POSTED 7/28/07
Security at LIV has been an interesting subject this year. Management told everyone for almost a year that they could get a security license. Management gave numerous excuses to our Board when questioned about their progress obtaining it. The truth is management did not qualified to get a Security License in the state of Texas.
This charade came to an end when a mysterious and still undiscriptive $20,000 out of state charge became managements "way out" not to obtain a Texas security license.

Even without a license, management still wanted to run what is now best described as a patrol staff and get paid at this time more money. Certain members of the Board are currently trying to persuade LIV owners that a non-security staff ran by our unlicensed management will be good for them and for their park.
The bottom line is the state of Texas did not qualifiy our management to manage a staff for security. Every LIV visitor will have the perception of a " security " staff. There is a tremendous possible liability being started here which screams for mega lawsuit.
Owners should question deeper why our management didn't acquire a security license.

Pat Burke's insert in our Village newsletter on security vs. non security choices struck me as being totally bias. She seemed to have displayed little neutrality and even less information. The choice she gave frankly was; do you want to pay $25,000 more for real licensed security when an unlicensed and unqualified staff will serve you just as well.

Our Board President knocked our current security company because they hired someone who stoled and implied this should solve such hiring problems. She did not mention Aramark's hiring track record though. I recall our Village being involved in a rape lawsuit. I understand the person charged for this rape was a Aramark employee.
Our Board President said our current security company had proposed a rate hike, but didn't disclose the amount. Was that increase amount $10 or $10,000?
Our President also said Aramark filed for a Level 1 security license. I believe this may show that neither Pat Burke or management knew what license Aramark actually needed. Information I received said a Level 1 is the training course available to security license applicants. Class B License is what should be obtained by Aramark.
Finally, Pat Burke said there were "various" reasons why Aramark will not be getting a Texas security license. Only one reason was expressed and without much clarity. I would like to know these other reasons and an explanation about this $20,000 charge.

It would be a pleasant change to just be told all the facts about an issue instead of being force fed certain pieces of information. There are things not being said about this security issue that needs to be addressed before the owners should try to make any final decisions that may put our beautiful Village in harms way.
I'm just a person sharing worried concerns.