POA board discusses misconduct allegations

The POA board opened its June meeting by reporting on an executive session that was called in response to allegations of misconduct. Executive sessions are always closed.

According to chairman David Brandenburg, there were two allegations. The first was brought by a property owner against a board member for violating Policy 1.11 which deals with conflicts of interest. The board voted 5 to 2 that the allegation was without merit. The two board members who disagreed were Jerry Hoover and Sandy Fosdick. No further details were given.

A second allegation named most of the former board members, except for David Whelchel, for violating Policy 1.10, which covers the board of directors’ ethics. The allegation said that by reading a summary of 23 letters during the May board meeting instead of reading each letter, the board had violated its own policy. The board members voted five to three that they had violated the policy and issued a public apology. They also directed the Rules and Regulations Committee to look at that policy. Three board members disagreed with this conclusion: Brandenburg, Whelchel and Jerre Barron Jr.

The letters were written for the May meeting instead of an open forum because the board was holding virtual meetings in response to the coronavirus. In June, they met in person but property owners were asked to sit outside the board room and watch on a screen. When it was time for the open forum, members

came in one at a time to speak.

Joy Sawyer asked the board if there was a difference between the Bella Vista POA and the Bella Vista Village POA, explaining that county records show that the Bella Vista Village POA owns almost 650 lots. She was concerned that those lots could be used for voting.

General manager Tom Judson explained that the policy is to listen to all open forum comments before answering any questions. When he did respond, he said the POA does not own 650 lots and he didn’t know what the county record Sawyer was referencing.

Beth Tracy said it was the first time she has spoken at a meeting, but she has been attending and watching meetings. She spoke against policy 3.04, saying the 2020 plan promised certain amenities would be private. The changes, she said, would allow outsiders to use those amenities.

“I really don’t want to be here asking for your promise to be kept,” she said.

Steve McKee, who was removed from the board in May, said the charges against him were “spurious and specious.” He implied that he was removed because of his position on policy changes that will allow nonmembers to use certain amenities. He echoed Tracy’s comment that the private amenities had been promised as part of the 2020 plan. He added that the fee schedule doesn’t include a fee for the public use of those amenities.

Chris Rose said he didn’t intend to rebut McKee, but he believes the Rules and Regulations Committee did a good job defining guests and when they can use amenities for specific events. Bringing guests into the community can be helpful.

Tommy Freytag argued that McKee should not have been removed from the board. The board member who brought the charges against McKee should not have been allowed to vote, he said.

Brandenburg read emails that had been sent by members who did not want to speak in person. One, from Mary Stewart, accused Brandenburg of verbal elder abuse in relation to his comments to another board member during last week’s work session.

The board moved on to discuss the policies that concern guests. Some events that have been going on for years make use of facilities that are not normally open to the public. Judson provided a list of 16 events that range from the trap shoot portion of the Cancer Challenge to the Wiener Takes All fundraiser for the animal shelter. Without nonmembers participating, some of these events would be canceled. When possible, these events occur when the amenity would be closed.

Since restaurants and golf courses allow nonmembers, golf tournaments and private events at Lakepoint were not part of the discussion. Trails are also open to the public, so no trail events were discussed.

Policies 2.02 and 3.04 change the policies to allow certain special events, approved by either the board or one of the joint advisory committees, to include nonmembers. Judson pointed out that the events have already been vetted and he believes they are good for the community and give members something to do.

“There’s nothing on this list that raises a red flag for me,” Mary Sinkus said.

Fosdick said many members are unhappy with the fishing tournaments that are open to nonmembers.

“There are other ways we can raise money for cancer research,” she said.

Hoover and Fosdick voted against policies 2.02 and 3.04, but the second readings passed so both policies are now in place. Teah Bidwell, head of the Rules and Regulations Committee, said the committee will look at the policy again and may recommend more changes.

The board also approved a change to policy 3.03 that limits the number of guests that can be sponsored by a dependent cardholder to five. Primary cardholders have no limit, but Judson explained that large groups of teenagers sometimes congregate on the dams with one dependent cardholder sponsoring them all.