Aruba Forums at Visit Aruba

Aruba Forums at Visit Aruba (
-   Costa Linda Resort (
-   -   Defective Election Process ( Tuesday, October 23rd, 2007 03:54 PM

Defective Election Process
*All Board candidates were asked to complete a questionnaire. Basically this questionnaire asked about our standing on certain issues.

*I completed this questionnaire and emailed it back within hours of receiving it.

*My answers were honest, direct and to the point.

*This questionnaire was never shown to CLBR members or anyone else that I'm aware of. It was never published.

*This questionnaire was drafted by certain members of the Coalition, one of whom was running for a seat on the Board.

* I later discovered that before it was actually seen by certain Coalition members, the Bulletin endorsing Cy and Gale was already being drafted.

*Frank Nini did an excellent job of interviewing candidates. Again, the Bulletin was already in process.

I never expressed my dissatisfaction with this process because C.L. was in enough trouble and I didn't want to add fuel to the fire. As you will recall, Dave L. did express his anger on this B.B. at this undemocratic process. This process continued when three candidates' resumes were presented to us as replacements for the 3 Arubans. The people on the "steering committee" had the resumes of at least 6 candidates. Why weren't they presented to us so that we could vote on the 3 replacements for the Aruban Board members? Are we not capable of thinking for ourselves and participating in the process for the betterment of our resort? Are we, under the rules of the Steering Committee, not allowed to participate?

This process is defective. Owners should have a choice. It is not up to one or two individuals to make decisions for us.
We do not want anyone telling us what to do, for whom to vote, what to say and how to act. We were smart enough to buy into CLBR, so I think we have enough brains to decide what is right for our resort. We demand our right to choose. That is the democratic way. The process mentioned above is "the steering committee way".

GregW Monday, October 29th, 2007 10:39 AM

Defective Election Process --- Freedom of Choice
Before last June's Annual Members meeting, while Candidates for the Board were sending in their Questionnaires, having their backgrounds checked, and being interviewed, some Members of the Coalition were already discussing and drafting the endorsement for Cy Holley and Gale Measel. Not only did the questionnaires not get published to the Members, but the replies were not presented to Members, so they could make their own discussions.

In the recent Convocation Packet for the Extraordinary Members Meeting (EOMM1) there were more than just 3 eligible Aruban candidates for the Board, but there were only 3 on the Ballot.

One candidate was nudged out because they perceived that being on the Board would mean they would need to commit an extraordinary amount of time. Another candidate did not have their resume included in the Convocation Packet because they were thought to be arrogant. This candidate had remarkable experience and references, but I did not get a chance to vote for him, nor did all the other CLBR Members.

When it was determined which Candidates would be re-elected sooner, if we went to a 9-member Board. George Metrey got the short-straw because he was liked the least by the Interviewing/Selection Committee. He was also the most vocal about the questionnaire, background checking, and interviewing process being flawed.

This goes beyond the point of endorsing, but to eliminating our Freedom of Choice.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2006 -2011 -