Just raises more questions
I appreciate the Board's effort to achieve a compromise. But it just raises more questions about why the proposed budget is being unusually embargoed from member scrutiny this year.
1. Why wait until October 8? What's the big secret which must be protected between now and then? Does the Board intend to tinker with the budget further at its special October 6 "planning session" ? Isn't that what the Budget Workshop is for? I cannot recall any year in which the Board held a special pre-Workshop meeting to predetermine what will occur at the Budget Workshop. It seems very odd. Yes, the cable experiment is in trouble. Yes, members are going to pick at those numbers and ask why the promised self-sufficiency is nowhere in sight and we face another dues hike to support a failing experiment. That's what the open processes are for. The fact that members are going to criticize the Board's business plan is not a legitimate reason to hide from the open process.
2. Presumably the October 6 "planning session" is an open meeting at which members can attend, observe and comment? Which means the meeting must be publicly noticed very, very soon to comply with the law and the bylaws. This certainly is not a legitimate topic of executive session, so whatever the Board intends to do regarding the Proposed Budget at that meeting must be done in the open, before the members. What is the "privilege" rationale for not letting the members see the proposed budget which the Board will be considering at that meeting?
3. What "privilege" is being relied upon here? Certainly none of those I can find inthe Code apply.
4. What the heck is going on?