October 2005 – Issue 10/20
thesummitadvisor.com ... Links & Archive

Vote your Choices!

Every vote counts! Be sure the resident community is heard!
Annual Meeting: Saturday, Oct 22, 2005 @ Reynolds Store Firehouse 9-12 noon.

Advisors for the Board

Bill Masters, sponsor of the Summit Advisor, is running for the Lake Holiday Board of Directors. Read his two minute "Meet the Candidates" speech here. Bill Adams, contributing editor, is also running. Adams writes most of the Advisors' articles. Bill Adams' speech is available here. We urge you to consider both candidates. It's time for some fresh ideas and direction.

Final 2005 Board Meeting

The Special LHCC Board meeting of Oct 12 was attended by 8-10 residents which included four new Board candidates. Resident forum items included a request that both renovation and replacement options for the clubhouse be pursued and financial justification be presented to the public. A suggestion for a "curve-15mph" sign on Country Club Drive was dismissed. Somewhat shuffled agenda items discussed included a report on an easement for well #9, a re-estimate of clubhouse renovation and rebuilding costs, and reports on the golf course sale and dam status.

The board decided to draft and issue an RFP for both clubhouse options. The 2006 budget was then discussed in detail and a number of line items changed. The new budget and a FMTF report will be passes to the new board. Departing members were thanked for their service and the Board reconvened in executive session. During the break one Director was requested that the Clubhouse RFP be reviewed by the new board prior to issuance.

Golf Course For Sale

Date: Sunday, October 9, 2005 7:09 PM
Subject: Golf course property for sale!
The golf course is being sold!

http://homes.longandfoster.com/Buy_Home/Search/Property_Details.aspx?coId=2&mlsNum=FV5415139
Sale Price $1,750,000 - 140 COUNTRY CLUB DR, CROSS JUNCTION VA 22625
Remarks:
200 Acre former golf course within Lake Holiday, a growing 2700 lot housing development 15 miles west of Winchester, VA. Potential for development as property is zoned R5 allowing 2.3 housing units per acre.
Price: $1,750,000

County: Frederick PropertyType: Sport & Entertainment Golf Related Lot Size: 205.00 Acres Year Built: 1986 Status: Active LoopNet ID: 14358970

Location Description
Cross Junction is located in the "Top of Virginia" approximately 90 minutes west of Washington, DC. The surrounding area has posted major growth in total sales revenue, where the County shows 115% growth from 1994 to 2004. The population has grown at a rate of 28% since 1994 and the area is now classified as the Winchester-Frederick County metropolitan area with a combined population of more than 91,000. The area continues to expand with the pressures from the defense industry, Homeland Security, commuters from Northern Virginia and Washington, DC, as well as workers from the industrial corridor along the major North/South Interstate 81.

Contact
Betty Friant Sperry Van Ness - Commercial Specialists (540) 535- 0808 betty.friant@svn.com
Conrad Koneczny Sperry Van Ness - Commercial Specialists (540) 535- 0808 conradk@svn.com

Date: Sunday, October 9, 2005 9:34 PM
Subject: Golf Course Property being marketed nationally
It appears that the golf course property is being aggressively marketed nationally. What might this mean to current members of Lake Holiday?

The marketing timeline below was copied from documents in the listing of the golf course property at Lake Holiday:

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/Looplink/Profile/Profile.aspx?STID=/broker/sperryvanness&LID=14358970
The following outlines the Action Plan for
The Summit Golf Club Inc.
(Approx. dates, and subject to actual date of listing agreement
9/20/05 Execute Listing agreement
9/21//05 Submit listing agreement to Irvine California
9/21/05 Adjust base information in property profile
9/22/05 Activate property web site
9/22/05 Include property information to Corporate Web Site.
9/22/05 Prepare National Sperry Van Ness Advisor presentation
9/22/05 Email SVN advisor presentation to Irvine California (prior to noon)
9/23/05 Post property profile in MRIS. (Metropolitan Regional Information System)
9/26/05 National presentation to Sperry Van Ness Advisors on Raindance format
9/27/05 Submit property information to Loop Net, CCIM Net and Property Line
9/29/05 Order "Just Listed" postcards for mailing to our regional data base.
10/4/05 Submit property information to Co Star
10/6/05 Begin email blast to 68,000 independent commercial practitioners
10/12/05 Wall Street Journal ad in National edition
10/19/05 Formal property presentation to MAREMA (Mid Atlantic Real Estate Marketing Association ?a
regional association of commercial practitioners)
First Month: Contact Sperry Van Ness advisors with specific experience in selling this type of property
Contact developers active in this market for sale or joint venture scenario
Contact local investor data base
Monthly Local/Regional Advertising
Sperry Van Ness company wide sales forums
Sperry Van Ness Eastern region sales forums
Sperry Van Ness Mid Atlantic sales forums
Period/to date activity and status report to owner
Ongoing Maintain and update all national and regional listing services
Respond to all inquiries and provide brochures and additional information as needed
Verbal update to Owner
As Needed Follow up
Meetings

Clubhouse Rises Again

The building gets another reprieve, thanks to the assertion of many residents, and a brave lady who stood up at a general meeting and got the go-ahead from the Board President. An ad hoc volunteer group has formed, contacts of which are listed on page 5 of the October 2005 Community Newsletter. We will endeavor to cover the progress of the group.

As previously reported, the clubhouse had undergone part of a five year plan which was formulated circa 2000. A new roof and siding were the major expenditures. We believe however that special interest overrode practicality at that point and may have contributed to the demise of the project. Specifically, the focus on the lower level as a location for exercise rooms, locker rooms, showers, a kitchen, snack bar, etc. circumvented the main purpose of the building which is a meeting hall.

We encourage the new group to focus on what would be year three and four of the plan which deals with the upper level. The main hall, east room, lavatories and coat room should be the singular objective. This would open the building for both large and small meetings, and replace the Community Center which now belongs to the Developer. Once open, specialty functions can be added later. For reference the original five year plan is transcribed here. We also have a CAD floorplan. - Bill Adams

Analysis of an Agreement

We've heard about the Development Agreement, and seen some of the effects. But what's really in it? Is it good for the community? The Summit Advisor did a in-depth analysis here (rev. 10/05) and some of the findings may surprise you. Note: If you are seeing the original and not the 10/05/2005 revision, do a refresh (F5) when viewing it - The original has some misinformation which is corrected in the revision.

Declaration Still A Problem

According to a memo from a resident attorney, the revised Declaration still has numerous problems, despite efforts(?) to implement the 40 issues raised by the residents. We yield to superior knowledge in these matters and refer the reader directly to the memo sent to the board.

A lost opportunity and another in the works?

Most who travel the newly paved Country Club Drive daily find the road difficult to navigate because of the narrow pavement, lack of shoulders, loose gravel, and deep drainage ditches. Winter driving will only magnify these shortcomings.

When asked at the September 24th meeting why the newly repaved road width was sub-standard Chris Allison seemed to avoid my question instead bring up speeding as the focal point. After pointing out my question was not about speeding but the sub-standard road, his answer was very blunt, "It's not finished" indicating it is slated in the future road plans. The recent re-grading and complete repaving of the road was at the expense of the Declarant due to the extensive three month utility work that had closed Country Club Drive. Time to ask questions?

Considering the amount of monies the Declarant invested to bring the road to its present condition, one has to ask if management and those representing this community made any concerted effort to consummate an agreement with the Delarant that should have surely resulted in a combined financial effort resulting in a safer, wider and "finished" (Mr. Allison's' terminology) road.

The budget will always be an issue. But isn't that what good management is all about? Bring things together and making things happen. We are continually being told at meeting of the great working relationship between the Association and the Declarant. So, why are we driving on a newly repaved sub-standard road? The least that could have been done if not paved was to have graded the road bed an adequate width for "the future road plans".

Let us all hope that those who are protecting our interests don't let Masters Drive end up another "unfinished" road. It is a major artery and carries 1/3 or more of the community traffic and likely to double in the near future.

Masters Drive has a number of serious safety issues some of which could be corrected with some aggressive grading. Issues normally addressed in advance of the installation of water and sewer yet again it appears that safety and cost are secondary. The aggressive attitude for water and sewer over all else permitted by the past and present board may prove to be a disaster for any future cost effective safety improvements for Masters Drive.

Let us all hope that management, board members and Declarant becomes more attuned to the communities' needs and safety issues. - Bill Masters

Smart Move?

As reported in last Month's Advisor, the Board has postponed the vote on the revised governing documents. This follows a number of events. The decision may seem like a good idea, but could there be hidden reasons? As hopes of passing the documents erodes, the board may be scrambling for ways to keep it alive.

One hope may have been the 223 lot votes denied by the court. Was the board intending to use them to pass the documents? We may never know. Another hope might have been that a fair portion of the population would vote for the new documents. Receipt of mail-in votes may have dashed that hope as well. Nobody who I talked to is supporting the documents. With imminent failure at hand, the cancellation of the vote may have been to only alternative to a major embarrassment.

But what about fairness to the community? Had the vote gone through and rejected the documents, we would have been rid of the problem forever (or at least temporarily). It would be over, and we would survive on the existing rules. No more mail outs or meetings or late nights trying to read and understand the verbose and convoluted rules intended to keep lawyers employed. We could actually go out and enjoy the lake and amenities without worry that we would lose our rights. God forbid we ever need legal interpretation of existing rules like "no clotheslines". Instead the misery lives on - Postponed until another angle can be contrived.

The board is likely caught in the middle for lack of foresight in dealing with the Developer. They were warned on many of the issues which are coming to light today, but chose to dismiss them. The obligation to provide utilities to the trust property should have been challenged in the first place, instead of allowing it to be the hammer lock to every condition the Developer may desire. And as we know - The Developer desires revised documents. It is unfortunate that we, the residents, must continue to be on guard to protect our rights, and must endure the stress of this prolonged intransigence.

Summary of Ogunquit v. LHCC, et al

Following is a synopsis of the Bill of Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief filed by Ogunquit Development, LLC. This is intended for informational purposes only and not as a comprehensive or legal analysis.

Petitioner: Ogunquit Development, LLC
Respondents: LHCC, C.Allison, M.F.Heisey, C.James, J.Platt, H.Smith, L.Einstman, M.Patterson, D.Legge, K.Pettersen, J.Seckman, D.Smith, K.Tierney, T.Wallace and LHEUC.

Summary:
Ogunquit owns 23 lots and is therefore a member of LHCC
Action is on behalf of Ogunquit, the Association and the utility

Petitioner seeks declaration that:
- Directors may not vote LHCC owned lots
- Voting for Declaration must be section-by-section
- Certain actions violate governing documents, waste assets and breach fiduciary duty (itemized below)
- Directors may not sell LHEUC without 2/3 membership vote

Petitioner also seeks $4M monetary damage for wasted assets and breach of fiduciary duty

Breach of Fiduciary Duty:
Petitioner states that LHCC unfairly allowed LH Investors (LHLLC + LH Land) to extend utilities to 115 membership lots in sec. 10 but disallowed Ogunquit to extend utilities to two lots in sec. 8A, despite the fact that Ogunquit is paying dues and LHLLC is not.

Improper Sale of Assets:
Petitioner states that (1)they tried to buy lot 7/1168 for $50k which was later sold to LHLLC for $25k, (2)that sale of the "bus stop" lots and movement of the bus stop is a net $64k loss, and (3)that a total of 48 other lots in sec 1A and 7 were sold to LHLLC for $25k each with utility fees waived.

Improper Delegation:
Petitioner states that LHCC delegated creation of a unified declaration to lawyers employed by LHLLC and that LHLLC is named as the Declarant for all sections even though few or no lots are owned by them in some sections. There is no reason given for revision of the articles or bylaws. The new articles adversely change quorum and voting rights. The September Articles and bylaws vote was improperly conducted.

Our Two Cents

Comments regarding Ogunquit v. LHCC...

The court's declaration barring the board from voting the LHCC owned lots was a good one, but it is unknown whether this was a real issue or not. Section-by-section voting may seem fair to residents of a particular section, but it ignores the rights of the community as a whole. To achieve unity, which is one of the stated purposes for new documents and a long time objective, all residents must adopt a standard set of rules and therefore the vote should be global. Otherwise, we would inevitably be back to square one with multiple sets of rules. Those with strict rules would be disadvantaged by those with lax rules. It is unclear as to where exactly the section-by-section voting requirement is implied.

Whether the board violated existing rules or not is up to the court to decide. It is worthy to discuss some of the particulars however. The two lots Ogunquit denied service (8A/136, 138) lie at about 1000' above sea level. The water tanks also lie at about 1000'. Result? Near-zero water pressure. Guess who will be the first to complain and demand that the utility is responsible. I would not grant permission without a signed agreement stating that Ogunquit is responsible to provide and maintain local booster pumps and storage at their expense. The community should not have to bear the extraordinary cost of this expansion.

On the bids for lots presumed to be covered by the Development Agreement, the court needs to render judgment. Our position is that the agreement is preferential and in bad judgment, but that it is binding. We agree with the improper delegation allegations of the Bill. We do not agree with the alleged damages or the reckless amount sought. The following article from last month elaborates. -Bill Adams

The Other Side of the Coin

I've never been a fan of million dollar lawsuits. I cringe at the damage to corporate stockholders and consumers which results when courts award single party amounts which are hundreds of times greater than they could ever earn in a lifetime.

As such, I have deep concerns with the action against the Board of Directors. Some of the allegations may be warranted, but the damages sought seem excessive. Further, saying that the award is intended for the benefit of LHCC may stretch the truth. For starters, does not the average lawyer take a sizable percentage?

One may ask where the $4M is to come from as well. Well, the current Bylaws indemnify Board and Committee members, which suggests that the award may be paid from LHCC to itself - less the lawyer's cut. And a cut of say, 25% is a million bucks net loss! If LHCC carries liability insurance that issue may be moot - but the rates will probably go up. If the Judge finds Board Members personally liable, other issues arise. It could mean the financial ruin of individuals who have insufficient liability insurance. It would set a dangerous precedent which would quickly reduce the number of willing candidates for the board. Count me out, for one.

It may interest some that Ogunquit is the developer involved in our July Road Damage article. The same lot had been previously used as access to a pumping station, and had sewer lines under the location where the house was to be situated. Our utility company moved the lines (presumably at POA expense) and intended to move the access road to straddle the property line, but was denied access according to sources. Could this episode be a factor in the court action?

Before we mentally spend the windfall, it may be wise to weigh in the downsides. Depending on the Judge, this could net out as Travell vs. LHCC (i.e.; we pay a huge sum to their lawyer) or could seriously penalize 14 of our neighbors, who have (however misguided) put in countless hours in our service. -Bill Adams

Residents Forum Section

Starting July 2005 we are printing residents e-mails for the Month right here on the front page! This simplifies your navigation and our maintenance. Be a star reporter or commentator and sent your e-mail to thesummitadvisor@adelphia.net !

Your e-mails are listed below in chronological order. Entries may be archived or removed every Month and/or at our discretion. Entry text is limited to 500 words (about 25 lines in this format) and may be edited to conform to standards of heading format, font and length. By sending to e-mail thesummitadvisor, you indicate your permission to publish here, unless you state otherwise. Retractions from same e-mail IDs will be honored - please indicate subject and date. Date and Subject will be included from the heading. If you wish your name or pseudonym known please include it in the text. Please do not send attachments - text only!

Date: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 6:32 PM
Subject: Truth In Advertising?
Since they claim they want to tear down the clubhouse, why is the developer using a drawing of it on their web site to advertise Lake Holiday? They're also using our lake as a selling point for their houses. Check it out at
www.lakeholidayvirginia.com

Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2005 9:36 PM
Subject:
According to http://www.lakeholidayvirginia.com/coming_soon/clubhouse.html "Renovation of the existing Lake Holiday Clubhouse will be completed in Spring 2005. "

Did we miss something?

Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2005 12:50 AM
Subject: Elections and Email from Bob Pumphrey
Good points about Einstman and Penfield running again. I think it takes guts for either to run again, BUT at least Bill has stated his reasoning for running on his candidate resume. He's against the revised articles and the bylaws. Plus, he thinks the membership hasn't been served well in agreements with the developer. That's the type of people we need. What's Louis Eastman's agenda or platform? Lou was one of "Frank's Boys" in the past and his logic is still the same. He's in it for the fame. To bad Chris Allison is running, a stunning defeat may shatter his ego and not make him eligible to become a Frank Jr. cadet. Pat Shields for the board?? Pat's still drinking that "Kool Aid" and thinking the the "DOCS" are for real and we'll all live happily ever after when they're approved. I want to know where he's getting all of this peacefulness and quite at. It sure isn't in my area or on any of the roads I travel in the Summit.

When you look at the resumes we just got I only see 3-4 who even mention the current issues that are coming up with the developer and the waste of our monies. This is the scary part because we going to get stuck with some people who are going to be in way above their heads and they may not be smart enough to think for themselves.

Bob Pumphreys email of 9/22/05 was a good one and all points were right on the money. But Bob if you'd be drinking Pats Kool Aid you see the light too.

Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2005 1:02 AM
Subject: Lots sold to LHLLC
I just got an email from a friend out of the area asking about lots numbered 1151-54 and 1164-1168 being sold to the developer for $225,000. Any truth to this and isn't $28,000 per lot cheap unless you're the buyer? After all we are the Utopia in the valley.

Date: Thursday, October 6, 2005 1:44 PM
Subject: FW: RE: I'm Interested in LakeHoliday...
After reading that the clubhouse renovations were to be completed in the spring of 2005, and looking at the picture, I inquired at the miller and smith web site about the renovations. The response (see below) was surprising having heard the clubhouse was to be torn down. What is going on with the clubhouse?
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
Subject: RE: I'm Interested in LakeHoliday...
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:49:44 +0000
We anticipate the clubhouse being complete mid summer of 2006.
Thank you, ... Miller and Smith
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 9:33 PM
Subject: I'm Interested in LakeHoliday...
Comments: I spent some time at Lake Holiday and am interested in property there. However, your website indicates, "Renovation of the existing Lake Holiday Clubhouse will be completed in Spring 2005." I know that has not happened. When do you anticipate clubhouse renovations will take place?

Date: Thursday, October 6, 2005 6:16 PM
Subject: Qualifications
Looking at the resume of Bill Masters, the Summit Advisor.

He has never worked on any of our committees here at the Summit. His experience seems to be handing out flyers at the gate and at meetings. He's also well known for jumping out of bushes with his video camera.

In my humble opinion, his qualifications are thin. He did serve a few months on the Utility Board a couple of years ago. However, the other members of that Board found him so difficult to work with that they petitioned the Country Club Board, which appointed him, to remove him. This was done.

Do we really need such a disruptive individual in a position of responsibility? I don't think so.

Date: Friday, October 7, 2005 12:03 PM
Subject: LHCC Transformation: "Thinking Outside the Box"
Like so many other members of the Lake Holiday property owners association I have taken the time to study the impressive resumes of each candidate for election to the Board of Directors. Of particular interest to me are visions for the future and objectives as set forth by the candidates. My impression is that much more creative thinking is needed before the vision statement adopted by the LHCC Board of Directors on July 26, 2005 will become a reality. That is, make Lake Holiday Country Club the preeminent property owners association in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

It would be a real gift to management and to the community, if members of the association find a way to empower elected representatives to consistently make ?wise choices? in all their deliberations. This would obviously require a transformation in individual and collective thinking and in the Board?s decision making processes.

By way of example, the first Department of Defense Transformation project was undertaken in 1980. A discussion of this and several other transformation projects can be found on my web site http://pentagonmeditationclub.org (click on Syllabus and scroll to SDIs.) After the President of the United States paid a visit to the Pentagon in 2000 each military department of the U.S. Department of Defense began aggressively developing a transformation program. Nevertheless those programs do not address the question of what is needed to make wise choices. In the aftermath of hurricanes Katrina and Rita the entire nation saw evidence of the need for transformation of management practices at the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Department of Homeland Security.

The two-part power point presentation I am forwarding to you focuses on a prerequisite for more effective and efficient management. Substitute LHCC for FEMA, and I think you will discover a fresh approach which would empower elected leaders to think outside the box and make faster progress in fulfilling the vision for the Lake Holiday community.

Edward E. Winchester, C.M.
Member, LHCC Property Owners Assn.
President, PeaceMakers Institute, Inc.
Editors Note: Regretably we are unable to view or convey Mr. Winchester's powerpoint files due to time, space and software constraints. We believe his e-mail text conveys the main points and it is therefore printed above consistant with the forum rules.

Date: Sunday, October 9, 2005 5:46 AM
Subject: Amendments
The LHCC website Bylaws has an amendment to article VI, section 2 ELECTIONS dated September 27, 2005. The amendment states a policy regarding changing votes on absentee ballots. Am I nuts, or does not an amendment require a majority of a quorum, or 10% of the *Members* per article XIV (amendments) and article X, section 4 (quorum)? Was there really 60+ voters and 30+ ayes at the September Board meeting? Indiscriminate changes to governing documents by a select few could easily shanghai the community into unknown waters.

Date: Monday, October 10, 2005 5:31 PM
Subject: Elections:
The e-mail dated Oct. 5th the writer suggests it takes guts for Einstman and Penfield to run for the board again. Both had years on the board starting when the Summit was at its lowest point with no where to go but up. During their respective terms the time line of improvements and slow results validates the writers own words. It takes guts to ask for another chance. The analysis of Chris Allison and Pat Shields could not be said more eloquent. All four have been in the driver's seat and we continue to see the results of the past decisions. It is always interesting to hear all the ideals and qualification of a candidate but when they have a past record to scrutinize, the term taking guts and double standards are issues that are points to ponder. Out of 17 running for the board certainly there are seven new qualified faces.

Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 4:24 PM
Subject: A Guideline for Selecting Board Candidates
To: The Summit Advisor
Subject: A Guideline for Selecting Board Candidates
BY: Bob Pumphrey, Sr. e-mail: RLPSR@Adelphia.net

I thought it would be appropriate for me to share one technique I'm using to evaluate Board Candidates. This is not to be construed as the only technique as many other factors should be considered that are not in this structured technique.

For those of you who may not have heard about this technique, it's called the Management Grid (MG). I personally believe our Board has to have strong management and people leadership. The MG provides a formal way to evaluate each candidate in this light.

To construct a MG, draw a 9 increment x 9 increment grid of 81 equal squares. Put the numbers 1 through 9 on the left-hand Vertical line with the 1 starting at the bottom of the Vertical line. Entitle this line "Concern for LH Residents". On the lowest Horizontal line put the numbers 1 through 9 with the 1 at the left so the first square can be identified as 1,1. Entitle this Horizontal line "Concern for LH Operations"(day to day services, budget, construction, legal documents, etc.) .

Grade each candidate by selecting a square on the grid and putting in it your grade using the appropriate vertical and horizontal numbers. For example, a 9,9 would be an absolutely outstanding manager with the greatest concern and abilities for Residents and Operations. Also, he or she would probably be able to leap tall buildings with ease. Really, no one can, realistically, be this good. A 1,9 grade would indicate a person who drives mightily to get all LH Operations outstandingly done without any regard for LH Residents. Conversely, a 9,1 grade is a person who does outstandingly regarding LH Residents, but never gets any LH Operations done.

I hope this guideline will help you. Please Vote !!

Date: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 4:50 PM
Subject: Board elections
When Chris Alison was President of the Board, the Board sold our community center to the developer and then rented it back from them. They arbitrarily changed the by-laws without consulting the property owners. How can Mr. Alison possibly justify these actions?

All our reserves have been spent and we're looking at the same conditions that we had when we got rid of Mr. Simms. No money in the bank and very few assets to trade. We have a huge bill coming for the dam and no money to pay for it.

We are in a really deep place right now and the community needs people with experience to get us out of this hole. Without firm leadership, the developer will walk all over us. We need to take control and we need to elect people who know how to do that. Penfield and Einstman did it before and they can do it again.

Date: Thursday, October 13, 2005 6:47 PM
Subject: the big vote
It's a shame that the homeowners in the Summit won't participate in the voting process. There is enough of us out there to crush anything the current board is up to. We should have all new blood on every seat and in every committee established. Wouldn't be nice to see new people at the meetings and on the board. It would make me proud again to live here. The top three board members especially should be banned from serving on any committee ever again. I not saying they couldn't have a lemonade stand. Though they'd mess that up to. I just think its time for them to blend back into there normal lives. Move away may bee. There's got to more for them to do in there lives than sticking there noses in everything around here. I know the places I have worked at would have fired people like them long ago...

Awaiting your E-Mail...

thesummitadvisor.com webspace provided by EZ Dezines