You missed a must see entertaining board meeting to say the least.
Due to the litigious nature of this evenings board meeting and attack by Woodmen Hills board members I will wait to post what took place in video and audio.
Some commentary will be delayed until I receive the files and records on claims made by Lisa Peterson at this evenings meeting the commentary will be on the video.
The board has dug in for the fight and Pizzi once again antagonized one resident who told her to take a hike and she came looking for a fight.
Pizzi didn’t deny her assault on Mr. Paces wife, thanks for that.
She didn’t defend the allegations of the 10.6 million dollars wasted in interest due to her actions while on the board.
Jan didn’t deny her lie on the 1099’s
As a matter of record nor she did not deny any of her actions as posted on this site with documents and records.
As shown in video she was allowed to run the meeting on the side sitting beside Mr. Cole.
St James came out (swinging) asking about the cost of a recall and it took off from there
- False claims by the board made in a meeting
- Accusations by the director Lisa Peterson without documentation
- False claims made about the money spent on recalls
- False (slanderous) claims made, by the board accusing Mr. Pace of doing both recalls.
The board sat there hurling out false claims one after the other.
The only one who didn’t say a word was Ronnie Parks but I have yet to review the entire video.
It was pure entertainment.
The board didn’t disputed Jan Pizzi’s actions that cost Woodmen Hills 10.6 million in lost payments of pure interest that partially benefited the developers and investors after she refinanced the bonds. That is a fact no one can dispute as it is of record.
The board appeared to be upset at the verdict that was rendered by the OAC and it showed.
The district claimed it spent “299,000” on lawyer on Mr. Pace on a question asked by Mike Pizzi during the meeting. (CORA submitted for those records) Peterson provided zero records only a comment which was by all appearances planned to combat the matter on the federal case which only cost 1,000.00 in legal fees deductibles.
The RO case cost 47,000 and some change as was posted by exposed on another site, lets add shall we 299,000-48,000=251,000.00 to account for. The district will now have to provide the records on this slanderous unverified claim as it just made claims in an open meeting. They did say “Ron Pace” cost Woodmen Hills the money spent on lawyers over 8-9 years
As this was the question presented by Mike Pizzi to Lisa Peterson.
Jan called the ruling “false” and a “lie” she said it wasn’t true.
They didn’t want to speak on it and Coles advise stuck.
It should be noted that Mike Pizzi after coming out of executive session wanted to make public comments but he stopped himself right before he did.
It looked like the board was planning on going after Mr. Pace to stop him but it was not confirmed nor denied by the board as they would not take questions about it.
The executive session went on till 945 PM
Looks like the board is fighting back against the “notice” giving to 3 board members stemming from the January 23 2017 meeting.
To answer those (21 visitors) who were not there, Janice tired to order around Mr. Pace before he could get situated before the meeting. She got in his face and Mr. Pace told her to back off and get out of his face or he was calling the sheriff. She was told the recorder was going and walked away.
The point of contention was the placement of the video camera and a cup of coffee placed on a table beside the “sign in sheet” on the same table. This prompted her to approached Mr. Pace to start a confrontation. Mr. Pace announced that he didn’t want to speak to her but she failed to get the hint. She continued to make comments until Mr. Pace said “your not a board member”, “you don’t tell anyone what to do”.
Mr. Pace was not given even 2 minutes to sign in and get things ready. She came up to Mr. Pace as he was extending the legs on his video camera and started giving out orders like she runs the place, ordering Mr. Pace to move the camera while he waited to sign in. She then ordered Mr. Pace to take a cup of coffee off the table and the papers that were brought to the meeting while ordering him to move the camera even before he got a seat. And the lawyer just sat there with a grin on her face doing nothing.
This is what all Jan has left is to try and pick a fight with the public as shown. She was found guilty and her hubby wants to retaliate in the worst way.
Jan denies that she is “guilty” as shown in court. She told the newspaper she was not “guilty” and yet Judge Norwood found otherwise.
The OAC ruling shows exactly what is wrong with Woodmen Hills. Stay Tuned!
She was warned on this site that Mr. Pace would not have any conversations and she thinks she can bully anyone around and bark out orders. She was searching for a fight all right and she failed.
Woodmenhills Exposed 
Mr. Pace please let me take a moment to say the allegations made if true present some legal hurdles for Woodmen Hills. First and foremost this is not meant as legal advice but rather a cursory opinion of the facts as presented.
If Woodmen Hills claims you to be the reason it expended two hundred and ninety nine thousand dollars two issues arise from their claims. First is the number as provided. If a board member asked the employee to put into the public record a number corresponding to monies expended by Woodmen Hills in legal fees they must have records to substantiate the claim otherwise risk civil action.
Second is they give no explanation for the reason other than state it is for legal fees if I understand you correctly a board member asked how much you cost the district in a specific time frame. This raises some interesting issues as well.
The board must provide documentation or risk a civil action for putting out information to the public on expenditures it claims you caused without explaining the reason why it expended the monies other to say it is for legal purposes.
Since they put a number to the claim you as the aggrieved party can request those records to verify if what they claim is a fact or opinion.
Once they open the door by making public accusations the door cannot be closed. Any good lawyer understands this and should have cautioned the clients against doing so. The basis of a claim is to establish if the board did this to harm you in some way in the public eyes. Ask for the records then if denied you can show a judge that comments made in public were meant to damage your reputation.
I suggest you start out by asking for the records that were used to provide the basis of such a claim. If denied a judge will see the intent to damage your reputation and privilege will not apply since the basis for their claim was legal billing records they will have to prove that with records that those expenditures were and are directly related to you as the cause of the expenditure. Since it is a disputed matter of record the district will have produce the records used in computing the numbers. The issue of privilege is to the extent that it gives the client peace of mind in being able to confer freely. Since the board has put out that the direct reason for such expenditures were your fault they now have put the onus on themselves to prove you were the reason for the expenditures.
You have a year to seek civil a remedy after the first date the claims were made. By the way, was there a lawyer present during the proceedings?
LikeLike
The blonde lady told the guy to remove his stuff off the table and put the camera in back of the room. She kept after him till the guy told her to back off or the sheriff would be summoned. Who and what gives this lady the authority to order this guy around? This lady was rude to say the least then acted like up when the managers went after the guy. He sat there taking notes as everyone spoke on topics is one of the people able to tell me if she has any authority to treat residents in such a fashion
LikeLike
For my own protection remove my name. I live off Pine Valley Circle, Jan get life. I am fed up with seeing the same people running Woodmen Hills year after year. I didn’t choose Woodmen Hills to listen to the Jan channel day in and day out. I pay 54 dollars a month to seek permission to use a facility we are forced to pay for then sign away our rights to enter the building. This is the worst place my husband has ever been assigned to. Warning to other families coming or thinking about buying or renting read the fine print.
Our realtor sold us on the amenities however failed to tell us how much political trash comes with it. Jan did you stop to think not everyone else is warped or wrong as you insist. Woodmen Hills is not Jan’s to control by any stretch of her wild imagination. In some ulterior universe she does run everything in the real world Jan is just another resident who has too much time on her hands. Let the rest of Woodmen Hills live Jan free PLEASE.
LikeLike
Ron I didn’t sign a nondisclosure like my wife did the stories about you could fill a book If you need a witness for any purpose do not hesitate Jan has no right to call my wife disgruntled. Jan forbid staff from talking to you she pulled staff aside warning each one to stay away from you if employees don’t they are labeled a problem and sent packing. Contact the state labor board about Woodmen Hills. I read the post about Green the staff are told to keep quiet about him Do not blame staff as they are ordered to fear you for no reason Jan is responsible for all of it it is the reason some of the office staff treat you poorly
LikeLike