I believe the most important issue in this year’s Board election is restoring Vecinos’ credibility as an unbiased representative of every community member it serves after the divisions of the past two years over the sargassum barrier on Half Moon Bay. If we can’t do that, Vecinos may not maintain the financial support it needs to continue moving the community forward.

The Vecinos Board voted to declare itself neutral on the barrier, which was the right thing to do because large groups of members disagreed on it. But several Board members, including the President, joined in funding a legal action against the barrier that cost members who donated to the  project thousands of dollars to defend and could have resulted in criminal charges against some of them. The legal action was dismissed by Mexican authorities, but the damage done to the fabric of our community remains.

Regardless of whether you think the legal action was justified or unjustified or was taken in good faith or bad faith, the neighbors who funded the action unquestionably had the right to do as they chose. But by failing to disclose their involvement, the Board members who participated damaged the credibility of the Board’s position of neutrality and they damaged the credibility of Vecinos itself among many of its members.

Disclosing actual or perceived conflicts of interest is a basic ethical responsibility of anyone serving in a position of public trust in any organization. So, I proposed that the Board adopt a Code of Conduct (which you can click here to read) that included the following: 

A conflict of interest arises between a Board member’s public duty of loyalty to Vecinos and their private interests if they act in furtherance of personal goals that are contrary to the stated goals, values, positions, or policies of Vecinos.  

To protect the credibility and integrity of Vecinos and the Board, Board members shall fully disclose their private actions to the Board in any matter where an actual conflict of interest or the appearance of one exists.

It doesn’t say that Board members must give up any of their rights as owners. It simply says they must disclose their private actions when they conflict with the public positions of the Board on which they serve. Yet a Board majority voted it down. They said that they thought a Board confidentiality agreement was more important and would be sufficient, but I disagree.

I will not vote for any Board candidate who will not commit to disclose their actual and perceived conflicts of interest, and I don’t think other members should vote for them either. I respectfully call on every candidate for any position on the Board to please reply to this post, state whether they will abide by this principle, and explain why or why not so that the members can know where you stand and decide for themselves.

Neil Canter
Vecinos Treasurer

Thank you, Neil, for addressing this crucial issue. It is deeply disappointing to learn that the board voted against such a reasonable proposal to discourage conflicts of interest within our neighborhood association.

It must be noted that Ricardo Mangione and Beryl Van Lierop, two board members who opposed your common-sense proposal and are now seeking re-election as Vocales, were secretly involved in the legal action against the project despite the board’s declaration of neutrality. Additionally, retired ex-president Dan Freeman and his partner David Zucker, who are running for President and Vice President, were both signatories and financiers of the meritless complaint. It is worth remembering that during his tenure as President, Dan Freeman himself declared neutrality on the Barrier issue.

Given this history, I urge Vecinos members to vote for change; an opportunity to transform the association into a truly unifying force that harnesses the talents and resources of the entire community.

I am afraid I must disagree with Neil Canter. The important issue in this election is not the actions of some members of the Vecinos Board and their supposed conflict of interest. The important issue is the discord and divisiveness sown by the Barrier Committee and their fellow travelers, which has polluted the comity that for years characterized Akumal Norte as a uniquely true community on the Riviera Maya, not just another “Tourist Town.”  Our welcoming atmosphere of warmth, friendliness and good cheer that promoted a sense of belonging and social acceptance descended into a miasma of rancorous argument and vicious confrontations.

It is unfortunate that Neil only criticizes those current members of the Board who opposed the barrier and not those Board members who have been simultaneously members of the Barrier Group. Such one-sidedness can not be addressed by “Codes of Conduct.”

I would like to thank the “anonymous member” who authored reply #13460147 in support of Neil for his endorsement of Dan Freeman for epitomizing the neutral behavior Neil has been championing. Dan indeed waited until after he had resigned as President of the Asociación de Vecinos de Akumal Norte before taking a stand against the barrier so as to keep the association out of the dispute. I suspect that the current members of the Board attacked by Neil for their “secrecy” were similarly motivated to protect the neutrality of the association.

I, personally, am proud to have been one of the group of neighbors that lined up to support the Turtle Volunteers who were appalled by the unintended if not unexpected consequences to the beach, the reef and the bay environment during the turtle nesting season. My own attitude toward the barrier had been one of mild condescension toward the misguided condo owners who chose to waste so much of their money. I was, however, affronted by the arrogant beggar-thy-neighbor attitude of the Barrier Group who acted as though they were the sole proprietors of the North Akumal shore, not only building an ugly barrier across the bay but then extending it along the shoreline both north and south, with complete disdain for the opinions of owners who had purchased expensive properties in large part for the beautiful view. They did not consult those neighbors nor ask their permission to decrease the value of their properties.

 I do not and will not apologize for opposing them. I will only say in answer to their whining over their supposed legal fees for defending themselves, they spent more than ten times what we complainants did. Having fifteen- or- twenty years’ experience with lawyers in Mexico, I know what the costs should have been. If they spent so much, they either had not acted so pristinely properly as they claimed or they had been taken for a ride by their lawyer. If that were so, I would never elect any of them to a position where they had responsibility for my organization’s money.

Adoption of any proposed new policy is a topic that must be openly discussed and voted on by the governing body of our association.  And Vecinos bylaws define the governing body as the entire Vecinos membership, not just the board.  So a membership-wide vote on this proposed new policy is an important topic that must be included on the agenda of our meeting on February 20th.

I have started a new thread that members may use to suggest topics like this that they'd like to see included on the meeting agenda:

https://vecinosakumalnorte.org/election-forum/13460931

Lisa Wilson
Vecinos member since 2018

Candidate for an At-Large Seat on the Vecinos Board

David, 

You say the Election Policy Manual is required to be on the Annual Meeting agenda to be valid policy under bylaws article 11 and is relevant to the objects of the association under article 12, but the Code of Conduct is barred from the same agenda under the same articles. Yet both are plainly acts of the Board that members may vote to ratify or reject under article 11 and both are plainly relevant to achieving the objects of the association under article 12. 

You are a candidate for Vice President of the association. Instead of parsing the bylaws to look for technicalities to block the members we serve from discussing and voting on this important topic, let’s look for ways to enable the members to address the Board conduct issues that have caused many to lose confidence in the association you and Dan hope to lead.

Neil