First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Longtime CA Member

Warren, NJ

#22 Oct 3, 2011
LSLDoc - that is not what I heard. I was told that only those supported by the CLSLCM voted for the dredging. The other "faction", as you call it, did not vote for this dredging.

I also have to disagree with your premise that whether or not this was done in an open meeting is a moot (not mute) point. How they conduct their business is very important to me. It sounds like you would have no problem with them acting in secret as long as you are ok with the outcome, but you might have a problem if you disagree? For me, I don't care whether I agree with the outcome or not, I expect the CA board to do the right thing, and conducting business behind closed doors doesn't qualify, regardless the outcome of that action. I think our community deserves better than that.

Saint Louis, MO

#23 Oct 3, 2011
When you do things behind closed doors, it as the appearance of wrongdoing.

When their is no oversight by other committees, it has the appearance of giving contracts to friends, or kickbacks.
Common Sense CA Supporter

New York, NY

#24 Oct 3, 2011
Really - Spot on! It is important that the membership can trust the board, otherwise you have the kind of name-calling/sky is falling malarkey we've been subjected to over the past couple of years. After all, since the LSLCA is in the Show-Me state, the least the LSLCA BOD could do is show us how/why they are making their decisions.

As for LSLDoc's comments about fairness, how do you define fair? If it cost the CA a million dollars to dredge the cove, would that still meet your standards of fairness? With that attitude, every amenity should be replaced every year, since some are in better condition than others. New tennis courts this year? Where is the new pool? It isn't fair that the swimmers don't get a new pool, since the tennis players got new courts! Obviously, every business decision (the CA is a buisiness, after all) needs to be based on a number of factors, and cost and the number of impacted people are among those factors. That and actual need, which the committees determined there not to be.

Foristell, MO

#25 Nov 2, 2011
Well it again appears that nobody reads or are attending the CA meetings. The votes for the dredging of Paris Cove was not done behind closed doors it was in an open meeting in July (read he minutes ) please don't assume you know something because this or that person told you attend the meetings and hear for yourself.
I think we finally have a BOD that will be respectful with all of our concrens

Saint Louis, MO

#26 Nov 3, 2011

Wake up....The vote was done in open forum, but the whole process was behind closed doors. The engineering committee nor the finance committee looked at any bids or qualifications of the contractor. Apparantly the contractor has now left for a bigger job, without finishing the job he was paid for. This wouldn't have happened if it went through the committees. They would have asked for references...

Foristell, MO

#27 Nov 6, 2011
The committees have no business in the procedure of bidding you over estimate the committees importance in the procedures. They have no other function than to advise the board not directit. If you are one of the committee members you really need to read your charter of responsibility .
CA Member

New York, NY

#28 Nov 7, 2011
Doc, I don't think you actually understand to role the CA committees have played for the past several decades. While it is true that they play an advisory role for the Board, they do so only after reviewing all of the available information and voting on a recommendation. In the case of bids, they have typically reviewed those bids to determine cost/quality targets are being met and to recommend the best bid to the Board. This does not always mean the lowest bid, since that often results in a vendor that is unable to meet the quality or delivery standards required by the CA.

The CA Board can always ignore the recommendations of their committees, but I would expect them to provide - in a public forum - their rationale for making that decision. For them to simply cut the committees out of the process completely suggests that they don't really care about the facts or the expertise that the committees can provide.

Time and time again we have witnessed the failure of leaders that think they know more than the experts that advise them. Bottom line, if you don't want the advice of the committees, disband them, and stop wasting their valuable time.
LSL Eastsider

Foristell, MO

#29 Nov 7, 2011
I agree with Doc the problem with the committees have done in the past is to recommend the bids of either prior awards ie. the pool repair when the committee recommended to go not with the lowest bid but award it to someone that they knew and felt Comfortable with.
That should not be allowed, and only to consider friends is programmatic. The committees should have input but not a blank check. Let's consider the BiLaw committee they are recommending changes and each and every charge MUST be voted on by he members. The committees in the past have been populated by members of the committee calling friends at home and encouraging them to volunteer for the committee so not to get an outsider of their views. This has to stop. And stop now.
LSL Westsider

O Fallon, MO

#30 Nov 7, 2011
LSL Eastsider,
The Committees should be used as a check-and-balance and have never had a blank check. The Watchers on the BOD secretly pushed through the bid and award of the Paris Cove dredge to benefit two Watcher members. The quotes and bid process were only reviewed and approved by the BOD in secret session. Nobody will know if they were the lowest or highest bids, or if they were friends with the Watchers/BOD.
All that we know is this vendor has left and the job is not complete.
This BOD is operating with Absolute Power and is not listening to a large part of the CA membership (not the Watchers).
CA Member

Warren, NJ

#31 Nov 8, 2011
Eastsider - Performance is just as important as cost. Just as I do at my company, I look at past performance history before awarding a bid. You seem to be equating the fact that a vendor has worked with the CA in the past as some kind of friendship with the Board. That is rarely the case. It just means the CA has witnessed firsthand the quality and reliability of a vendor's work. So nobody should be surprised if they go back to the same vendor, especially for a complex or time-critical job, rather than a vendor who provides a low-ball bid but has no track records to prove they can actually meet the terms of the bid/contract. As often as not those vendors provide sub-par work, fail to complete the job, or end up requiring so many change orders or additional fees that they end up costing more than the more experienced vendor.

If you can provide a single instance where the past board hired vendor who was unable to complete the worked they were contracted for, I would be interested in hearing about it.

BTW, as far as I can tell, the Tennis committee recommended a specific option for replacing the tennis courts, and that recommendation was ultimately adopted by the Board after they tried to push through other options a couple of times. So, was the committee right or wrong on this?

Saint Louis, MO

#32 Nov 8, 2011
CA Member,

You ask for an instance of the past board...I'm assuming by past you mean prior to current all watcher board.

Instance: Board hired contractor to dredge paris cove without input from E&F and Finance committee. Wayne, Faye, and Jerry voted for it while Greg and Joan voted against. Board executed contract with a brand new dredge company. Dredge company started job, but ultimately pulled out to move to a bigger, better paying job. If the committees were involved, they would have asked for references.

This happens when their is no oversight of the board...
LSL eastsider

Foristell, MO

#33 Nov 9, 2011
The tennis committee was wrong,don't you remember the request. Theywanted so much more after the fix on the courts and their estimate was held in check by Jerry Knott. The bid process worked then, they wanted a divider in the middle of the courts so the balls wouldn't squirt around. This was ultimately reconsidered and probably won't resurface due to safety concerns. Then they wanted landmark trees taken down,now a big stink again about the trees.
It just never ends, there are always some dissatisfied people. The last meeting lasted only 30 minutes because the cry babies were not in the audience lengthening the meeting. I am also in favor of committee term limits to weed out non productive and life long ambitions to control the CA. Some committees need to be audited for responsibility to the the members not the other way around.
The ACC is very dominating in the community and not answerable to the BOD like other committees. This also needs to change along with perhaps a change in the Staff of the CA.
Like LSL

Sikeston, MO

#34 Dec 20, 2011
I believe the current BOD should be audited for responsibility to all of the members.... not just the Watchers who get special treatment from them.
LSL eastsider

Lake Saint Louis, MO

#35 Dec 26, 2011
I don't know of any special treatment, please be specific , I would really like to know so this could be brought up at meetings. As far as being audited I'm not sure of the meaning.
Like LSL

Sikeston, MO

#36 Dec 27, 2011
It sure sounds like this Paris Cove dredge is special treatment for a few Watchers members.

I'd like to see a public audit of that decision process, but since it was made in special session that will never happen.
The lake

Saint Louis, MO

#37 Dec 27, 2011
Someone! Fill me in on all this! I'm a temp person who has been asking why it's dredged so much! Im not here long on this assignment, so I guess I'm just being nosey, but I would consider staying if my job ends up moving here. I enjoy Lsl, but lost when it comes to the politics- help a neighbor out!
Like LSL

Sikeston, MO

#38 Dec 28, 2011
Both lakes require dredging once every couple of years - this has varied from approx 5 to 7 years in the past. This is because of the high volume of silt that comes down the waterways that feed both lakes.

The CA Board Of Directors has recently been replaced by a group of people (Watchers or CLSLCM as they call themselves) based on their accusations that prior BOD's were not listening to the CA members. They also claimed that the prior BOD made many decisions secretly away from the public view. None of this was proven, but they have the voting CA members believing these accusations so they won the last few elections.

Now they made a decision to dredge Paris Cove on the small lake because two of the Watchers complained about it. Paris Cove is near one of the inlets into the small lake and has always been a shallow cove. Measurement results proved that the cove was deep enough to get a boat out, but the BOD ignored the committee’s recommendations and approved the dredge in secret session.

This is still a great community; it is just currently run by a BOD controlled by the Watchers/CLSLCM and includes a few hypocrites. This BOD is doing exactly the things that they accused the prior BOD of doing, but could not back up with facts.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Lake St. Louis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
All white world Jun 23 HDD1982 2
Stonemore Subdivision Jun 19 HDD1985 1
Neighbors draining their pool water to my back ... (Jul '10) Jun 5 Peggy 29
FOX2Now May '17 Expert 1
searching for (Jul '09) May '17 MichelleStratton 6
Ofallon people can't dance (Jan '15) Apr '17 Bbedancin 12
Beware of Mark and Pam Hupp in O'Fallon, MO (Dec '14) Apr '17 Fast Forward 200

Lake St. Louis Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Lake St. Louis Mortgages