The first outdoor in-person Poudre Overlook HOA Special Board Meeting was held in the grassy area behind several of the homes in the middle of the neighborhood. The site was out of view of the street in a notch between homes that offered some relief from the setting sun which was nice initially, but was kind of blinding for those in back rows.
The meeting proceeded with the five Board members each reading pre-written resignation speeches that were emotional and tearful. There was a theme to match the written materials handed out to everyone as they arrived and signed in: Bullying.
Each Board member described their experiences and grievances, which were well-received by their supporters in the audience. Several made mention that they were “the majority”, which has never really been in question.
They cited some specific numbers in their grievances, including an alleged 997 pages of emails received over the past several months. However, while they said they’d love to show everyone exactly what they’ve been subjected to, they alleged that the attorney, VF-Law, advised them to not release them out of fear of litigation.
That too was a theme of the meeting – the persistent or even imminent threat of litigation. When asked to cite the specifics of that threat, no one would explain. The audience of homeowners then took these allegations to be facts, and subsequently attributed them primarily to me. The incitement of anger was palpable and vocal, with some calling for potential litigation against the bully or bullies.
After this take-down of the bullies with unverified allegations, the next step was to ask: “So, who wants to run for the board?”
To no one’s surprise, there was a range of outbursts from laughter and snarky comments to, again, anger. Several predicted that anyone who volunteered would also be subjected to bullying. Some who were informally nominated declined. There was an eventual discussion over whether the HOA should disband altogether, which actually seemed to be cheered by quite a few people.
The meeting had lost focus and control for considerable periods of time, as it turned into, essentially, a grievance session. If you can imagine being the focus of such comments, but remaining silent, it was an odd position to be documenting it with this video – and then to have the same homeowners then presume that the purpose of recording the meeting was a setup for . . . litigation.
Eventually, two persons volunteered, Clay Jones and Lora Bellweber. However, the Board continued to solicit nominations until, at one point, the spouse of one of the exiting Board members, proposed that the person doing all the bullying should “jump” at the chance to be on the Board. Kind of the leap to the Triple Dog Dare.
While an unusual method of nomination, I accepted the challenge. Because, that is what it really was. There have been questions as to whether my actions are truly in good faith and intended for the greater good of the community. Or, whether I simply was a contrarian who intended to actually harass and annoy for ego-purposes. Many post-meeting conversations (not on the video) brought up these themes, which indicates to me that it’s part of the discussions coursing through the neighborhood.
After some discussions about how to conspire to have enough people run to avoid my election and then just resign right after the election were voiced, the reality was that if no one else was going to run, any one nominated was essentially on the Board. So, that led to the last attempted at personally humiliating me – to have a secret ballot so that they could announce how few votes I actually got. You know, to demonstrate I was unsupported or illegitimate or something like that.
Well, the finally tally was 61 votes for Mr. Jones, 60 votes for Ms. Bellweber, and I received 5 votes. This represents a 66% increase in votes after the election on 12/1/21, so, in a sense, my support is growing rapidly. You just can’t tell from this video.
You need to see this one:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/yUbDaFYROnw (orientation won’t allow embedding, sorry)
While it’s unlikely that anyone will change their mind about me rapidly, I think as those who have reacted emotionally to the hearsay evidence may find in the future that they weren’t given an accurate picture. So, it’s hard to blame anyone for getting emotional, venting, or even lashing out. One woman came up to my wife and I during the vote count and wagged her finger while declaring “You’re an embarrassment to the community.”
I guess, as the only long-haired hippie I’ve ever seen in this community, that may, in fact be true, if that type of person is embarrassing to you. But, then she turned to my wife, and said “And you are too!”, which is wholly undeserved. Again, I get that some have been motivated to arrive at these conclusions with blanket allegations of “bullying”, but I couldn’t help but wonder if anyone who was saying such things considered how their collective actions would look to an objective 3rd party.
I asked someone after the meeting whether they considered how it might feel to be in my shoes, and how I reacted. He gave me a B+, which I said left me room for improvement.
I’ve learned quite a bit over the past 3-4 years, and I guess now we get to see how applicable it all will be. I suppose if I don’t materialize the way I’ve been stereotyped, some of it will fade. But, keeping your cool while being verbally confronted or attacked isn’t considered a skill set, when those delivering the goods think it is justified. Bullying is such a subjective topic, begging for objective criteria. If you watch this video, whether you live here or not, I certainly welcome your comments.
In the meantime, I hope this community can move forward with Civil Discourse for the proverbial greater good, and stay focused on the actual challenges ahead.