Updated May 28, 2022
You would think that after a national spotlight on government election integrity during the past few years even the Hickory Cluster Board of Directors would try hard to avoid real or perceived election irregularities. And to provide a consistent and fair, if not legal, Director election process as an example of capable cluster management.
Sadly, that did not happen in 2021, and it is about to not happen again in 2022. Instead, it appears the Board is continuing to manipulate the annual meeting candidate nomination and election process, and is trying to enshrine more of the same manipulation in proposed new versions of HCA bylaws, to ensure election of those candidates the Board likes vs. those it does not.
Last year was a preview of this year's plan. You may not have noticed the details then or now, but here's apparently how the 2022 Hickory Cluster Annual Meeting election manipulation works:
1. SUPPORT NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNING
On a private social media group co-administered by a Director, who also sought re-election after the 2022 initial nomination period closed, support another candidate by allowing them ... someone who has commonly-understood histories of undermining the HCA Board and causing the Cluster added expense during the Block 3 parking garage crisis by triggering its condemnation earlier than the Board planned, and of filing Fairfax County zoning and building code complaints against neighbors ... to publish negative and derogatory half-truths about a third candidate specifically to undermine them, even though that social media private group's "rules" say such posts are not allowed.
2. ANNOUNCE A PHONY NOMINATION DEADLINE
In a first mailing postmarked April 29, announce a pre-meeting nomination form submission hard deadline of 3:00 p.m. May 12 with no other options for nomination later. And "forget" to include the nomination form in the mailing, but post the nomination form on the official HCA website with no other direct notice that it is there. That gives the Board advance knowledge of candidates, only two of which applied on time in compliance with clearly stated May 12 deadline, and an ostensible reason to change the deadline mid-stream.
3. ANNOUNCE THE SAME PHONY DEADLINE ... AGAIN
In a second mailing postmarked May 9, send out the "missing" nomination form with the original 3:00 p.m. May 12 nomination submission hard deadline stated again, and again with no other options for nomination later.
4. RECRUIT MORE CANDIDATES
Review the candidates that complied by the twice-stated May 12 deadline. If you like the candidates, accept them and send out the meeting packets with only those candidates listed. If you don't like them, set a new nomination deadline to recruit and allow additional candidates.
5. ALLOW OTHER CANDIDATES TO NOMINATE LATE
Notify other possible candidates, including Directors who originally decided not to run, or others who publicly stated they missed the original deadline, that they are special and do not have to comply with the original clearly-stated nomination May 12 deadline.
6. ANNOUNCE A NEW NOMINATION DEADLINE OBSCURELY
On the obscure official HCA website, announce there, but not directly via written notice or in any other way to all Members, that the original nomination hard deadline has been magically changed to May 16.
7. ALLOW EVEN MORE LATE NOMINATIONS AT THE ANNUAL MEETING ITSELF
In a third mailing meeting packet postmarked May 19, now announce that additional nominations during the Annual Meeting itself ... that were NOT allowed according to the first and second mailing announcements ... can be made.
8. RESTRICT PROXY VOTING ONLY BY THE HCA SECRETARY
In the same third mailing meeting packet, manipulate the proxy form so that proxies can now be assigned ONLY to the HCA Secretary and NOT to other Members as has been the case in HCA for decades. Assignment to other Members is NOT restricted by the current HCA Bylaws. And then continue to allow the HCA Secretary to vote uninstructed proxies ... those without designated candidate voting preferences ... without transparency for the candidates of their choice.
9. ANNOUNCE TWO PROXY SUBMISSION DEADLINE TIMES
The third mailing meeting packet cover letter clearly states a 2:00 p.m. Friday, May 27 proxy submittal deadline to TWC. BUT ... the proxy form itself amazingly states a 12:00 noon deadline the same day. This is nuts. And could result in disqualified proxies.
10. REMOVE A CANDIDATE'S STATEMENT SECOND PAGE
The May 9 mailing and official website-posted nomination form clearly stated that candidates " ... may submit your statement on a separate sheet of paper and attach it to this form (up to 2 pages). The Cluster will distribute your statement to the membership with the official Notice of Annual Meeting. ... ." And April 29 and May 9 mailing cover letters stated " ... Your Statement of Interest provided will be presented to the members exactly as it is provided to us. ... " One candidate submitted a TWO page statement as allowed. But the Board failed to include the second page ... a reference copy of the 2019 HCA proxy form that shows serious discrepancies among the 2019, 2021, and 2022 proxy forms ... to Members in the May 19 third mailing meeting packet as promised.
11. HOLD THE ELECTION ON A MAJOR HOLIDAY WEEKEND
Many Members and their families will probably be out of town for the typically long Memorial Day weekend, Friday-Monday, May 27-30. They understandably have better things to do than attend a homeowners meeting. So that means more votes will be by proxy rather than in person, and therefore controlled by the Board to again potentially determine the election winners. Previous Boards have specifically NOT held the Annual Meeting and election on a holiday weekend to maximize Member attendance and in-person voting. Yes, Zoom may increase attendance, but it is just not the same. Really ... who wants to do that on a holiday at the beach or wherever?
12. ALLOW CANDIDATES TO BE ABSENT FROM THE ELECTION MEETING
Legal counsel advice to previous Boards maintained that Director candidates MUST be physically present at annual meeting elections to effectively and transparently understand and accept election results. However, for the first time in more than a decade, at least one candidate was on vacation during the time of the Annual Meeting. And at least one candidate's statement of interest appears to have been written by someone other than the candidate themselves.
13. ALLOW ABSENT MEMBER VOTES VIA UNKNOWN ONLINE POLLING TOOL
This adds increased complexity to, and questions about, the election process and results audit trail. What tool is being used? Who is managing it? Are all attendees validated as real Members in general, and in good standing specifically? Does the system produce complete paper records of attendees and their votes for official records and possible review by all Members? Are the system and results subject to manipulation during or after use? And a 2013 legal opinion to HCA stated that email voting, a similar electronic process, was not permitted.
NOTE: More, including respective reference documents, will be posted soon. Please check back again.
This is not just a simple mistake or two. It is more than that. The Board is apparently trying hard to get the Director election results it wants. Or it just doesn't know what it is doing. Either way, it is unfair to everyone involved, if not possibly illegal, and indicates either more bad faith or less competency than is reasonable.
So the question is: Are enough HCA Members willing to let this happen now and in the future?
Next time YOU could be the person NOT preferred by the Board.
Regardless, those two candidates who filed May 12 on time according to the Boards twice-stated deadline requirements should be directly elected to two open positions because they would not have been subject to a clusterwide vote for them. The other three candidates who filed late May 15-16 should compete only for the one remaining open position.
And ... Board manipulation of HCA Director elections, for whatever reason, must stop now.