The board persists in disregarding the very property owners it is obligated to serve.  Such disregard was palpable at the April Board meeting when the acting president swiftly moved to squash a common parliamentary courtesy: yielding time.  This action, taken before resident comments commenced and without prior notice, reflects a disdain for the voices of the community.

Many individuals attending these meetings are not seasoned orators, and expressing their concerns within a strict three-minute window can be daunting.  Personally, I meticulously time my remarks before addressing the board, but the controlled environment of home cannot replicate the pressure of a public forum.  Factors like equipment glitches or interruptions, whether from the audience or the board, are not factored into our allotted time.

The practice of yielding time, a gesture of respect and cooperation, is a fundamental aspect of democratic discourse.  When topics overlap, allowing a fellow member to complete their thought demonstrates civility and unity.   Yet, the lack of documentation in the meeting minutes suggests that the board is indifferent to public opinion, despite their complaints about communication from the membership.

The passing of this motion reflects a blunt and narcissistic disregard for the concerns of the community, sending a clear message that the board’s priorities lie elsewhere.