ECA Members Hoodwinked by Referendum

The results are out for the recent Referendum (non-binding) vote on how much community owners were willing to spend on the Center. Somehow the Referendum became a vote on HOW MUCH TO SPEND –suckered again by governance? The absolute refusal by the Board, General Manager and CRC Committee to provide detailed financial information on how much had already been spent on the Center as well as why and how much it would cost to upgrade certain Center components, FORCED ECA members to comply with the Board’s conditions. Questions continue to go unanswered by key governance officials. Is that acceptable for the people who pay the bills? Is this acceptable governance for ECA members?

It is clear from the results of the Referendum that community owners do not want to spend more than the minimum. No CRC Committee member could explain why it was necessary to spend any amount. However there is no requirement for the Board, the CRC members or Ken Ryder to explain. They only report to Mr. Goldman and Mr. Parker.

In reviewing the Board minutes of the June meetings, it was noted that legal counsel was contacted regarding the wording of the Referendum. Ms. Karash and Ms. Shulman contacted Atty. Cirone, who is the Community lawyer on his opinion of the first five questions, however we have no written copy of his opinion—seems excessively casual. Two days later at the final meeting of the Board and the Petitioners on the wording of the Referendum, Mr. Webber, the current Vice President of the Board, added a sixth question, which without legal counsel, NEGATED the first five questions by forcing an answer to an amount one would be willing to spend, causing a Mandate to Spend. Not if, but how much? Why is the Board playing games with its constituents? Why do we put up with this flim-flam behavior?