This reorganisation, including the memorandum of understanding (MOU), was to give the landholder associations greater input to the board of directors at MIL.
This strategy worked well for a while and everything seemed to be going as planned
After about a year, it appears that the wheels fell off this cart!
The board flatly rejects to take any input from the landholder associations and the SRI chairman. Nobody at MIL remembers the MOU, at all, and there is no understanding.
The board increased my charges by seven per cent and I have had no water for two years.
There was no discussion with the landholder associations at all on this issue.
The independent directors are not answerable to anyone and are content to drive the shareholders into the dust with costs, while MIL has $80 million of our money in the bank and getting no return!
MIL still has 150 people working there, who are not delivering water.
We attended our landholder meetings to give our support to the legal action. It got massive support from the landholders and none from the MIL board.
The MIL chairman did not attend any of these meetings, nor did the independent directors.
Our landholder association said the legal action received 97 per cent support across the five association meetings, which was the biggest attendance of anything seen in the last 30 years.
I have had discussions with people who have been approached for proxy votes in favour of the MIL chairman. I believe this is in reaction to the threat of an Extraordinary General Meeting, that may be called shortly.
I urge people to give their proxy votes to the landholder association chairs, because they look after our interests better than the MIL board.
What happens in the MIL board room that turns good people against the shareholders?
Graeme Spunner
Berrigan
