Palace Intrigue in Columbia?

Watching the Squirrels of Greater Mischievousness sprint across Faulkner Ridge this morning.   So much motion; yet what purpose is being served?

A recent Howard County Times letter to the editor with the title, “Gag effort toward Alan Klein cannot be ‘anonymous’” distracted me from my rodent-focused observations.  The third paragraph, in particular, deserves a bit of attention. 

Stepping back for a moment, a re-cap of the specific allegations can be found here: 

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/howard/columbia/ph-ho-cf-ca-ethics-0108-20150107-story.html.

Now, returning to the letter, the author claims that this action against Mr. Klein is an “effort to disenfranchise his constituents.”  Given the scope of the Columbia Association’s authority, and the process whereby the Board Members are elected, this assertion, even if it had an ounce of merit, is either a finely crafted piece of satire or a shockingly egregious example of hyperbole.

From my perspective, which is admittedly that of an outsider, it appears as though the Board is undertaking a procedure designed to ensure the integrity of the Columbia Association in general and the Board, as the governing body, specifically.  Further, it seems as though they are investigating this matter in the proper, legally prescribed manner.  I would think Columbia residents, particularly those who dwell in Harper’s Choice, would respect a “by the book” approach in the handling of this complaint.

The author of the letter states that this is a “staff-instigated” effort.  Oh?  So then he knows the identity of the individual who filed the complaint?  I thought he was concerned about the anonymity of the complainant.  If he doesn’t possess this information, it would appear that he is making a fairly grand leap to the conclusion that this is some sort of staff conspiracy.  Has palace intrigue become the parlor game of choice at the Wincopin HQ?  

The author, of course, is free to exercise his First Amendment rights.  It is my belief that his not-so-subtle depiction of Board Members as so many CA staff puppets is unfair, ill-founded and disrespectful.  It is arguments such as this that undermine confidence in the work of the Columbia Association.  That is the pathway to estrangement, disillusion, and ultimately the sort of disenfranchisement that he claims to working against.

I look forward to the resolution of the Klein matter, although I am certain the debate will merely take another form, because why resolve something when one can continue running about in circles, chasing after elusive acorns.       

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

“We are connected, we foster opportunities to connect with others”

The title of this post, of course, reflects one of the five stated Values of the Columbia Association.  These words were very much top of mind as I strolled toward the CA building, where, at the stroke of three o’clock Saturday (12/13/14), the inaugural meeting of the Haiti Sister City Planning Committee Meeting was gaveled to order.

Columbia, as you may be aware, has three Sister Cities – two in Europe and one in Africa.  Today, the discussion of forming a similar relationship with a city in the Western Hemisphere, specifically with the city of Cap-Haitien, Haiti, took a step forward.

Intuitively, this potential arrangement makes a great deal of sense.  Haiti’s geographic proximity to our corner of the States (relative to the other three locales) should help facilitate exchanges and other interactions between residents of our two communities.  We even share the same time zone.  Moreover, there are many Haitians and those with family in Haiti who reside and/or work in Columbia.  Cap-Haitien is known for being a center of artistic activity; Columbia celebrates the arts.        

We are both going through times of transition.  Our unique community is evolving while Cap-Haitien is undergoing significant changes as well.  The University of Haiti – Campus Roi Henri Christophe in Limonade (which is part of the Cap-Haitien Arrondissement) was just completed in 2012.  Tourism is growing in the city that has been called “the Paris of the Antilles.” 

But I am not yet on expert on Cap-Haitien, and I may never be.  Moreover, j’ai oublie la plus part de la langue francaise depuis l’ecole secondaire (I hope I am in the ballpark there).    I also don’t speak a word of Haitian Creole but I have always been interested in the history of the Republic of Haiti.  So I am elated to be part of a group that is working to formalize a relationship, via citizen diplomacy, with Cap-Haitien.

I am encouraged based on the intellectual firepower of those who attended today’s meeting.  There were some smart discussions on next steps as well as key challenges and considerations, and some on-the-nose questions were raised.  Overall, we are off to a promising start.

There are many steps remaining in order to move this process forward.  To that end, I encourage my readers – particularly those who reside in Columbia – to attend the next meeting of the Haiti Sister City Planning Committee, which I believe is scheduled to occur on January 13, 2015 at 7 pm at the CA Building (in the Board Room).  I will re-confirm that day/time/location in the days ahead.

And while international relations may not be a centerpiece of CA programming, there is a deep and abiding commitment to diversity, to building bridges, to learning from one another.  To those vital ends, among others, this author believes that the uniqueness of Cap-Haitien, combined with the special nature of Columbia, would make for a long and mutually beneficial association….hopefully, a Sister City relationship.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

The Wincopin Steamroller

The deal went down last night. 

Mr. Reg Avery sits, officially, as the Columbia Association Representative from Oakland Mills. 

The Code of Ethics provision that fueled the controversy [about a Board Member not being able to be a candidate for public office while serving as a CA Representative] was changed to limit the applicability to a “Board Member sworn into public office.”  It is noteworthy that the new Harper’s Choice CA Rep, Alan Klein, pushed to strike the original, apparently controversial, language from that provision entirely but his motion was defeated by a 5 – 4 margin, with the minority position held by the three new Board Members and Ms. McCord. Mr. Swatek abstained. 

So Mr. Swatek suggested amending the language to cover a CA Board Member when he or she actually assumes office.  His motion passed by an 8 – 2 majority, with Mr. O’Connor and Mr. Schwind in the minority.

There were some hard truths spoken and tough questions asked.  One of the Board Members in the aforementioned two-person minority, joining the discussion via telephone, wondered aloud if some future Board Member, seeking elective office, might jeopardize the Association’s 501(c)(4) status. Bill Woodcock, graciously congratulating Mr. Avery on his election, also raised concerns about the possible future implications of allowing Board Members to be candidates for office simultaneously.

Meanwhile, there was a heated debate occurring directly behind my seat.  The janitorial service was just outside the door of the meeting room, making the sounds one would expect of a cleaning crew…a bit annoying but sporadic…and not 120 decibels.  A former CA Representative sitting in the audience wanted the glass door to be closed, to help shut out the noise.  Another person (according to my sources, a CA employee) insisted that the door stay open, in keeping with the spirit of an “open” (read: not closed) meeting.  So voices were raised as tempers flared.

Frankly, their debate made as much sense as anything else last night.  Many of the arguments in favor of seating Mr. Avery or revising the Code of Ethics had much to do with the circumstances surrounding the election of a specific individual….and not the application of a specific policy.  Remember the whole, “a government of laws and not men” philosophy? Not many people did in the Columbia Association Board room last night.  One gets the feeling that – had a candidate with a perspective different from theirs been elected – some members of the audience who supported seating Mr. Avery without the need for a waiver and/or the Swatek Amendment - would have instead pushed for a rigorous adherence to the existing policy. 

Am I saying there was a certain paucity of intellectual honesty and an abundance of disingenuousness in the room? Absolutely.

Oh yes, and Mr. Stack is going to be the Chair for the first six months of the year, and Mr. Swatek will assume the Chair for the second six months.  This came following a 5-5 split on the election of the Board Chair.  I left before this vote occurred, but my understanding is that there were no surprises regarding the composition of the two voting blocs.

I have a feeling we will see the same coalitions emerge on other issues over the course of the next 12 months.  The calendar says 365 days, but it will seem longer.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Skulduggery in Oakland Mills?

Subtitle:  Open (Village) Covenants...Openly Arrived At

For the record, I am not stating that there was any illegal or otherwise nefarious goings-on involved in the decision by Alex Hekimian to not seek re-election as the Oakland Mills Representative to the Columbia Association Board of Directors, and the...presumably 11th hour... decision of current Oakland Mills Village Board Member Reg Avery to seek said post.

But secretive? Perhaps. Hence the use of the word "skulduggery" and the question mark.

Neither person was under any affirmative duty to disclose their electoral intentions in advance of the filing deadline.  Their actions, neither technically nor physically, prevented other candidates from filing for that position. 

However, as they say in the public relations business, the optics are bad.  Moreover, Mr. Avery's decision to run for another office, the Howard County Council, puts the Columbia Association...specifically the Board of Directors...in an awkward position.

In recent years, the CA Board in general (and certain members of the Board in particular) have adopted "transparency" as a watch-word.  A letter to the editor of the Baltimore Sun from April 2013 touts Mr. Hekimian as the candidate of "openness and transparency." [The letter can be found here.]

So it does seem incongruous for such a person - someone committed to such values - to inform another person, privately and shortly before the filing deadline, "Hey, I am not going to run, but why don't you go ahead and put your paperwork in?" Because, from the outside, that looks exactly like what went down.

Would other candidates have run if Mr. Hekimian announced that he was not running for re-election? I am not a resident of Oakland Mills, but I am inclined to believe there would have been a contested race.

At this point, there is no apparent wrong-doing.  Even if there was a matter of collusion - which has not yet been proven - well, they played within the rules, right?  It might be neither just nor fair but politics is politics.   Not exactly what one expects in civic-minded Howard County, but "oh well," right? Or no?

So now Mr. Avery, as the sole candidate for the office, is poised to win election....however....

This brings us to the second major point of contention.  Mr. Avery is also a candidate for the Republican nomination for the Howard County Council (Second District).  The Columbia Association's Code of Ethics would seem to indicate that Mr. Avery, as a candidate for another office, would have to make a choice: either forgo your campaign for County Council between now and the election/the beginning of the new CA Board term, give up your quest to sit on the Columbia Association Board of Directors this time around, or apply for a waiver that would allow you to be seated.  However, that third option doesn't resolve the issue that the Columbia Association's Code of Ethics is intended to prevent: eliminating the possibility of a conflict of interest or the appearance of impropiety.

Mr. Avery's statements regarding the ability of other candidates to seek multiple offices (found in this article) are...disingenuous at best.  In those circumstances, the relevant state statutes permitted those candidates to run for two federal offices simultaneously.  Here, we have a case where the Columbia Association, a nonprofit service corporation that exercises quasi-public functions, seems to have clear rules in place that would prevent a member of the Board from running for another office.

Mr. Avery's interpretation of his attorney's perspective on the matter is not dispositive. 

If he continues with his course of action, running for County Council after being elected to the CA Board, he will require the Columbia Association Board of Directors to decide whether or not to seat him...or whether or not to grant him a waiver.  Beyond rewarding a decided lack of transparency, how will it look for the Board to ignore its own clear rules in such cases?  When others faced a similar situation, they did the right thing and stepped down from the Board. 

If elected and seated, how can Mr. Avery - with a straight face - extoll the virtues of transparency given how he arrived at the Board?

The answer seems to be clear: he should either vacate his current candidacy for one position or the other.  If he opts to give up his long-shot County Council race, he can take his seat on the CA Board (granted, he got there in a somewhat unseemly manner, but that matter can be addressed in a future election).  If he decides to end his candidacy for the CA Board, it appears as though there would need to be a new election for CA Rep from Oakland Mills.  Then, Mr. Avery can proceed with his quixotic and ultimately doomed District 2 campaign.

Definite shenanigans, which is too bad, given the energy that needs to be spent solving real issues.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.