Background and Disclaimer:

---

The 2019 Bonds contained a provision (Section 5.04) in which the "Issuer covenants not to issue additional bonds"....Yet, UPRD and its attorneys have spent the last year doing just that:  Attempting to issue additional bonds that it is prohibited from issuing! 

Illegal and INSANE!

Why haven't you heard about this from YOUR BOARD?

 In early December 2023, residents began asking the UPRD Board" "how can you issue bonds in light of language prohibiting additional bonds from being issued?" 

Scrambling to explain, UPRD conspired with its attorneys to concoct bogus documents and represented to the residents that UPRD had the authority to issue additional bonds when Section 5.04 clearly states it cannot.  

So, this was a lie.

Here is a picture of the "Opinion Letter" represented by Chair DICKSON as "proof" that the attorneys gave the "green light" to move ahead with the [prohibited] bond issuance

Folks...this is NOT an "Opinion Letter."  No law firm, letterhead, no signature, no date.  It was purposefully concocted by the attorneys (as confirmed by UPRD's Financial advisor, PFM) to mislead the residents (in my opinion, of course).

YOUR BOARD pulled the wool over YOUR eyes.  Shameful.

The fact that YOUR UPRD Board and its attorneys would enter into this deception should give us all pause as to who these people truly are (in my opinion, of course).

Who does this and why do they think they can get away with this? 

At the January 4 Town Hall, the residents confronted the Board publicly about the bogus Opinion Letter.

Supervisor Murphy dodged the issue saying he did "NOT ACKNOWLEDGE" the letter.

Why wouldn't Supervisor MURPHY answer a simple question for the residents?  What is he hiding?

Then the next day, January 5, Chair DICKSON, feeling the heat and needing to address the Section 5.04 issue, sent the bogus "Opinion Letter" out in an emergency email to all residents (check your email: "An important message from Sally Dickson") in which she doubled down stating that the attorneys saw no problem with the language in Section 5.04 [prohibiting UPRD from issuing additional bonds.]

Basically, she was telling us not to worry about this issue.   

But, as described more fully below) you'll see...this wasn't exactly the truth either.

What else have they hidden from us?

Watch below at 1:38:00 - 1:41:25

On January 12, less than a week after DICKSON assured us that the attorneys are 100% behind UPRD issuing these new bonds (again, which are PROHIBITED by Section 5.04), attorney Robert Gang from Bond Counsel (Greenberg Traurig, LLP) required that the Board issue a Conflict Waiver before it issues a [real, legally valid] Opinion Letter and also required that the existing language from 2019's Section 5.04 MUST be amended (i.e. removing the Prohibition from issuing additional bonds) before he and his firm can issue a [real, legally valid] Opinion Letter.

WAIT....WHAT?  

How can this be?  Less than 1 week before DICKSON assured us there was nothing to worry about and that UPRD had all the legal authority it needed to issue additional bonds.

Now the attorney says it can't issue an Opinion Letter (that she already represented was issued???)

It sure appears that DICKSON lied about the attorneys attesting to UPRD's ability to issue additional bonds...doesn't it?

The agenda above is from the January 12 Board Meeting with these emergency agenda items required before a [real, legally valid] Opinion Letter can be issued by Bond Counsel.

Since the governing language from 2019 precluded issuing additional bonds at the time it conducted a) 3 Town Halls, b) the December 8, 2023 Public Hearing authorizing the Assessment Methodology, AND c) the January 16, 2024 referendum, all of these actions are illegitimate.

At the April 29, 2024 Bond Validation Hearing, it was apparent that the Judge looked the other way on this very material legal matter (in my opinion, of course).

Thus, the appeal to reverse this fairly obvious judicial error.

YOUR Board and its attorneys, thumbed its nose at the relevant law, took a shortcut, and plowed ahead with the referendum when it didn't have the legal authority to do so.

Why haven't you heard this from your Board of Supervisors?

Because they have been trying for the past 6 months to scheme and conspire to cover this gaffe up and prevent you from knowing this.

What they should have done is: a) PAUSE THE REFERENDUM, b) determine if the language could be fixed, c) fix the language, and d) THEN and ONLY THEN, proceed with the actions to issue the bonds.

An ethical Board with integrity, ethics, and respect for the rule of law would have done this (in my opinion, of course).

But YOUR Board chose NOT to do this.

Ask them why?

We tried but they would not answer us and wished this issue would magically go away.

Is this the type of people YOU want leading us? [and leading us into the financial abyss?]

In my opinion, of course: This isn't an innocent mistake....it is purposeful.  They got themselves into this predicament and continued to lie and only made the matter worse for ALL residents.  This is YOUR Board's unforced error that YOU will now be paying for.

At the January 4 Town Hall, Chair DICKSON deflected blame for why she invited a Sheriff's Deputy to be in attendance....turning our friendly community into an armed militia meeting.

Reading from prepared notes, she states the reason was because she received "email threats."

For sure, bona fide threats should be taken seriously and addressed.

You know what else should be taken seriously and addressed?  When YOUR public officials state that threats were received...when none actually were!

She played to a sympathetic crowd which believed everything she said and even applauded her "courage" for enduring these "threats".

Watch/listen for yourself below at 1:11:48 - 1:13:21

Problem is...THIS WAS A LIE.

For 3 months, the residents have been trying to get DICKSON and UPRD to comply with a Public Records Request showing support for her statement that she received email threats.

FINALLY, on April 10, ONLY AFTER getting a Public Records Watchdog group (Florida's First Amendment Foundation) and a Mediator from Attorney General Ashley Moody's office involved, was DICKSON sufficiently backed into a corner where she had to admit she never received written threats as she previously told residents.

Do you want a leader that you need to enter into a chess match to get simple answers or do you want a leader with ethics and integrity and one that tells the truth and is transparent and accountable at all times?

Do you want your elected public officials and neighbors to lie to you?

Let's get people on the Board who are ethical, have integrity, and are transparent!

Watch/Listen for yourself below at: 1:22 - 4:39 to Chair DICKSON not wanting to explain why she lied:

I hope you don't think that the UPRD Board did any financial planning before deciding to proceed down the path to issue the new 2024 Series $21,000,000 [prohibited] bonds.  They are required by the terms of the Charter....a Charter in place to protect the residents from rogue actors, poor decisions, and fiscal recklessness.....to maintain a 5 Year Plan at all times.....ESPECIALLY FOR NEW PROJECTS.  Simply, the Board has not adopted any such 5 Year Plan that OUR Charter says it SHALL maintain.  Note:  it says SHALL, as in NOT AN OPTION.  It doesn't say "try to maintain," or "maintain when you get around to it," etc.  It says SHALL.  And UPRD has chosen to purposefully ignore this requirement.

Worse yet, the time that we need this forward-looking analysis most is when they are contemplating NEW PROJECTS!

YOUR Board is derelict in its fiduciary responsibility to us before running up "the credit card" and saddling the community with $44 million of burden of debt (the average house will pay $37,000 over the 30-year period for 1,202 homes).

If the Board has extra cash lying around from operations the, fine, let's approve projects that make sense.

But, because the 5-person Board can issue [prohibited] bonds when it wants for whatever it wants (because the residents chose to be a "Special District") we are beholden to their lack of fiduciary responsibility and poor judgment.

This is a consequence of being a Special District that YOU agreed to, whether you realized it at the time or not.

Again....don't think any financial analysis was done on OUR behalf.

Who spends $44 million without any forward-looking analysis?  YOUR BOARD.  Shameful.

One more thing:  The Board is required to complete a budget and audit as per terms of the bondholders.  They do this flawlessly and without prodding.  They do this because there are consequences with the State of Florida if they don't.

But when it comes to maintaining a 5 year plan, they don't.  They don't do this because there is no authority that will come down on them if they don't.  They police themselves.  So, because no one other than the residents they are supposed to represent have any leverage over them, they simply ignore this responsibility.  Are these the types of people you want representing you going forward?

They demonstrate no respect for the people they represent.  In my opinion, of course, they don't operate with integrity...they operate on the basis of whatever they can get away with.

The Town Hall Presentations were full of rosy verbiage but devoid of the most basic information.

Truth in Lending Laws require even used car salesmen to state the total amount of the principal and interest payments that the borrower will incur.

YOUR Board, however, chose not to put this number in writing in any Town Hall.

The number (on average) is $37,000 per home.  Remember, this is a GIFT from homeowners to UPRD.  Homeowners do not have any ownership in the assets of UPRD.  You still need to pay fees to use most of these assets.

You should ask why?

Nowhere did the Board provide this information.  This slide is the closest they came to disclosing any such information on the total costs.

The total burden of debt that these bonds will cost the average home in University Park is FAR MORE than the $3,666 three-year number presented on this slide.  It is a staggering $37,000 (again, on average).

Why did the Board hide the total cost from you?

By purposefully suppressing this number from you, they wouldn't even comply with Federal Truth in Lending Laws.  I would call them worse than used car salesmen, but that would be an insult to used car salesmen (in my opinion, of course).

Certainly, the UPRD Board is pushing an agenda and they don't want any obstacles in their way.

This is YOUR Board's purposeful deceit and misrepresentation and UPRD Residents are the victims. (in my opinion, of course)

Why do our elected officials operate in this fashion when they are supposed to be transparent and acting as fiduciaries for us??

The Town Hall made lofty statements, the most important of which were never supported by any study or the like....just things that sound directionally nice so it sounds good to the majority of residents who don't pay much attention to these types of issues.

Here is a page from UPRD's Town Halls that touts the $21 million capital spending plan will yield "ENHANCED PROPERTY VALUES."  

The Board was asked many times to show support for this statement and hasn't.

Have you asked your realtor?  Many have and they say that they don't see how any of these capital expenditure lead to special benefits that exceed everyone's $37,000 total burden of debt.

In fact, realtors state that the fact that assessments which can be dictated by a rogue Board is indicative of an unstable and unpredictable assessment environment and actually scares many buyers away who, obviously, want to see stability and predictability when they do their financial planning, including where to live.

ALSO...at one time Chair DICKSON actually stated in a TOWN HALL that these capital projects actually help promote the Diversity and Inclusivity goals of the UPRD.

Really?

When challenged that her statement was without support and was just meaningless virtue signaling, she never mentioned this again....but it is a good example of the pandering that this Board does:  making things sound good to those of you who aren't paying attention (in my opinion, of course).

YOUR Board says a lot of things that aren't true, but which sound good to the undiscerning listener.

UPRD and its friendly Judge Nicholas (in my opinion, of course) assumed this would be a rubber stamp meeting,  They went through the performative motions and the judge issued an order approving the bond.

Along the way, however, we believe the judge erred on several legal issues.

See the court records to understand more about these issues.  The relevant documents to review "the other side of the story" are:

14-Answer to Complaint

15-Civil attachment to Answer-Exhibit List

22-Motion for Emergency Hearing

23-Exhibits for Motion for Emergency Hearing

26-Motion for Rehearing

27-Motion for New Judge

32-Statement of the Evidence and Proceedings

Not surprisingly, due to the conduct and prejudices exhibited by the judge (in my opinion, of course), items 22, 26, and 27 were DENIED

...and, thus, the reason for the appeal.

Item 32 is a re-creation of the events at the Hearing since there was no Court Reporter present.

The MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING includes evidence initially uncovered by The Observer Newspaper reporter Lesley Dwyer as to some suspicious backdating of documents (documents to amend the existing Section 5.04 language to delete the prohibition against issuing additional bonds....language which the Board had at one time told residents did not need to be amended).  The Exhibits to this EMERGENCY MOTION show the actual documents that were approved by the Board on March 22.....AND ALSO....the executed version of these documents that contain dates different than what was approved by this Board.

Look at these documents with YOUR OWN EYES to see the two different versions.

Why would YOUR Board approve documents at a public meeting on March 22 and date them March 1, but the executed version of the documents (signed by DICKSON and CARVALHO and Trustee SCHUHLE) is dated January 1??

This is part of the reason why the Florida Commission on Ethics has a complaint pending these actions by DICKSON and CARVALHO to determine if and to what extent UPRD residents may have been defrauded by them in an apparent public document falsification scheme. 

At one time, the UPRD attorneys changed their story 3 times as to explaining why there are three different versions of these documents floating around.

Seems nefarious and potentially fraudulent (in my opinion, of course).

I have been trying for months to get UPRD to send me answers to my Public Records requests surrounding this potentially fraudulent activity.  They have stonewalled and thrown up roadblocks to prevent me from seeing and report on this information and I still do not have this information.

Why?

What are they hiding?

Did they really backdate documents to make it appear that the new language to replace the Section 5.04 from 2019 [which prohibits additional bonds] that was approved March 22, 2024 was really effective January 1 (i.e. BEFORE the referendum?)

Unless the Florida Commission on Ethics moves forward with its investigation, we won't know for sure unless they are taken to court and deposed.  Stay tuned!

See for yourself:

Believe it or not, UPRD actually has a CORE VALUE STATEMENT that includes an ethics/integrity statement.  

Actually, UPRD's CORE VALUES Statement states that it will operate with the highest of integrity and ethics.

In my opinion, of course, and based on the stories contained herein, I haven't seen the Board living these values.  Problem is these are just virtue signaling words on paper: the Board chooses to ignore this part of its Values (in my opinion, of course).

It seems to me that the Board's Core Values is not based on operating with the highest ethics, but, rather, what they can get away with from its unsuspecting residents they were elected to serve.

The day after the initial bond Validation Hearing, the Board immediately went forward to begin work in the Golf Course Irrigation System.

In my opinion (of course), this is indicative of the immaturity and lack of fiscal discipline and financial inexperience of this Board on several fronts:

FIRST:  The Board only received 1 bid for the irrigation system.  It was in the range of $5.5 million.  Good Management Practices and the general practice of this Board is to get 3 Bids.  So why the hurry to move ahead with 1 bid?  Remember...the decrepit state of the irrigation system should have been addressed as a purchase price reduction in 2019!  (Now we are paying for it again...in 2024 prices!)  Additionally, two golf course management companies we've talked to state that the average rate to install an irrigation system is typically $3 million per 18 holes...or $4.5 million for our 27 holes (before the efficiencies of doing 27 holes all at once instead of just 18 holes).  So it seems that our 1 bid is well in excess of industry standards.  We are owed an explanation.  Without such, we can only conclude that the Board just wasted at least another $1 million more of YOUR money.

SECOND: This Board was too busy spiking the football and celebrating the "decision" validating the bond from the April 29 hearing.  Still giddy from the [temporary] good news from the bond validation hearing they decided to move ahead with the irrigation system without assurance of if/when funds would be in place to pay for this.  As such, the Board now finds itself in the horrible financial reality that they are, yet again, over their skis.  Bills are coming due and there are NO FUNDS to pay for this.

This fiscally reckless action they took by themselves.

This is the reason for the recent letter in your mailboxes for another Supplemental Assessment.

So, as cryptically explained in the June 27 Board Business email, the Board had to get approval to enter into a $5 million bridge loan.

This bridge loan is expensive.  There are about $120,000 of direct additional fees associated with this bridge loan in addition to a higher interest rate than the [prohibited] Series 2024 $21,000,000 bonds they are trying get issued.  (When considering indirect costs like legal fees, postage, etc, the costs are closer to $200,000)

MORE TROUBLING is that to get the Bridge Loan, the lender requires collateral for getting repaid at the end of the two-year term in case the bond money never materializes (for instance if an appeal torpedoes the current lower court judge's ruling).

So, guess what the collateral is?

You've never been advised of this potentiality in the Town Halls, because YOUR BOARD didn't have the forethought that it would find itself in this current horrible financial position when it did the Town Halls.  Of course, had it complied with its Charter and/or if the Board Members were fiscally conservative and not fiscally reckless and inexperienced, they would have laid out a plan and timeline to anticipate these additional costs (in my opinion, of course).

So, what they did at the June 27 Board Meeting is plan for YET ANOTHER assessment that will be triggered in 2025 should the Bond financing never materialize.  It will be a one-time payment ranging from $5K - $10K per home to pay off the $5 million bank note and its associated high fees/costs and interest rate.

We all recently received this notice around the week of July 8.

It is disingenuous at the least to put yet another lien on your house to enter into a short-term shylock loan.  But YOUR UPRD BOARD's actions caused this.  It is unthinkable that they do this without YOUR knowledge.

Who are these people?

This is insane.  This must stop.

The equity in our homes are OURS...not to be used by a financially reckless Board under the guise that "Property Values will be Enhanced" without proof.

Instead of sticking residents with these usurious Bank Note related costs, the Board (acting as our fiduciary) should make its attorneys and advisors pay these extra costs for taking legal shortcuts and getting us $44 million deeper in debt.

They have no credibility left and are no longer deserved of our trust (in my opinion, of course).  What is your opinion?

In my opinion, these people need to go.

Their own actions have put UPRD in a fiscal mess and look at our homes as a never-ending source of free money...free money to them...but money that is effectively a 30-year ball and chain on YOUR homes...whether a) while YOU own them, b) you sell and then some future owner will have to pay.

We need to vote in people who are fiscally responsible, fiscally experienced, fiscally prudent and respectful of YOUR Treasure

The Board has its head in the sand and is naive with respect to representing to residents that "we are protected from cost overruns due to the contingency they have in their estimates."

Again, they are over their skis and leading us off a fiscal cliff.

Let me explain why we believe we will experience cost overruns of $5 - $10 million or more:

1) These estimates yielding $18.5 million of capital projects are almost a year old and already stale

2) The projects won't even start until 12 months from now, at the soonest (not even considering the effect of any possible appeal)

3) The projects don't even have architectural plans yet.  Only when architectural drawings are available can the subcontractors prepare somewhat accurate bids. 

4) The Board is giddy in that the estimate from a year ago has a 9% contingency.  Here, the Board is inexperienced (in my opinion, of course).  Local projects are coming in at 50-75% more than original projected costs (In 2021, a local church took pledges for a $6.6 mm project; then, in November 2023, once architectural drawings were available, the price increased to $9 million; then, in March, 2024 the cost increased to $11 million due to supply chain and labor issues.

5) The Board has been asked to explain their plan for cost overruns.  Where would additional money come from?  Another bond issuance?  Another assessment?

Their only answer is they have a [pitifully inadequate] 9% contingency build into their estimates.  They have no clue.  They only have wishful thinking.  This is not a plan.

On March 22, in a Board meeting, Chair DICKSON was cornered into stating that regardless of cost overruns, supply chain issues and the like, that YOUR Board would not spend more than the $18.5 million net bond proceeds.  I don't know about you, but based on her and this Board's track record and body of work, I'm not buying it.  I don't trust her anymore and certainly won't bet that she states she will stop spending at $18.5 million.  Her credibility is zilch and we cannot afford to continue to trust a word she says (in my humble opinion, of course).

We can't take the risk that this will turn out to be another lie from DICKSON.  The proposed capital spend plan must stop now or it is likely to expect a third assessment.

Watch/listen for yourself below at:  6:20 - 11:48

The Club Weekly invites all residents to "GET TOGETHER" and will advertise for groups interested in forming.

At least that's what it states on paper.

In practice, however, this is not the case.  Groups will only be approved if they are not deemed a THREAT to the UPRD Board's Agenda of ramming through a [prohibited] $21,000,000 Bond.  Case in point:

GM John Fetsick approved my concept for an Aviation Club (to discuss aviation-related topics)....however, when I floated the idea of a Finance/Legal Club (to discuss Financial and Legal topics), he shut that down.

Why?

I believe that he (and the UPRD Board) is paranoid and afraid that discussions in this proposed club would illuminate the lies, deceit, deception, missteps, obfuscation, and possible fraud that the UPRD Board has done (as documented in this webpage, in court filings, and objections to the recent supplemental assessment) in trying to ram through this [prohibited] bond.

They want to quash any dissenting views to their agenda.  It's like living in a communist country.

This is who these people are.   

Your GM, John Fetsick, has reached deep into the rule book to advise that proposed clubs cannot raise money for political causes or have a religious purpose.  So, these are FETSICK's (and UPRD's) official statement and reasons as to why my proposed Finance and Legal Club was denied.

Problem is, however, my proposed club is not doing any political fundraising or associated with any religion.  

Why is this club denied for me and hundreds of interested residents?  Afterall, UPRD is not a private entiry.  It is publicly held.  I and other residents pay an average of $36,000 for this first bond which is supposedly conferring me special benefits that I now want to take advantage of.

How many voted in FAVOR of the proposed {prohibited] 2024 Bond hoping to use meeting space not knowing that your request is subject to how FETSICK feels about your club and if it fits the narrative that the UPRD is pushing?

Let's cut through the BS.

In my opinion, of course, FEETSICK is worried to death that residents may discuss all of this Board's actions, activities, and proceedings with respect to trying to push through this [prohibited] bond issuance.

This is how this Board has operated for 5 years.  Shut down those who disagree with the "leaders."

FETSICK's actions are discriminatory and violate residents' rights to peacefully assemble and freedom of speech.  This is what happens in China and Russia...and, now, apparently here at University Park.  Is this a fight he really wants to drag UPRD through?  Is this the type of decision we expect from our current GM and the UPRD Supervisors?

 By his denial of this rather innocuous club that dozens of residents would enjoy and have asked for, John Fetsick is suppressing free speech and is surely representing the UPRD Board's paranoia that open discussion may derail the Board's agenda of ramming through $44 million of debt burden on its residents.
What is the fear, John?  Why can't you treat all residents as adults.
There is nothing political or illegal about this club.

John Fetsick's suppression of this group meeting is unwarranted, exposes his and the UPRD Board's paranoia of dissention of their [prohibited] bond.

Isn't this what communist countries do?

If YOUR Board has to suppress such a group from meeting, you should ask WHY?  

If their capital expenditure idea is soooo good, then shouldn't it be able to stand on its own merits?

The point is that they have had to lie, fabricate documents, ignore the rule of law and more to keep this [prohibited] bond issuance alive (in my opinion, of course).

So, they resort to these childish tactics?

Let's get adults on the UPRD Board and running the club. 

 In denying the Finance / Legal Club from forming and meeting, John has exposed himself as a hypocrite and protectionist (in my opinon, of course).

He cited that the proposed Finance / Legal club is Political in nature (which it isn't).  YET the MEN's Book Club that IS approved blatantly states in its advertising that it "welcomes diverse political views" (see above).

Seems like a double standard to me.

 Why is he quashing free speech and freedom to assemble in a public space (remember the assets of UPRD are in a public entity, not a private entity) for a Finance/Legal Club that many residents would like to join?  A club that is NOT political or even illegal.
Who is he to determine that non-political, totally legal clubs should be prohibited?
Book clubs are allowed, Bridge Clubs and Canasta Clubs are allowed to meet...why not a proposed Finance/Legal Club?
Is John monitoring the table conversations at the existing clubs and blessing the topics being discussed?
Be careful...Big Brother is watching....and this is childish and not becoming of our General Manager (in my opinion, of course).  We never had these concerns with Laurie Evanas....just saying.  What do you think?
Shameful. 

UPDATE September 19, 2024:  

We have been informed that the Finance/Legal Club will be allowed to meet.  The first advertisement will go out in CLUB WEEKLY on September 27 with the first meeting sometime in October, 2024.

....The Florida Gaming Control Commission has opened up an investigation into UPRD allowing illegal, criminal gambling activities and running an illegal card room right on our property.

Let's pause and review:  My proposed Finance/Legal Club proposal does not violate any laws.

YET, YOUR GM, John FETSICK, and your UPRD Board and your UPCAI Board apparently don't care about illegal activities taking place right under their noses here on UPRD Property.

This is insane!

The advertising of the High Stakes Poker and the Texas Hold'Em groups expose UPRD, its Board, the UPCAI Board, and residents participating in these groups to criminal, illegal gambling activity as these groups potentially violate Florida Statutes 849.085 and 849.086.

So, John, UPRD Board, etc.  please explain yourself...your paranoia is showing.

YOUR Board is supposedly so concerned about "enhancing property values" and the best way they know how is to saddle its residents with another $44 million of debt burden, yet they don't see that hosting an illegal cardroom, violative of Florida Statutes and policed by the Florida Gaming Control Commission Statutes would decrease property values??  Seems to me that being under a Florida Gaming Control Commission investigation puts a stain on our beloved community's reputation.   

In my opinion, YOUR Board is recklessly promoting illegal criminal gambling activity right here in YOUR beloved community.  They should all resign and quit staining the reputation of UPRD further.

We'll have to wait until the Florida Gaming Control Commission concludes its investigation to see what they think.

YOUR Board is more concerned with what color denim you can wear in the dining room than they are in running an illegal cardroom and hosting illegal gambling activity and subjecting UPRD (i.e. YOU) to significant risks in terms of fines and sanctions!

Seems like their priorities are a little messed up.

Treat us all as adults, not as your subjects you rule over.

To my UPRD fellow residents:

These people have exhibited POOR judgment, discrimination, and paranoia.  They want to run YOUR lives as they see fit.

Again, in my opinion, of course, simply...these people need to go!

Based on what you have read herein...what do you think?  Are these the types of people you want to continue to represent us? 

They have and continue to fail us and put UPRD in fiscal and legal jeopardy!