Since this was such an important matter I thought it odd that there was nothing purposely mentioned about the general manager’s recent retirement at our last Coffee with the Directors. Afterwards I reckoned they were just saving this for the Regular Board Meeting so certain Directors could have an opportunity to point out some of our GM’s fine points, accomplishments, and say how such an asset he was to our community. Wrong, there was nary a word.
Why was that?


Was the GM’s retirement not mentioned because it might stir the pot a little with questions from the audience? Possibly a question like why was the highest paid and most important appointed overseer to Village operations be allow to drop everything, pack it up, and leave our Park high and dry in giving everybody just a two day notice?


Could another stirring questions be why our Board is apparently so content about it? Shouldn’t they be troubled with having our Village be put in such a potentially compromising position?

By per chance the most stirrable question the Board might have had to hear in bringing up this retirement subject was somebody asking if this tale about he either had to retire or be fired was true. The GM has since given every indication the retirement was his idea and anything other than that is false. So now we all know that story was false and couldn’t be the real reason for this short notice.

Virtually every legitimate business seems to have a standard notice requirement of two to four weeks. That’s for even the most menial laborers, but everyone knows we aren't talking about a Whataburger worker here; this is the head guy in charge of maintaining and running a multi-million dollar corporation, your Long Island Village.


To my knowledge the GM has never disclosed to the owners any pertinent reasons as to why his retirement couldn’t have started after thirty to sixty days. Why didn't our Board ask him to stay or have Aramark tell him to stay until he was replaced instead of both allowing what seems to be a worthless two day notice. A timely notice is something that most people do consider to be a common courtesy and a good business practice? Why was this left to be allowed?


Isn't there something written in Aramark’s rules spelling out just how an employee should give them a notice? Isn’t there something in Aramark’s contract with our Park that indicates Aramark will provide a notice with a reasonable amount of time for any managerial changes?


It also seems that since his retirement, our Park has afforded him every courtesy, from advertising for his retirement party on channel 18 to displaying it on the marquee for over a week. He was also given all the ample space needed to write his sparkling green farewell speech in new LIV newsletter?


One might think it would have been appropriate to at least make it an official mention into the Village minutes, as they did with our previous general manager (Dave Fletcher) when his managerial services with LIV was being terminated. That’s right, Dave was canned by the Board and Aramark found it prudent to provide candidates for the Board in time to have a replacement waiting in the wings to take over.
So one must ask, what’s wrong with this picture?


Should not our Board be all over Aramark like a wet suit about this instead of thanking them for taking only four weeks to bring them a whole one person to interview? Aramark’s incredulous decision in allowing this notice go uncensored and then showing this somewhat cavalier attitude afterwards with replacement makes one really need to ask if they are doing all they can in looking after Long Island Village’s best interests.

Our new Board will hopefully do what we all wish Directors to do, and that’s to make our park a better place by their thought-out actions and error free decisions. It would be extremely beneficial to our Village if every candidate that’s being considered would be required to hold a C.M.C.A. qualification. The feeling is that it would be a mistake in hiring someone without this certification because it encompasses a pro active twenty first century managerial education in running every operational aspect efficiently within a condominium association type structured community. In other words, he/she is more qualified and familiar in how to do this job.


One should believe that it would be so irresponsible for our Board to let this end up being a one and done interview affair. Most owners though feel this Board will support the owner’s best interests and methodically interview a group of candidates before making their decision.


I can’t wait to see who fills this most important void in our Park and hear the reasons of why he/she was selected over all the other candidates. I would hope that this replacement will be held accountable for their actions.

Any comments?