"Mr. Reynolds,
At no time was a motion made a seconded to suspend the rules that I refused to honor. Your misinformation on this topic and others is completely unwarranted and tiresome. If you wish to criticize me, please do so with factual information.
Regards,
Cheryl Jacobs"

I replied to her with:

Thank you for the response.

It seems that I provided a quote to you from former OPA President Bill Zawacki and now you accuse me of misinformation on the topic. I suggest if you have a problem with what Mr. Zawacki wrote that you contact him directly.

As to the issue of suspending the rules, Mr. Collins did not make a motion. I never claimed he did. He did request initially that the rules be suspended. Later in the discussion he brought the issue up again asking if a committee member would be allowed to address the board. At that point you responded that you would not allow that. That is a fact. It happens around the 2 hour and two minute mark of the meeting video. I stated that you made a unilateral decision on the issue. I believe the video clearly indicates my comment in that regard was factual.

During discussion you also suggested that Jim Trummel, the previous chair of the ByLaws and Resolutions Committee, must have somehow approved of the Elections Committee counting the votes in closed session.

On 8/5/2015 Jim Trummel wrote, “I do not consider the candidates to be personnel of the Association. They are competing as individuals for a seat on the board, not engaging in a common effort. The bylaws requirements for being a candidate are (1) a lot owner since January 1 of the election year and (2) eligible to vote. Bylaws section 5.02(a). These requirements do not bring a candidate within the meaning of personnel. They are no more than members of the Association like every other member.”

He went on to add, “The closed meeting issue only occurs if there is a committee quorum present when the committee exercises its responsibility to count the ballots.”

Now that is rather interesting. It would seem Trummel is saying the committee can meet without a quorum and count the ballots and not violate the HOA Act.

If that is the premise, the obvious next question is how the Elections Committee can do anything in closed session, as directed the Board in M-06, when a “closed session” requires a public vote of the committee and stipulation as to purpose of going into closed session as required by the Act.

In fact, the Elections Committee last year, a quorum present, opened in public, took public comments, and then VOTED to go into closed session to count ballots and stipulated the HOA Act reason for the closed session was discussion of personnel. Perhaps you were not aware of this when you made your comments at the board meeting.

What is really interesting is that Jim Trummel does indeed understand the law. It would appear that Mr. Collins and all other board members do not understand the law. Why do I say that? Because if the Collins motion yesterday had been approved it would have removed any question about counting in closed session and the Act does not stipulate how ballots are to be counted. It is the very directive of the board resolution to count in “closed session” that creates the HOA Act issue. The resolution could comply 100% with the Act if it said something like “The ballots will be counted by an outside contractor and members of the election committee may observe the counting process.”

You wrote, “Your misinformation on this topic and others is completely unwarranted and tiresome. If you wish to criticize me, please do so with factual information.”

I believe I have provided factual information to the board in a polite manner as to your unilateral refusal to allow a committee member to address the board.

You may find it unwarranted and tiresome, but it remains my opinion that your response on this issue of rules suspension showed disrespect of your fellow board members by that unilateral decision.

As for what you also say are my unwarranted and tiresome opinions on other matters, please be specific and I will be happy to respond.

Regards,

Joe Reynolds