How far we can go in maintaining a Colony?

Last night, a meeting was called by LH (the place where I stay and proud of it) Members to discuss the roadmap ahead. It resulted in chaos and ultimately no one knows what we should do next. This has happened because a two year contract by the builder to maintain the property ended and they have posted their interest to continue if everything is in the same order as before.
Many of us are too much inclined towards the past and not seeing the future. Most of the members are interested in the nitty gritties of previous years and unable to fathom the grave situation ahead of us if we need to keep the place well maintained.
The only question we should ask from the previous accounts is the amount of Transfer Fee which is shown as a meager amount. The rest was part of the purchase cost and we need not dwell into it.
Ideally Pacifica should have formed a Managing Committee of the so called Service Society consisting of members of LH and ask their consent as to who should manage the facility. Now there is a peculiar situation. We pay a monthly sum but we still cant have a say in it. We employ people to look after the facility but we cant control them. We pay from our nose but we cant see its proper utilization. This is completely against the logical wisdom.
I still would like Pacifica to manage the facility but as a contractor not as a boss of the members. Ideally all the money collected should go into this Co-operative society and all service contractors should be paid by cheque signed by the chosen members of LH and not Pacifica.
But this is not what we are discussing. We are more concerned with taking grudge against people. One person who has two cars but one parking and was told to park the second car outside was heard saying we should get Pacifica out. Just because it serves his purpose. A few others were screaming as if some major accident has taken place. And most of the members, without realizing this personal grudges, are succumbing to unwarranted mercies.
We still have people who do not adhere to the basic code of conduct but talk as if they are the biggest disciplinarians. Now a days all sundry are entering the gate and all guests are welcomed inside by the members to bring their car and park anywhere they like. Members themselves who doesnít have additional car parking are enjoying parking anywhere at the cost of those who paid for it. 
As members it should be our responsibility to take care of the place where we live, and not the builder. If Pacifica is interested to keep the upkeep, we are pretty happy about it but the methodology should be logical. Now who will listen this?
I think we have a notion about our professional abilities. All humans have this and even I am no exception. Last nights tu tu main main was a classic example of this. 
But even if we are at the echelons of where our professional capabilities are, we may not be able to do something that doesn't come into our forte. We have CAs, Doctors, Journos and other professional people and this, perhaps, seems to be the nagging problem in coming to a consensus.
I don't have an iota of idea where this will go. But my only suggestion to the newly formed Block Committee is to see this problem in a pyramid manner. The biggest issue should be solved first followed by smaller ones.
In the midst of this, we should also thank Pacifica to have done a good job in the upkeep of the place. The entire debate is how to keep this intact, which is a compliment to the builder. Today we have a few groups - one which supports the builder, one which doesn't have a voice at all and a group which just don't want Pacifica to be in any matters. To make matters worse, a counter circular not to attend last night's meeting was also circulated - which goes against the basic ethics of democracy. Whoever has done that should have come and aired their voice openly.
All these groups works separately. It is sad that such a small number of people (perhaps 100 or less considering a majority are tenants) can't agree on simple things. Let's not make this as an individual issue. Everyone have a right to object but then majority prevails.