TO:Richard Simeonoff,

Here is what Ellen has said, are you in agreement with her on this?

I am wondering what is going on, I hear one thing then I hear something

else. She still wants the proxy vote?Why I thought you said everyone is in agreement with you on this one.

Let me know.

 

Ralph S. Rastopsoff

ivorywolf2006@yahoo.com

 

—– Forwarded Message —-
From: Ellen Simeonoff <ellen@Kvok.com>
To: rsimeonoff@hotmail.com
Cc: salmonsal@ak.net; clara.larson@ustravel.us; fsimeonoff@yahoo.com; ivorywolf2006@yahoo.com; richardsimeonoff@hotmail.com; certainHG@cox.net; ancroberts@yahoo.com; kblack@bhb.com; johntollakc55@hotmail.com; tweten@ptialaska.net
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 3:32:15 PM
Subject: re:

1. The Board is in Unanimous Agreement on how to proceed with this proxy and that’s what we’re doing. The land sale will be tied to distribution.
2. We are waiting to hear from two different CPA’s regarding tax information, one local CPA and Deborah Holmes. I have contacted them.
3. We’ve been working diligently to hear back from all board members on the proxy changes made Wednesday night by Alyce.
4. Kathy Black will be back in the office Monday. We need to change our meeting date and the business who will handle the proxy votes for us because Pat Szabo will be on vacation after the 13th.

From: “Richard E Simeonoff” <rsimeonoff@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 12:40 PM
To: “Ellen Simeonoff” <ellen@kvok.com>
Subject:

Ellen, I appose any proxy or vote that is not directly tied to distribution. I would rather not sell the land. this has been my position from day one. I don’t care that the board had voted to distribute the money. the board votes have been ignored in the past and resolutions have been ignored. I do not appose paying the president to get the job done correctly as numerous other shareholders agree on. Do you know shareholders that don’t want all the money? why do you think the vote wont pass if distribution is tied to it?. well if its not I do not want to sell the land. by state law you would only be able to distribute 25% of the money without a shareholders vote. the money could be locked up forever in litigation if shareholders believed they were to get the money after voted and receive far less. the original vote to partition out of AJV had we would do a major distribution of the money. We have the power to change shareholder lives for the better. so far the proxy has had all kinds of things that could prevent distribution or delay it indefinitely. I do not know who helped draft the original but it clearly has loopholes, it seems every move is meant to stop distribution.  The Vote should be tied to distribution  the taxes have to be addressed. I don’t know how much you want to be paid to do this right but I don’t see a problem if it is in all shareholders best interest. I know you say you support  the distribution but so far your actions do not seem to follow your words.  I will not vote yes for a land sale without full distribution and will do all I can to discourage all others. this proxy should not be misleading. we have had since sept 29 to work on this. we are just now working on the proxy. why do you think the vote for land sale will fail if it has the distribution tied to it??… I really want to put this all past us. but my conscience will not let me become a sheep I must stand up for my shares and all shares that want this distribution. I am not a politician I am a business man. I don’t not need this money. I make a good living contracting but this is not about me this is about all the shareholders on fixed incomes and small retirements trying to have a good life. please pay yourself to get the shareholders the money. if you have shareholders who don’t want all the money please speak up or if you have a reason why the proxy will fail if 95% distribution is tied to it please let us know why.

Richard Simeonoff