(Advertisement)

Bella Vista POA Under Investigation

ASSOCIATION COULD FACE ALMOST $300,000 IN FINES

Posted: March 10, 2011 at 5:29 a.m.

Tim Fosdick, with the Bella Vista Property Owners Association’s Street Department, drops asphalt into a pothole Wednesday in Bella Vista. The association could be fined by the Arkansas Contractors Licensing Board for performing contract work without a license.
Zoom

Tim Fosdick, with the Bella Vista Property Owners Association’s Street Department, drops asphalt into a pothole Wednesday in Bella Vista. The association could be fined by the Arkansas Contractors Licensing Board for performing contract work without a license.

The Bella Vista Property Owners Association could be fined as much as $276,595 by the Arkansas Contractors Licensing Board for failing to obtain a contractor’s license.

This story is only available from our archives.

(Advertisement)



« Previous Story

DIFFERENCE OF OPINION: City Eyes Used Car Loc...

A difference of opinion over used car lots seemed to split the City Council and the Planning Commission, but members of both agree improving lot appearances is needed. Read »

Next Story »

Other days

100 YEARS AGO March 10, 1911 As the result of a letter received by Acting Mayor John S. Odom from Carl Voss, president of the City Beautiful Association, asking that the ci... Read »

This is stupid. The state needs to spend more time on things like missing and abused children or doing a better job of keeping track of sex offenders then running an investigation into the POA on street projects

Posted by: DNC

March 10, 2011 at 8:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mr. Barfield, apparently you are not aware of the fact that the POA can NOT just hand over the equiipment to the City for street maintenance or anything else for that matter. The governing board does NOT own any of the properties, the entire Bella Vista Village Property Owners Association is made up of the "PROPERTY OWNERS" whether it is their residence or a lot and they are the owners. It would take a VOTE from ALL property owners and a majority percent to allow such an action. Now that you have voted to be a City does NOT mean just hand everything over to them it takes a MAJORITY VOTE for any of this to happend. Then your taxes will increase on everything and infact we are now paying City Taxes which we did NOT have to do before. If you hand every thing over to the City it becomes PUBLIC remember that word PUBLIC. Is that what you want? All the amenities i.e. pools, lakes, golf courses, tennis and recreation centers, not to mention the parks would be PUBLIC for anyone from anywhere to use the amenities. So now that you are a City is that what you want everything to become PUBLIC. I moved here because it had restritions and covenants not to be PUBLIC

Posted by: Queeny49

March 10, 2011 at 1:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Oh, God-- no! Please: no! Not the PUBLIC!!

Posted by: AlphaCat

March 10, 2011 at 1:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Why would the POA give all its equipment to the city? Doesn't it need it to maintain its own roads, parking lots, cart paths, etc.

Posted by: BVVresident

March 10, 2011 at 2:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Yes but there are some people here that want everything given to the City and eliminate the POA all together. How would the City maintain all of our amenities, they don't have the manpower or the funds. Only through charging us higher city taxes which we never had until we became a City. We need the POA to keep our Village the way it always has done in the past. Most people have NO idea how much it costs to run this Village and it won't get any cheaper if we allow everything to be turned over to the City of Bella Vista.

Posted by: Queeny49

March 10, 2011 at 3:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Wow! Clark is an attorney, and does not think the contractor needs a license. When the city hires anyone, that would be the first question to ask I would think, and if they carried insurance in the event property damage occured. You would think as an attorney, you have investigated a little further to determine what was required.

Posted by: Criminalj

March 11, 2011 at 8:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

WOW! I love it when neighbors get together and exchange ideas.

I know it is a dumb thing to say but POA members and the public that makes up the City of Bella Vista are one in the same people. DUH!

I really think I want to buy my own stuff from myself so the POA can give Cooper Industries everthing I have including my house and property. OH, with interest tacked on a long term loan.

I am beginning to think that retiring in Bella Vista was one of the dumbest things I have done in my lifetime.....so far. It ain't over yet.

One thing I can say of the POA and "the city", stupid is stupid does.

Posted by: hbcark

March 11, 2011 at 11:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mr. hbcark,

Bella Vista is not for everybody. That road that led you here leads you back to where you came from as well. If you are that miserable, I would suggest you sell your property and move back. Life is too short (especially in retirement here in Bella Vista) to go around being angry and miserable.

Posted by: hawgfan25

March 11, 2011 at 11:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

hawgfan25, who said I was angry? Who said I was miserable? You? Is it because I gave my opinion that you feel this way?

Believe it or not I am neither. How can one be angry and miserable at himself when he does it to himself? I love the Ozarks.

There was irony in that message that I am sure you cannot see. I actually think it is a joke that people cannot see the forest for the trees.

Posted by: hbcark

March 11, 2011 at 12:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

hb

I apologize as I did not mean to offend you but your comments appeared to reflect frustration at the very least if not anger and misery. Bella Vista is still a fine place to live and it is governed better than many places who do the same things for their citizenry. I just wish Mr. Parsons and others would quit the non-stop carping and negativity. His actions have turned a beautiful place into cess pool of hate and discontent. We don't need that around here. If a mistake is made, fine let's correct it. But let's not act like a bully and belittle those who work hard to serve us!

Posted by: hawgfan25

March 11, 2011 at 2:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I agree and confirm hawgfan25. If we would all just help by making sure that both the POA and the City are able to work together and stop trying to tear them a part Bella Vista may be able to get back to the way it was intended. Mr. Parsons seems to want to stir up trouble as far as I know everytime he doesn't get his way. Apparently he has done so many times both on local and state levels. People out there need to stop trying to get rid of the POA it is not going to happen unless you can get a majority vote from ALL the property owners to dissolve it entirely. Read the Covenants and Declarations.

Posted by: Queeny49

March 11, 2011 at 3:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mr. Parsons is not stirring up 'trouble'. The city and POA both have numerous issues of which Mr. Parsons has identified the 'trouble'.
FACT: A lawsuit is currently filed against the city due to its failure to allow competitive bidding as required per state law.

A former city alderman was formerly quoted at a council meeting:

"We took oaths to uphold the law and one of those laws is that our city, on any bid over $20,000.00 gets competitive bidding. We are now going into the fifth year and we haven't figured out how to get a competitive bid. I really don't think you're following the oath of this office."

More facts:

FACT: Let us not forget that three POA Board Directors resigned last year due to the problems they all encountered with other POA board members and POA staff.

FACT: Let us not forget that last year,the POA sued Mr. Parsons for harassment of which ended up as a jury trial and a unanimous verdict in FAVOR of Mr. Parsons of which cost the membership approx. $65K.

FACT: Let us not not forget that the POA was sued for allowing 2000 votes cast in a 2007 POA Board election for certain 'preferred' candidates due to the creation of 2000 micro lots by the developer with assessments UNPAID! The court found that the POA accepting the votes from the unassessed 2000 mico-lots was IMPROPER and in violation of the governing documents and in violation of the declarations and covenants.

FACT: When the city incorporated, the police and fire services and EQUIPMENT was transferred from the responsibility of the POA to the city. The equipment was NOT transferred by a vote of the property owners but through drafted lease agreements of which to my recollection was at the cost of about $1.00.

Posted by: Hammer1

March 11, 2011 at 7:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Hawgfan25: your post at 9:10 am is the best post on this topic. I wish everyone in BV would read it.

Posted by: RDodger

March 11, 2011 at 7:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Quoted comment from a POA Board Director who officially resigned effective 07/14/2010:

"Given the current make-up of the board, and the approach I understand the current Board members have indicated they intend to follow, I believe it is no longer possible for me to accomplish the above objectives. And so it is with sincere regret that I announced my resignation from the POA Board of Directors, effective July 14, 2010. I can not, and will not, work in an environment where I believe personal and special interest’s decisions come before what is best for the POA membership. I feel the direction that the current majority of the Board, and the General Manager is committed to, is in direct conflict with my own system of values. And I cannot, and will not, continue to serve on a Board where I believe that I have to compromise my own sense of what is right or wrong. I thank the community for the support you gave me in the 2009 election and wish the very best for a most deserving membership."

Posted by: Hammer1

March 11, 2011 at 8:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

A few quoted comments from another POA Board Director who officially resigned effective 07/14/2010:

"Also, I have worked tirelessly over the past 14 months to do what I promised during my campaign, “Preserve, Protect and Enhance” all of the amenities in Bella Vista. This has been very difficult to do. I’ve met resistance along the way, always being pushed two steps back for every step forward. The bullying and sometimes threatening environment I endured during my first year on the Board is something that I believe no one should have to tolerate."

"I realized this undue influence at a Board working session on July 8, 2010. There were several members/guests in the audience, including a director from last year’s board. I personally witnessed this former director sitting in the audience giving hand signals to our current Chairman to cut off a POA member who was answering a question that I had asked him. The Chairman acted on these inappropriate hand signals and prematurely cut off the member from speaking. I was appalled."

"The bottom line is that I can now totally understand why there is such a perception from the membership that the Board of Directors works for the GM, instead of the GM working for the Board of Directors. From what I have seen, this is no longer a perception – in my opinion, it is, in fact, a reality."

"Thank you Bella Vista for allowing me to serve you as a member of the POA Board. I love this community and I will continue to be involved and look out for your interests, but in a different capacity. Therefore, it is with a sad heart that I must resign from the POA Board effective immediately."

Posted by: Hammer1

March 11, 2011 at 8:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Last, for those who apparently exercise blind faith in the city and POA, a few quoted comments to peruse from the 3rd POA Board Director who officially resigned effective 07/14/2010:

"On June 14, 2010, 2:00pm, Director(Blank) and I brought to the attention of the current Chairman, serious ethics and procedural concerns. The justification for this meeting was that we were hoping that a resolution could be found privately, since the issues were very sensitive."

"Because of these reasons as stated above, I feel I can no longer be effective as a Director and fulfill my obligations to the membership. In my opinion, it is all about maintaining control. And as such, I believe that the Board of Directors is now an entity in name only; relinquishing its oversight responsibility fully to the General Manager. It is also my opinion, that should the Board of Directors disappear tomorrow, the oversight of the Bella Vista POA would not change."

"I am an independent person. I do my homework and research, and most importantly, I justify in public why I vote on issues. For those who will say that I am a quitter or disgruntled due to the results of the recent POA Board election, please don’t marginalize and simplify these serious issues. I can only say that I am smart enough to know when I have been placed in a position where I can no longer be productive and an effective advocate for the membership on those very issues that I was elected to change. To continue in my position on the Board would be dishonest and disrespectful to both myself and the members."

"With much regret to the membership, I have resigned from the Bella Vista Property Owners Association Board of Directors."

Posted by: Hammer1

March 11, 2011 at 8:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

@hbcark Your statement "I know it is a dumb thing to say but POA members and the public that makes up the City of Bella Vista are one in the same people. DUH!" is not entirely true. There are number of residences incorporated by the City of Bella Vista which are not part of the POA and, if memory serves, the opposite is true as well.

Posted by: EndPoliticalCorrectness

March 12, 2011 at 9:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I believe your right EndPoliticalCorrectness

I had forgotten that the City with its imminent domain powers was trying to incorporate spots located within its city limits [even outside its city limits], if memory serves me right. I have not been following the outcome of those turf battles. However, I believe the population count would be a minimal number, like say 25 people or less. I don't have a clue.

Bit more later - another subject.....maybe.

Posted by: hbcark

March 12, 2011 at 11:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mr. Cooper--

Eminent domain is not the same thing as annexation. Don't try to make annexation or incorporation sound worse than they really are.

Posted by: AlphaCat

March 12, 2011 at 12:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Several things caught my eyes in different posts. One was “it is not going to happen” – “unless you can get a majority vote from ALL the property owners to dissolve it entirely. Read the Covenants and Declarations” and “violation of the governing documents and in violation of the declarations and covenants.”

An example given as FACT: was “When the city incorporated, the police and fire services and EQUIPMENT was transferred from the responsibility of the POA to the city. The equipment was NOT transferred by a vote of the property owners but through drafted lease agreements of which to my recollection was at the cost of about $1.00.”

I moved here in 1999, which was during the time of the purchase of the property located in the northern part of BV that extended into Missouri. I tried to research the transaction of this purchase later in POA Board minutes located in the BV Library to no avail. I had to presume adherence to the declarations and covenants was nonexistent. Property owners were never allowed to vote on this – and if they did it was no doubt denied by the property owners handily. Getting two-thirds of the property owners to agree on anything would have been unusual and novel back then. This was ignored and the property was purchased ingloriously and secretively.

First the golfers were to pay for this property with added golf fees [was to be a new golf course] and when that was found to be insufficient it fell on the property owners to pick up the tab, which they did.

Someone can correct me on any or all the above, if untrue. I would also like to see the proof of your clarification of my misinformation.

Seems like the glorious declarations and covenants of the POA also declare that if property obtained by property owners for a specific reason was not fulfilled within a certain length of time this property would default back to Cooper Industries. Who owns the property now – pray tell and hopefully, the POA.

Point being declarations and covenants have meant very little or naught to the POA Board in the past. Why mention them now? I can see why honest and noble elected POA Board members would resign. I can empathize with them.

Posted by: hbcark

March 12, 2011 at 12:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

As far as the POA purchased ARK-MO property years ago, that transaction was completed before I relocated here, but I have heard about it from POA members who did, in fact, live in Bella Vista at this time.

As 'rumor', I heard from several members that someone in POA decision-making was linked, (possibly through marriage) to a realtor who personally profited from this land transaction-- once again, rumor.
Now, with a little digging through public records and minutes, I think this 'rumor' could be verified.

Now, I do know that the POA borrowed money to purchase the Ark-Mo land, but that note was paid for approx. 1-2 years ago. Due to a declining real estate market, if the POA attempted to sell the property at this time, I believe the POA would most likely incur a monetary loss, so it appears they are holding onto it for now until market conditions improve.

As far as the POA declarations and covenants, for the 'Final Judgment' of 2000 votes cast on the unassessed lots, ruled as improper, the Judge also ordered on 2/12/2009 whereas:

Roger A. Norbeck, Plaintiff

Bella Vista POA, Defendant

Cooper Communities, INC., Intervenor

(4) "The Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted and a declaratory judgment is issued against the Defendant and Intervenor. In so doing, the Court declares that the Defendant and Intervenor are to perform from this day forward, in a manner in keeping with the Declarations and covenants that run with the lands that make up Bella Vista Village, and the Defendant is to perform in a manner in keeping with the Defendant's Articles of Incorporation."

In summation POA: Follow your own rules!

And last, for the aforementioned lawsuit above, Mr. Jim Parsons was personally involved in raising money for this lawsuit; whereas, POA members pooled their own monies together to legally fight against their own POA.

Posted by: Hammer1

March 12, 2011 at 2:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RESOLUTION NO. 2007-21
AS AMENDED
CITY OF BELLA VISTA, ARKANSAS

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE BELLA VISTA VILLAGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR PURPOSES OF LEASING A POLICE DEPARTMENT FACILITY AND PURCHASING POLICE EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHEREAS, the City of Bella Vista requires an adequate facility for the location of its police department, and

WHEREAS, the City also is in need of acquiring law enforcement vehicles, equipment and other items necessary for the full operation of a police department, and

WHEREAS, the Bella Vista Property Owners Association has agreed in principle to leasing a police department facility and selling all law enforcement vehicles and equipment to the City for a de minimus cost.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLA VISTA, ARKANSAS:

Section 1: The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into a contract with the Bella Vista Property Owners Association for the purpose of leasing a two story police department facility located near town center and purchasing law enforcement vehicles and equipment.

Section 2: The amount of the lease portion of the agreement shall not exceed the annual cost of insurance premiums and real estate taxes paid by the Bella Vista Property Owners Association for the police department building, on an annual basis. The contract shall provide that proof of said premiums and taxes paid shall be provided to the City upon request.
The lease agreement shall also provide for the City to pay for monthly utility costs and for normal/routine maintenance and landscaping of the facilities.

Section 3: The amount authorized to be spent for the purchase of vehicles and equipment shall not exceed a total of $250.00 for all vehicles and equipment purchased from the Bella Vista Property Owners Association.



Resolution No. 2007-21
Page 2 or 2

Section 4: Unless already authorized and budgeted from a different account, the amounts to be paid shall be paid from city general funds.

PASSED THIS 25th DAY OF June, 2007.

APPROVED:


__________________________
Frank E. Anderson, Mayor

ATTEST:

______________________________
Jane A. Wilms, MMC; City Clerk

Posted by: Hammer1

March 12, 2011 at 4:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RESOLUTION NO. 2007-43

CITY OF BELLA VISTA, ARKANSAS

AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE BELLA VISTA VILLAGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR PURPOSES OF LEASING FIRE DEPARTMENT FACILITIES AND PURCHASING FIRE EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
______________________________________________________________________

WHEREAS, the City of Bella Vista requires adequate facilities for the location of its fire department; and

WHEREAS, the City also is in need of acquiring fire vehicles, equipment and other items necessary for the full operation of a fire department; and

WHEREAS, the Bella Vista Property Owners Association has agreed in principle to leasing fire department facilities and selling all fire vehicles and equipment to the City for a de minimus cost.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLA VISTA, ARKANSAS:

Section 1: The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into a contract with the Bella Vista Property Owners Association for the purpose of leasing fire department facilities currently controlled by the POA and purchasing fire vehicles and equipment.

Section 2: The amount of the lease portion of the agreement shall not exceed the annual cost of insurance premiums and real estate taxes paid by the Bella Vista Village Property Owners Association for the fire department buildings, on an annual basis. The contract shall provide that proof of said premiums and taxes paid shall be provided to the City upon request.

Section 3: The amount authorized to be spent for the purchase of vehicles and equipment shall not exceed a total of $250.00 for all vehicles and equipment purchased from the Bella Vista Property Owners Association.

Section 4: Unless already authorized and budgeted from a different account, the amounts to be paid shall be paid from city general funds.

PASSED THIS 17th DAY OF December, 2007.

APPROVED: _______________________________
Frank E. Anderson, Mayor
ATTEST:

______________________________
Jane A. Wilms, MMC; City Clerk

Requested by: Mayor Anderson
Prepared by: Jason B. Kelley, Attorney for the City

Posted by: Hammer1

March 12, 2011 at 4:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

@hbcark
You state " However, I believe the population count would be a minimal number, like say 25 people or less. I don't have a clue." According to the 2010 census, the City of Bella Vista has 12879 housing units. According to the POA's website, as of February 2011, there are 12526 residential water meters (households), a difference of 353. Approximately 353 households in the City of Bella Vista which are not POA members - hardly a minimal number.

Posted by: EndPoliticalCorrectness

March 12, 2011 at 8:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

@EndPoliticvalCorrectness

THANKS! That is an interesting tidbit of info.

Not sure what the difference entails but that number is more than I would have ever figured.

Posted by: hbcark

March 12, 2011 at 10:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Parson's has never served on a Board of Directors or a City Council. Who would elect him? He simply wants to play "gotcha" and denigrate the institutions and their officials that govern Bella Vista and contribute to their dysfunction. It's no wonder that Bella Vista is looked on as a laughing stock when it comes to properly and progressively run communities. Just look at Bella Vista's neighbors to the south. Bentonville has a beautiful skating rink and splash park, walking trails throughout town and serious plans to build a state of the art community center. Rogers has an Adult Wellness Center for people over 50 that is a model for other communities around the country. Unfortunately, people like Mr. Parsons just don't get it. They would rather the City and POA spend their resources on defending themselves over highly technical and esoteric issues that further noone's quality of life. It's time for Mr. Parsons to quit foisting his pointless point of view on the rest of us and let us enjoy Bella Vista and all it has to offer.

Posted by: hawgfan25

March 14, 2011 at 3:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

@ hawgfan25
Are you certain that you are okay with the City of Bella Vista possibly ignoring state law by not putting the street maintenance contract out for competitive bid? Or are you just down on Mr. Parson's for inadvertently revealing the ignorance of the POA's general manager and attorney?

Posted by: EndPoliticalCorrectness

March 14, 2011 at 5:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Here is the thing folks. The Declarations and Covenants apply to all lands in the original development created by Cooper. there is language in the Declarations to the effect of "each Owner of any Lot or Living Unit by acceptance of a deed there for, or by entering into a contract of purchase with the Developer, whether or not it shall be so expressed in any such deed, contract of purchase, or other conveyance, shall be deemed to covenant and agree to ..." By buying land here you agree to live by the Declarations. The Declarations create the POA, ACC, etc and can only be dissolved by a 2/3 majority vote of all members-whether they live in Bella Vista or not, and a significant number don't.

Regarding the Ark-Mo land purchase that was done by the POA and was never part of the development so is not subject to the Declarations and its requirements of a vote etc. Everyone seems to forget that the POA is a corporation and not a government. We are all essentially stock holders and if you don't like what the corporation is doing you can always sell your stock (land).

Posted by: BVVresident

March 14, 2011 at 5:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I don't believe the city is necessarily ignoring state law. There does seem to be some question regarding this so I am happy to let a judge decide. My understanding of the matter is that the contract is just for costs incurred by the POA in providing and overseeing street maintenance. What would it cost all of us if the city does put it out for bids? Wouldn't a commercial contractor like a profit margin? Where does the city come up with the funds to provide for that? We have a 4+ year old city government which everyone expects to be able to provide services like they have always been here. I would imagine that cities have start-up costs just like a business and it takes a while to be operating like a comparable city the size of Bella Vista. I think too many assume that everyone is out to get them when in fact they are just trying to figure out the best way to go with what they have to work with.

Posted by: BVVresident

March 14, 2011 at 6:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

That 'only' 4 year old city government argument is just plain bunk; whereas, before Bella Vista became an incorporated city, the POA governed Bella Vista entirely, so a form of government always existed here of which included police and fire departments, and so forth...

And, some of the same folks running it before are still running it now-- To note is that Mayor Frank Anderson previously served as the POA General Manager and also on the POA Board of Directors. Also, city alderman Berdine, Farner and Hutchinson previously served on the POA Board of Directors.

And, per POA Bylaws, ARTICLE II.

"Organization and Responsibilities of the POA"

"Section 1. Organization."

"A. The POA shall be governed by a Board of Directors elected by the membership. The powers of the Board and duties thereof are hereinafter set out in these Bylaws."

"B. The POA is a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Arkansas composed of Members and Associate Members as hereinabove defined. The rights, privileges, and conditions of the membership and restrictions thereon are hereinafter set out in these Bylaws."

And just because the POA is a non profit corporation does not mean that the association is exempt from state law nor member induced accountability.

"Arkansas Code Annotated Title 4 Subchapter 2— Arkansas Nonprofit Corporation Act"

"4-28-218. Books and accounting records."

"a) Each corporation shall keep correct and complete books and records of account."

"(b) All receipts of moneys and expenditures shall be properly recorded according to accepted accounting principles."

"(c) A record of the proceedings of its members, board of directors, and committees shall be kept."

"(d) A record of the names and addresses of its members entitled to vote shall be maintained at the principal office or place of business of the corporation."

"(e) All books and records of a corporation may be inspected by any member for any proper purpose at any reasonable time."

Posted by: Hammer1

March 15, 2011 at 12:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

As someone who worked for the POA for eight years and has been elected to a City Council as well as sit on numerous boards of directors around NWA over the last 25 years, I think Mr. Parsons gets a perverse thrill exposing miniscule (and innocent) transgressions that do not improve the quality of life for the citizens of Bella Vista all for his narcissistic pleasure. As I have said earlier, if there are problems with how the City and POA let bids to maintain the roads, then pay a fine and get on with fixing the roads. I know for a fact that the POA has its books audited every year by a highly regarded professional and impartial accounting firm. What's implied in Mr. Parson's diatribes is that the POA General Manager and the Mayor of the City of Bella Vista are venal corrupt individuals and anyone with a shred of common sense know that is not true. If mistakes are made in good faith then correct and learn from them but, most importantly, move on. Nobody has all the answers and certainly not Mr. Parsons. He simply has no credibility except with a cadre of fellow malcontents and crackpots.

Posted by: hawgfan25

March 15, 2011 at 8:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

hawgfan25:

You purport that you previously worked for the Bella Vista POA for eight years...

Well, during that period of employment, were you ever subject to, or did you actually sign the POA's Non-Disparagement Agreement to prevent any form of whistleblowing and potentially stifle any unfavorable information from ever reaching the membership?

NON-DISPARAGEMENT AGREEMENT

_____hawgfan25_____agrees not to disparage or defame Employer in any respect or to make any derogatory comment, whether written or oral, whether during your employment or thereafter regarding The Bella Vista Village Property Owners Association that relates to The Bella Vista Village Property Owners Association's business or related activities or relationship between the Employee and Employer.

_____hawgfan25_____agrees to not make or encourage others to make any statement or release any information that is intended to, or reasonably could be foreseen to, embarrass or criticize the Association or its employees, management, directors or members.

____hawgfan25_______________________
Employee Signature Date

____Adolf Hitler_____________________
Witness Signature Date

Posted by: Hammer1

March 15, 2011 at 12:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Lighten up Hammer1! It's sad that when Mr. Parsons has a problem with the POA or the City, his credibility is so bad and dealing with him in a rational manner so distasteful and unprofessional, noone will listen or want to work with him even when his concern has validity. I have not worked for the POA for 18 years and no I did not sign a whistleblowing agreement. Had there been a whistle to blow I would have done it but in a fair and reasonable way without trying destroy everything in my path. Unfortunately, I do know that Bella Vista has always been riddled with know-it-all curmudgeons who would rather curse the darkness rather than light one candle. Mr. Parsons is just latest version of a craven geezer who wants to make a name for himself by spreading his own anger and discontent.

Posted by: hawgfan25

March 15, 2011 at 1:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

The following reports are available on their website:

POA Reports
Budget
General Manager’s Report and Financials
Fee Schedule
Independent Auditors' Report
Summary Income Statements
Year End Financials
2010 Annual Budget Book

on this Page:

http://www.bellavistapoa.com/board.asp

That seems pretty open and straight forward to me.

Posted by: BVVresident

March 15, 2011 at 4:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I saw this today and thought it really applies here:

Upright citizens are good for a city and make it prosper, but the talk of the wicked tears it apart. Proverbs 11:11

Posted by: BVVresident

March 15, 2011 at 5:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Well, how about asking to see a copy of the POA General Manager's contract? -- Good Luck!

"Abuse of power isn't limited to bad guys in other nations. It happens in our own country if we’re not vigilant." ~ Clint Eastwood

Posted by: Hammer1

March 15, 2011 at 7:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

An e-mail I received from a friend of a friend of which I thought I'd share...

"SUBJECT: ST BERNARD’S POA ELECTION BOARD FORUM A DISASTER"

"I attended the St. Bernard’s Men’s Club forum, March 5th to listen to candidates via for the POA Board. It was informative as well as disastrous."

"When I say disastrous, I don’t mean that the logistics were disastrous. With the EXCEPTION of one candidate, Jim Parsons, the rest for the candidates are a disastrous train wreck waiting to happen and they will be riding the train carrying our POA assessment fees with them."

"JIM PARSONS is breath of fresh air with his insight, goals and determination to make the POA responsive to the POA membership. He distributed a brochure giving his vision of the POA Board; one of responsible spending, accountability, and transparency. At the forum he detailed why the Board is out of control. He stated that that the POA management is the tail wagging the Board with no oversight. Mr. Parsons presented an impressive chart comparing the Bentonville Parks & Recreation Dept. with the POA Parks & Recreation; two communities of near same size. The POA spends $15 million; Bentonville $4 million on their Parks & Recreation amenities. The POA pays the General Manager $157,000 per year; Bentonville pays its Director $75,000. The POA has 119 employees; Bentonville 20. Jim Parsons has my vote. He has a blog….check it out…….."

www.parsons4poa.blogspot.com

"ANITA WERTS is running again and simply does not have a clue of what her responsibilities should be to us POA members. She began the session with near tears, rambling on and on about her integrity. When asked at the forum does she believe in freedom of information and specifically support approving FOIA for the POA. She emphatically said NO. She stated her future goal will be to continue to give the General Manager, Tommy Bailey more latitude and freedom to run the POA. She said that her goal will be to finish what Roberta Dale did not finish as POA Chair. She did not say what that was ??? That makes me nervous. I recall that she ramrod the $200,000 cost over-run on the new tennis center building. In the past she approved the closing of the Branchwood golf course. She definitely does NOT have my vote."

"THE OTHER CANDIDATES – George DeGroot did not show up but asked that his answers to seven pre-prepared questions be read. They were. There was even a photo of George sitting on the table. I understand that he has high opinion of himself. David Houk and David Allen kept confusing the responsibilities of the POA with Bella Vista City. Neither candidate supports freedom of information. Houk believes Tommy Bailey should be given free rein. Allen doesn’t like golf or golfers."

Posted by: Hammer1

March 15, 2011 at 7:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

As I previously noted above, and now again below, the Bella Vista POA sued Jim Parsons for approx. $65,000.00 for harassment. After careful review of all the evidence, the jury's verdict at the Benton County Courthouse was unanimously in favor of Mr. Parsons. The $65,000.00 bill was for POA legal fees of which was not recouped; the bill was later paid through POA membership funds.

"Thankful for awakening"

"By Mike Masterson"

"Tuesday, December 1, 2009"

Just a few quoted excerpts:

"LITTLE ROCK — In a season of thanksgiving, I am most thankful that national polls show that Americans finally are awakening to the reality that the world outside their comfortable homes has become illogical, corrupted and headed down the wrong dead-end logging road."

"Several of you have contacted me since my column about Jim Parsons’ lawsuit to break free the records and books kept by the Bella Vista Property Owners Association. He is asking to see the accounting that state law says he and every other dues-paying property owner in the retirement community are entitled to see."

"Not only has the BVPOA refused to allow Parsons to examine its working records, the association has counter sued the retired military officer for harassment in an apparent effort to intimidate him into shrinking away. They obviously don’t know Parsons very well."

"I happen to believe that property owners’ associations are financed by and work for-ready?-the property owners. And we all know that there should be no secrets kept from the boss, especially when that’s the law."

"It seems to me that the good folks of Bella Vista deserve some hard and thorough answers from their POA employees and officers."

Posted by: Hammer1

March 15, 2011 at 8:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Hammer1,

If Mr. Parsons thinks the POA is so mismanaged and fraught with corruption, then he ought to go to work for it. In 1986, I saw Dennis Harmon and his staff work 36 straight hours to restore water service to over half of Bella Vista after a flood wiped out the transmission line from Bentonville that spanned Sugar Creek. I could go on and on about the dedication that Bella Vista POA employees demonstrated over the years to improve the quality of life for its residents. Mr. Parsons forgets that most (if not all) of POA management are property owners or citizens of Bella Vista too. It's not in their best interest to mismanage POA resources. Your verbatim depictions above only feed Mr. Parsons insatiable appetite for attention. It does not take a psychiatrist to know that he has some serious mental and emotional issues. In the City of Bentonville, the current police chief has fostered a culture of "quiet professionalism". That is Bentonville Police officers go about their business in a quiet unobtrusive way. When mistakes are made own them and correct them. Always be open to criticism but always consider the source. In Mr. Parsons case, he has lost all credibility with those who were elected and selected to lead Bella Vista. The media loves him because he creates their product. Unfortunately, his recklessness leaves a path of ill will and upset that is counter productive for the people of Bella Vista.

Posted by: hawgfan25

March 16, 2011 at 8:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

IF the City of Bella Vista had followed state law and let the street maintenance contract out for bid, there would NOT be an issue. IF the POA's general manager and the POA's attorney had done their respective jobs by first determining if a contractor's license was required, there would NOT be an issue. If we're going to blame, let's place the blame where it belongs.

Posted by: EndPoliticalCorrectness

March 16, 2011 at 8:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

An taxpayer's e-mail of city public record has been circulating of which I found very interesting so I'm sharing his thoughts on this subject matter:

“Honorable Mayor Frank Anderson
Bella Vista City
Suite 416
Town Center East
P.O. Box 5655 – 72714
Bella Vista, AR 72714”

“To Mayor Anderson & the Bella Vista City Council,”

“I was a bit appalled as a taxpayer when I received a copy of Tuesday’s article (11/23/2010) titled ‘Bella Vista OKs Maintenance Contract’,’MOTION TO CONTRACT WITH POA APPROVED IN 5-1 DECISION’, by Gaynell Belloni. After approximately four years of citizen complaints and desperate pleas to consider the needs and the financial well being of local residents, it appears that you and the City Council have once again decided to move in a direction opposite that of lawful process and fiscal diligence. Excerpts from the article read:”

“The City Council approved a street maintenance contract with the Bella Vista Property Owners Association despite one alderman’s protests at Monday’s meeting. The vote was 5-1 for approval of the 2011 contract, with Alderman George Holmes voting ‘no’. Holmes said he believed the council were violating their oaths by approving the $1.185 million contract without putting it out for bids. 'We took oaths to uphold the law and one of those laws is that our city, on any bid over $20,000, gets competitive bidding. We are now going into the fifth year and we haven’t figured out how to get a competitive bid. I really don’t think you’re following the oath of this office,' Holmes said. Alderman Dick Rooney said he believed they had a ruling from the attorney general’s office but Holmes reminded the council that it was an opinion, not a ruling.”

“Holmes said he had discussed the street maintenance contract being awarded without a bid with two attorneys that held opposing opinions. The contract represents an increase of approximately $85,000 from 2010.”

“It appears that Alderman Dick Rooney and Attorney Bryan Vernetti have been tenaciously scouting for ways to bypass Arkansas law, which does by-the-way require bid-letting on municipal contracts of this magnitude. The point of this argument isn’t whether or not the city of Bella Vista can find legal avenues to evade the State’s law, or how best to suit the financial interests of the POA, but rather why the City of Bella Vista’s leadership isn’t making the slightest attempt to safeguard the public’s money by seeking competitive pricing. The fact that Bryan Vernetti stated ‘We feel very confident we can justify the actions of the City Council’ strongly suggests that your primary motive isn’t to provide the citizens the best deal possible, but rather to get away with curtailing this obligation regardless of any cost implications to the taxpayers.”

Posted by: Hammer1

March 16, 2011 at 9:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter continued from above:

“Each of you is legally obligated to seek the most cost effective option for completing built projects in excess of $20,000.00. It is further your job to seek fair market pricing on all municipal expenditures for the good of the people you serve. As has been diligently pointed out, there are several qualified contractors in the area that have expressed a strong desire to bid on Bella Vista road projects. Year after year however, these opportunities have been ignored by your administration despite the significant possibility that these companies could very well save the taxpayers money. This same Modus Operandi has prevailed since the time the city first incorporated. Your administration seems to have assumed an almost dogmatic approach in its attempts to side-skirt this and other fundamental duties.”

“I recently spoke to a resident who informed me that he had personally made an effort to visit City Hall every year and address this very issue with you. He further stated that you have repeatedly promised to come into compliance with this legislation. Obviously, these promises have not amounted to much. This is but one of many ways that the interests of the taxpayers are being carelessly jeopardized. As long as there is an opportunity to cheat, I suppose there will always be a percentage of people who do so. What I find to be unfortunate is the percentage of this demographic that seems to be employed by the Bella Vista city government.”

“Given the current economic downturn, there is every reason to believe that now, perhaps more than ever, there are ample financial opportunities to be taken advantage of if one were to simply take the time to look. I see no justifiable reason not to seek out competitive pricing on million dollar contracts. The possible savings could easily measure in the tens of thousands of dollars, possibly more. Your job, as well as that of the City Council, is to manage the public’s money, not to waste it and certainly not to nonchalantly ‘pass it under the table’ to your friends at the POA.”

Posted by: Hammer1

March 16, 2011 at 9:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter continued from above:

“These legal concessions have been specifically designed with the taxpayer’s interest in mind. It suffices to say that each of the city’s elected leaders have failed in their obligation to honor this commitment. Arkansas Code 14-42-106 ‘Oath and Bond Required’ states ‘All officers elected or appointed in any municipal corporation shall take the oath or affirmation prescribed for officers by the Arkansas Constitution’. Each of you has taken this oath to ‘faithfully discharge the duties of the office’. This was an agreement you made when you accepted your seat in public office. Our elected aldermen have again failed to faithfully honor this pledge. You have not only shown disrespect to the people whom you serve through your poor decision making, but have also disrespected our money and the Great State of Arkansas. I would mention that there are several other statutes which the members of our City Council have also failed to uphold.”

“PROPOSED RESOLUTION 2010 Street Contract with POA.2011”

“This latest proposal states ‘WHEREAS, given the unique nature of the relationship between the City and the BVVPOA and the recent history of the City’s incorporation and the traditional role the BVVPOA has played in street maintenance prior to the City’s incorporation, the fact that the BVVPOA and the City service the same residents in providing street repairs and the fact the agreement is basically a cost reimbursement agreement with a nonprofit corporation, an agreement between the City and the BVVPOA is advisable and in the best interest of all citizens of the City’. HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY KNOW IF IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS IF YOU CONTINUE TO REFUSE COMPETITIVE BIDDING?”

“It also states ‘WHEREAS, the City of Bella Vista and the BVVPOA have had a contract for street services for the past 12 months.’ THIS FACT DOES NOT JUSTIFY YOUR ACTIONS BUT ONLY HIGHLIGHTS THE FACT THAT YOUR PRIOR CONTRACT WAS ALSO SECURED WITHOUT HONORING THE STATE’S COMPETITIVE BID REQUIREMENTS.”

“Section 1 states ‘To the extent required or permitted by law, the requirement of competitive bidding is deemed impractical, impossible, and not in the best interest of the City, at this time.’ CARE TO EXPLAIN? CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ISSUE ‘NOTICES TO BID’ ALL THE TIME. IT’S COMMON PRACTICE. IF YOU HAD ENOUGH TIME TO WRITE THIS SILLY PROPOSAL, YOU HAD ENOUGH TIME TO DRAFT AND SUBMIT A SHORT NOTICE TO BID. THIS IS A SINGLE ANNUAL CONTRACT THAT WOULD ONLY REQUIRE ONE SINGLE NOTICE IN THE NEWSPAPER. HOW IS DOING YOUR JOB IMPRACTICAL? HOW IS DRAFTING A QUICK ARTICLE IMPOSSIBLE? AND HOW EXACTLY IS SAVING US MONEY NOT IN OUR BETTER INTEREST?”

Posted by: Hammer1

March 16, 2011 at 9:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter continued from above:

“Section 2 states ‘the supervision of street maintenance and the expertise required in seeking competitive bids and the knowledge of street repair and construction is hereby deemed a 'professional service' as defined in state law.’ HAVING KNOWLEDGE OF SOMETHING DOES NOT QUALIFY AN INDIVIDUAL AS A 'PROFESSIONAL'. STUDYING SPACE TRAVEL ON WIKIPEDIA DOES NOT MAKE THE READER A PROFESSIONAL ASTRONAUT. LIKEWISE, A DITCH-DIGGER MAY KNOW EVERYTHING THERE IS TO KNOW ABOUT DIGGING DITCHES BUT IT DOES NOT QUALIFY HIS WORK AS A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE. IS THIS $1.185 MILLION CONTRACT FOR STREET MAINTENANCE OR FOR THE SUPERVISION OF THAT MAINTENANCE? AND IF YOU CHOOSE THE LATTER, THEN EXACTLY HOW MUCH DO YOU HAVE ALLOCATED FOR THE WORK ITSELF?”

“Section 4 goes on to say ‘Said contract shall contain a provision whereby the POA holds the City harmless from any failure of the POA to comply with any applicable federal, state or local laws while carrying out its obligations under the contract.’ WHY WOULD THE CITY DRAFT A PROVISION WHEREAS THE CONTRACTOR HOLDS THE CITY HARMLESS? THE CONTRACT SHOULD BE WRITTEN IN THE CITY’S FAVOR IF ANYTHING AND HAVE A PROVISION WHEREAS THE CITY HOLDS THE POA LIABLE FOR ANY FAILURES OR ERRORS. AND WHAT GIVES THE CITY THE AUTHORITY TO INDEMNIFY THE POA FROM ITS OBLIGATION TO LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAW? THIS NOTION IN ITSELF SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ILLEGAL.”

Posted by: Hammer1

March 16, 2011 at 9:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter continued from above:

“ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT”

“In further addressing this issue, there are several other considerable factors beyond that of potential cost savings that should be acknowledged. All of these issues further promote the need to extend bidding options to qualified contractors on such significant public contracts.”

“Qualifications – The Bella Vista P.O.A. by title is a ‘private non-profit homeowners association’, not a professional contractor. There are several regional companies that specialize in road and highway construction and repair. Many of these groups are skilled in perpetual pavement, concrete and composite surfacing, warm-mix asphalt, and porous asphalt. From what I’ve observed the POA’s street department basically specializes in patching potholes, sealing cracks, and chip and seal surfacing. Normally these larger outfits have both the equipment and manpower to offer customers significant price breaks.”

“License and Bonding – Is the POA Street Department even bonded for projects in excess of $1 million?”

“Quality of Work – Bella Vista’s streets are notorious for their failed quality. Wear and fatigue can be observed almost everywhere. Most of this is POA work. Perhaps hiring outside professionals could actually lead to improved street quality, thus reducing the need for repairs and further save residents money."

“Ability to Get the Job Done – I believe portions of both the 2008 and 2009 road contracts had to be carried over to the following year due to the POA’s inability to complete the work on time. In your April 15th letter to A.D.E.M. you specifically stated that one of the primary reasons an extension was needed for the federal relief subsidies was because the POA did not have adequate staffing; that it was essentially too small to get the job done. So why would the city re-contract the same group knowing this?”

Posted by: Hammer1

March 16, 2011 at 9:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter continued from above:

“Liquidated Damages – I have serviced numerous municipal contracts around NWA, and never have I seen a case where a liquidated damages clause was not included as a security measure. This is simply a contractual device whereas the aggrieved party (i.e. the city) is rewarded a designated amount of compensation if a specific breach of contract occurs or the project isn’t completed on schedule. I get the feeling no such measure is included in the city’s contracts. As an example I’ll use Gosforth Lane, which required roughly a month’s worth of work in order to repair. It took the POA street department nearly three years. That’s 3,500% of what could be considered a reasonable time frame. A regular contractor normally strives to meet project deadlines and typically seeks to provide the client the best service possible knowing that it often leads to future contracts. Can the Bella Vista POA make that claim?”

"Failure/Refusal to Comply with Bella Vista Street Code – Another concern is that the city is obligated to maintain conditions on city properties that take into account the health, safety, and welfare of the people. The POA should in theory support this same requirement. After portions of Gosforth washed out there were numerous hazardous conditions which were left unattended for over a year. Two cars could not even pass on this road and there were a couple of places where serious drop-offs occurred. I once witnessed two separate cars in the ditch. One, a small red pickup, had literally flipped on its side because a tire had gone off the road. The last time I spoke to Kirk Allman he said that he had assisted in getting this same vehicle upright. Why should citizens have to deal with such problems? The city has its own street code, but again refuses to honor it. I might also mention that in the above example, instead of a guardrail, the POA used police tape to ‘fix’ the situation.”

“Communications Policy – Finally, given the fact that the city has attempted to deny residents the right to contact the POA street department and the additional fact that the POA operates with such secrecy and elusiveness, this in my opinion makes the Property Owners Association a poor choice for issuing such major contracts.”

Posted by: Hammer1

March 16, 2011 at 10:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter continued from above:

“In closing, it would be nice if from time to time our elected officials would consider the people’s financial interests. As a resident I find it troubling that the city isn’t even willing to take the time to shop around for better pricing. This is just one more case of the people having to work harder so that our elected and appointed officials can work less. Perhaps you should call either Rogers or Bentonville and ask if they let bids on million dollar contracts.”

“Please keep a copy of this transmittal on file. Thank you.”

-------------------------------------------

THE END of a taxpayer's e-mail of city public record that has been circulating of which I found very interesting so I've shared his thoughts on this subject matter.

Posted by: Hammer1

March 16, 2011 at 10:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

@BVVresident

“By buying land here you agree to live by the Declarations. The Declarations create the POA, ACC, etc and can only be dissolved by a 2/3 majority vote of all members-whether they live in Bella Vista or not, and a significant number don't.

Regarding the Ark-Mo land purchase that was done by the POA and was never part of the development so is not subject to the Declarations and its requirements of a vote etc. Everyone seems to forget that the POA is a corporation and not a government. We are all essentially stock holders and if you don't like what the corporation is doing you can always sell your stock (land).”

So you say the Ark-Mo purchase was not a part of the development and not subject to the Declarations and its requirements – REALLY. If it was not why were golfers’ fees increased to pay for the property? [It was purchased to build a golf course.] Why did fees collected from property owners in BV go to pay for the property? Am I missing something here? Or is this the mentality of the past and present BV POA Board members.

“SUE ME!” Remember that one.

No wonder they do not like Mr. Parsons. Honesty is not wanted.

Does that mean the BV POA can buy a chicken farm in Georgia with fees collected from property owners in BV, AR?

Can I use the term hogwash without offending “Hog Fans”? (-;

You know why BV does not have what Bentonville has – the POA Board and Cooper Industries. It is like a “pot of gold” at the end of a rainbow to them.

Don’t tell me to move out, change the way the POA does business. Use the property owners’ monies for the good of the property owners. Their fees are not your private piggy bank. In the end you will reap what you sow. I have that from a very reliable source.

Posted by: hbcark

March 16, 2011 at 1:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

It's fun to keep Hammer1 and hbcark busy - keeps them off the streets! The POA and the City of Bella Vista are good organizations run by decent people. As I have said, they are human. They make mistakes. It's imperative that they are not beaten up mercilessly by angry people with an emotional ax to grind. They still have a job to do (ie provide a management presence to fix roads for example) and I would rather see them do their job than have to be knitpicked to death by people who want to waste property owner and taxpayer resources fighting imaginary windmills. Bella Vista's culture and reputation being a cauldron of anger and hatred needs to change.

This my last post. It's time to move on!

Posted by: hawgfan25

March 16, 2011 at 2:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Hmmm MISTAKES !?

Well, I make mistakes, you make mistakes, and I truly believe that everybody makes mistakes!

AND, people SHOULD be forgiven for mistakes!

BUT, there is a difference between a 'mistake' and a 'screw-up'! (saying that nicely)

A screw up is when someone knows what they are doing is wrong, and they go ahead and do it anyway! (such as the city not allowing competitive bids on million dollar road maintenance contracts)

And, this folks is no mistake. It is a screw-up!

Now, what Bella Vista needs is more disinfectant of which is known as SUNSHINE; therefore, Sunshine it shall get!

Sunshine Week 2011 is March 13th through the 19th.

Happy Happy Sunshine Week ! !

"Sunshine Week is an initiative spearheaded by the American Society of News Editors to educate the public about the importance of open government and the dangers of excessive and unnecessary secrecy." ~ Wikipedia

Posted by: Hammer1

March 16, 2011 at 4:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

@hawgfan25

Was it the “hogwash” comment?

Differences of opinion are from “angry people with an emotional ax to grind”? And “Bella Vista's culture and reputation being a cauldron of anger and hatred needs to change.”

Dare I use – “REALLY” again.

I don’t see the anger in the culture of BV that you do – must be my rose colored glasses. I have had differences of opinion over the years but anger and hatred, no – must be my Christian upbringing.

Over the years those with a conscience of righteousness have resigned from the BV POA Board because of the Board’s wasteful use of property owner’s fees and resources. Not having participated in this activity, naturally you will have to check with them to ascertain this statement.

Mistakes are made by all but outright chicanery is a no-no. Is wasting property owner and taxpayer fees, taxes and resources the hallmark of the BV POA and, dare I say, the recently incorporated city of BV?

Posted by: hbcark

March 16, 2011 at 5:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

This may be a little late, but better let then never. Firstof all, the POA NEEDS to turn everything over to the City. Let them keep the golf courses and recreation centers. After all, the State of Arkansas, Gave and Fish Commission,whom we pay taxes to, stock the Bella Vista lakes. Not only that, but we pay federal taxes also and the AGFC get federal funding so, yes, these should be public. The POA has no right to handle the roads, water, or anything else now that we are a City. The city needs to take over everything that a City should have.

Also, as for Mr. Parsons he is GREAT and abides by the Constitution of the United States of America, that is why as you say, no one likes him. He want's to do what is right for all people, not just a select few. Mr. Parsons - you go. I am behind you 200%

Posted by: vil

July 7, 2011 at 5:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )