03/24/22 BOD ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING: SYNOPSIS AND COMMENTARY BY VICKI ROBERTS
Posted March 27, 2022. Your Editor provides the following synopsis of the March 24, 2022 Board organizational meeting with commentary and satire indicated inbold blue and pictures.
This synopsis and commentary is the property of Vicki Roberts, is my independent work product, and is not affiliated with the HOA. Redistribution or republication of cartoons is strictly prohibited and may subject you to legal liability for copyright infringement. Bizarro cartoons are courtesy of Dan Piraro, www.Bizarro.com. Thank you, and you may now enjoy the show.
Editor’s Opening Monologue:
This edition is entitled “Gentlemen, Start Your Engines!”
(including: one “H.O.T.” Board member, election of officers, qualifications of nominees or lack thereof, post-Board meeting chatter, and other juicy stuff!)
And they’re off! The new Board is in place!
And here we all find ourselves once again grappling with issues upon which there never seems to be a consensus.
But not all conflict is bad; sometimes it leads to much needed reform. And conflict among the Board members is nothing new. Only now it will be much more open and transparent, much to the chagrin of some of the Board members.
But fear not, nothing has changed as far as my reporting for you is concerned. The free press is alive and well! And worst-case scenario, if I need a lawyer, there’s always one at the ready to assist!
Because if anyone has a habit of shaking this place up by throwing truth bombs around, by golly, it’s me.
So, as we stumble into another political season of saber-rattling here at Cascade Lakes, remember that you can always count on your Editor to bring you the (sometimes inconvenient) facts and analyses that you either crave or hate. Besides, I have nothing better to do.
Rest assured, however, that you will get the unfiltered truth and honest analysis as I continue to bring you all the facts that the elitists don’t want to talk about out loud.
Now on to the first Board meeting of the new Board, which is their organizational meeting, and it didn’t disappoint!
Board Meeting: Audio and Video Up and Running; Zoom meeting online for residents, live in the ballroom for new Board members, started at 7:00pm.
Board Members Present: (in alphabetical order)
Arthur Andelson (Equal Board member) [your Editor’s husband]
Bob Dingee (EqualBoard member)
Jeff D. Green (Equal Board member)
Richard Greene (Equal Board member)
Harvey Ginsberg (Equal Board member)
Pat Nast (EqualBoard member)
Sue Schmer (Equal Board member)
Editor’s note: here we go! Warning: Arthur is H.O.T!
Honest, Open, and Transparent!
Ron Capitena of FirstService Residential, the HOA’s management company, opened the meeting by handing Jeff a trophy meant for Deborah, her staff, and the community.
Here is what went down, and this time the synopsis is a complete verbatim transcription because it was very important to preserve the actual comments and statements that were made throughout the entire meeting.
So, here is the entire Organizational meeting in black with commentary in blue. I start after the pledge of allegiance which was actually before the residents’ annual meeting but I must include remarks made by Ron Capitena, the moderator from FirstService Residential who was running the meeting, because they are relevant to the organizational meeting.
Ron Capitena: …I’m gonna go off script for a minute. I think Deb has notified you but every year FirstService Residential holds an awards banquet for our employees, for terms of service, employee of the year, [inaudible word] award, and in that we also include different communities. My office represents close to 300 different associations.
Regional directors, property managers can nominate their community for specific awards, and this year, Cascade Lakes was voted on by an independent panel as the 2021 community of the year within FirstService Residential condo/HOA division.
So, I would like to present this to Jeff and Deb, as the past president and as the community association manager [he then handed the award to Jeff, not Deborah nor to both of them together], and congratulations to the community, the Board. I think it’s well deserved.
It’s based on, you know, how sound financially the community is, how well it is run, and in this year specifically how you handled the Covid situation, and any number of items; how the community looks.
So, congratulations. I really appreciate being part of this community, and look forward to servicing you guys for a long time to come [actually, he said afterwards he was retiring in a month]. Give yourselves a hand. [Board members all clapped.]
This should have been done at a duly noticed Board meeting, and certainly not at the meeting where officer elections were being held because it put an unfair focus on Jeff who was not the only person in contention for the president’s position, but it was not even part of the agenda. There was no notice to the community in advance.
Further, on Friday afternoon, Deborah then sent a lovely email to the Board stating that she “was very proud to receive the Community of the Year award on behalf of the community and my team who works hard daily for the community.” She understood it was for her, her staff, and the entire community.
It was wholly inappropriate for Ron, who is supposed to be a neutral here, to have singled out Jeff for this award and handed it to him right before nominations for president, because it was akin to campaigning for Jeff prior to the nomination for president.]
So, Deborah and her staff and the community at large received the Community of the Year Award, and Ron threw his best employee of 250 properties under the bus, denigrated our property manager and her staff’s winning of this award by including Jeff and then handing the award to him instead of Deborah. It was very inappropriate.
But it wasn’t surprising, because it did appear that Ron had met beforehand with Jeff and perhaps one other Board member prior to the meeting and developed a game plan to try and shut down another equal Board member, as you shall see in this report. That little plan failed miserably, as it should have.
He then went on to conduct the residents’ annual meeting and then went on to the Board organizational meeting. The annual residents’ meeting is not reported herein. I resume the transcription at the start of the Board’s organizational meeting.
Ron: I’m going to stop here and clarify something. It’s been pointed out that there’s a feeling that you don’t need a second on nominations for an officer, and with this Board of Directors, I’m fine with that. If I can see a show of hands, I need a majority; if not, I will ask for a second, because that’s how I’ve run meetings for 31 years in this business.
[Sue made the motion that no seconds to nominations were required, Ron failed to ask for a second to the motion; he immediately asked for a show of hands in favor of the motion, and five Board members raised their hands in favor of not requiring a second: Sue, Pat, Harvey, Bob, and Arthur.
Neither Jeff nor Richard raised their hands, so it was 5 for Sue’s motion and the motion passed.
Ron also failed to complete the requirements of the motion: to ask for all opposed and then for all who abstained, so we don’t know if Jeff and Richard opposed it or were abstaining.
This was one of a number of errors Ron made in this meeting, all shown below in all their decadent glory, which is consistent with his past behavior of making errors in running these meetings. A number of Board members were apparently fine with the repetitive failure to follow the rules.]
Ron: ok, that passes, so I am going to take nomination for president of Board of Directors [Harvey raised his hand]. You can nominate your --
Arthur: Point of Information.
When casting your vote for President, I want to make sure all of you are fully informed of what our governing documents state on page 3-10.
Ron: Excuse me, Arthur, we’ll get into that. Arthur: Point of Order. Ron: [started to interrupt a Point of Order, which is a big no-no.]
Arthur: no, Point of Order, I have the floor now. This is about the president and the rules that follow the duties and responsibilities of the president and I have the floor. Let me finish; thank you.
When casting your vote for President, I want to make sure all of you are fully informed of what our governing documents state on page 3-10. Section G. Duties. The duties of the officers are as follows:
1. President. The President shall preside at all meetings of the Board of Directors --
Harvey: Point of Information. I’d like to accept those by acclamation because I believe we’ve all read them, and all know the duties of all the officers. Arthur: Point of Order. I want to make sure the residents understand what the duties are, and I want to reclarify it when we make the vote. [Arthur then resumed reading.]
Shall see that orders and resolutions of the Board are carried out; shall sign all legal documents and promissory notes.
That is it. The President has no other duties.
With that being said, I nominate Sue to be President for the following factual and important reasons: [at this point, Harvey and Jeff stopped listening and started to chat about the microphone, which was incredibly rude to their fellow Board member, although that chat didn’t last long.]
1. Sue knows the rules and will follow the rules and will not make false claims of having more authority than the duties stated above.
2. Sue is respectful and transparent and always keeps her word.
3. Sue always is complimentary and gives the recognition to the ones that did the work.
4. Sue treats everyone fairly and equally and therefore is not a part of and does not participate in elitism.
5. Sue will never use the HOA’s resources (Website, HOA’s attorneys, News and Views, and her title as Director or as President) to shut down opposing views. [Harvey and Jeff chat to each other again.]
And actually, Sue looks forward to and welcomes opposing views as an opportunity to research, learn, and grow from different ideas. [Harvey started chatting with Jeff again during this section of Arthur’s speech. Deborah even extended her arm to them in an attempt to get them to knock it off.]
6. Sue will be a great leader because she is patient and respectful and it is impossible for her to be threatened by opposing views, opposing ideas when she openly welcomes all ideas.
Now if there are any other nominations, I believe it is incumbent upon you to state the reasons that you believe another individual is more qualified than Sue.
[Harvey and Jeff then both looked at each other, Jeff pointed to the award sitting on the desk in front of him, and then Harvey picked up his microphone. Clearly, the fix was in, to use the award as a campaign tool, and indeed Harvey used the trophy in his nomination speech for Jeff directly after Sue’s nomination.]
Arthur, continuing: If you cannot do that, then I suggest you should be nominating no one else. This is not a time to make nominations based on friendships or horse-trading.
[Editor’s note: that was definitely H.O.T. – honest, open, and transparent!]
Ron: Sue, do you accept the nomination? Sue: Yes. Ron: Any other nominations for president? [Harvey raised his hand.]
Harvey: Yes, I’d like to nominate Jeff Green for president. The mere fact that we won this award under his leadership should be reason enough [false flag!].
We’ve come up, we’ve been fiscally managed appropriately, we came up with $157,000 surplus, we managed to keep the community going and open it, you know, while still maintaining safety through the epidemic, the pandemic.
[Notice how neither Ron, the moderator, nor any Board member, interrupted Harvey during his nomination speech for Jeff? There was not a peep.]
Harvey, continuing: Also, I’d like to request that all ballots be secret ballots for all officers. Ron: Jeff, do you accept the nomination? Jeff: I do. Ron: ok.
[And now you see how outrageous and inappropriate it was to present that award prior to this process. Harvey used it as “reason enough” for his candidate of choice to be picked.
Ron’s presentation of that award to one Board member who was in contention for an officer position unfairly politicized the award presentation and allowed another Board member to use it as a political tool.
And all the points mentioned by Harvey really had to do with a lot of other people working together as a team and was in fact not attributable to Jeff’s former position as president. It also watered down the accolades to the true recipients of the award: Deborah, her staff, and the entire community and those residents who worked hard on the committees.
It is also critical to note that no one interrupted Harvey during his speech; to the contrary, Arthur was interrupted during his speech about Sue and then again during his response to Harvey about Jeff.
Ron’s bias in that regard was palpable. A moderator with an agenda of his own or who has personal biases against or animus toward one of the parties before him should not be moderating that procedure; it’s a disqualifying trait in addition to being unpleasant, unsophisticated, and gauche and it shows lack of competency.
Now let’s see what Arthur proceeded to say about Jeff, Harvey’s nominee.]
Arthur: Point of Information.
Clarify. It is extremely important to clarify more than Jeff’s fiscal responsibility. There’s a group of people involved in this community that had a lot to do with it. And the president had nothing to do with that obligation. Those are other committees and other individuals. His responsibilities are three things –
[Harvey and Jeff did not appear to be listening. Then Harvey interrupted Arthur and he and Deborah started passing out ballot papers to other Board members and Jeff was seen writing on his ballot paper. Bob also filled out his ballot.]
Harvey: ok, I’d like to call the question [he literally was talking over Arthur and then looked at Ron as he continued to interrupt Arthur]because campaigning should really not be allowed. Ron: all right. Arthur: Point of Order. I have floor now. Ron: no, no, you do not have the floor. I am running this meeting. Arthur: Point of Order. Let me finish.
Ron: I am running this meeting. If you don’t like the way I’m running the meeting, there is options that you have. But I am running the meeting the way I’ve always run a meeting, ok?
Arthur: Point of Order. Ron.
[Ron again interrupted a Point of Order, which is a big no-no. A Point of Order should never be interrupted; this was not only completely contrary to Robert’s Rules of Order; it was downright rude. Rest assured, if Jeff or Harvey made a Point of Order, Ron would not interrupt them, and indeed Harvey did make a Point of Order which Ron didn’t interrupt.]
Arthur: Point of Order, Ron, at the previous meetings, the ones that I’ve been here in the last 3 years, you made four major mistakes, and I’ll clarify them right here in order. Number one.
Ron: sir, I have been running meetings for 31 years, I follow the directions of attorneys from various associations, and – Arthur: last year you allowed Marion Weil to run the last Residents’ Meeting when you were in charge. You muted the mikes. That is not properly running a meeting. Harvey: Point of Order. Point of Order. Arthur: let me finish. Ron: no.
Sue: you can’t interrupt. He made a Point of Order. Harvey: [interrupting Sue] I’d like to call the question, we’re only becoming argumentative here, it’s not – Arthur: Point of Order. You’re not letting me finish what I’m saying, and let me clarify what I want to say, why Jeff is not qualified for the next year as president. Let me have that opportunity –
Harvey: that’s your opinion and it’s up to the – Arthur: I have the facts. Harvey: and it’s up to the individual – Arthur: I have the facts. Let me play it out. Harvey: it’s up to us to vote for who we want. Arthur: absolutely, after I finish speaking.
Harvey: And we do not need to campaign for anybody. Arthur: I’m not campaigning. You’re campaigning for Jeff. You just campaigned for Jeff by this award that should not have been presented before the meeting to dilute what’s important here.
That was outrageous and uncalled for to do it at this meeting. You changed the momentum by opening up and presenting this award. I call it outrageous and uncalled for. We’re going by merit, not by awards. Now, please, let me finish, and when I’m done, it’s only going to be two minutes, and you can make your vote. Ron: I’m not making a vote.
[Boy, these fellas are really trying to shut down debate and stop the truth from coming out. It’s a pile-on helped along by the supposedly neutral (not) moderator.]
Arthur: To date, the nominee, Jeff, that you chose, has not demonstrated good leadership in my opinion, and the opinions of many residents in this community, and actually he has a history of waste and abuse by using the HOA’s resources for his own political purposes.
He has used the HOA’s attorneys which cost the residents thousands of dollars, he has used News and Views, and he has used the president’s opening remarks at board meetings to denigrate residents.
He even did it in the latest edition of News & Views, March 2022, by criticizing residents who disagreed with him. He denigrated them by calling them, quote, “naysayers,” unquote, and criticized them for vocalizing their displeasure at Board meetings and on the HOA Message Board.
That’s not good leadership. That’s elitism and someone who is not interested in what all residents have to say.
His fiduciary responsibility is to all residents, not just the ones who pat him on the back. He should not be singling out a group of residents for being vocal about things that concern them. They have every right to voice their opinions and concerns. Referring to them as “naysayers” is insulting, condescending, and dismissive.
Also, on the same page in his report in the latest News & Views, he started his report by saying, and I quote, “As my first year as a Board member, and more importantly as President, is coming to an end, I would like to reflect on a number of items.” Unquote. What does that mean, quote, “more importantly as President,” unquote.
That statement appears to be more about ego and appears to lack an understanding of what is really important, which is that it is an honor and a privilege to represent our community.
He clearly has no idea that his functions as president are extremely limited: conducting the Board meetings, signing documents, and making sure Board orders are carried out. Only three things. That’s it. He clearly doesn’t understand that he is an equal Board member.
His waste and abuse of his fiscal and fiduciary responsibility is glaring: he has used the HOA’s attorneys to try and silence dissenters, and this was extremely fiscally irresponsible. That’s the residents’ money, not his personal piggybank.
And the lawyers represent the entire Board, not just Jeff and one or more of his colleagues, yet he recklessly engaged the lawyers’ services without the knowledge of other Board members.
He has used other nefarious tactics, including bullying and defaming members of the HOA when he did not get his way or when he felt threatened with opposing views. He congratulated a resident for bullying another resident on the Message Board. I personally witnessed that.
He was so reckless and callous during a meeting of the Board that he actually believed the HOA’s attorneys were his own private counsel and actually told another equal Board member to go get her own attorney.
That statement in itself, “go get your own attorney” to an equal board member is troubling and should automatically disqualify him from your consideration of this nomination and your vote.
Arthur, continuing: The residents are entitled to know the truth. This is about good judgment. Now the rest of you on the Board, do you have good judgment or is your first vote going to tell the residents to go pound sand?
Many in the community do not want Jeff as president and I know this because many residents have personally told me they like him as a friend or acquaintance but loathe him as president for many of the reasons I articulated here this evening.
Board members: I am not okay with this type of reckless improper leadership which is harmful to our community, and neither should you be. Vote wisely for the benefit of all, and not for the benefit of a few.
Now is the time for all of us on the Board to be completely honest, open, and transparent, and do what is best for our community by choosing officers who will not abuse their power.
With all that has been said, do you still want to nominate Jeff, or would you like to withdraw your nomination, Harvey?
Harvey: no, I do not want to withdraw my nomination and I would like to call the question please. Ron: so, we have a motion to do this via secret ballot; Deb has given you ballots. Please fill them out, pass them to the center of the table, and I will read them out loud.
Sue: we haven’t done the motion, to second and approve. Ron: what do you mean second and approve? You first told me, all right, Harvey, you called the question, you’re going to have a vote on president. Harvey: I asked for a secret ballot. Ron: All in favor of a secret ballot and all in favor of voting on the president at this time?
[wrong: you don’t mix issues on motions. In any event, six Board members raised their hands; Arthur did not. Ron never stated the count, never asked for opposition to the motion or absentions, and completely ignored proper procedure and Robert’s Rules of Order yet again.]
Harvey: Also, I prefer that we just give the winner and not the count. Ron: that’s fine.
[uh, Ron, where’s the motion on that? Harvey’s preferences are those of one Board member. It’s not fine; there needs to be a motion, a second, a vote of all in favor, a vote of all opposed, a vote for any abstentions, and then an announcement that the motion passed or failed.]
Sue: are we all in favor of that?
[most said “yes.” That’s not the way you do motions. This is devolving into a free-for-all. The only ones who regularly and consistently follow Robert’s Rules are Arthur and Sue. Harvey uses Robert’s Rules when it’s convenient for him and ignores them when it’s not. The moderator is clueless. The rest of them remain quiet in silent ignorance.
I think what we really need is a chaos coordinator because we have Board members and a moderator who clearly don’t have a clue about how a Board meeting is supposed to be run.
And then they have the audacity to get annoyed at the one or two Board members who are trying to insert proper order into their self-righteous and smug chaos while they strut around the community masquerading as more important than they are.]
Arthur: Point of Privilege. While secret ballots for electing officers is allowed by statute, I am not voting by secret ballot. I am voting for Sue because [Deborah started talking to Ron, got up, and started interacting with Jeff and Harvey during Arthur’s speech. This was wholly inappropriate, distracting, and discourteous.] I think the residents have the right to know that I am being honest, open, and transparent. Thank you. I’m voting for Sue.
[The lack of decorum on the part of some of those on camera and the disrespect shown to Arthur was both palpable and inexcusable.
Ron then opened each paper ballot, and then placed the paper ballots on the floor of the stage next to where he was sitting and separated them out. Arthur’s ballot was not yet in the pile as it was added later.
One pile consisted of five ballots, and the other ballot was separate. This necessarily means that the so-called secret ballot was again not secret: Jeff, Harvey, Pat, Bob, and Richard voted for Jeff and Sue and Arthur voted for Sue.]
Ron: The president for 2022-23 will be Jeffrey Green. Can I have a motion for the vice-president? [not a motion, a nomination. Jeff Green raised his hand.] Jeff: I nominate Harvey Ginsberg. Ron: Harvey, will you accept that? Harvey: yes. Ron: are there any other nominations for vice-president? Arthur: I nominate Sue for the same reasons I stated before. Ron: Sue, will you accept that? Sue: yes.
Ron: any other nominations? Can I have a motion to accept those nominations in a secret ballot vote? Sue: I’ll make that motion. Ron: [looking to his right.] Second? [not seeing Bob raising his hand on the left and not identifying anyone who seconded the motion.] All in favor?
[Sue, Harvey, Bob, and Pat raised their hands. No other Board member did so. Again, Ron never stated the count on the vote, never asked who opposed, never asked who abstained, and never announced whether the motion passed or failed.]
Arthur: I vote for Sue. I vote for Sue. [Ron then again took the paper ballots, opened them up, and put them in separate piles; again, there were five ballots in one pile and two in the other. Again the “secret ballot” was not secret; Sue and Arthur voted for Sue and the rest voted for Harvey.
It’s amazing, because this stuff isn’t rocket science, and yet the moderator again seems to be oblivious to what he’s doing.]
Ron: the vice-president for 2022-23 will be Harvey. Harvey: Thank you. Ron: I need a motion for a treasurer [Bob raised his hand.] to the Board of Directors. Bob: Richard. Ron: Richard, will you accept that nomination? Richard: yes, I will. Ron: are there any other nominations for treasurer?
Sue: Ron, there might be someone who is listening in because treasurer and secretary positions do not have to be Board members – [Ron interrupting Sue this time.]
Ron: I addressed that question with two different legal counsel, and I was told that the Board of Directors is elected to serve as officers [this is flat out wrong as to the Treasurer and Secretary can come from outside the Board of Directors per our governing documents, page 3-9].
Ron, continuing: the only time you would go outside of the Board of Directors is if you do not find someone on the Board ready to serve in those positions, and then the Board -- Sue: I suggest – Ron: and then the Board, by majority vote, can ask for a volunteer from outside.
[Ron’s statement is completely contrary to our own governing documents, which clearly none of them read before rendering this incorrect legal advice: If a lawyer made that argument in a courtroom, and the judge saw our By-Laws, the judge would rightly question his competency.
So, which firms are incompetent? We need to know and sometimes it’s hard to differentiate between the bad ones and the good ones.]
Arthur: Point of Order. That’s incorrect. Sue: it’s incorrect. Arthur: on page 3-9 of our rules and regs, our governing documents, states: “The officers of the Association can be a president and vice-president, who shall at all times be Directors of the Association, a secretary and a treasurer who do or do not have to be Directors of the Association.”
Ron: who do or who do not. Arthur: that is correct. Ron: so, the first option is those people who are on the Board of Directors.
[ok, now he’s just making things up and what he is saying is flat out untrue, false, wrong, and completely contrary to law. The word “or” means either, with no preference to one or the other. This is becoming comical and tragic at the same time.]
Ron: if we cannot get an agreement, a vote on a treasurer, then we can go outside, but that is what I’ve been told by two legal counsel [who clearly didn’t read our governing documents, because no lawyer can be that stupid.].
Harvey: may I ask a question? Is there anybody in the audience that would like to be nominated for treasurer? [ah, so Harvey realizes that Arthur and Sue are correct, otherwise he never would have asked this question and opened up the nominations from the floor.] None seen, we can proceed.
Ron: I’m waiting for the answer. Arthur: wait for – Harvey: we’re waiting for the answer. I mean, we’re making a big deal, but if there’s nobody out there from the floor, then we don’t need to worry about it.
[It is a big deal: if you don’t respect procedure, you have chaos and that leads to corruption. We’ve already seen that in action here at Cascade Lakes many, many times over.
You cannot follow the rules at your pleasure for half the time when it’s convenient and beneficial for you, and the other half the time throw the rules into the clearance bin when they don’t suit your purposes.]
Sue: I will tell you – Harvey [again interrupting Sue] Jeff [addressing the Zoom operator], is there anybody raising their hand? Sue: I’ll raise a Point of Order. Zoom operator: I don’t see anybody right now. [Zoom operator should not interrupt a Point of Order.]
Sue: Either/or does not give preference to one or the other. It’s either one or the other, but it is not involving a matter of preference. There is nothing in our documents that say that, and you know how I stand on this, because I’ve told you.
There’s no such thing as “first dibs” among Board directors unless it is specifically stated in the documents. So, therefore, I have no problem with anybody who wants this position, but if they’re online, they should have a right to nominate themselves if they --
[the Zoom operator again abruptly interrupted Director Sue. This was outrageous. The Zoom operator, a resident, has no business interrupting a Board member while she was making her point.
Instead, a member of the Board should make the inquiry of the Zoom operator. This was a complete abuse of the Zoom operator’s access to and control of the Zoom function. The Zoom operator is Jeff F. Green (a different Jeff Green with a different middle name). Again, Ron utterly failed to properly conduct this meeting, and this is another example.]
Zoom operator: [abruptly interrupting Board member Sue] there’s nobody online that has come on or has raised their hand in the chat at this point.
Harvey: Point of Order. Is there anybody online – Ron: he just said no. Zoom operator: no, there’s nobody. Ron: ok. Harvey: then I make the motion that we proceed with the vote. Ron: we have Richard Greene by unanimous consent.
[say what? That’s insane. Where was the vote? Were there oppositions or abstentions? This is again completely wrong. And there’s no such thing as unanimous consent in this context.]
Harvey: I move that we accept Richard Greene by acclamation.
[you can’t do that; you have to take a vote. This is just made-up stuff at this point. This is becoming a farce. This is really embarrassing for these individuals.]
Sue: well, it’s not by acclamation. It’s technically -- Arthur: you have to do a vote. Sue: it’s not unanimous. Ron: all right, all in favor of Richard Greene as treasurer. [although not visible to all Board members, a review of the tape shows that Pat, Bob, Jeff, and Richard raised their hands.]
Sue: no, no, no. Secret ballots. Ron, we went through this last year. Please. [she is referring to the Board’s vote last year for secret ballots which Ron failed to do at that time and instead took a raised hand vote. And he did it again.]
Possibly Bob: but no one else is running. [he clearly does not understand the rules for voting and that there may be abstentions or opposition votes.]
Arthur: but still, you have to have more than a plurality. You need four people. Harvey: you could have abstentions. Arthur: you have to have four to agree for Richard to be treasurer. Harvey: you are correct. There could be abstentions. [Directors then filled out their ballot papers.]
Arthur: And I vote for Richard as treasurer. Jeff: it’s supposed to be a secret ballot, Arthur. Arthur: I choose to vocalize it. That’s my option. Jeff: well, I vote for Richard also. Possibly Bob: as do I. Ron to Richard: did you vote for somebody else? Richard: no, I voted for myself. Harvey: you could also have abstentions, so it makes sense.
Ron: unanimous for Richard as treasurer. [again, he just blew out the point of a secret ballot by announcing the tally.]
Ron: so, the last officer position is the secretary position. Do we have nominations for the secretary of the Board?
[Goodness gracious, it’s not for secretary of the Board; it’s for secretary of the Association. There is a very big difference. The Association’s secretary has duties outside of and independent of Board meetings and Board work: see By-Laws, page 3-10 for the complete list of the secretary’s duties and responsibilities. It’s not just taking Board Minutes.]
Bob: I nominate Pat Nast. Ron: Pat, would you accept that nomination? Pat: I would accept, yes. Ron: are there any other nominations for secretary of the Board?
Ron: Jeff [Zoom operator], are there any nominations from somebody in the audience that might want to be secretary of the Board? Zoom operator: not at this moment, if you want to give it 15 seconds or so, I’ll let you know. [no response from the audience. The tape indicated 20 seconds transpired and there was silence after which Arthur spoke.] Arthur: I vote for Pat.
Zoom: I have no raised hands and no chat requests. Ron: thank you. Zoom: so, I have nobody in the audience that has said anything. Ron: has everybody turned in their vote? [Ron then tallied the paper ballots.] It is unanimous for Pat as secretary. [again, he just blew out the point of a secret ballot by announcing the tally.]
Ron: There are no other items on the agenda. Can I have a motion to adjourn? [Bob, Jeff, and Harvey raised their hands.] Seconded. [by whom?] All in favor? [all Board members raised their hands, but Ron never announced the passage of the motion or the votes.] Thank you.
Zoom operator: ok, I’m going to end the meeting and stop the recording. [recording stopped at 7:25pm.]
POST-BOARD MEETING CHATTER:
Now what happened the very next day? A former Board member the next day posted on the HOA message Board for only the second time in her life according to what the Message Board says next to her name (it states the number of total posts for each person), and wrote the following statement:
“Everyone should definitely watch the Organizational meeting of March 24. It was a disgrace and an embarrassment.”
Arthur replied on said Message Board as follows:
“To the contrary, it was honest, open, and transparent, things that have been missing from the leadership of this place for too long. Many, many residents have expressed their appreciation for the truth being stated so succinctly, factually, and publicly.
It was the opposite of what you call a "disgrace” and an “embarrassment.” It was refreshing, and all of it is true. There should be no secret code where Board members agree not to call each other out in public. Their fiduciary duty is to the residents, not to each other. That so-called secret code denigrates their responsibility to the community.”
There was continued banter on the HOA Message Board, but one comment said it best:
“All residents ought to watch this exercise in democracy, whether or not they agree with what was said or done…I had some difficulty in accessing it initially until a Board member was kind enough to help.”
He then gave the instructions which Arthur had given him. Your Editor replied on the Message Board:
“Thanks, …. The kind Board member to which you referred was Arthur. And yes, regarding your "exercise in democracy" statement, that is exactly how it is supposed to work: a robust debate, recitation of demonstrably true facts, followed by an informed decision. Trying to shut down debate is the opposite of that. Thanks again.”
Another resident wrote the following:
“A debate and I quote is a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly in which opposing arguments are put forward.
A [sic] accusation and I quote is a charge or claim that someone has done something illegal or wrong.
What I saw at the organizational meeting did not come close to a debate.”
Once again, your Editor replied thusly on the HOA Message Board:
“This was a public meeting and it was a legislative assembly where the election of officers was being made. As such, robust debate, recitation of demonstrably true facts, and discussion with an informed decision were to have been the order of the day.
Facts were recited supporting the claims that someone has done something or several things wrong. It was not a hollow accusation; it was followed up with actual statements of evidence (the actual evidence consists of documents which are in written form, videos, and eye witnesses.)
Not one fact was challenged by any other member of the assembly or by anyone, actually. I understand it's difficult to accept the fact that the evidence shows and proves unfortunate occurrences and a multitude of them. But that doesn't make them untrue and it doesn't mean they should be brushed under the rug.
The fact that no one challenged any of the recited facts was their choice and continues to be their choice but it would be difficult if not impossible to do so based on the actual evidence that exists.
The residents deserve honesty, openness, and transparency, and based on the enormous positive feedback we have received in the last 36 hours, we know it was much appreciated.”
Also, the very next day after the Board meeting, a false rumor started circulating claiming that Arthur is suing the Board, and on that basis, they want to have him recalled as a Director, and they are purportedly telling residents this garbage in order to get their signatures on a recall petition.
This is 100% false; it is completely fabricated, and it is more of the same character assassination that a few have been engaged in since we started calling out the elitists, the bullies, and the rule breakers.
It’s no surprise that they’ve ramped up their tactics because in reality, they’re desperate and they don’t care about the residents; they only care about hanging on to their own power, and one of the main pillars of Arthur’s platform is transparency, which is antithetical to their elitism and power grips because secrecy works best for them.
Residents are rightly outraged at this attempted coup d’Arthur and also about this little group’s attempts to manipulate the residents with false rumors created based on nefarious motives.
This is the kind of pushback you are witnessing from the elitists for whom openness and transparency are their greatest fears because it would mean fairness for and equality with all of you, which is the opposite of elitism. The last thing they want is to share the top of the mountain with the rest of you.
In conclusion: the new officers are: President: Jeff Green; Vice-President: Harvey Ginsberg; Treasurer: Richard Greene; and Secretary: Pat Nast. Their respective very limited duties are spelled out on page 3-10 of the By-Laws.
This does not make them more powerful than any of the other Directors, despite what they may think, feel, want, wish for, crave, demand, or otherwise dream. They’re still all equal. They just have additional ministerial duties. That’s it. And that’s the way it went down.
[Editor’s note: A big shout-out to Zoom and sound operators Mike Blackman, his assistant Arnie Green, Mike Deckinger, and Jeff D. Green (a different JG), for doing a great job administering the meeting in the ballroom where the Board was situated. We thank them for their continued service and volunteerism.]
And so concludes the Board’s organizational meeting of March 24, 2022; next Board meeting: April 6, 2022 at 9:30am.
Thought for the Day:
When all else fails, get comfortable, relax, and play a good old fashion game of chess.
1. Don’t forget to join the community on the Cascade Lakes Boynton Beach Facebook Page, a place where you can interact and communicate! Click here: