Our Governing documents were initially written for the developer. Although some items have been updated, a vast majority are still heavily weighed in favor of a dictatorial board.
This means that once elected a Board member has absolutely no recourse or accountability. History has shown that since the POA became completely run by elected owners, contentious issue have been withdrawn from owner debate and decisions have been made behind closed doors. Do we need a route for owners to recall Board members?
We are NOT saying the current board needs to be recalled. This is just incase we get an elected person that turns out to be totally corrupt. As things stand now, a corrupt board member would serve the three full years without accountability. Do we need to protect ourselves?
End
Should we have a route to recall board members?
Choose Your Country
- Afghanistan (+93)
- Aland Islands (+358)
- Albania (+355)
- Algeria (+213)
- American Samoa (+1684)
- Andorra (+376)
- Angola (+244)
- Anguilla (+1264)
- Antarctica (+672)
- Antigua and Barbuda (+1268)
- Argentina (+54)
- Armenia (+374)
- Aruba (+297)
- Australia (+61)
- Austria (+43)
- Azerbaijan (+994)
- Bahamas (+1242)
- Bahrain (+973)
- Bangladesh (+880)
- Barbados (+1246)
- Belarus (+375)
- Belgium (+32)
- Belize (+501)
- Benin (+229)
- Bermuda (+1441)
- Bhutan (+975)
- Bolivia (+591)
- Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba (+599)
- Bosnia and Herzegovina (+387)
- Botswana (+267)
- Bouvet Island (+55)
- Brazil (+55)
- British Indian Ocean Territory (+246)
- Brunei Darussalam (+673)
- Bulgaria (+359)
- Burkina Faso (+226)
- Burundi (+257)
- Cambodia (+855)
- Cameroon (+237)
- Canada (+1)
- Cape Verde (+238)
- Cayman Islands (+1345)
- Central African Republic (+236)
- Chad (+235)
- Chile (+56)
- China (+86)
- Christmas Island (+61)
- Cocos (Keeling) Islands (+672)
- Colombia (+57)
- Comoros (+269)
- Congo (+242)
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo (+242)
- Cook Islands (+682)
- Costa Rica (+506)
- Cote D'Ivoire (+225)
- Croatia (+385)
- Cuba (+53)
- Curacao (+599)
- Cyprus (+357)
- Czech Republic (+420)
- Denmark (+45)
- Djibouti (+253)
- Dominica (+1767)
- Dominican Republic (+1809)
- Ecuador (+593)
- Egypt (+20)
- El Salvador (+503)
- Equatorial Guinea (+240)
- Eritrea (+291)
- Estonia (+372)
- Ethiopia (+251)
- Falkland Islands (Malvinas) (+500)
- Faroe Islands (+298)
- Fiji (+679)
- Finland (+358)
- France (+33)
- French Guiana (+594)
- French Polynesia (+689)
- French Southern Territories (+262)
- Gabon (+241)
- Gambia (+220)
- Georgia (+995)
- Germany (+49)
- Ghana (+233)
- Gibraltar (+350)
- Greece (+30)
- Greenland (+299)
- Grenada (+1473)
- Guadeloupe (+590)
- Guam (+1671)
- Guatemala (+502)
- Guernsey (+44)
- Guinea (+224)
- Guinea-Bissau (+245)
- Guyana (+592)
- Haiti (+509)
- Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands (+0)
- Holy See (Vatican City State) (+39)
- Honduras (+504)
- Hong Kong (+852)
- Hungary (+36)
- Iceland (+354)
- India (+91)
- Indonesia (+62)
- Iran, Islamic Republic of (+98)
- Iraq (+964)
- Ireland (+353)
- Isle of Man (+44)
- Israel (+972)
- Italy (+39)
- Jamaica (+1876)
- Japan (+81)
- Jersey (+44)
- Jordan (+962)
- Kazakhstan (+7)
- Kenya (+254)
- Kiribati (+686)
- Korea, Democratic People's Republic of (+850)
- Korea, Republic of (+82)
- Kosovo (+381)
- Kuwait (+965)
- Kyrgyzstan (+996)
- Lao People's Democratic Republic (+856)
- Latvia (+371)
- Lebanon (+961)
- Lesotho (+266)
- Liberia (+231)
- Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (+218)
- Liechtenstein (+423)
- Lithuania (+370)
- Luxembourg (+352)
- Macao (+853)
- Macedonia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of (+389)
- Madagascar (+261)
- Malawi (+265)
- Malaysia (+60)
- Maldives (+960)
- Mali (+223)
- Malta (+356)
- Marshall Islands (+692)
- Martinique (+596)
- Mauritania (+222)
- Mauritius (+230)
- Mayotte (+262)
- Mexico (+52)
- Micronesia, Federated States of (+691)
- Moldova, Republic of (+373)
- Monaco (+377)
- Mongolia (+976)
- Montenegro (+382)
- Montserrat (+1664)
- Morocco (+212)
- Mozambique (+258)
- Myanmar (+95)
- Namibia (+264)
- Nauru (+674)
- Nepal (+977)
- Netherlands (+31)
- Netherlands Antilles (+599)
- New Caledonia (+687)
- New Zealand (+64)
- Nicaragua (+505)
- Niger (+227)
- Nigeria (+234)
- Niue (+683)
- Norfolk Island (+672)
- Northern Mariana Islands (+1670)
- Norway (+47)
- Oman (+968)
- Pakistan (+92)
- Palau (+680)
- Palestinian Territory, Occupied (+970)
- Panama (+507)
- Papua New Guinea (+675)
- Paraguay (+595)
- Peru (+51)
- Philippines (+63)
- Pitcairn (+64)
- Poland (+48)
- Portugal (+351)
- Puerto Rico (+1787)
- Qatar (+974)
- Reunion (+262)
- Romania (+40)
- Russian Federation (+70)
- Rwanda (+250)
- Saint Barthelemy (+590)
- Saint Helena (+290)
- Saint Kitts and Nevis (+1869)
- Saint Lucia (+1758)
- Saint Martin (+590)
- Saint Pierre and Miquelon (+508)
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines (+1784)
- Samoa (+684)
- San Marino (+378)
- Sao Tome and Principe (+239)
- Saudi Arabia (+966)
- Senegal (+221)
- Serbia (+381)
- Serbia and Montenegro (+381)
- Seychelles (+248)
- Sierra Leone (+232)
- Singapore (+65)
- Sint Maarten (+1)
- Slovakia (+421)
- Slovenia (+386)
- Solomon Islands (+677)
- Somalia (+252)
- South Africa (+27)
- South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands (+500)
- South Sudan (+211)
- Spain (+34)
- Sri Lanka (+94)
- Sudan (+249)
- Suriname (+597)
- Svalbard and Jan Mayen (+47)
- Swaziland (+268)
- Sweden (+46)
- Switzerland (+41)
- Syrian Arab Republic (+963)
- Taiwan, Province of China (+886)
- Tajikistan (+992)
- Tanzania, United Republic of (+255)
- Thailand (+66)
- Timor-Leste (+670)
- Togo (+228)
- Tokelau (+690)
- Tonga (+676)
- Trinidad and Tobago (+1868)
- Tunisia (+216)
- Turkey (+90)
- Turkmenistan (+7370)
- Turks and Caicos Islands (+1649)
- Tuvalu (+688)
- Uganda (+256)
- Ukraine (+380)
- United Arab Emirates (+971)
- United Kingdom (+44)
- United States (+1)
- United States Minor Outlying Islands (+1)
- Uruguay (+598)
- Uzbekistan (+998)
- Vanuatu (+678)
- Venezuela (+58)
- Viet Nam (+84)
- Virgin Islands, British (+1284)
- Virgin Islands, U.s. (+1340)
- Wallis and Futuna (+681)
- Western Sahara (+212)
- Yemen (+967)
- Zambia (+260)
- Zimbabwe (+263)
NEXT POLL Or comment below
With 111 votes so far, it’s interesting how we only have 2 comments on this one. Please do remember, only your nickname is visible to users. Only 1 admin can see who actually made what comment (this is to comply legally) and my lips are sealed tight.
I believe we have to protect ourselves in the future. In the space of two board elections six possible rouge board members could be elected. If this happened, they would control everything without any recourse or accountability.
Depends if board members are not supporting the majority community. If it is evident that they have alternative motives other than supporting the mission statement — then yes!