OSHNA General Membership Meeting
The Old Seminole Heights General Membership meeting will be held Tuesday, July 27th at the Seminole Heights United Methodist Church at 7pm. The church is located on the Southeast Corner of Central and Hannah.
This is an eating meeting and Business Appreciation meeting.
Tagged as Old Seminole Heights, Seminole Heights United Methodist Church
Categorized as uncategorized
Business Appreciaton meeting? Isn’t this the meeting where the bylaw changes, including kicking out businesses as members, is up for a vote. That’s some appreciation!!
Nice comment Troll. The Summer eating meeting has included an advertiser appreciation event for the past 2 years.
How is pointing out the irony of having an “appreciation” night on the same night of a vote on proposed bylaws that will exclude those being “appreciated” as members considered trolling? Methinks #2 is an over-sensitive OSHNA kool-aid drinker whose method of debate is to label all comments he/she doesn’t agree with as “trolling”.
Yes, and every year it has ruffled feathers. Advertiser Appreciation might be a better name for it
#3 It is a troll because the proposed bylaws do not “kick out businesses as members”.
There are certain people that feel they have to make a negative comment everytime OSHNA appears on the blog. Can we make a special blog just for these people so that they can continue to troll on their own? It really does get tiresome. They like to refer to it as free speach, debating, etc. but it’s just stirring things up.
Don’t feed the trolls and they will go elsewhere.
Reading these comments, a quote from Mark Twain comes to mind:
“If the man doesn’t believe as we do, we say he is a crank [or a troll?], and that settles it. I mean, it does nowadays, because now we can’t burn him.” Well, we still can’t burn them, but we CAN kick them out of a neighborhood association. And OSHNA has. However, let’s not burden #6 with those messy little things called facts, negative as they may be.
But with respect to this neighborhood, Jefferson hit the nail on the head:
“An association of men who will not quarrel with one another is a thing which has never yet existed, from the greatest confederacy of nations down to a town meeting or a vestry.”
And #6, it IS free speech and debating. And you are under no requirement to participate. Oblivious bliss on a site that you find less tiresome is but a mouse click away.
OSHNA is the only neighborhood association that doesn’t allow “Property Owners” a vote !
And, now the leaders??? would like to make sure the “Business Owners” don’t get a say in their community as well !
A fine group indeed ! And, an inclusive bunch as well !
So you can own a property in the hood, and your tenant can vote, HOWEVER you as the OWNER have no vote ???
Way to go BILL HUNTER ! ! !
Mr. Hunter you are one of the reasons we need TERM LIMITS.
#1,3 and 9 sound so HTNA.
Impressive, #8.
Looking forward to the meeting and hoping the discontents are not going to come just to disrupt the meeting like last time. I am not on the OSHNA board, but it is a volunteer position and I am glad someone has the time to do it. OSHNA has had it’s rocky times, but can’t we just move on now? How long is this insane feud going to go on? Can’t we get back to a few years ago and make up?
11 – the current leadership kicked out those who ran it a few of years ago. You know, the period before the rocky times. When OSHNA is willing to be inclusive that will be a starting point. When OSHNA is willing to play nice with its fellow associations, that will be a starting point. When OSHNA is willing to follow the same neighborhood guidelines that it is demanding the city to force HTNA to follow, that will be a starting point. When OSHNA starts spending money on the neighborhood instead of on lawyers, that will be a starting point. When even one city council member can recognize even one OSHNA board member, that will be a starting point. Until those things, and a few others, happen, OSHNA is low hanging fruit.
#12, HTNA? What is an HTNA?
#11. Like the last meeting. You got to be kidding. There were 25 people at that meeting. Of those people 9 were OSHNA board or committee members, another 4 were significant others of the board members, and 8 were opposed tothe new bylaws. That leaves 4 people who were there who probNly had no idea what was going on. Worried that you would consider those of us opposed to the bylawas as they stand as disidents. Why do you not consider anyone with a dfferent opinion as bad? Can anyone spell intolleranc?
12- huh?
# 10 – 9 here – sorry to bust your bubble, I’m an OSHNA member !
Since you like dealing with facts, I thought I’d come clean with you! So you like OSHNA and it’s exclusive behavior?
Do you realize that there are founding members of OSHNA that today have NO VOTING rights within the organization they founded.
All the businesses that OSHNA claims they want in the hood, then OSHNA excludes them from having a seat at the table!
I don’t see much leadership in the concepts of OSHNA as of late.
#11 “…hoping the discontents are not going to come just to disrupt the meeting like last time.”
How sad that the Kool Aide Pot Luck thinks that people who have a different opinion out of lock-step with the current OSHNA Board are trying to disrupt the meetings by pointing out the things that are wrong with how business is being conducted. OSHNA refuses to follow the rules in their own bylaws and now, at the up coming meeting, are going to try to pass bylaws that give the Board absolute power over the member’s wishes is wrong. Shouldn’t someone be there trying to fight for the members? Get off the OSHNA opiate before members are just numbers and OSHNA is a few voices speaking for themselves. Vote no on ALL the bylaws!
Thanks Dirk!
Has anyone noticed that OSHNA is always “raising funds” ? They can have a $200 project and they will have to raise money to accomplish it. What ever happened with the 10s of thousands of dollars we have or had? The soccer goals are now having fundraising? WTF?
The soccer field article was a farce. I next to the park and the soccer goals are only out when there is practice or tournaments for the adult league. If they want to spend their money on helping the city buy news ones that’s ok but don’t call in the name of the children.
Very few children get to enjoy the park because it’s adult leagues who play softball and soccer there. The playground is nice but you can’t even play basketball because lots of people from outside the neighborhood come and dominate the court.
The park is more a nuisance because of the outsiders than it benefits the neighborhood.
Starbucks must be giving out free kool-aid on Saturday mornings.
20 – If the Starbucks kool-aid stands for fairness, inclusiveness, being open-minded, supporting transparency, being proactive and having a successful track record, then brew up some more and give me a cup. It is certainly not the same kool-aid served at pot-luck and OSHNA board meetings. Then again, maybe it’s not the kool-aid, but the people. At some point, given their disastrous record over the past 2 years, maybe it will be recognized that the current board members just aren’t very good at leading a neighborhood association. That’s not to say that they aren’t nice people with the best of intentions who may be successful in other endeavors. I am sure John Scully was a nice guy with the best of intentions. And he did a great job at Pepsi. But he almost killed Apple.
What was disruptive at the last O’membership mtg that barely 30 people attended was that the board, after proceeding on with “introducing” the proposed bylaw changes without a quorum, was that the board further frustrated those who attended by refusing to allow any discussion on those changes being introduced. -No discussion was allowed. Nothing.. Not even a reading.
-Boy howdy that was some “introduction”.
Unfortantely, whatever good there might be seems to be outweighed by the bad and the board lost an opportunity for to put forth supportive reasons that could have been discussed over the past few months. Cramming a full length discussion in on the night of the vote bodes well for no one.
Starbucks is indeed giving out free kool-aid….though it doesn’t take much to get that group of trolls fired up.
#1 says OSHNA is kicking out businesses as members. The bylaws on the OSHNA blog do not support that. Business memberships are listed.
#9 says “OSHNA is the only neighborhood association that doesn’t allow “Property Owners” a vote !” but provides no evidence of that. A bold claim. How many neighborhood associations are in Tampa anyway? Can #9 email me all their bylaws?
#12 says a lot of thing and provides no evidence. A huge pile of strawmen and red herrings. Where is the proof?
#15 (#9) says that OSHNA doesn’t provide businesses a “seat at the table”. Which businesses have been turned away?
#16 says OSHNA is “going to try to pass bylaws that give the Board absolute power over the member’s wishes”. Really? OSHNA Mind Control?
#19, in quietly putting the lie to #12’s claim that OSHNA spends no money on the neighborhood, claims that only adult leagues play at Henry & Ola park. All 400 of the children in the city’s youth soccer program play there. If there are more adults than children playing there as #19 claims, that park is one heck of a good investment.
If all the energy that goes into the anti-OSHNA posting on this blog were spent on getting involved and working out compromises, there would not be anything to fight over today.
If we learned anything from the HTNA fiasco, it is that it’s easier to tear down than to build and the people good at destroying are not so good at building.
23 – the posters that you refer to are not anti-OSHNA, they are anti-board. That is probably because they have had to personally deal with the board. Or because they remember a time, prior to this board, when OSHNA was the example that associations tried to emulate instead of the war-torn fiasco it has become.
# 17 – Thanks for the honorable mention ….. however I didn’t state any facts- YET.
How many years are people going to be “anti-board”? The OSHNA board has changed siginicantly in the past few years yet the negative people have remained the same.
I’ll wager a bet that the only reason they’re anti-board is because they’re not on the board themselves!
I’ll wager second bet that these same negative people make another run for OSHNA board election.
23- Some facts from our friends to the South:
South Seminole Heights Civic Assn:
Purpose: The South Seminole Heights Civic Association (SSHCA) is a nonpartisan organization of community residents and business
partners representing the South Seminole Heights neighborhood in Tampa, Florida. Our borders are Hillsborough Avenue to the north, Dr.
Martin Luther King Boulevard to the south, Florida Avenue to the east and the Hillsborough River to the west. We invite you to join our
association and assist us, “To educate, promote and encourage civic pride and awareness of issues impacting the neighborhood in the area
known as South Seminole Heights while revitalizing a sense of community in a safe and healthy residential neighborhood. (SSHCA Bylaws
Article 1, Section 2.)”
Membership: Any person eighteen years of age or older or business enterprise interested in promoting the purpose of the SSHCA is eligible
for membership. Individual membership annual dues are $12.00 for a one-member household and $20.00 for a two-member household.
Voting privileges are limited to residents (owner/tenant) of South Seminole Heights and property owners (landlords) in South Seminole
Heights.
Business membership is $35.00 annually. Joint membership as an individual and business shall be limited to one (1) vote in the SSHCA.
From Southeast Seminole Heights Civic Assn:
” 4. MEMEBERS. Membership in the Corporation shall consist of residents, property owners, corporations and other entities of any kingd having an interest in the preservation and restoration of the “Southeast Seminole Heights area of Tampa, Florida and who pay the annual membership fees established and assessed from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Corporation. “
25 – ABOVE – I provided you the bylaws of our neighbors to the South and East.
Dirk Peters
If membership is open to anyone who has an “interest”, how do you control a group coming in that actually has no interest in the betterment of the neighborhood but rather what is best for them and making changes that are not desirable. As an example, there are several businesses on Florida Avenue that are leased. The business owner does not live or work in Seminole Heights and his only interest is in renting his property. Most of these buildings are unsitely and the owners do not care to maintain them. Should these business owners be allowed to dictate how our main corridors are currently used and what they will be used for in the future?
I’m not for or against any of these associations, I’m just asking so don’t get your panties in a wad. Just a reasonable response would be nice.
Why would ANYONE who want to BETTER our neighborhood be banned? That is ridiculous. If I am active, have an interest in improving IN ANY CAPACITY, pay my dues, then I should be allowed to join.
What is the reasoning to exclude anyone? Has there been a reason given?
Honest questions, not trolling or trying to sling mud. Find it odd that if we are all working towards a common goal that someone would be turned away. Hell, even the US has “roads to citizenships” for illegal aliens.
How do you know that they want to BETTER our neighborhood? It is obvious that there are some who don’t give a rats a** about making it better. You can look at their homes or businesses and easily see that they are not looking out for the betterment of the neighborhood. It is naive to think that everyone holds the best interest of the neighborhood above their own interests.
33 here. Very good points 32. If OSHNA would be a bit more forthcoming with the association things could be so much better. Based on 32’s questions I would not support businesses joining our group. Or if they did, they woudl not have voting rights on anything other than officers. They would not be allowed to run for office unless they owned property.
Anon- I agree that many “property owners” dont’ maintain their properties as they should. However, they wouldn’t dictate anything, they would be allowed a voice (1 vote).
I would say we would be better served to bring all “stakeholders”, to the table & include them in the process! If you want change you have a better chance of creating change by including all parties.
Dirk Peters
I agree number 35. Communication is very important. I know that OSHNA posted the proposed by laws on their website and gave folks an opportunity to ask questions or make comments through the website. However, I never tried it so am not sure what type of input they got from that.
All great points. Who is to say that all the car dealers don’t join and railroad the association. They then fight all the rules on fencing, zoning, etc. that could be a huge nightmare. Look at some of the business that have been long time businesses in SH. When they are sold the new owner comes in and fixes it up and they actually better the neighborhood. Imagine if Leroy never sold its sad that Leroys looks better now than it ever did. Look at D and D Antiques, Reservations, and the list goes on. What if the owner of the Seminole Heights Movie Theater gets on the board and lobbys the city to leave her alone?
Dirk what happens as one pointed out if all the car dealers unite and their “one Vote” is now 50?
>It is naive to think that everyone holds the best interest of the neighborhood above their own interests.
WTF am I reading?
I don’t think ANYONE would hold the best interest of the neighborhood above their OWN interests.
#35 your position is in line with the proposed changes to OSHNA business membership. Dirk’s is not. Non-resident property owners do not get voting rights today and that does not appear to be one of the changes. It should be. These bylaws are dated Oct 1996. If you go to the OSHNA blog you can see who made comments and how the bylaws people answered.
The people who supported voting rights for non-resident property owners in comments are Shawn Hicks, Dirk Peters, Gail Davis, and Larry Drane.
I see comments in there that say the bylaws people changed some of the proposals based on comments from Larry Drane, Brad Patrick, Shawn Hicks, and Karen Rae Anderson.
#37 these bylaws were open for comment for many months. As a member of OSHNA I got an email, postcard, newsletter, and a letter about them. I read the website too. The bylaws people responded to all of the comments. They even responded kindly to one that wanted to tie OSHNA funding limits to FEMA declarations.
38 just because there is a “vote” associated with a business does not mean that they have taken control of OSHNA. How do you stretch that to imply that they will take over the city and change zoning laws to suit themselves? Do you actually think the OSHNA is the tag that wags the government dog? We are actually the pile of **** and the flies around it at this point with all the drama of the past few years.
anyway 32 – 39 for the most parts sounds like one person posting and answering themselves (excluding Dirk’s post 36)
39 – I doubt 50 car dealerships will join OSHNA, first and foremost. And, if they did OSHNA would have 50 NEW MEMBERS !
And, furthermore I doubt 50 car dealers would vote the same on any given issue. And lastly OSHNA has some 400 current members so therefore I doubt the car dealers would bring OSHNA to its knees.
Let’s deal with reality! Its about OSHNA being inclusive, not exclusive!
Dirk Peters
Yeah we thought there wasn’t a chance for Obama to be Hillary and look what happened. Then we said, well if he beats Hillary there will be no chance he could win the general election and look what happened! Why even set yourself up for a situation that could easily be avoided in the beginning.
41 – “Non-resident property owners do not get voting rights today and that does not appear to be one of the changes.”
Actually, they do depending on who Jeff Harmon, Doreen Dibona and Bill Hunter think they will vote for. Two years ago, Diana Duvall was told by the above people that she could NOT vote because she was a non-resident property owner. Do you think the fact that she is the ex-wife of Bill Duvall, who is a past president and a member of the “Starbucks” group, had anything to do with that?
Last year, Steve Johns and David Purnell, two non-resident property owners were told initially by the election committee person that they could not vote, in line with the Duvall precedent the year before. However, the election committee person was specifically overruled by Dibona, Hunter and Harmon (who also happened to be candidates). Do you think the fact that Steve and David were going to vote the “pot-luck” slate had anything to do with that? Unfortunately, their two votes changed the results of the election of the treasurer. Cathy Simon went from losing by 1 to winning by 1 once the Johns and Purnell votes were allowed.
This board makes up the rules in their favor as they go along. There are numerous additional examples from Bill Hunter’s eligibility to run despite not paying dues for 7 years to limiting/censoring information in the election bios when they knew the infamous postcard was about to come out. Let’s not forget the expulsion of prior officers (two presidents and a VP) who tried to hold the pot-luck crew accountable and who would have run against them. Interestingly, those three were also removed from the bylaws committee when they were expelled without any due process and in violation of both state law and the city’s neighborhood guidelines.
This is the legacy of the current board. Me first, neighborhood second. The demise of OSHNA is the unfortunate result and it’s members, and the neighborhood at large, are the unfortunate victims.
#45, your post moves the neighborhood forward precisely how?
#46. I think #45 is pointing out that we are moving nowhere now. What’s the matter? Can’t see the forest for the trees, or too much koolaide?
#46 – Fair comment ….. Question being is how does the board’s stance on stakeholders move the neighborhood in a positive direction?
Why don’t we vote to add property owners to a voting member and leave business members as voting members. That would seem to be fair thing to do as they are stakeholders in the neighborhood.
#47, I admire your astuteness. “Kool Aid” is the cute and politically correct buzzword of the moment. Sorry to disappoint you. I don’t drink Kool Aid. I grew up thinking it was unhealthy.
I am drinking from the well of the refreshing and cold hard facts.
You are either moving our greater neighborhood forward or contributing to our demise.
My response to #45 was to suggest a move from living in the past to a move toward the future and what we can be.
You can live in your titillating and fabled chronolgy of the past if you wish.
Isn’t that akin to watching soap opera re-runs?
Doesn’t accomplish much.
But really.
Who cares what “they” did in the past?
What can WE (collectively) accomplish in the present and future?
That is my focus.
Our present and future.
We can’t change our past, only learn from it.
What shall it be?
Let’s change our psychology from “unfortunate victims” (as #45 suggests) to agents of change.
Forward or backwards?
Let’s move forward.
-b
So 49 you are OK with rewarding the behavior of the board by saying “let’s just wipe the slate clean and move forward”? I’m ok with that as long as the board is required to do the same. The day they revoke the ill-advised, vindictive and illegal expulsions is the day that I will believe that this board is willing to move forward. However, I think it will also be the day I look out my window and see pigs fly by.
#50, you may be waiting by your window a long time to see the pigs fly by. I could be wrong, its has certainly happened before. I confess, though, I do love BBQ, Carolina style, so let me know when they land.
In the meantime. I will be working to advance our community to the point that we are the rival of South Tampa and our surrounding environs.
I am tired of fielding calls from South Tampa asking about our “Civil War”, our crime and our instability. All this discussion of our past does nothing to move us forward. Please prove me wrong.
Call me when the pigs land and the charcoal is glowing, I’ll bring the slaw.
In the meantime, I’ll focus on our future rather than our past.
-b
51 – I have to answer those questions too. It is a shame how much damage the reputation of our neighborhood has suffered. And yet to move forward, the board has to learn to wipe the slate clean just as you are advocating everyone else to do. Unfortunately, OSHNA is the face of SH to many city employees and residents SoK, or even SoMLK. Rumor has it that the three expelled members approached the board with a compromise, but were rejected. Rumor has it that, prior to their petition drive, the people that formed HTNA approached the board with a compromise but were rejected. It seems that it is the board’s way or the highway. In fact, this was the reason cited when the 3 board members (including the elected president) resigned in December. The remaining 6 were impossible to work with and made demands (threats) if the other 3 didn’t follow the rest. No room for compromise, no openess to other ideas but their own.
It is possible for people to move forward independant of OSHNA. In fact, many have done so and have had some success. But it would be a lot easier if OSHNA reached out instead of closed ranks.
#52 And, some of the bylaws changes are written to codify the absolute authority of the Board over the membership. If you thought the membership had no voice before, just wait until you have voted yes on these bylaw changes. They give the Board complete control and allow them to disregard the wishes of the membership. Yes, they already have been doing that, but now the bylaws will sanction their behavior. Be very cautious.
My question is to Bill Hunter and Doreen Dibona. Since you see fit to bring in term limits and you both have bee on the board double the time expressed as a term limit. Will you step down for the required time period or will you stay for another 10 years making your total well beyond 30 years. I would think the reason for term limits, new ideas and people, would compel you to step down in the interest of the neighborhood, or are you so self obsessed that you believe you are the best thing for the neighborhood?
#40, I disagree. There are people who are willing to consider and promote what is best for the neighborhood above what suits their own ideas or interests. That is part of functioning in society. We all know that we have to compromise at some point in our lives … which usually involves putting the interest of the others above your own.
Hey Neighbors,
How do we fell about the proposed “TERM LIMITS”, ten years?
I think the proposed term limits does nothing to address the issues we currently face with the “long timers”. I would prefer they match that of the presidents. Two 2 year terms.
Joe Doe, OSH resident, age 32: “Mommy, when Timmy was seven, he spit in my sandbox”….to this day, I won’t play with him and hold it against him. Mommy, Timmy is bad and I never want anything to do with him, even if it is detrimental to our property values, our neighborhood, our neighbors or the overarching well being of the community in which we live. Timmy is a bad boy. Always. Mommy….I wanna go to Bo’s. NOW.
Caveats:
Close the chapters of the past.
Move forward.
Impact the future.
Build a new sandbox.
Invite Timmy to join you for a cone at Bo’s.
-b
58- Is Right ………… let’s vote no to the bylaw changes and eat a good meal.
58 – There is spitting in a sandbox and then there is publicly slandering, suing and expelling.
58- Since when does OSHNA have an impact upon our property values?? If OSHNA is responsible for the declining values – I say throw the bums out.
#55 >We all know that we have to compromise at some point in our lives … which usually involves putting the interest of the others above your own.
It never happens.
Think hard about it, you have never in your life done anything that you didn’t feel was for your best interest over the anonymous greater good.
Even those times you thought and felt that you were sacrificing your best interests for the greater good, on closer examination if you’re honest with yourself, you’ll see your best interests were tied to the greater good you thought you were sacrificing for.
Overt acts of altruism stand on a foundation subconscious selflessness.
“selflessness.”
Was meant to be “Selfishness”
Damn spell checkers.
I am unsure of what some are asking. Move onward, look to the future. Are you asking those who were slandered, sued and expelled (mentioned above) to pretend nothing happened. These are people who worked very hard for our community and who continue to do so. I think those that ostrasized them should be ashamed for what they have caused in our neighborhood. how can OSHNA expect anyone with any charcter to continue on without them. it is my opinion that unless they are reinstated there can be no moving on.
#62, “you have never in your life done anything that you didn’t feel was for your best interest over the anonymous greater good.”
You are obviously an extremely selfish person.
If there is a quorum tomorrow night, I hope that a majority will once again reject these “agenda driven” proposals
For more than two years I have voiced opposition to the proposed OSHNA changes. I stand to gain nothing either way with regard to the organization. If there is a gain to me personally it is in the belief that a healthy and functional neighborhood association is in the best interest of our community.
As is always the case in anything political there are those who think it is best to shut out dissenting voices or opposition. Look the Republican Party is suing to keep John Dingfelder off the County Commission ballot so that whoever wins the Republican primary will have no opponent in the general election. It is no different here in the OSHNA portion of Seminole Heights. As apparently Dirk Peter’s pointed out the other associations have a much broader definition of membership. The definition in South Seminole Heights I believe is unchanged from what was originally written in 1996. It pretty much summed up my viewpoint: if you live here or own property then you are a stakeholder and have a right to claim a vote and a seat at the table. If you believe in outreach how can you vote for by-laws that restrict participation?
I have chosen to no longer be a paid member. I don’t believe in exclusion. The expulsion of members should have never occurred. At that point OSHNA crossed a line that should never have been crossed and ceased to be a neighborhood association, more concerned with power, control and ego than the common good of the community. Once there was a time that I bought memberships for new neighbors in the hope that it would encourage them to take an interest in their new community. I bought advertising not in expectation of recouping it in actual business but to support an event and the neighborhood, using the same logic I had used years before in selling neighborhood advertising: it is not solely about getting a monetary return but to support the community. What happened? The board took and wasted 4 grand on attorney’s fees against neighbors. I don’t support neighborhood businesses that don’t give a rats a** about the community where they are located so why should I support a not for profit association doing the same thing? More than any single event this torn at the core fabric of what brought all of us together. So no, I can’t see voting for provisions that give the board more control with less potential competition.
If this is supposed to be about an inclusive and community driven association then why make it harder to participate? You can’t serve in certain capacities unless you have served on a committee; you can serve on a committee without the approval of the committee chair; a majority of the committees are chaired by board members. The circular reasoning is profound. It is not about meeting your neighbors where they are at but expecting them to meet the board members where they are at. That is not inclusive. It is tokenism masquerading as outreach.
Two year terms, barriers to running for board positions and the shrinking of the stakeholder pool are not the signs of an organization dedicated to being representative of the community and it is about as legitimate as gerrymandered political districts. It is about people who think that they and their views are the community.
These bylaw proposals don’t fix any of the real problems of the past two years. Those broken areas are not really addressed. These proposals will not help create a better neighborhood association. People with other ideas were not allowed to participate in crafting these proposals. A hand picked committee crafted these revisions. A committee chaired by a person anointed the Parliamentarian for years and yet did not even know the by-laws required the payment of dues to be a voting member while sitting on the board.
That fact that it was not open to participation by any member with an interest is reason enough to vote them down. I won’t even begin to address the tortured logic that it took to schedule this vote when they were presented at a meeting that lacked a quorum to do business and they could not even be discussed.
So to conclude as I began: If there is a quorum tomorrow night, I hope that a majority will once again reject these “agenda driven” proposals.
All, come out and vote!! Term limits, c’mon, its a volunteer organization, who cares. I can remember when no one was around to even hold a board position, no opposition whatsoever. Give me a break. For the record I’ll vote no, on general principles.
With all of this discourse, you’d think we were talking about a governmental organization.
67- YES, term limits …..being that it is a volunteer group and we have plenty of people who would take the time to help our neighborhood however they have no name recognization …. and we have a few lifers who don’t know its time to step-aside …..thus term limits are needed , HOWEVER 10 years is a lifetime.
I say (2) 2 years terms with a two years off.
#66, I don’t disagree with what you are saying. I think you have some very valid points. However, why would you drop your membership? You should be at the meeting. You should be voting. If you truly believe what you have stated to be true, the only way to make it change is to show up and vote.
#69 – If the lifers NEED to step-aside, wouldn’t that happen during elections? Aren’t the board positions all elected by the members?
The problem with the elections as with all elections are name recognition. People get elected because people know their name whether they are the best candidate or not. This especially holds true for the elderly in the neighborhood.
71 most new people won’t get in because they don’t have name recognition and many of the old timers just vote known name. That’s why incumbents always have the advantage in an election.
Also, have you ever notice who checks people in at the door at the general meetings? Doreen Dibona, Bill Hunter and now Evan St Ives. They seem so nice and pleasant and helpful, so why wouldn’t people vote for them. Who cares that when Dibona was in charge of the Advisor that it lost thousands of dollars every year and only went into the black when she was removed. Or that Hunter didn’t pay his dues for 7 years. Come on, Bill, it’s only 10 measly dollars! Or that the three of them voted to spend thousands of dollars on an ill-advised lawsuit that OSHNA not only lost, but that resulted in negative and embarassing press. The fact is that performance and competance is not a determining factor in OSHNA elections. If it was, those three, and a few others, would have been gone long ago and we wouldn’t need term limits.
# 66 has found better things to do with 2 hours on a Tuesday. On the one hand I care and on the other I am tired of spitting in the wind.
75 I’m in that same boat. I don’t care, but I don’t like the black eye the current board’s actions give the neighborhood that I live in and love.
#71 — that is a good point. Term limits are a way of saying we do not trust our membership to vote in the right people so we have to limit who the membership can vote for.
If shrinking the the pool of people who can vote is wrong (and it is) then so is shrinking the pool of people the membership is allowed to vote for.
Personal vendettas against individual board members are driving some of this loony behavior.
Vote “no” on the membership changes. Vote “yes” on the other changes that fix spelling errors or clarify minor issues. Take the good and reject the bad. That is still progress. Voting “no” on everything is lazy.
Where were all you “vote no on everything” people when the bylaws people were asking for input and discussion? You had months to discuss it and only a small handful bothered. Laziness or agenda?
#75 maybe if you stopped spitting and started communicating and negotiating you would get farther.
“black eye the current board’s actions give the neighborhood that I live in and love.”
I wonder if you’re one of the people who runs to the newspaper reporters with various conspiracy theories and negativity.
IMO, that’s the kind of action that brings negativity on the neighborhood.
Aren’t the bylaws vote a package deal? Vote for the whole package? Yay or Nay?
If so, then one should vote “NO” for the all changes if there is other option.
66 is right on the mark
77 – “If shrinking the the pool of people who can vote is wrong (and it is) then so is shrinking the pool of people the membership is allowed to vote for.”
Well, you can just do what the board did. Expel people so they can’t run. After all, what kind of experience could two former presidents and a vice-president bring to the table? Each of whom, btw, voluntarily stepped off the board without need of term limits.
The one absolutely necessary bylaw change is to remove the ability of the board to unilaterally and arbitrarily expel, without any due process, those they do not like or do not agree with. However, you won’t find that one in the proposed changes. Just removing another class of members and ineffective term limits.
#80 one vote per article. 12 articles. you can vote no on membership and yes on other things.
#81 negative revisionist history is boring. moving forward yet?
82 – If only it was history. And it certainly isn’t revisionist, unless you happen to be one of the board who doesn’t believe in due process.
The fact remains that if it could happen to those three, it could happen to anyone. Don’t agree with historic preservation – EXPELLED! Want to scrutinize the association’s books – EXPELLED! Want to run against the board – EXPELLED!
While these seems like extreme cases, the fact is that the board retains the power to do it. It is a power ripe for abuse. And, as the incidents of just last year have shown, this board will not hesitate to abuse it.
Remember, to move forward, ALL parties need to compromise. Apparently in your world, if those who are the victims of an injustice or abuse of power attempt to hold the perpetrators accountable, they are somehow holding back progress. I would suggest, however, that accountability IS progress.
81 – We as Americans term limit our President …… and many of us Americans think we would have a better America if we term limited the rest of our government.
This is a neigborhood association, we should want more participation ~ not less!
“Remember, to move forward, ALL parties need to compromise.”
yes. to compromise one must be willing to communicate calmly.
read this entire set of comments and you come away seeing who is willing to compromise and work for the neighborhood and who is not. some have moved forward and done good things and others are stuck in a rut. outlandish claims of control, expulsion fear-mongering, and personal attacks. boring.
this board is not the same as last board. recognizing that is a step in the right direction. move forward. compromise is risk. risk letting go of your anger.
this board is the same just the positions have changed.
#86 – this doesn’t jive with what I see. could you support that position with details please.
85 – As I read this entire set of comments as you suggest, I see claims that compromises were offered to the board but were rejected. I see claims that the board abused its authority. I see claims that the board is being exclusive. I see frustration by residents who want to be involved but are excluded.
And as I read other topics on this blog I see that those who you condemn are the ones actually moving the neighborhood forward. Hess leads neighborhood and city wide crime issues, Baron negotiates alley trash service and Kwid was the last effective code chairman for OSHNA. Barnhill starts the SH Market and he and Jenkins organize the tree giveaway. Expelled former OSHNA members, and other SH association officers, are at zoning workshops and Council hearings, but no OSHNA.
Then I see you repeatedly saying just ignore all the damage that the board has done. And if you don’t, then YOU’RE the problem.
So, tell me, where is the compromise there? Where is the commitment from OSHNA to move forward? To forget the past and embrace (or just accept) people who want to work for the betterment of the neighborhood? Heck, OSHNA can’t even get a quorum at the eating meeting (i.e. free food). And yet they can afford to expel and disenfranchise residents?
And, btw, the “personal attacks” you mention (and I assume you mean the references to Harmon, Dibona, Hunter and St. Ives) are nothing but statements of facts. Harmon did fire the THAN rep (who is now president of that organization as rep for SSHCA), appoint himself and then rarely go. Dibona did run the Advisor thousands of dollars in the red and had to be removed. Hunter did fail to pay his dues for 7 years. The board did authorize a disastrous lawsuit. But feel free to refute them, if you can.
And I’ll look forward to your same tired old accusations of how I, and others who want to hold this board accountable, are the problem.
Well said 88. But don’t worry they will keep presenting the same tired bylaw proposals year after year.
Two suggestions:
Maybe it is time to put someone else in charge of revising the bylaws. Someone not interested in sitting on the board for life or limiting participation.
Maybe the current board should annul or rescind the expulsions. The decisions of the past board appears to have so damaged the organization that they cannot muster a quorum even when free food is involved.
I’m having flashbacks to Junior High School.
#88 still fighting last year’s battle. my dad can beat up your dad. whatever. boring.
move forward.
Given last nights underwhelming turnout it sounds like most of the neighborhood has moved forward.
Kharma ?? There wasn’t a quorum when the board “introduced” the changes..
It’s only fitting that a quorum failed to be reached to vote on these “agenda driven” proposals.
Anyone know what the headcount was last night?
How long can Dirk and Stuart keep this post going?
I think it’s hard for anyone to “forget the past” when it’s dragged up on this blog, seemingly on an hourly basis.
Some people have nothing better to do with their time.
Yet here you are.
Do a head count of people who have historically been involved in OSHNA and attended most meetings but were MIA last night. Where did those 30+ people go? Most gave up and moved on following the October election issues and the resignations of nearly half the board before the 1st meeting following the election.
Very sad what the last 2 boards have done to one of Tampa’s most respected neighborhood organizations. It has gone from respected to a sad joke. sigh.
Dear # 95 – I have made comments on this thread, however they have been signed.
Perhaps u could comment about the subject and sign your name?
Dirk Peters
Muppets
mna….mna……
Ho Hum
#99….not #95 here, but a curious OSH resident.
I have seen your name throughout these threads and applaud your unusual “full-disclosure” which runs contrary to typical blog protocol. The name sounds familiar. Are you my neighbor by chance? I’m new to OSH and have yet to meet all my neighbors.
I applaud your passion and apparent desire for transparency. If you explore other blogs, you find the posts are almost always anonymous.
It is nice to know my neighbors and the residents of OSH prefer to operate without the veil of anonymity in some instances. A refreshing departure from the norm.
Regurgitation = No Digestion.
No *Digestion = No Growth.
No Growth = Death.
Challenge for Survival = Learn to Digest.
*Digestion includes a process of elimination of those elements not vital to growth. You learned all of this in early high school, I suspect.
Draw your own suppositions and apply accordingly with the ultimate goal of a thriving, vibrant, robust and living organism mutually beneficial to all involved.
-b
So OSHNA has to shit out Dibona, Hunter, St. Ives, Hicks and Spanos? Is there a laxative for that?
More muppets.
too funny #103
Perfect 103 and 104!
#99 – given your previous prolific posts, we welcome your response as to your residency and if we might be neighbors? Or perhaps you are merely a property owner without residence in OSH? Just curious. Surely it is either/or? #105 – still curious.
Dear 108- the answer to your question regarding my residency is, Carrollwood Village (currently).
I say currently as sometime in the next year, I will move back to OSH.
Yes that makes me a “property owner” in OSH, today and since 1991. A true stakeholder !
I also own “Heights Realty” which makes me a “business owner” in OSH, today and since 1993. A true stakeholder!
So since I’ve been here nearly twenty years, I think you would agree that I have a stake in the neighborhood and could possible care about Old Seminole Heights just as much as my neighbors who have been hear for five years.
I suppose this question was asked regarding the OSHNA debate about stakeholders??
If OSHNA doesn’t like “business owners” and/or “property owners”, it’s my opinion they should rename the association to OSHHOA, and become an HOA.
Neighorhoods are made-up of all stakeholders just as the City of Tampa’s, Neighborhood & Community Relations requires to be recognized by the City (ie. Property Owners, Home Owners, Buiness Owners & Renters). All these stakeholders indeed make-up our neighborhood. To me if you were going to exclude any group, it would start with “renters” as they have no skin in the game, so to speak.
Dirk Peters
OSHNA member since 1991
Thanks, #109. I think I’ve got the picture.
We are not neighbors by virtue of your residency.
You anticipate moving to OSH in the future but currently live in Carrollwood Village, have been a OSHNA member since ‘91 and you own a businesss w/in OSH (I presume).
I was merely curious as your name was not a household name to me. You persisted in publicizing it (contrary to typical blog protocol). Naturally, I wondered who you were.
Albeit, I do not have quite the pedigree of OSHNA memberships that you hold for what that is worth.
I appreciate the transparency. I honestly did not know what affiliation you had w/in the boundaries of OSH or who you were for that matter, only that you felt you had “name recognition”.
For your reference, I have no voice in what OSHNA does or does not like beyond my one vote as dues paying member.
I assure you, my only agenda is to celebrate our rich historic heritage with a laser focus on our future.
Perhaps we have something in common?
#108.
Dear # 108,
I think people should sign their names and I suppose I disagree with the “blog protocol”.
I think we are neighbors, I spend about 10-12 hours a day in OSH. If we look at the 8-9 hours you leave the neighborhood to work and take into account that you sleep say 8 hours a day. I figure I’m out & about in OSH, perhaps more that the resident of OSH.
To me what makes myself & others a “stakeholder” ……. is ownership ! ! !
Stakeholder = a owner, someone who owns a piece of the pie.
It is my hope that OSHNA and its members will vote “no” of the Membership portion of the Bylaws.
They are exclusive in nature. The City requires membership to be open to ALL stakeholders.
Please give me a call sometime and come by for a visit at my office, Ph. 239-1100
Dirk Peters
OSHNA member since 1991, and perhaps longer pending the Bylaw changes
Dirk, we have two votes in my household and will be voting NO on the membership portion and the 10 year term limit proposal. Both are unnecessary, exclusive in nature, and divisive to a Neighborhood Assoc. These by-laws are bad-laws, IMO.
OSHNA members since 1996
112 – There are other bylaws that need some adjustments, Larry Drane has a few other ideas he will suggest at the meeting.
IMO we need “term limits”, we seem to have board members whom will not step down and let others have a chance to lead OSHNA.
Dirk Peters
Agree Dirk but the “term limits” need to be reasonable. 10-years? That’s way to long.
In the initial bylaws committee meetings in 2008, five year terms were suggested but were shot down by…wait for it…Doreen Dibona and Bill Hunter. They only agreed to 10 if the time didn’t start running until the change (i.e., they would get another 10 years). So whose best interests do you think they have as a priority: thiers or OSHNA’s?
114 – Term Limits:
I agree ~ I think no more than (4) years and then a (2) year break. This policy would provide others a chance to serve OSHNA.
Committee Chairs:
I also believe that all committe chairs should not be held by OSHNA board members !
Both of the above would foster my participation with OSHNA. The more members we have involved the more we accomplish.
Explusions or Suspension from OSHNA:
The explusions of Randy, Susan & Christy, have caused more harm than any single action to OSHNA. After that action we witnessed a lawsuit (sorry arbitration or legal proceeding), which further damaged the OSHNA.
So its my opinion in the future any expulsion/suspension should be approved by the membership, with a 51% of a quorum vote.
This would place more control with the membership.
We need to remember this is a membership-based organization. Not a board-based organization.
Dirk Peters