MEL & JOHN

My heart dropped when I read your post, yeswecan. What happened ? Please
give us some more information.

Thank you

Mel & John

yes we can

Hi Mel & John

I prefer to wait for the official minutes (wich we can challenge) to comment on what happened yesterday.
SL for sure will post much better than me about what happened yesterday. But in short: they (EUC board) won.

Regards

spanish_lawyer

Sorry, sorry, sorry...
I don't agree with you. They (EUC board) didn't win... I'm very, very happy.

I promise to write more...and answer to John & Kath about his question on banck garantiees. John, I didn't forget it!!!


Regards.

MEL & JOHN

I feel better now !! Good for you SL..........looking forward to your next posting. I am sure there will be some points we are unhappy about as yes we can as has already reported but hopefully the EUC board has made good decsions also.

Let's hope L & G are pro-active in collecting the money in now.

I have a feeling that it went so well that the 2 M Fadesa board members paid up in cash before they left. By heck it is lovely in my dream world !!

Take care all

Mel

Jon-Bxl

Hi SL

Wow this is a (nice) surprise - the feedback I heard was not at all good.. but if you are so happy that is fantastic.

Looking forward to hearing your view - when you have time.

Thanks for all the work you did at the meeting - very impressive!

Regards
Jon

spanish_lawyer

Hi everybody!!!

I´m happy because I am very positive and I have a different interpretation of what happened at the meeting. Today I have a lot of work. But I try to write tonight. Please, you understand that I take too long time to write in English (nevertheless, I know I haven´t wcorrectly ritten and that you often do not have understand anything.).

Monday, how awful!!!!


Regards.

MEL & JOHN

Good Morning SL

Thank you very much for letting us know you will be posting soon, we all very much appreciate the time and effort; especially as you are kind enough to translate for us which doubles your workload.

Thanks again and look forward to reading your report of the meeting when you have the time.

Warmest wishes

Mel

CAROL TAFF

I attended the meeting on Friday. I now await SL's interpretation of what went on with some anticipation. He/she understands Spanish and I don't, so has a much better understanding of what went on than I do. He/she is a lawyer, and I'm far from being that. However, I'll give my version as an aperitif.

Firstly, I must congratulate Steven Tipper on his arrangement of a screened Powerpoint translation of proceedings for the non Spanish-speaking attendees. The system provided was a long way from being perfect, but infinitely better than would otherwise have been the case. Well done Steve! My wife and I went to the meeting to register our disapproval, by our very physical presence, for it only being entirely in Spanish. Our intention was to leave soon after it started. As it was we stayed till the bitter end.

The meeting agenda comprised of:
1. Accepting the Minutes of the last meeting.
2. Approval of the 2010 Budget.
3. A question and answer (??) session.

Because I was an Inter-Community member, I had no vole. Independent villa/plot owners had a vote weighted proportional to their EUC coefficient. Inter-community presidents carried a vote weighted to the sum of the coefficients of all the owners in their Inter-Community. Thus, the weighting of any particular villa owner was negligible when compared to the vote carried by, for example, MF who still own some 20% of the total number of properties. Thus, although, for example, there was almost total unanimity amongst those present that the 2010 Budget should be rejected, the motion proposing its acceptance was carried. The meeting was therefore a shambles in that everything was carried or rejected exactly as the Committee wanted. Thus, as Yes We Can has already stated, the Committee won.

However! however!!

The committee can not now be unaware of the feelings of the owners. For a start, representation was approximately 50/50 between British and Spanish, thus speaking volumes as to the need for bilingual meetings. The anti feeling against budgetary provision for an Administration office and furniture at CE, Security at CE, Board Members expenses ,etc is now very apparent, as is providing the Admin company with 10% of the total expenditure.

MF's position on the board was questioned to such a degree that it will be impossible for them (or any other developer) to be board members or have any voting rights if they have not fully paid their EUC dues by 20th February.

The legality of the EUC and the position regarding the 6 million euro bank guarantee was queried in detail, and an awful amount spoken about the subject, mainly in Spanish; thus, I'll await to see SL's interpretation.

If SL was at the meeting then I can only assume she was the very confident and composed lady (called Suzanne?) who spoke in what appeared to be a highly articulate manner as to the EUC's legality.

As I have said, I'll now await to see SL's interpretation as to what happened at the meeting before deciding on what I would wish for the future. What I do feel is that we now have the beginnings of a true Spanish/British community spirit which I will do my utmost to foster. I feel that in the combination of SL together with Carol and John, we have the expertise and will to achieve the very best from the situation at CE.

Taff

EsuriJohn

What a good post. Just a couple of points I think the coefficient is based on the area of land that comprises the Parcela I think in our case this 0.02 or 0.002 more likely so Fadesa with the golf courses, the commercial center and hotel without the unsold properties will always out-vote us as long as they pay their dues.The Fadesa rep (an accountant) promised to do this on the 20th Feb. I will report back if any low flying pigs are seen on the evening of the 20th over Golf II.

It was good to see such a good and even turnout and despite the language difficulties I think both Spanish and English were united in their sceptism about Fadesa and therefore the current Mayor doing as much as they could/should to move Esuri forward. I asked a very direct question about the legality of the Bank Guarantee/Promisary Note but the meeting ended before I heard an answer. I do hope the minutes include this. Steve Tipper brings along Janice to interpret for him and pays her himself so I am confident we will get an unbiased version eventually (Steve called round last night collecting email addresses so that he can send info direct since the EUC do not have this information).

A big thank you is due to Steves wife who is not an interpreter nor typist for doing a simultaneous translation for the overhead projector it was not perfect but alerted us to what was going on and what stage we had reached. Thank you Lisa.

spanish_lawyer

Spanish we say “lo prometido es deuda” (A promise is a promise).
Yes we can, maybe, you are right and the main concern of the neighbors, members of the EUC, to improve his handicap. Some of you know that in the past I was really angry because I wrote in this thread with the only intention of improving CE. I have been suspected of trying to test and get new clients as a lawyer. I have been suspected of misleading people, giving opinions when it comes to real information.

I believe (and desire) that any lack of confidence in me is gone ...

Yes we can, maybe you're right and most of the members of the EUC were yesterday, at 6 pm at course golf, but while a group of people as we read, write, and is interested in this thread the fight for to improve a wonderful area, I say you: YES, WE CAN.

Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm really glad, happy and proud of all the English community who went to the meeting, with all the linguistic difficulties, of legal knowledge, simultaneous monitoring of the opinions of other people, (the Spanish) and members of Board.

I know that your compatriot, Steve Tipper, was frightened and surprised at your behavior. You were giving a lesson of nonconformity to all, including those who were playing golf.

I assure you that no member of the Council expect such opposition, and most of the English Community, which has always been considered conformist and easily manipulated.

Mel, in other post, I said that I was happy. Yes, I do. Now, I know that a little group can demonstrate that it will not consent to some gentlemen, who are pretending knowledge, will decide the fate of a paradise such as Costa Esuri. Yes we can, for me quality is more important than quantity.

Yes we can, I have to give you the reason: the votes were not enough to cripple the purposes of the Council. I knew it would happen, but for me that on 5 th February happened wonderful thing: the beginnings of opposition to each other's decisions in the interest of the community of Costa Esuri.

Perhaps not change the destiny, but the world was not built in a day.

You are also right, we have to wait to the minute. Once we have it, we can decide what to do. However, I believe it is positive that you, and who were, write his version. The reason: very easy. They can write his version and don´t the really.

I think the summary of Taff is very good. But I need to say that MF said "loud and clear" LET'S PAY. When?. I don´t know…
On the 20th end the voluntary period for payment (I know, our receipts say in December, but apparently the Board extended the deadline). From day 21th February, the lady manager will begin with the (vía de apremio) "way of urgency." She said that in his meeting the Board on what to do with not paying MF abstained from voting on behalf of the embargoes. I wonder if they thought pay, why do not they voted for the fast track (vía de apremio)- enforced collection action-????.

There was some discussion about what would happen if a volunteer has expired and MF does not pay?. Answer: "As today is not liable MF sits on the Board."

Apparently, an important moment was when the Ms. Manager said that many members of the EUC had asked to have an office in Costa Esuri. Elisabeth (thank you) said very clear that no member of the English community had asked for to spend any money on rent. Of course, once she changed her speech and said "if you do not want a new office, you choose". I wonder, but didn´t you say that many people were saying you had requested the rental of the office?.

I wrote in this forum that the LGC in Ayamonte office belongs to Mr. Mayor. I sense, and this itself is a personal opinion, that the Mayor wanted, in the future that the EUC was in the same office but paying the rent. I repeat it: this is my opinion.

The Mayor made it clear that there wasn´t DEFINITIVE RECEIVE by the municipality any part of CE. Someone (I do not know who) told him that without final approval wasn´t legal to ask for EUC´s members money to keep what was not done.

I think that another important moment was when someone explained (to those who were not, apparently, the mayor learned a lot that day because many people had taught him how to do things legally) that the security was paid by the Town Hall. Today, I can tell you that the hotel has undergone so many robberies, I think, leaving only the walls... Of course, MF off his surveillance that he thought was better than paying the EUC...

Eventually, John, I have not forgotten you!!!!. You ask me about the validity of the guarantees of MF, which is the Mayor doesn´t want to run.

There are 3 guarantees (I attached it when I told that Alberto Fernández, candidate for mayor by the Partido Popular, had demanded in writing to the Mayor that he ask for the money to the bank. Now, I attached it):

- The first guaranties (is a document that the bank have to pay, it isn´t a promise) is for 1.742.262,43 €. It is valid until July 19, 2010.
- The second guaranties: 3.005.060,52 €. It´s valid until November 14, 2011.
- The last guaranties: 1.262.778,09 €. It´s valid until November 24, 2012.

At present day, all guarantees are enforceable (ask your bank charge). Why?. Simple MF is in bankruptcy and are unable to complete its work on time. Well, he could hire the unemployed to 4.500.000 of Spain has to finish on time ..

Finally, I want to apologize for my English. I know I never write correctly, but today I'll be surprised if someone understand something .... I also repeat my thanks to all who were there (to the golfers were not welcome) and those who could not attend but are awaiting all of OUR COSTA ESURI news. Thank you.

Best for all.

Jon-Bxl

Thaks Carol Taff and John+Kath for the feedback above.

I wasnt there and only have this second-hand but here is my view

Bi-lingual Meeting: Finally they heard the message and did something about it. However I am not totally happy at this. Why? We have the system for bi-lingual meetings already set up with the intercommunities and communities, where a translator stands up and verbally speaks out after a 'paragraph' of Spanish. Best precatice. The lady (I believe Mr Tippers wife) who typed did an excellent job .... as it must be very hard to speedtype and translate at the same time. Surely in this set-up however is difficult to get it right with all the conversations going on. A cynic would say that this was deliberate, in order to manipulate the meeting and avoid writing it all down in the minutes. It wont work this time as there was a good and strong level of resistance. Lets wait for the minutes to see if they put all the important points in. The wont get away with hiding stuff this time.

I'm not just complaining - but the lady who normally stands up and speaks/translates in the usual manner, was there with Mr Tipper all along translating for Mr Tipper and making notes. If we the EUC are paying her expenses, why did we not use her as normal? As it is could be paying twice i.e (1) for a difficult translation method i.e typing in real time and (2) the persons time that does the 'normal' method used in the inter/communities. I believe that the process they used on Friday is less effective than the way its always done. I stress again I, in no way, criticise the TOUGH job done by the lady for hours typing away, she did a great job. But the management responsible should have used a better method - when all the resources were there.. and we have experience of how it should be done. If Mr Tipper bought the 'usual lady' along as his private translator then I suppose he paid privately for her time.

New Offices / Resident feedback: I think it was wrong to say beforehand that (quote) 'the vast majority' of people wanted these offices - this for me is untrue and the meeting showed them that this was not the case. In December, there was an an excellent email circular going around CE residents that asked for 4 things: 1) Bi-lingual meetings like we do for inter/community meetings; 2) Proper administration + Comms processes to ensure that we are informed and can have a say in advance and also proper feedback at the end; 3) Rules enforced on voting powers of non payers (eg Fadesa) and 4) Proxy votes being used for non-attendees.

This communication went around a group of the resident community of CE and asked people to personally contact their presidents and the EUC management in writing expressing their wishes. Also to pass it on to others to decide if they agreed and would also put their name on a similar direct communication to the presidents and Administration.

My understanding is that this hit a large community - I forwarded it and agreed to what was asked i.e wrote to them via a personal email and letter - like many did.

There was no mention of this initiative in the meeting, and there was no mention of new offices in this communication either. I wonder if this board listen or just go ahead anyway with what they want.

EUC set up + Fadesa: I believe that in the current set up, the EUC is ineffective and I have no confidence and trust in them. It needs to change.

We'll see if Fadesa meet their requirement to pay (remember if they do, they arent doing any favours) - however I disagree with Taff (sorry) that if they dont pay they are automatically out. I asked for exactly that - a proposal, voted on, that says very soon after the end date (for admin time) if any board member hasn't paid - they are automatically ousted. In the melee of the meeting, this didnt get proposed and voted on.

As it is, I believe if they don't pay, they remain on the board and we need to set up an extraordinary meeting to get rid of them. I heard that last year an intercommunity president tried to set up this extraordinary meeting, against decisions were made to Fadesa's benefit without his input. But he didnt stand a chance and I heard had to resign his post as IC president. I dont know all the details here and the behind-the-scenes stuff, but I think this is the case (happy to be corrected). I think it will be hard to set up this hypothetical extraordinary meeting (in reality) with them having so much of the vote - we are stuck here. Let's hope they aren't counting on that.

However Fadesa have publically stated that they will pay - I hope so its the first step in a long way for them to pay off their debts and mistakes.

The meeting was good in that it showed the board that actually there is a resistance, and that the Spanish/British home owners aren't all uninterested and ready to take anything pushed at them. Even though for many its a second home - we still don't accept any mismanagement or arrogance of this board. This is a first step in improving matters and hopefully doing something about this board in the longer run.

Lets see if this feedback that the board got - that I think may have been unexpected for some of them - actually makes a difference to the way they operate.

I also would like to understand why the Mayor vetoes bank guarantees (not Fadesa money that could be cents on the euro as a result of the administration) - but bank guarantees already paid for (like an insurance policy we need to call on.) The Mayor needs to prove that this is not some sort of 'private self interested group', controlling the plebs. He should also should push for the IBI monies - CE/Ayamonte needs it. or is he not pushing as we would expect the IBI to be spent on CE - and its not his priority?

I am intrigued about SL's optimism and look forward to seeing his/her views. I hope there is something, that SL found, that allows us to ensure improvements to what I believe is an arrogant mess of a board - as soon as possible.

I also wonder if an owners association - which is legally binding - is actually the best idea.

Lets see what sort of presentation they give with the minutes and if they contain all the salient details - I hope so.

Regards
Jon

Jon-Bxl

Looks like SL responded whilst I was typing my reply..... so it came in before I finished....

spanish_lawyer

Sorry, Jon Bxl. I stepped forward!!. I'm going to read me your post. I love how you write. You're my best English teacher!.

Jon-Bxl

Thank you, SL - very kind. You made me read my post again and I saw spelling mistakes and grammar mistakes. They say that one can learn a lot from mistakes... so my posts are a good lesson

CAROL TAFF

Thanks for the complement. However, an apiology. I got my subscribers mixed. The last para of my post was directed at you, ie John & Kath, and not Carol and John who I hold, nevertheless, in equally high esteem.

By the way, I find it difficult to believe that the EUC coefficient is based on land area in respect of the golf courses. That would leave Fadesa contributing the major part of the EUC funding, and I'm sure that they would never wear that!!!

Taff