Privacy of Vote

Is your vote in the recall election private?
Thankfully, yes.

This was a major point of contention in the negotiations between the two sides in the recall election. We strenuously argued for privacy while the dominant Board faction (dBf) sought a public vote.

This is our understanding of the process.

If you participate by proxy:

You submit your proxy to PO Box 24. 

The Inspector holds the only keys to Box 24 and will retrieve those as he sees fit. There is a safety deposit box to which we believe that only the Inspector has the key right now. The box is held in the name of Dan Burke. To open the box, the Inspector and Burke need to visit the bank at the same time. 

The Inspector and whoever he names as assistants will validate the proxies prior to the Member meeting on the 28th. 

Patty Miller is the only named assistant as of September 20.  Bob Eagan was named and then withdrew his name once it became known that he had signed the petition to recall the minority directors. 

The Inspector (Stewart Andrew), Patty Miller, and whoever else the Inspector names as an independent assistant will be able to see how the proxy votes are cast.

The named proxy holder will also be able to see the vote instructions submitted by the people for whom they hold proxies. This will be Brian Ehrmantraut or Mike Stolmeier or whoever you have named, if someone different.  

The attorneys will also have the right to look at any proxy they want. The attorney representing the minority directors and others is Shawn Alexander. The attorney representing the dominant Board faction is EWUA Attorney Rochelle Doyea.  In theory, Doyea represents all seven directors and the Association’s Members. It is a good theory, but does not seem to work that way in practice. The attorneys have promised they will not pass along the information from the proxy cards to anyone else.

If you vote in person at the special Member meeting:

After long debate, all parties agreed that there will be a paper ballot at the in-person meeting. We fought against the vote being via public outcry (voice vote) and pushed for a paper ballot.

The dBf’s current plan is to have Dan Burke and Cory Harrington admit people to the room and to print out a ballot(s) for those in attendance. This is a significant threat to the legitimacy of the recall, as both have publicly stated their strong preference for the removal of the minority directors.

Each Member or proxy holder  at the meeting will be allowed to privately complete the ballot. 

These ballots are to, then, be placed in a ballot box. If the Inspector verifies that the only ballots that go into the ballot box are placed there by the person who has the authority to vote, then the integrity of the election is good. It is up to the Inspector if he will provide this security measure. We believe it is essential that he does. Those of us who know him also trust him to assure this security and integrity.

The vote on each ballot is to be known only to the Inspector and the assistants of his choosing. Each ballot is to have the name and account number of the person voting. There is to be one ballot for each membership.

Tabulation

The tabulation is to be done using a yet-to-be sourced, secured computer at a yet-to-be determined location. The Inspector and his yet-to-be determined assistants will tabulate the proxy votes and ballot votes, combine those, and produce a final number.

Timing 

The dominant Board faction wanted the results to be announced at the meeting. And, elements of that demand are still in the Memorandum of Understanding. However, both sides have agreed that it is more important to have an honest result rather than one forced by a deadline. The MOU says that if the results are not announced on September 28, the current Board will be told on October 2, and the public told on October 3.  Those dates may not hold. The Inspector has been granted whatever time he needs to do his job properly.  

Privacy

Very few people should know your vote. Assuming the Inspector chooses assistants with integrity and assuming the attorneys act honorably, you should be safe to vote your conscience without fear of retaliation.