PHILIPSBURG--St. Maarten Housing Development Foundation (SMHDF) Finance Manager Emilio Kalmera – in the midst of negative publicity, a court case and questions being posed concerning his credibility – has issued a press that highlights what he calls questionable actions.

He says, “The reasoning for all this fiasco is more personal than anything else.”

 

Amongst other concerns, Kalmera said someone had been assigned to the board on the same day he and his colleagues were suspended; the audit was being carried out and supervised by the wrong persons; and former Minister of Housing, Spatial Planning, Environment and Infrastructure VROMI Maurice Lake had not stopped the investigations by Government Accounting Foundation SOAB.

 

Kalmera said he wanted to clear the air, especially after the March 11 article in this newspaper with the headline “SMHDF dumps Lynch for financial mismanagement” was published based on a press release by SMHDF attorney Jairo Bloem in which he announced that Director Henry Lynch’s service agreement had been dissolved as of February 4.

 

Kalmera focused criticism on how Bloem and the board “conducted their affairs,” adding that he had more concerns and documents in his possession to discuss, but that this was not the forum for doing so. He also told this newspaper he did not want to discuss too much, as the court case is still pending.

 

Kalmera said he, Lynch and another colleague had been notified on August 12, through a letter signed solely by Bloem, with regard to their suspension pending an investigation by SOAB.

 

“All three of us received a letter with the same contents as if the director, myself and my colleague formed part of general management. … As far as I am aware I have a labour agreement with the foundation, which the director signed off on. If I was appointed by a board, I wish they would have told me so and not left me in the dark all this time. A wise attorney would have written either three separate letters or two with different wording,” Kalmera said.

 

In line with criticism published previously on the basis of a leaked document by attorney Cindy Marica, Kalmera described an unjustified suspension, as Bloem should not have had the right to take such action on his own.

 

Using Marica’s statement for brevity: “… the decision would need to be taken by the board according to SMHDF statutes. A meeting should have been held with all members in attendance, and another one, two to four weeks later if all were not present for the first meeting. A two-thirds majority backing is required. This did not happen and no resolution was received by Lynch.”

 

Kalmera adds, “At the time of Bloem serving his letter, the board was not present. To date, I have yet to see a resolution from the board in regard to the suspension of Mr. Lynch, much less myself and my colleague.”

 

He said, “Bloem acted as though he was both the board and a public prosecutor” and acted “above the law and against corporate governance.” He said the letter only had Bloem’s signature and described assertive behaviour, including the changing of locks to the office.

 

“All of this drama was concocted by the board instead of doing what should have been done, which was to call a meeting with management to discuss matters before taking such extreme measures as though we are criminals,” Kalmera said.

 

He said later, “Two senior, seasoned board members had resigned leaving two newly appointed board members on the board and they took it upon themselves to bypass the director to talk and conduct meetings directly with employees and used this as basis, without having any discussion with the director to act in the manner they did.

 

“I understood that there was no resolution at that time as there were only two members on the board after the additional two senior, seasoned members had previously resigned. …”

 

Of those, two, “One had to travel for medical treatment. It appears that Bloem advised the remaining board member to appoint someone to the board in a hurry, as when you check the Chamber of Commerce information, a young person with the initials J.P., who conveniently works in a similar capacity in the same ministry in Government as the board member who had to travel due to medical reasons, was put on the board the same day of the suspension.”

 

This newspaper had no way of verifying this in time for publication. Kalmera said that although he did not have a copy of this proof, attorney Marica did.

 

“Even if they signed a resolution after the fact (by back dating), J.P. could not have had sufficient time to read the many documents to form an adequate opinion to sign off on a resolution with far-reaching consequences,” Kalmera said.

 

“If he did sign, then he is a fool and it would be questionable if sensitive documents were given to him to read prior to becoming an official board member, which would also be a breach of confidentiality.”

 

On another topic, Kalmera said, “The prior chairman had convinced the board to engage the services of HBN Law for a retainer fee. The agreement officially expires at the end of March 2015, so it behoves me why Bloem was chosen to represent the board to incur additional legal expenses.”

 

March 12 marked three months since suspension, while Kalmera and his colleague “are still awaiting the opportunity to be heard, but in the meantime, the director was fired based on an internal investigation which no clarity until this date was sought by my person, who functioned in the capacity of Finance Manager.”

 

Kalmera asserted that they had been told by former Minister Lake during a recent meeting with Parliament to which the board also had been invited, but did not attend, “that he did not stop SOAB from conducting any forensic audit.”

 

However, at the time the news of the suspension broke, Minister Lake issued a press release that stated: “I have requested the management of SOAB with immediate effect to withdraw the current process because it does not have my blessing and goes against proper procedure. …”

 

Kalmera also questioned why accounting firm BDO, which conducted audits for KPMG, which assisted in cleaning up administration and carried out a quick-scan, was not used to investigate. He said findings by both companies never had been discussed with the board despite pressure to do so by Lynch and both firms were in a position to carry out unbiased investigations.

 

Kalmera said the director had plans to terminate labour agreements with interim management as they were “long-standing non-performing employees,” yet the same employees “conducted the internal investigation with a newly-appointed financial supervisor hired in December of 2013.”

 

The supervisor was said to have “abandoned the organisation in 2012 by going on vacation to Holland and never returning. … She had not only abandoned the organisation when it needed her most, but she is also a contributor to why the administration was in a mess in the first place. In other words, the internal investigation is biased, as these persons do not possess the competence to conduct a forensic audit. …

 

“I can only conclude that the board, the two interim managers and attorney Bloem acted out of personal or biased reasons, but they were only part of a bigger plot from higher powers.”

 

The Daily Herald