On July 22, we submitted petitions calling for the recall of four directors.
With little evidence that the recall was being taken seriously, we went to Court asking for four things:
- A neutral election inspector;
- The Members to be allowed to use the proxy of their choice;
- For proxies that are held in the name of the Board for quorum purposes to not be used by the dominant Board faction (dbf) to remove directors they don’t like;
- The privacy of the Members to vote so that they are not intimidated or harassed if they vote against corruption. (The dominant Board faction had wanted a voice vote to be held at the recall Member meeting).
We do not believe we would have accomplished these things if we had not gone to Court. Nor do we believe that they would have happened prior to the Member meeting without the Court action. Up until the first Court hearing, the dbf had rejected the independent inspector. However, while in front of the Judge, the dbf’s attorney (the Association’s attorney) agreed to the independent inspector.
We have accomplished each of our primary goals. Now there will be:
- An independent election inspector;
- The Members will be allowed to select the proxy holder of their choice;
- The proxies held by the Board will not be used to favor one group or another;
- And, the Member votes will be private.
As acknowledged by the dbf’s attorney (Association’s attorney), what we have sought in the suit has been accomplished. As a result, we have offered to withdraw the suit. This requires the dbf to agree.
We received notice on Monday, Sept 16, that the dominant Board faction (dbf) is unwilling to allow the legal battle to end. On Tuesday, Sept 17, the dbf argued in court that the lawsuit was frivolous and the Plaintiffs should pay EWUA $34,000. This is something called “fee shifting” and is not permitted in Washington.
On Tuesday in court, we would have been allowed 7.5 minutes to defend ourselves. We did not think that sufficient time, and the Court agreed. The hearing has been moved to October 2, 2024.
The October 2 hearing date is the same day that the Board has instructed the Election Inspector to notify the Board of the outcome of the recall vote.
Please remember that all six Plaintiffs in this case paid for the costs out of their own pockets.
Also, please know that the dbf paid for their defense against the recall and their offense against the minority directors using your Member money and the Association attorney.
The “Plaintiffs”:
- Ron Claus
- Carol Ann Anderson
- Jim Cook
- Tenar Hall
- Steve Smith
- Mike Parnell
The “Defendants” (a.k.a. the dominant Board faction):
- EWUA
- Jim Nelson
- Teri Nigretto
- Mike Cleveland
- Leith Templin