Post by Poor Richard on May 7, 2022 15:05:56 GMT -7
Annual Election Date is Set for August 19, 2022
On April 27th, 2022 the Swandal Law firm penned a letter to all Glastonbury landowners. In the letter, Attorney and former District Court Judge Nels Swandal presented a 10-point plan regarding how he will conduct the 2022 Glastonbury Annual Election and address the question of separating the GLA. The election and separation process was assigned to Swandal by Judge Gilbert of the 6th District Court in Livingston. Gilbert was responding to the Dissolution lawsuit presented by three GLA Directors; current President Pro Tem John McAlister, Directors Andrea Sedlak, and Jerry Ladewig. In March of 2022 Judge Gilbert put their lawsuit on hold, "Stayed" is the legal term, until Swandal could complete the task assigned to him. Gilbert ordered an annual election and also ruled that the question of splitting North and South Glastonbury should be voted upon by Glastonbury landowners. Once both votes are completed, Nels Swandal will present a written report to Judge Gilbert. Then the Dissolution lawsuit battle can proceed in the courts. Even if Glastonbury landowners fail to approve splitting North and South, the court could eventually conclude that a split or even dissolution is the best path forward. To date, the Dissolution litigants have not formally withdrawn their lawsuit.
A Covenant Change Vote is Required to Split Glastonbury
Nels Swandal stated that he will combine the question of splitting Glastonbury with the ballot for electing directors. That almost guarantees that Glastonbury will not be split into two self-ruling communities. Why? Dividing Glastonbury into two self-ruling communities requires a Covenant change. A successful Covenant change demands that a minimum of 51% or about 208 parcels cast a YES vote. Director elections face a much lower threshold. Just 25% or about 104 parcels must cast votes to reach quorum and make the election valid. Once 104 votes are tabulated in a director election then the top vote-getters win seats on the GLA Board. Seats have been won with as few as 35 votes for a particular candidate. On average annual director, elections garner about 140 parcels casting votes. If all 140 parcels approved a GLA split, the vote would still fail because 208 YES votes are required to change the Covenants.
The last time a Covenant change was voted upon was in 2007. Then the Master Plan was adopted by a majority of Glastonbury landowners. The Master Plan was a work in progress since 1998. By early 2007 countless neighborhood meetings were held. Landowners offered their thoughts while carefully debating every proposed paragraph. Changes were made to the Master Plan and more meetings were held. The edits continued. Finally, a written Master Plan was created that seemed to satisfy a majority of landowners. A preliminary copy was mailed to everyone and comments were solicited. Meetings and more edits followed. A final copy and ballot were then mailed to all landowners. Many directors then took to their phones and email and eventually contacted almost every landowner. As the votes came in they were counted and it was noted who had not voted. Those landowners were called and cajoled to vote. Finally, enough YES votes were tallied for the Master Plan to pass. It was a Herculean effort that reached out several times to all landowners. Simply adding the question of changing the Covenants to split Glastonbury to an Annual Election ballot almost guarantees that the critical threshold will not be met and thus the split will fail.
The last time a Covenant change was voted upon was in 2007. Then the Master Plan was adopted by a majority of Glastonbury landowners. The Master Plan was a work in progress since 1998. By early 2007 countless neighborhood meetings were held. Landowners offered their thoughts while carefully debating every proposed paragraph. Changes were made to the Master Plan and more meetings were held. The edits continued. Finally, a written Master Plan was created that seemed to satisfy a majority of landowners. A preliminary copy was mailed to everyone and comments were solicited. Meetings and more edits followed. A final copy and ballot were then mailed to all landowners. Many directors then took to their phones and email and eventually contacted almost every landowner. As the votes came in they were counted and it was noted who had not voted. Those landowners were called and cajoled to vote. Finally, enough YES votes were tallied for the Master Plan to pass. It was a Herculean effort that reached out several times to all landowners. Simply adding the question of changing the Covenants to split Glastonbury to an Annual Election ballot almost guarantees that the critical threshold will not be met and thus the split will fail.
2022 Annual Election for GLA Directors
Nels Swandal stated in his letter, that a 2023 Annual Election will NOT be held. Swandal is planning to disregard Glastonbury Bylaws by denying landowners a 2023 Annual Election and by allowing some candidates in the 2022 election to win 3-year terms on the GLA Board. His scheme would award 3-year terms to the top six vote-getters and 2-year terms to the next six vote-getters. The Bylaws require annual elections and only provide for one and two-year terms. Traditionally North Glastonbury has a higher voter turnout than South. Since 3-year terms will go to the highest six vote-getters, it seems likely that North Glastonbury landowners will have to wait until 2025 to replace directors they do not agree with. All 12 board positions are open.
Swandal has also prohibited an in-person 2022 Annual Election meeting. All voting will be done by US Post, email, and fax. Both email and fax ballots violate Montana state law that requires voting to be confidential. US Post is unreliable and there is no guarantee that a landowner's ballot is delivered in time unless it is sent by expensive Registered mail. Allowing three different ways of casting ballots also allows the unscrupulous to vote three times. A normal GLA Annual Election includes extensive checks to prevent voter fraud which unfortunately occurs with almost every election. Swandal does not even mention how he will combat voter fraud except to say that ballot revocation will not be allowed.
The nomination packets will be mailed by June 1st to landowners and must be returned to Swandal's office by July 6th, 2022. Nels Swandal will review all nominees to see if they meet eligibility requirements. Apparently, there will be NO GLA board or landowner oversight. In 2020 several non-landowners filed nomination forms posing as Legal Representatives for the parcel owners. Most failed to follow explicit directions and thus were disqualified. In 2022 non-landowners will again be allowed to run for the GLA board. No mention was made by Swandal as to whether three directors, Charlotte Mizzi, Newman Brozovsky and Gerald Dubiel, who fulfilled term limits, will be allowed to run again. On May 5th, 2022 Charlotte Mizzi stated "Can't wait for the new board to take over".
All of the ballots will be collected by Swandal and then turned over to an accounting firm, ATS, that has collected tens of thousands of dollars from the GLA for previous accounting work. Hardly an independent 3rd party, ATS will determine winners and losers. No mention was made of any plans to insure ballot integrity by Swandal or ATS. Director Brockett asked if all directors could examine ballots and election materials. He was told "no" by former Election Committee chair Director Jerry Ladewig. In the past directors were routinely denied election tallying records, sign-in sheets, and cast ballots. "Trust us but do not verify" appeared to be the unofficial line of thought.
Swandal has also prohibited an in-person 2022 Annual Election meeting. All voting will be done by US Post, email, and fax. Both email and fax ballots violate Montana state law that requires voting to be confidential. US Post is unreliable and there is no guarantee that a landowner's ballot is delivered in time unless it is sent by expensive Registered mail. Allowing three different ways of casting ballots also allows the unscrupulous to vote three times. A normal GLA Annual Election includes extensive checks to prevent voter fraud which unfortunately occurs with almost every election. Swandal does not even mention how he will combat voter fraud except to say that ballot revocation will not be allowed.
The nomination packets will be mailed by June 1st to landowners and must be returned to Swandal's office by July 6th, 2022. Nels Swandal will review all nominees to see if they meet eligibility requirements. Apparently, there will be NO GLA board or landowner oversight. In 2020 several non-landowners filed nomination forms posing as Legal Representatives for the parcel owners. Most failed to follow explicit directions and thus were disqualified. In 2022 non-landowners will again be allowed to run for the GLA board. No mention was made by Swandal as to whether three directors, Charlotte Mizzi, Newman Brozovsky and Gerald Dubiel, who fulfilled term limits, will be allowed to run again. On May 5th, 2022 Charlotte Mizzi stated "Can't wait for the new board to take over".
All of the ballots will be collected by Swandal and then turned over to an accounting firm, ATS, that has collected tens of thousands of dollars from the GLA for previous accounting work. Hardly an independent 3rd party, ATS will determine winners and losers. No mention was made of any plans to insure ballot integrity by Swandal or ATS. Director Brockett asked if all directors could examine ballots and election materials. He was told "no" by former Election Committee chair Director Jerry Ladewig. In the past directors were routinely denied election tallying records, sign-in sheets, and cast ballots. "Trust us but do not verify" appeared to be the unofficial line of thought.
The May 4th, 2022 GLA Board meeting was canceled. At that meeting, Nels Swandal was to answer questions in person from board members and landowners. The meeting was then rescheduled for May 11th. Swandal has stated that he will not be able to attend on May 11. Rather than reschedule the board meeting convenient to Swandal, it was decided that any questions may be submitted in writing to the litigant and President Pro Tem John McAlister who has promised to forward them to Swandal.
You may download a copy of the April 27, 2022 Swandal law letter here.