Disappointed by committee move

(The following letter was sent to the OPA Board of Directors prior to last Saturday’s meeting and vote with a copy forwarded for publication.)

Editor,

I am writing to express my disappointment in your decision to put forth a motion to disband most of the advisory committees. This disappointment has to do with the motion itself but also with the awareness that the community can expect no discussion of this motion that would reflect your having earnestly considered the ramifications of this decision.

 The rationale presented in the proposed motion is that “OPA’s management team has grown in size and in depth of talent and ability.”  The management team, as you know, is not there to be advisory to the board of directors, nor is their role to speak to governance issues.  One of the most important governance duties of the board is to prioritize spending such that it reflects not only operational needs but also the priorities of the OPA members.  The advisory committees have their fingers on the pulse of the membership’s priorities and have historically served as a conduit for information to the board about community priorities.

There is a long history of member priorities that were germinated and incubated in advisory committees then eventually got a life in the imaginations of the board and the general manager and came to fruition because the board did their job of approving the required funding.  Among many great improvements that were first germinated in advisory committees are the electronic signs and good neighbor awards (Communications Committee); the statement of values and priorities that became wedded to the general manager’s priority list and formed the basis for the now published General Manager’s Strategic Plan (Strategic Planning Committee); several iterations of amendment and restatement of the OPA Bylaws (Bylaws Committee); Family Fun Night at the YC Pool (Aquatics); outsourcing our food and beverage operations (Clubs—already disbanded); expanding the pickleball courts and rebuilding the racquet center building (Racquet Sports); resisting the call to shut down the golf course and instead to invest in it (Golf); humane management of the goose population (Environment and Natural Assets); Ocean Pines Expo (chairs of all the committees); to name a few.  These have not only brought quality of life benefits to Association Members but have also directly or indirectly reaped financial rewards for OPA.

As you know, members of the board do not come to their positions with in-depth knowledge of all aspects of the social (amenities) and physical infrastructures of Ocean Pines.  Historically, they have relied on the passion and knowledge of a broad spectrum of volunteers to be their eyes and ears on the ground in the form of advisory committee membership.

As a former director, I am intimately familiar with the many ways in which the relationship between the board and its committees has been fraught, and both sides of that equation have required repeated reminders of the boundaries of their respective roles and responsibilities.  This has not always been comfortable or seemed efficient, but nonetheless, outcomes were achieved that may never have come to fruition without the committee members’ lively discussion of pros and cons, and their passionate commitment to responding to and informing the board of the community’s priorities and wishes.

We all owe a debt of gratitude to these passionate and hard-working volunteers not only for the work they have done and the outcomes they have achieved, but for their courage to persist in their efforts to be heard (despite push-back from the board and vilification in social and news media).  If approved, the motion you are considering is not only a slap in the face to these volunteers but it is also a huge loss of human capital and the potential improvements to our community these volunteers are yet to germinate and bring forth.

This board is one of the most opaque in recent memory for coming to meetings and voting on motions without any meaningful discussion of the pro’s and con’s of what is being proposed.

I will applaud Steve Jacobs for being the consistent voice of dissent–if only in service of bringing forth minority community opinions on things.  Yet, his attempts to spur honest debate have consistently fallen on deaf ears, and in some cases have been ridiculed by the board leadership.  You can take a page from the playbook of your advisory committees who have modeled for you how to engage in earnest research and honest debate that fully examines a diverse complement of issues related to proposals they put forth to you (sometimes year after year until you finally see the light).

I urge you to at least engage in honest and earnest debate about this motion before you — yet again — dismiss Steve Jacob’s comments and proceed to a mindless vote on this.  More importantly, I urge you to withdraw the motion or vote against it. I regret that I am unable to attend your meeting on Saturday to express these thoughts in person.

Colette Horn
Ocean Pines

(The writer is a past OPA Director, Secretary, Vice President, and President
and past Liaison to the Communications, Parks & Rec, Strategic Planning, ARC,
and Racquet Sports advisory committees.)