06-21-2012, 04:44 AM
I was at some of the HPPOA meetings when the dust issue was first brought forward in terms of filing legal complaints with the state, as opposed to simply griping about it verbally. The militant presentation of these complaints began when the board was in the process of designating a new round of roads to be paved. Everyone knew by this time that only about a third of the roads in HPP could be paved with the $12M bond, and that the group being considered would be among the last roads paved. So it seemed obvious to many of us that the threats of formal complaints with the state were designed to influence that decision in favor of paving the road where the complaining parties live. They all seemed to be from a single road in the upper part of HPP.
Next began a process that was very unflattering for both the BOD and the complainants. The complainants presented their own traffic survey of their road, which was wildly inaccurate and refuted by the BOD's own survey. (Both surveys were informal, without benefit of mechanical traffic counters BTW. Oddly, HPP has one of these machines, but rarely uses it.)
The BOD, not liking the heat, resorted to having discussions about which roads to pave in executive session. I complained about this in open session, and they scheduled an open meeting to discuss the issue. At the open meeting, the rationale for choosing roads to pave was described in cogent detail, but the actual roads to be paved were imbedded in a spreadsheet so complicated and obtuse that most of us could not figure it out until later. (A professional office administrator and myself with a combined 30 years experience with spreadsheets only decyphered it twenty minutes after the meeting was over.) The board president did not announce which roads were being paved, which was everyone was there for, but adjourned to executive session without a motion (or second) to adjourn which was a clear violation of Roberts Rules and the Association by-laws. In exec, they approved a list of roads.
Now as if this all were not bad enough, the minority on the BOD who had opposed the secretive deliberations, did not protest the illegal adjournment or the violation of the by-laws provision on executive sessions. They shuffled into the back room with the rest and joined in the vote. That was the point that I realized that this was all pretty hopeless. I have since reduced my frustration level by lowering my exposure to this group. For those of you who may have missed my email meeting reports, I apologize for not explaining this sooner. I'm taking a break from the insanity.
The lack of competency and backbone on the HPP board is directly proportional to the apathy shown by the lot owners. Having followed board elections for ten years now, I can tell you all that quite a few races have been uncontested and voter turnout in contested races has ranged from 11% to 18%, mostly trending toward the lower end of that range. Until more people participate, it will likely remain this way. As for running for the BOD myself, I may consider it in the future, but until he lost the last election, my own district representative was one of the few whom I could trust overall, although we did have disagreements. I am convinced that he lost because he was an incumbent and there is a high level of general dissatisfaction. If only that could be turned into wholesale change!
Sorry for the rant, folks. As for the dust issue that set me off, some good could come out of it. If, as Rob hopes, the BOD rises to the occasion and parlays a legal crisis into a ground-breaking decision on the whole Puna subdivision conundrum, it could profoundly change a lingering mess for the better. If the HPPOA is forced into receivership by massive fines, the stewardship of the association would be placed in court-appointede hands. Either would be a big change, but you can make up your own minds as to which is more likely.
Next began a process that was very unflattering for both the BOD and the complainants. The complainants presented their own traffic survey of their road, which was wildly inaccurate and refuted by the BOD's own survey. (Both surveys were informal, without benefit of mechanical traffic counters BTW. Oddly, HPP has one of these machines, but rarely uses it.)
The BOD, not liking the heat, resorted to having discussions about which roads to pave in executive session. I complained about this in open session, and they scheduled an open meeting to discuss the issue. At the open meeting, the rationale for choosing roads to pave was described in cogent detail, but the actual roads to be paved were imbedded in a spreadsheet so complicated and obtuse that most of us could not figure it out until later. (A professional office administrator and myself with a combined 30 years experience with spreadsheets only decyphered it twenty minutes after the meeting was over.) The board president did not announce which roads were being paved, which was everyone was there for, but adjourned to executive session without a motion (or second) to adjourn which was a clear violation of Roberts Rules and the Association by-laws. In exec, they approved a list of roads.
Now as if this all were not bad enough, the minority on the BOD who had opposed the secretive deliberations, did not protest the illegal adjournment or the violation of the by-laws provision on executive sessions. They shuffled into the back room with the rest and joined in the vote. That was the point that I realized that this was all pretty hopeless. I have since reduced my frustration level by lowering my exposure to this group. For those of you who may have missed my email meeting reports, I apologize for not explaining this sooner. I'm taking a break from the insanity.
The lack of competency and backbone on the HPP board is directly proportional to the apathy shown by the lot owners. Having followed board elections for ten years now, I can tell you all that quite a few races have been uncontested and voter turnout in contested races has ranged from 11% to 18%, mostly trending toward the lower end of that range. Until more people participate, it will likely remain this way. As for running for the BOD myself, I may consider it in the future, but until he lost the last election, my own district representative was one of the few whom I could trust overall, although we did have disagreements. I am convinced that he lost because he was an incumbent and there is a high level of general dissatisfaction. If only that could be turned into wholesale change!
Sorry for the rant, folks. As for the dust issue that set me off, some good could come out of it. If, as Rob hopes, the BOD rises to the occasion and parlays a legal crisis into a ground-breaking decision on the whole Puna subdivision conundrum, it could profoundly change a lingering mess for the better. If the HPPOA is forced into receivership by massive fines, the stewardship of the association would be placed in court-appointede hands. Either would be a big change, but you can make up your own minds as to which is more likely.