The UCO controlled Election process!

By Stew Richland

Hello Mr. and Mrs. Century Village and all our residents around the globe.

“Happy Days Are Not Here Again!”

In my two prior posts I attempted to point out to our Century Village residents how the election process that is currently in place is biased,  heavy handed,  burdensome,  often confusing, and last but not least,  does not respect our First Amendment rights of freedom of expression and assembly.

George Will, writing in the Palm Beach Post noted, “never has American free speech been attacked so flagrantly and promiscuously and on so many fronts.” Will is referring to student demonstrations on university campuses, but he could also be describing what is happening here in Century Village.

Will observes that in most universities, political advocacy is confined to designated spaces.  If this situation disturbs Will so much, can you imagine what he would write about Century Village.  One other observation is made by Will that “54 Democratic Senators had voted to amend the First Amendment to empower Congress to regulate the  QUANTITY, CONTENT AND TIMING of political campaign speech.”

Well that is what is happening here in Century Village. In Anita Buchanan’s column, Century Village Needs You!  she states that,  “in order to protect your interests, property values and priorities for Century Village,”  just submit your Bio to run for UCO office.  If you are a candidate for President or Vice-President, you are allowed 250 words to present your credentials to the voters.  To quote George Will again, this process is, “insidious and an abridgement of the right to make oneself heard.”  If Ms. Buchanan’s premise is correct, that these top UCO positions are critical to protecting the rights of Century Village residents along with coping with Village priorities, than how in heavens name can a delegate be expected to select the best candidate based on a picture and a 250 word biography?

This whole process is poorly planned  at best and embarrassing to any reasonable thinking individual.  Let me use a simile to make my point.  Your daughter has advised  her parents that she is bringing home a man that she  likes very much.   After the initial shock, most parents will ask some basic questions about this man that could possibly become their daughters husband.  Not vocalized but the first thought that any parent thinks about is, “does  this young man have the ability to provide for our daughter in the style that she is accustomed to?” 

Parents, I ask you what questions would you put to your daughter?  Where did you meet him?  Did he go to college, and what did he study?  What does he do for a living?  Where does he live?  What does his father/mother do for a living? 
The answers to these questions are just the beginning of a process that will either make the parents uncomfortable or hopeful about the young man they have yet to meet.  Next step is to invite the  young man to your home,  in a congenial environment so that you can draw your own conclusions about his worthiness for your daughter.  What is at stake here?  Your daughters future happiness for sure?  A new member of your family including his parents and siblings. 

We all know that the first impression is the lasting one.  So all concerned will be on their best behavior.  There will be questions asked.  Many areas of interests to be perused.  You, as a parent, want to be convinced that this is a good match. You also know that there will be many more such opportunities to gauge the measure of this young man.

So I ask why then in both scenarios it is so important to learn as much as you can about the candidate for your daughters hand,  and give such short shrift to a candidate that we entrust with protecting our interests and property values here in Century Village.

“What we have here is a failure to communicate.”  This lack of dialogue between the candidates and the voting delegates is like going into a car dealership and buying a car without test driving it.  What this process does is muzzle free speech and slams the door on the rights of the Delegates to properly access the qualifications of the candidates.

In his latest missive to the Village, our current UCO president refers to “the small group that has disrupted our Delegate Assembly” meetings.  From his focal point its called disruption, from the other side of the coin it is “need to know.”  Our president wants an Amendment to the UCO Bylaws to be voted down by the Delegates. His reason is he does not want the Delegate Assembly “bogged down with endless repetitive, frivolous Amendments.”  This is a classic example of the left hand not telling the right what is going on.  What is there to fear from having the Delegates know what transpired at the Executive Board meetings.  The election process, as it is currently being presented,  virtually eliminates the opportunity for the Delegates to intelligently select the best candidates in the March 2016 election.

How can you vote for a candidate to “protect your interests” when you know so little about them?  You can’t!  Lets open up the pools and club house to rectify this glaring fault in our system.