If you’ve been following our posts you already know that our main goals are to “inspire” more transparency from our Board of Directors and our management and, eventually, have our leadership evolve to welcome and value information from outside the closed system into which they have retracted. On the “simple and easy menu” we have advocated for direct and private email accounts for each Board member because we find the current system where your email to board@hhppoa.org gets pre-screened by management quite absurd. And yet, just a few months ago the Communications Committee took up the issue and decided the existing email communication “is sufficient.” That means that you still cannot directly contact the candidates you elected to represent you in previous elections, and this simplest “thing” seems to represent the “institutional attitude” which influences all interaction, or absence of interaction, between our governance and us. And now it’s election season again.
So maybe, you may say to yourself, it’s time we elect candidates who believe in more open governance! Great idea, but easier said than done. That’s because the election of POA Board members is specifically designed to preserve the status quo, and to do so in the least transparent way possible. First, there’s the conclave of former POA Board presidents who make up the nominating committee, which controls who can even appear on the ballot. Then there is the confusing distribution of votes, where households entitled to two votes are only allowed one vote which at some point in the ballot counting gets doubled (maybe by the even more mysterious “Election Committee”?). Even worse, we’re questioning whether the substantial bucket of votes allotted to “commercial and recreational members” are cast or influenced in such a way as to constitute possible overt election influence by those already on “the inside.”
Finally, here’s one you possibly haven’t considered. The HHPPOA Board’s Nominating Committee completed its work in mid-December with respect to carefully choosing which few of an unknown number of applicants to fill three expiring Board positions will be allowed to appear on our ballot next year. So, who are they?
Well, we’re not allowed to know at this point and that’s because……..who knows? We do know that’s the way it’s always been. And we do know that’s one subtle, but very effective way to limit the information you and I will have about the candidates before we vote. Standard practice has been that we will see an announcement in the February newsletter, two months after the candidates were selected, which will include a profile of each candidate, each offering a 20 to 30 word-count description of their “goals.” The candidates will then be given a couple of minutes to make a statement at the late February Coffee with Peter, but will take no questions. That’s it — 30 words, an unchallenged three minute statement, and a few weeks before we vote, after which the successful candidates can disappear behind board@hhppoa.org and monthly meetings we are not allowed to attend (or view in a video stream). Oh, and active candidate campaigning has historically been strongly discouraged.
This would be a great time for HHP360, your favorite (and only) independent source of HHPPOA information, to solicit information from and put your questions to these candidates to help inform your voting decisions in March, 2025. And we have some questions too! So, President Dallas and Mr. Kristian — release the names of the candidates selected by the Nominating Committee immediately, and the names of any additional candidates to be placed on the ballot by resident petition when those candidates, if any, have been verified. (maybe we should send this to board@hhppoa.org so we’ll know at least Peter will see it?)
And, by the way, if you have been selected as a candidate we would like nothing better than to put our questions to you or to publish, without edit, whatever you’d like potential voters to know about you and your goals as a HHPPOA Board member. Just drop an email to hhp360team@gmail.com and we’ll arrange to accommodate your preferences.
And readers, what would you like to ask those who will be seeking election to our Board in March? Just let us know. Meanwhile, we all better take a little time to find that fur hat we last wore in December 2023 — I hear there’s bad weather on the way. This chill may get as cold as the response we’ll likely receive to this request to the Board to identify the candidates. Stay warm.
Thanks for your comments. I think if there wasn't a history of people complaining their email never got to the Board member intended or of Peter "shading" issues, or if members could attend or see a Board meeting the concerns would be less. But there is literally no way to contact an elected member of the Board without finding their personal email. What's wrong with bringing an issue to a person you elected and let that person decide where to forward, whether to have Peter respond. Our belief is that what you describe as "continuity and consistency" has been taken to an unreasonable level. As to the candidates, they are all already selected, already known. There is an option for a candidate to petition for a place on the ballot and that deadline has not passed, but it's happened once- last year. And there is never "questions from the floor." We realize all of these processes make life easier for Peter and Board members....maybe that shouldn't be the overriding purpose for the Board and Management. Thanks again....we just think it's a matter of degree.
Not going to be easy, but I'm noticing a lot of younger couples around. Maybe they have the energy to stick with it