[Watchdogs] Drama

[Milton Hawkins]

Douglas,

 

Well said!

 

Milton

 

From: watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org [mailto:watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org] On
Behalf Of Douglas Mink
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 2:49 PM
To: Linda Kaye Rogers
Cc: watchdogs at pec4u.org
Subject: Re: [Watchdogs] Drama

 

Ms. Rogers,

Thanks for the 9 emails or so. Perhaps it's just as you wrote: "To expect
anything different was either pure stupidy or ignorance." 

Before your next email, perhaps you will take a moment to study up on the
concept of fiduciary duty. As Wikipedia states, a fiduciary duty is the
highest standard of care. A fiduciary is expected to be extremely loyal to
the person to whom he owes the duty: he must not put his personal interests
before the duty, and must not profit from his position as a fiduciary,
unless the principal consents. The 4 directors who didn't cooperate with
PEC's internal investigation, and who voted against the motion by Director
Cox, broke the cardinal rule of a fiduciary: Those 4 directors have
continually and blatantly put their personal and legal interests ahead of
their duty to PEC. Your rant against Director Cox for a supposed use of bad
judgment is, to put it mildly, highly illogical. With every new email you
send, I grow ever more thankful that you did not win election to the PEC
Board.   

Regards,



On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Linda Kaye Rogers <rogers-pec7 at live.com>
wrote:

[. . .]



Now, about Mr. Cox demonstrating rather poor judgement, from my perspective.
He KNEW this would not fly.  How could he not know---the four older
directors were put in a corner and of course they would unite.  To expect
anything different was either pure stupidy or ignorance. And I don't think
Mr. Cox is either one of these.  He also had other information that made it
clear this  is how the vote would go. So, why do it?  To make a show. To
further fuel the the fire of "old vs new".  I cannot think of any reason
other than these possibilities. If anyone really wants to have all the
facts, go back and review the many times there has been cohesive voting, or
when one of the older directors has voted against one of his/her fellow ,
purported "old guard" members.  True, not often, but it has happened. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://103.greenbuilder.com/pipermail/watchdogs/attachments/20090206/d2cbedfb/attachment.html>