The CHCA Election: Part 3

The long story about the Chestnut Hill Community Association election moves into new territory.

It has been reported that the CHCA vote counting for the recent election has been adjourned until Monday, May 8.

And now, a letter is being sent to the board regarding the counting process.

It reads:

Hello, Chris [Kemezis],

It has come to our attention that there is a serious flaw in the way the votes for CHCA Board membership are being counted.

At the Second Opinion Caucus last Tuesday, we discussed this and it was agreed that I would bring it to your attention so that you can make some changes necessary in order to have an election that is above reproach.

We concluded that no one who is an active member of the Alliance or the Caucus or a strong supporter of either party should read off the names on the ballots to the counters.

The reason is, of course, that they could be called off incorrectly favoring whichever party the person is attached to.

Now, I want to emphasis that we do not think that there has been any impropriety to date. But, in any election, especially one as hard fought as this one has been, there should be no loop hole like this where the possibility of impropriety could have occurred.

You have not set up the Judges of election to cover this. There are only three members and you. The two ministers have been wonderful, but the two times I was there the accountant was not present, nor were you. If you had seen to it that all of you were there this problem would not have occurred. Since you didn’t you should have added members to the Judges such as, possibly, Armond Delaporta or Dorothy Corn both of whom have served before and know the system.

When I was there on Monday, Ron Recko came in. People seem to agree that candidates may observe, although the Board or your Judges never decided this and his presence was accepted as were other candidates.

He brought the above-mentioned matter to the attention of the people who were working. And the Judges decided that there was nothing that could be done about this at this time.

I had to agree with them because these men expected to spend two days on this and now it is turning into weeks. That is not fair to them when they so readily agree to serve us.

After Ron’s statement it was felt by a number of people that he was being difficult. This has happened many times with the more aggressive members of the Caucus and it is not fair to him in this instance because he was absolutely right and his demeanor was calm and respectful of the process we were all engaged in.

If someone does not point out failures in our procedures they cannot be changed

I am hereby requesting that you appoint enough new Judges, or see to it that you and the accountant attend, so that the counting can now be done in a fully proper way and that it can be restarted long before next Monday. We certainly do not want the counting to be challenged and all the furor that that could cause, but, if you will correct this system as we are suggesting, or in another way if you feel there is one and we can agree upon it, all should go smoothly.

Please respond as soon as possible so that there will need be no further discussion or questioning.

It should also be noted that the verification of the separated ballots in question that have to be verified by Sheryl must be prioritized. The election process has already been extended and this verification will extend it further unless it is prioritized now. We suggest that two observers - one from each party - be present at that verification.

I am sure all of us are respectful of the voting process, so,

"Respectfully",

Mary Anna (Ross Cowper)