Our Board is composed of five seats. Not individuals. Each seat has a 3-yr term. Individuals are elected to seats, not to a given term. At each annual election, we elect an individual to sit in that seat, and assume the powers and responsibilities that come with it. Our By Laws stagger terms such that all seats on the Board are never up for election at the same time. At least one, and no more than 2, seats come up for election annually. If someone resigns or otherwise vacates their seat, another individual is appointed by the Board to sit in that seat until the next annual election, at which point either the same or another individual is elected by the members to sit in that seat for the remainder of that seat’s term.
When someone vacates a seat, or is removed from their seat, the person then appointed or elected to fill that seat does not get a brand new term…that’d be like creating a new seat on the Board. Well, that’s exactly what the lawsuit alleges this Board and COMANCO are doing…arbitrarily and capriciously creating and eliminating seats on the Board without regard to our governing laws. Because of this, there are now at least 8 individuals with claims to a Board seat when there are only 5 seats available!. How did we get into this mess?
By Laws Article V Section 5 establishes each seat is elected to a 3-yr term. It establishes that the seats on our 5-seat Board come up for staggered election in a rotating cycle every 3 years: 1st year-2 seats; 2nd year-2 seats; 3rd year-1 seat. Then the first 2 seats come up for election again at the completion of their 3-yr term. And so on.
Why is this a difficult concept to apply? At the 9/23/08 meeting, Ruth Angell of COMANCO said she and the Board were going to be following the election By Laws from that very night. Then, that very night, they approved our attorney Michael S. Neall’s letter that violates these very By Laws, and then they approved terms of office for the current Board that also not only violates these very By Laws, but conflicts with the now-approved attorney’s letter, too.
Are they crazy, is that their problem?
President Joe DeSantis asserted at the 9/23/08 Board meeting that the Board is legal until a judge says otherwise. It could cost thousands of dollars to await a judge’s decision. Why don’t we all consult the By Laws ourselves for free, see if we can’t put our heads together and figure this out so our elections are consistently carried out in compliance with our governing laws? Don’t we have a right to expect that?
Charing Cross Lawsuit Freedom of Information Weblog 
Sent a response last evening. Was it eliminated? I have lived here since 12-84 and this has been a wonderful and friendly neighborhood until all this mess started. Leave our neighborhood if you do not like the way things are run as we have never had trouble around here until you, Chris, started this mess. I feel it is a power play and nothing more. Why would you want to mess up a GREAT area with lawsuits and ruining peoples lives. You must need a job because obviously you do not have one except to cause problems for your neighbors.
Oh please Pat Gardner! HOAs are running amok all over the country. Even the AARP is demanding some legislative oversight (there is NONE now)
You stick your head in the sand and want everyone else to do the same.
Chris McKeon wants this HOA to get its hand out of your pocketbook, and make its business more transparent and they are fighting this tooth and nail!
And you are mad at Chris???
What a strange pathology this HOA business it!