MEETING WITH RICK ARCHBOLD
The Reform Committee received feedback from a homeowner who wanted answers to some serious questions. Here's what we learned.
- Rick Archbold would not agree to respond in an OPEN meeting. Instead, he required advance notice of almost TWO weeks before meeting in private.
Problem: When Archbold finally met, it was with his spokesman, Board Member Mac Hinman. Hinman hired Archbold while he was Acting Pres, despite the fact that the Pres, Tandy Bozeman was not so incapaciatated that he couldn't be reached, nor was the Secretary. And, according to Bozeman, 2 directors voted against the hiring, and Bozeman abstained.
Contracts, resolutions, withdrawals from the reserves, are signed by at least TWO directors, not the ACTING whatever. Why did Hinman need to control a member's meeting with the manager? Why didn't he include other board members? What's up between Hinman and Archbold?
- Archbold cannot produce a RESUME.
Problem: Archbold, the excessively paid manager, claims to have worked in the 'corporate world'. The only 'corporate' work he claims is a 'few years in electronic controllers.' Funny thing: electronic controllers, aka remote controlled devices/toys that can detonate explosives, have been the subject of recent intensive news coverage in reference to Iraq
These news reports occurred during the exact time Archbold was preparing answers for his scheduled meeting.
Archbold conveniently withholds the NAME of this 'corporation.' It's not the only NAME he withholds. See below.
- Archbold, at age 61 or whatever, thinks a resume is a birth history.
Problem: Archbold faxed copies of certificates on July 6, several months AFTER he was hired. Most interesting, on July 6, this committee had no posting about Archbold other than his quote about SUING homeowners and terrible past history as a manager. The questions about his IDENTITY didn't arise until weeks later.
Why would a man his age rush to make COPIES of a strange assortment, incl: birth certificate, marriage certificate (WHAT??) and passport. Who would think to supply this info, when hired for an executive position?
Why would he need to 'prove' his IDENTITY, before it became the subject of our investigation?
- Archbold has some papers he claims are DD-214's.
Problem: The FOIA we obtained shows that he was BRIEFLY active (months), NOT the 5 years he claims. The FOIA also states, under court martial, "not in file." For those who were never court martialled, that space is reported as N/A. Hmmm
The FOIA also shows no attendance in Military School. Officers MUST attend, before or during service. Hmmm
Problem: Archbold will not allow copies to be released, as they could be 'misconstrued'
LACC reports a WIN in a small claims action. We've learned such win equates to SUPPRESSION of Archbold's purported DD-214's. Why would LACC keep the DD-214's confidential, when Archbold presented a birth date and Soc Sec # at the meeting with a member? What's the SECRET?
- Archbold claims to have rejected a much better offer from a San Jose HOA in favor of LACC
Problem: No mention of the NAME of this HOA? See #2. And Timing is wrong. Archbold claims he rejected a February offer from San Jose. We know that LACC only came through the last day of April. Are we to believe that San Jose would wait 2-3 months for a reply?
ANSWER: Archbold lost the San Jose job, because that HOA did better vetting than LACC. Archbold was ordered to start looking in Winter '06, and was finally fired in Spring '07.
- Archbold claims that a lawyer "incorrectly" wrote about Archbold's DISMISSAL
Problem: What lawyer makes such a mistake? The Sproul firm is 'big time', at least in price. LACC uses Sproul. Hmmm
The 'letter' was written by HVLA Board Pres. Scott. See Scott's letter, this site. The DISMISSAL reference is about 'probable litigation by the general manager.' Are we to believe that the GM Archbold would be threatening lawsuits, if it were his choice to leave?
- Archbold provided a COPY of his Social Security.
Problem: It's illegal for an employer, LACC, to accept anything but an ORIGINAL. Only a certified replacement from the gov't can be accepted for a 'lost' original. With the concern about Archbold using Jackson as an alias, both sharing the same number, it is incomprehensible that LACC wouldn't require an ORIGINAL
- Archbold says he's been married 37 years.
Problem: He claims to marry AFTER college. LACC has a 'certificate' of graduation in '73
2007 -1973 = 34
These 3 LOST years are a pervasive problem. If Archbold is 61 (b 5/46), then he managed to avoid getting drafted until he was 21 1/2, since the FOIA shows enlistment in late 12/67. THREE Years: 3 years off in marriage date, and 3 years off in enlistment date. Hmm
- Archbold claims to have bought a house HERE.
Problem: No such record in Plumas County. Not for Archbold nor Jackson.
Why is his wife not living here? Archbold says she needs to keep her job. With his exhorbitant pay, why would she need to keep a receptionist job? Why has Archbold not put his HVLA house up for sale?
- Late Breaking News:
Kathy Welch, Archbold's executive secretry and CONFIDANTE just 'left' HVLA, and the HOA members say 'good riddance.' Beware, Archbold might attempt to hire her at LACC.
- Why is LACC having so many SPECIAL BOARD MEETINGS? (2 in 2 weeks) Archbold just arrived a few weeks ago. Why is there no publication of the purpose of these meetings? Why are the meetings held when most LACC owners have left?