Shareholders are determined to recall the following board members, Benjamin D. Cornell, Katherine Eldemar, Richard A. Beasley, and Lori M. Grant. Combined they have 52+ years of service. The intent of this petition is to authorize Goldbelt Shareholders the right to vote on the resolution below in its entirety and exact language.

Resolution-setting a recall of the listed board members for failure to show positive proof that promotes or protect the interests of the company’s shareholders and their service exceeds the norm for fair term limits and recent board actions that include:

• The recent compensation increases of the board, from $2,000.00 to $5,000.00 monthly or from $24,000 to $60,000 individually or $540,000 total for the 9 board members combined. These pay increases failed to prioritize the needs of the corporation and of the shareholders. The compensation needs to be repealed and the board must be ordered to pay back the retroactive pay and difference in pay compensation. This 250% increase appears as an action to improperly convert the corporate financial assets for their own financial benefit. The pay increases should have been subject to the approval of the Finance & Audit Committees where proof of research would assess the increase and the failure to do this makes it a conflict-of-interest.
• The failure to properly assign/rotate the board committees ensures the utilization and experience of only a select few, not the entire board. The lack of rotation is reducing the powers of the board to the "majority" by excluding 3 properly elected board members and reduces the board to 6 by unfair committee assignments that favor the power of the “majority”.
• The elimination of the Ethics Committee and the selective handling of ethics issues by the Goldbelt Executive Committee who were alleged subjects of ethic complaints to which it was necessary to recuse themselves.
• The involvement of some board members by the proxy solicitation for their peers to maintain their majority violates the no-board-slate policy and they failed to separate themselves from the corporate election and to maintain a neutral role. The board should put a stop to this but do not. Banking and Securities are aware of this.
• The removal of the CEO demonstrated that this was not an orderly succession and recruitment. The unfair recruitment of the replacement CEO by advertising a position description so appears to benefit one person by lowering the standards so that one person will qualify. A shareholder asked for a rewrite of the position description, extending the CEO search to 2 months, and hire a professional firm to do the CEO search, all of these suggestions were ignored.