By Finn Myggen [ First Members’ Budget Meeting is Wed. March 13 at 7 p.m. Pool Pavilion.]
Pine Mountain Club POA’s Board Chairman Bill Gurtner wrote an OpEd in the March 1 issue of The Mountain Enterprise [“We do not play fast and loose with ‘Other People’s Money’”]. In it he stated: “Transparency, within the limitations of the law, is important to us.”
In February at its regular meeting, the PMC Board was asked by The Mountain Enterprise for the schedule for the annual budget workshop for members. PMC Boards have made this a major annual event since 1974—until recently.
At that February 16 meeting, Chairman Gurtner stated that they were not ready to set a date. A fellow board member suggested they set a date at that meeting for a few weeks later into March. This was rejected by Chairman Gurtner.
Now the meeting date has been set. It is posted in the hallway at the clubhouse, where it is guaranteed that almost no one will see it. So I checked the PMC website. As of this writing, the meeting is not posted there. The date also missed the deadline for the March Condor (the house organ newsletter for the PMC association).
It appears Gurtner’s board is meeting only the most minimal legal requirement for “transparency” under the law.
•Could it be that not posting the meeting on the website would limit the number of members that know the meeting is taking place? If members don’t know, they won’t show up.
•Could it be that the reason for not setting a date in the board meeting was to avoid having the date in the Condor? If members don’t know, they won’t show up.
•Could it be that the reason for setting meetings on March 13 and 27 is that it will also miss the April Condor? Again, if members don’t know, they won’t show up.
•Could it be that the reason to set both meetings on Wednesdays at 6 p.m. [now 7 p.m. for March 13, and 6 p.m. for March 27—Editor] is that it will be close to impossible for members working off the hill to battle traffic to attend? How many members with primary residences off the hill will show up in the middle of the week?
This meeting matters and nothing is more important than having members informed. Suggestions or questions the members might bring to the table are vital.
So, reflecting once again on Gurtner’s statement: “Transparency, within the limitations of the law, is important to us,” I wonder: ‘What actually is it that is most important to this board?’ Is it to keep transparency limited to the minimum level required by law or is the board truly interested in keeping the members informed?
Chairman Gurtner’s statement can be read either way.
Looking at the recent lack of transparency in regard to the full consultant’s report about the mismanagement of the Bistro on the Greens, the GM’s contract and now this, I have to wonder. But you be the judge.
This is part of the March 08, 2013 online edition of The Mountain Enterprise.
Have an opinion on this matter? We'd like to hear from you.