According to HSVPOA Board Chair Lloyd Sherman, the Board of Directors have four types of meetings. In a Board Discussion Session on October 7, 2020, detailed in this report, Sherman explained what these types of meetings are:
- Board Meetings (Regular and Special) – these are open to the public with COVID restrictions.
- Discussion Sessions which are also open to the public with COVID restrictions.
- Executive Sessions – These are called infrequently and NOT open to the public.
- Informal Board Information Sharing Sessions – these are NOT open to the public. According to the Chairman, this type of meeting has been utilized for some time. Sherman said, “this is for all members of the board, where we can talk in an informal, non-decision making process. We could reach a consensus on something we wanted to take on as a project, or that needs to be done. It is just an open dialogue, talking about activities that are going on and where we need to focus our attention.
“Sherman: ‘I just wanted to let everybody know that there are those four types of meetings. We will be as transparent. If there is anything that comes out of the information sharing, we will also, like we would do, out of an executive session, we will share those contents with the public if there is anything that needs to be addressed that way.’”
The Hot Springs Village Property Owners’ Association Bylaws and Policy Manual are very clear that the board meetings should be public except for in certain rare cases which involve legal matters, and other sensitive topics. This is what executive sessions are used for.
Bylaws on confidentiality & transparency
The Bylaws state:
“As further described in Chapter 8, Article 3 of the Board of Directors policies, both confidentiality and transparency must be balanced to prevent harm to HSVPOA or frustrate the deliberations of those individuals elected to govern the organization. Executive sessions are not intended to, nor should they be used to hide important and appropriate information from the members, but to protect the innocent, assure confidentiality about sensitive matters, and avoid unnecessary legal expense or action.”
Click here to see pages 12 and 13 of the HSVPOA Bylaws. (This section titled, “Confidentiality and Transparency” begins near the bottom of page 12.) The policy guide, which is referenced in the bylaws, goes into more detail on confidentiality and transparency. Both documents state that except for certain issues, public meetings are required.
Policy Guide on confidentiality & transparency
“Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, all meetings of the Hot Springs Village POA Board of Directors shall be public meetings.“
“Executive Sessions. Both confidentiality and transparency must be balanced to prevent harm to HSVPOA or frustrate the deliberations of those individuals elected to govern the organization. Executive sessions are not intended to, nor should they be used to hide important and appropriate information from the property owners, but to protect the innocent, assure confidentiality about sensitive matters, and avoid unnecessary legal expense or action.
(1)” Private board deliberations are permitted, and their confidentiality required in these matters:
i. “Discussions regarding employment, appointment, promotion, demotion, disciplining, or resignation of the General Manager (GM), as well as all other personnel authority delegated to the GM;
ii. Discussions regarding board member conduct and conflicts of interest;
iii. Discussions regarding legal matters;
iv. Discussions regarding the purchase, lease, exchange, or value of real property;
v. Discussions regarding prospective gifts to HSVPOA;
vi. Discussions regarding security issues;
vii. Discussions regarding economic development negotiations;
viii. Discussions of other confidential matters as reasonably expected to protect the organization and its interests.
(2)”Public deliberation is otherwise recommended to build property owner trust and support. Board members should not use private deliberations for the sole purpose of circumventing prudent transparency.”
Public meetings build property owner trust and support
The 2020 board started with conducting two scheduled public Board Discussion Sessions a month. These sessions were open to the public and recorded. This allowed for optimum transparency and building trust between property owners and the board. The idea behind open Board Discussion Sessions was to allow property owners to see how they deliberate and make their decisions. The Board Discussion Sessions were also supposed to be an avenue to allow property owners an opportunity to address the board with concerns or questions. It now appears that there will only be one Board Discussion Session a month. Instead, the board conducts Informal Board Information Sharing Sessions, which are not open to the property owners.
This board promised total transparency to the property owners, which brings us back to the Policy Guide, which states, “Public deliberation is otherwise recommended to build property owner trust and support. Board members should not use private deliberations for the sole purpose of circumventing prudent transparency.”
Will the board change HSVPOA governing documents to reflect this new “closed-door” meeting policy?
Click here to view the HSVPOA Open Meeting Policy from the Policy Manual.
In all fairness, before you blame the Chair for this move away from transparency, please remember when he makes board announcements, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is his policy, only the policy of the majority of the board. Who or what is influencing the board to eliminate some transparency to property owners? It is seriously doubtful that it is property owners as they have made it very clear over the past few years that they desire complete transparency.
* * *
By Cheryl Dowden, October 16, 2020
* * *
Thank you for reading. Be sure to bookmark this website. Click here to visit the Hot Springs Village People Facebook Group. Click here to visit Hot Springs Village Community forums.
Frank Leeming
10/16/2020 — 1:56 pm
Your report on our POA board’s new definition of its meetings is so sad. It reflects abandoning transparency and embracing the convenience of hiding behind closed doors to discuss the public’s business.
Board chair Lloyd Sherman described the new secret meetings as a time when the board “can talk in an informal, non-decision making process. We could reach a consensus on something we wanted to take on as a project, or that needs to be done.”
So we’re back to where we were before we elected these directors. Instead of making decisions in Governance Committee meetings, we’ll be making them in “Informal Board Information Sharing Sessions.”
All the pledges of openness lasted less than six months.
The board, probably with the approval of the new general manager, finds it’s easier to hash things out in secret, then sit down in public and ratify the decision, thus leaving the public in the dark about how the decision was reached.
Joseph Vlasek
10/16/2020 — 3:38 pm
Sadly this comment is Spot On!
Keith
10/23/2020 — 10:35 am
Such a pitiful turn of events with the board Chair accusing anyone who asks questions of creating drama.
Where is the transparency that was promised, Lloyd? You can start by telling us why you are quietly implementing the CMP by incurring legal fees to purchase property. How much is this costing us and what is the ultimate plan: https://www.explorethevillage.com/images/OCT2020_Board_Packet/5_Ratify_Guidance_on_Real_Estate.pdf
Was something of this magnitude seriously handled by email? When will the rest of us see those emails and where can we find videos of any related discussions?
Elmo Wiggins
10/24/2020 — 9:24 am
Keith … do you believe the POA will build a Town Center on these lots that the Rose Law firm is buying?
Walter Chance
10/16/2020 — 4:55 pm
We voted in this board to make these decisions. As a former City Council member we discussed legal matters in private. As for the other meetings, they seem reasonable and subjects where there is consensus, they bring to the board meetings. How quickly y’all forget the wall of secrets from the last board and GM. The new GM has been here not even three months. The new board is about to have there 7th meeting. I see nothing but positive action and responsible decision making thus far.
Walter Chance
10/16/2020 — 6:39 pm
Saying I’m wrong is YOUR opinion. I do not think so. The bylaws were misused in the past. This board is trying to undo the wrongs of the past. Again. You can disagree. But saying I’m Wrong is inappropriate for a commentary. I didn’t know the admin was the judge and jury of comments.
HSVP C
10/16/2020 — 7:03 pm
You missed the whole point, Walter. Have a nice evening.
Walter
10/16/2020 — 7:12 pm
No I didn’t. Nice try. I appreciate you and Joe’s effort to get this board in. Now I view you as a thorn in the side of our new board and GM. You are now part of the problem. Not part of the solution. Please remove me from this drama filled website. You should really think about taking a vacation. Good night.
Walter
10/16/2020 — 7:15 pm
No I didn’t. I appreciate you and Joe getting this board in place. Now you are part of the problem. Creating drama and challenging the very people you helped get elected. Maybe it’s time you take a vacation. Please remove me from this negativity and drama filled site. Good day.
Linda anderson
10/17/2020 — 6:08 pm
Frank & Cheryl are correct. Complete transparency is very important for property owner TRUST and open communication. It eliminate doubts about a Board’s integrity. Unfortunately, our Board has chosen to back away from Transparency. Could this be about Board Members controlling determinations or decisions in order to make sure that most are in agreement ? I heard this discussion at a Nalley Board Meeting when a Board Member asked a question and the chairman said: ” You know we have already discussed this “. This represented closed door discussions and ” understandings “. It has always been my understanding that each Board Member ( whenever possible) has an obligation to bring out his or her best case for or against an issue without interference or scrutiny from other Board members. An exchange of ideas represents the Boards best attempts to represent truth, understanding, and shows best efforts to be operating on behalf of property owners. Could our Board re-evaluate its position and remove closed-door meetings ?
Andy Kramek
10/18/2020 — 9:00 am
I am so sorry for you all in HSV. It really does seem to be yet another case of ‘out of the frying pan, into the fire’. Maybe there is something so terribly wrong with the POA, that is only disclosed to people once they become Board members, and which is so dramatic that they completely and immediately drop all of their plans and renege on their campaign promises. Alternatively it could just be another example of the Douglas Adams Principle – “Anyone who wants to run for high office should on no account be allowed to do so!”
It certainly looks as if there simply is not anybody who is really capable and willing to tackle the fundamental issues with Village Management and, if someone does dare to try they are discredited and removed. Either way it seems that the Village management is right back in the same old game as before the much-vaunted new Board was elected with promises for major change, just with new players. Believe me I wish you all well, but I very much fear that HSV as we knew it really has ceased to exist and will not return. So sad.
Lloyd Sherman
10/18/2020 — 9:08 am
Here we go again! Stirring up drama that doesn’t exist. Your Board IS NOT “making decisions in secret!” NOTHING is being hidden from property owners. The ISS is discussions with Board members to cuss and discuss openly and informally topics that will either need action in an Executive Session or make it to the Discussion Session for comment and input of the property owners. Nothing is being done in these sessions that won’t be conveyed to members. Now take your conspiracy theories and put them to use as part of the solution for the Village and not creating drama that keeps everybody questioning management and the Board. If you will recall, it was me who brought to the attention of the previous Board that they are bound by the Bylaws to communicate DECISIONS made in Executive Session and that process is in full effect with this Board. No wonder we have troube finding good people to run for Board positions!
Phil Lemler
10/18/2020 — 9:58 am
My opinions: first, I believe you have to give this board and new management team a chance. They have a very tough job and are dealing with (in my opinion) virtually unsolvable structural problems in HSV.
I believe it is unfair and unadvisable to assume the decisions they make are “just like the old board and management teams” because the decisions may mirror what has been done previously. You need to judge them on quarterly and annual benchmarks.
I also believe you have to give them (POA Board and GM) some leeway in their decision-making process. Not every decision can be 100% transparent. You deserve to know the end results of this process but being exposed to every turn in the discussions is a mistake. IBM does not allow its shareholders to decide whether they will open an office in Cleveland or buy out a competitive company. IBM states their plan and regularly presents the results. This micro-managing of HSV affairs is counter-productive and damaging. It forces board members/managers to make less-than-desirable choices by an over concern on what villagers will think/say.
This constant attack of the process versus results will make it harder to find good candidates for the board and may end up chasing away good management.
You have the right to know the plan … how HSV has performed via the plan … and you have the right to express your views and have input into the major decisions. However, complaining and asserting that this management/board is no different from previous boards will destroy the Village.
Patty MacDonald
10/19/2020 — 1:43 pm
This current discussion about whether the board should be able to take part in informal discussions of POA issues without disclosure to property owners or input from them, showcases yet another reason our Village will eventually have to incorporate its government. The AR municipal code contains a Freedom of Information law which is considered a model for the nation. It has also survived numerous court challenges, some of which forbid informal meetings that exclude the public. It isn’t that we don’t trust you board members, but we are trying to save you from the temptations of cronyism and self-dealing that disgraced the last board. Please don’t take us down that slippery slope again. Patty MacDonald