A Very Strange, Unfair, and Unbalanced Election Process

I have lived in this airpark for 18 years, and so far, this board has run the worst election process I have seen.

• When I began with simple questions about processes and nominating, the Board responded with attacks on me because of my questions about a nominating committee. (the overused “disservice” and “misinformation” claims.)
• Next, they announced a deadline for nominations within just 10 days — by 8 September.
• They stated two requirements: (1) statement of candidacy, and (2) a statement of willingness to serve.
• With some difficulty, the membership willingly (and dilligently) responded by the Board’s short (and likely arbitrary) deadline with nominations.

From that time forward, the Board continued its process of unbalanced action.

• The board attacked those who sought information on nominations from the Board or its allies.
• They stated that the Board could not respond in a timely manner because they all held full-time jobs.  (Although we are unaware of such employment for either the President or Vice President.)
• The Board stated that they needed time to “confirm” nominees, although:
  • The only two board-level nominees were from the Board itself (easy to confirm!)
  • No effort was made to reach out to the nominees from the membership at large to “confirm” their intentions.
  • Mistakes were even made in the list that would have been easily fixed with such “confirmation”.  (E.g., Deborah Suddarth is not running for the Architecture Committee.)
• Two weeks passed! — multiple reminders were sent.  Finally, the board responded.
• The list of candidates does nothing to show that those newly added candates (from the Board/allies) did the necessary steps to confirm their candidacy in the proper way.
• The membership has no way of knowing if the Board is even following its own rules.

When  I asked the board at the conclusion of their nominating period (8 September), they indicated that I was too impatient.  However, I remember that just last year (with the same people in charge), they were adamant that nominations had to be in place, absolutely at closing time!  This was shown by the fact that they refused a nomination from Deborah Suddarth for Architecture Committee one day late.

The Board has a set of standards for the membership — and another set for themselves.  This is going to be a difficult election for gaining confidence in fairness.