dot-dots) you see are not things I left out; this is how she spoke her "sentences". That's what I'll call them, at least. Anything you see in italics is Rupe commenting on my website quotes. This color is Rupe speaking her own words. This color is the quotes from my website that Rupe is reading (close to correctly quoting me). The black is other people speaking or notes. Remember these are direct, exact quotes):

"Well, yeah, yeah. Yeah, I do want to say something. I wasn't going to, but I do want to say something. And this is perhaps the first meeting that I've attended... So I should face people... This is perhaps the first meeting I've been to... I've come to the general membership... in two years. I've not come or been associated with the Port St. John Home Owners Association."

Helen pitched in to help, "Except for to pay your dues."

Rupe said, "Yes, I do pay my dues. Um, I have been reading from Linda McKinney's website and what I really came here tonight for... I didn't know anything this what was going on... but what I really came here tonight was... to ask you... ask the Board... and I'm willing to go before membership... to go into litigation against Miss McKinney like I am considering myself. So... myself for countless years of... of libel... which I have a stack of it, going back to even a few weeks ago. So I was coming to ask you for what Mrs. McKinney has put on her website, umm, about this home owners association... where she says, 'The image of Port St. John Home Owners Association has become over the last ten years' (and then she says) - 'compiling what I've heard from residents' (well that doesn't help, she has printed it and my attorney says that makes no difference whatsoever.. she can't... you know... she has to prove this... Where it says... Oh, I haven't got my glasses on...) 'what I've observed myself over the last twenty years of living here - a bossy, secretive, negative, overbearing, untrustworthy, aggressive, uninteresting, political, lying organization.' Now, I think that it... as... as an organization... over the past fifteen years... we can bring forward... The County knows that it... the tremendous progress we have made in Port St. John as the Port St. John Home Owners Association... we have got a list as long as my arm of the things we have fought that benefits Port St. John and the curious thing is... and that was in 2004... in 2002, Linda McKinney says, (note: start website quote, different page) I would highly recommend you join in the Port St. John Home Owners Association... tadah tadah... Now..."

Here I interupted her and said, "Read the tadah tadah."

Rupe said, "Okay, I was most certainly would!"

I'm giggling in the background of my tape recording.

Rupe continues, "It was just that I can't see very well." Then she quotes my website again, "'I'm... I would most highly recommend joining the Port St. John Home Owners Association. Remember, this organization is where Port St. John for Tomorrow met, realized they had the same ideas, same beliefs and the same goals for Port St. John and the other communities. If you don't want something similar to happen again, this is a good place to keep informed.' (Rupe stops quoting me here.) And then it goes on and on and on. So what she's saying is... You're confirming what you said the first time... about this association. Is what you're actually doing."

An audience member jumped in with, "Sue her!"

Rupe replied, "Absolutely. Absolutely!"

Audience member, "Yes. As soon as possible."

I said, quoting the PSJHOA website (but I don't know if anyone caught on), "Family, friendly atmosphere! Oh, boy!"

Rupe continued, "No! Lying...."

A little talking over each other.

Rupe continued, "I was just asking... I was just asking... that... that... Because that was what I... I don't mind going to membership... That... that the Port St. John Home Owners Association please make Miss McKinney prove everything that she has called this association and its... and its Board of Directors... and its past presidents because I am doing that myself. I have a stack of... of libel from Miss McKinney."

I raised my hand to speak, but...

Rodriguez said, "It was a bad idea, Mr. Costello. The meeting is adjourned."

I said, "I had my hand up," but no one cared.

Questions:

  • Notice the underlined portion where Rupe admits that the PSJHOA has fought things that "benefit PSJ"? Freudian slip?
  • If she "wasn't going to" say anything, why did she come equipped with pages of my website printed out?
  • And then she goes on to say, "what I really came here tonight for..." she finishes, "to ask you... ask the Board... and I'm willing to go before membership... to go into litigation against Miss McKinney like I am considering myself." So the real reason she went to the meeting was to not say anything even though she came equipped with the printed pages she would like to quote when she really came to the meeting to ask the Board "to go into litigation against Miss McKinney." She admits that she came for one reason only: to ask the PSJHOA to sue me. But she wasn't going to say anything? Is that not a conflicting statement? Within three minutes of speaking, she contradicted herself as to what her purposes were. So did she lie? I'll let you decide.
  • She also says that she "has not come or been associated with" the PSJHOA. And she admits that she has come to general membership meetings (I know of at least two) and paid her dues, keeping her membership current. Doesn't that scream 'associating with'? Keeping your membership current is associating with! Going to two meetings is associating with! So did she lie? I'll let you decide.
  • Was there something planned that if the "audience" spoke that she would, too? Wasn't it too convenient that Dezendorf just happened to ask, "Anyone else?" Just asking.
  • Notice Rupe introduced the idea of the PSJHOA's "past presidents" being included in the organization's description that she quoted? I never drew any special attention to any specific group. "Past presidents" would include herself, of course, for many years.
  • I would think that a courtroom would be the last thing anyone in the PSJHOA would want to see me in. Remember, anything proven in court is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Anything proven in court stands. I have enough evidence on my website, in past issues of Rodriguez's Toilet Paper, and in past PSJHOA newsletters to prove what I say. I have some of the proof in writing and some on tape. Anyone want to take me to court and allow my website to be validated by the court? I think not. You would have no credibility left. At least now you have some level of deniability. After a courtroom disaster in which you would have to pay for all my expenses after losing, you would have no room to even squirm.
  • Rupe speaks of libel. Does anyone know the current standard for libel or slander? If not, then don't try to scare me with that. It won't work.
  • Isn't that special? You find someone who tells the truth, and a past president of the organization the truth is being told about asks the organization to sue the person telling the truth! Wonderful concept; silence the truth by threatening a lawsuit. But, it's not the first time she threatened to sue me. She did so at least twice during the incorporation battle; once in writing and once verbally I have on tape.
  • Note: To read the exact quotes of what Rupe was reading, the first one is: 10 Steps to a Better PSJHOA and the second quote is from Why You Should Join the PSJHOA. Read the exact quotes to make sure I told you the truth here.

    I raised my hand to request to respond to Rupe and her invitation to sue, but Rodriguez adjourned the meeting without allowing me to speak. Question: why didn't I get to speak in my own defense?

    After the meeting was over, I realized that the person sitting directly in front of me was none other than "past president" of the PSJHOA, Amy Tidd, who no longer is a member of the PSJHOA. She doesn't even live in PSJ any more. When incorporation went down to defeat, she took her little red wagon and moved to Rockledge, a city whose accounting books she loved (Remember, in Cocoa's accounting books Tidd said she couldn't find $11 million and then it suddenly became a stunning $17 million?). I suppose she was there to support the other "past president" in her lawsuit bid. Too bad the bylaws state that the Board meetings are open to members not everyone. Convenient thing, those bylaws, when you want them to be. Consider Dezendorf's response to my inquiry as to why Tidd was there. Notice her final reason: "and she conducted herself in an appropriate manner". Appropriate compared to what? Calling the police on someone for taking notes?

    Tune in later this month for more on the PSJHOA. Better yet, attend the meetings and see for yourself what happens in these meetings. You may be surprised to find that truth is stranger than fiction. I can't make this stuff up, folks!

    Find the TRUTH!



    NOTE: Not all links work at this time.

    Drawing Blood

    Receipt

    My E-mail to Scott Knox

    Knox's Reply

    Dezendorf's Email to Peggy Busacca

    Dezendorf Responds to my inquiry

    Shut me up within the PSJHOA

    Kick me out

    Door Sign: Members Only

    Page 1 Community Center Report

    Page 2 Community Center Report

    The PSJHOA's 2004 Filing with the State

    This page last updated January 8, 2005. 2003 - 2005 Linda McKinney. All rights reserved