Reading all
28 messages in thread
message board home
message board home
Next
4/29/2025 3:04:54 PM
 
Reply
or ReplyNewSubject
Section 23: OPA Elections Subject: Public Vote Count Results Msg# 1224518
|
||||||
| Stuart not being the signatory to the election vendor contract -- because he's a candidate this year -- is a matter of preferable "optics," rather than to address a conflict of interest (there really is none), and certainly is not a requirement legally or otherwise. If my memory is accurate, last year I had JV sign the election vendor contract rather than Rick (who was president and running for re-election). Stuart, Steve, and Monica could make there own respective decisions as they did -- one way or the other -- about whether being candidates would give them reason to recuse themselves from the contractor vote. Board members who are incumbent candidates voting on some direct election-related matter like candidate qualification, whether and how to count ballots, or other aspects of the election process itself that may impact process or outcomes, presents the kind of conflict of interest that supports recusal more clearly. Bottom line, there was nothing at all wrong with any of the decisions by Steve J, Stuart, or Monica, vis-a-vis voting on the motion Saturday or participating in discussion. | ||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: But since the vote on John L's motion was 3-3 and did not carry, the outcome was essentially the same as if his motion was tabled (and assuming that motion had passed). Addressing this separately. I thought Monica Rakowski, as a candidate, did the right thing and stayed completely out of the discussion and vote. The only comment I heard from Monica was, "I'm not getting involved in any of this." Whether such actions by a candidate are required or not, she did the right thing in my view. I believe both Stuart and Steve Jacobs should have taken the position Monica took. Of course, the vote result, at 2-2 would have still failed. Of interest to me as well is that the motion mentioned Stuart Lakernick could not sign any contract for an election vendor, but apparently he was within his rights to vote on selection of the vendor. |
| Calendar |
OPA Board Meeting - Golf Clubhouse
5/24/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
|
OPA Board Meeting - Golf Clubhpuse
6/28/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
|
OPA Board Meeting - Golf Clubhouse
7/26/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
|
Annual Meeting - Assateague Room
8/9/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |