Recall Statement

August 9, 2023

I have been asked my opinion many times on the Board Recall effort. What follows is my statement on this. 

I will start with saying that there is nothing I state here that I haven’t already or wouldn’t say directly to the people I am speaking about. I am confident in my perspective based on my experiences and the feedback I receive from residents. Also, there is written documentation of all the factual details I will refer to below, so for those that attempt contest it, these facts are publicly available. Finally, I stand behind my words, and I am happy to meet with any resident in person to discuss my perspective here further.

Most importantly, this isn’t personal whatsoever. It is about the running of CROA as a business; not a social club.

None of this is new, internally to the board. I realize much of this may be new to many residents. But I offer it as evidence to guide your decision in the recall, not to cause conflict. The conflict already exists daily, unfortunately.

I trade emails 20, 30, sometimes 50+ times a day with those named in the recall. So I am well-experienced in their cavalier attitudes and presumptive behavior.

I’ve been told by Cindy Swisher that “nobody gives a hoot what I say”, which is dismissible. But more dangerously, she has tried to enforce on me that I cannot ever request project updates from Grand Manors (including the Spring Park Playground) and that I cannot have access to any legal correspondence related to CROA (both of which are legally within my right by state statute, and more importantly, my responsibility to review as a board member.)

We have all seen how Celia McFadden speaks to residents on social media. It’s inappropriate as a resident, but simply unacceptable as a board member. Board members should separate their emotions from their role as a director. And with Celia McFadden it causes tension with residents and the board alike. I have been attacked on social media as well, but it comes with the role of an elected position. You simply can’t please everyone. But you CAN be courteous, and you must rise above it. In fact most recently, she told me, over a business email, “I don’t give a crap what you think.” This is standard tone in her communication both with the board and on social media.

David Anderson, on the other hand, very regularly goes several days, sometimes more than a week, without engaging and responding to emails and providing input and direction for the community. It is my opinion he is wasting a valuable board seat by not contributing equally to the community. And his repeated disregard for community involvement, both by not wanting a Master Plan Advisory Group, and also by changing his tune to not wanting committees to have more members, is evidence of this.

Make no mistake, my emails are very direct. I don’t sugar coat my communication. I am clear in my requests and voice my opinions with supporting evidence and reasons why I suggest a certain course of action. However, never ONCE have I been aggressive without being attacked first. And even when I have needed to defend myself, my response falls well within professional communication standards of today. I say this because these three are inexperienced in modern professional communications, and they take opposing opinions as personal attacks, which would more accurately be described as their ignorance in how a business is run today.

Celebration needs leadership with direction.

Leadership with experience.

Leadership with transparency.

And most important; Leadership with no conflict of interest, acting in the best effort for the greater community.

What Cindy Swisher, Celia McFadden, and David Anderson repeatedly seem to forget is that this is OUR money. It’s not corporate profits funded to spend as they see fit. It’s OUR money contributed to ensure OUR property values remain and increase, and that WE have the entertainment and amenities that a majority of residents can enjoy.

The list of violations in ethics, conflict of interest, and transparency to the community is quite extensive.

Many thought there would be improvement from these individuals after the overwhelming voice of residents expressing their displeasure in their voting record with the Lot D Referendum. But I can assure you that not only have they not learned anything from that expense and waste of resources and time, but they have strengthened their bond to ensure they control all decisions made; and make no mistake… it is working.

Others thought surely someone would resign, based on veiled threats from both David Anderson and Celia McFadden. I am confident that won’t happen either, just as I stated in my blog post on April 29th.

They know they have a majority vote, and their actions continuously show they do not need input or buy-in from the other board members, committees, or residents. They can vote how they wish, and that will be what happens. And that is true! So to those who say “well maybe this will scare them, so let’s give them one more chance…” the time for this has passed with the first referendum ever called on a board in our history. It is decision time for the health and future of our community organization.

Cindy Swisher has now started preventing critical topics from being discussed on board meeting agendas, and when others raise the alarm, they use their majority vote to hold Cindy’s wishes as valid.

I believe that if the recall is not successful, the best we can hope for is that nothing significant is accomplished until March, 2024. But the reality is much worse, and we could be facing another referendum for irresponsibly spent money on another unorganized project.

It comes down to one simple fact:

The actions by Cindy Swisher, Celia McFadden, and David Anderson over the last five months would, without question, result in termination at any place of business in corporate America today. Some may even have resulted in legal action. But the only way to “fire” these individuals from their position is this recall.

It’s that simple.

In my opinion, Cindy Swisher, Celia McFadden, and David Anderson should be recalled from their director roles so that CROA can move forward with community in mind, and owner residents involved in how that takes shape.

You can be for or against the recall. But if you refuse to sign the ballot, you are supporting this behavior and are directly responsible for whatever may come the rest of this year, including dues increases, irresponsible spending, and personal attacks on residents.

I encourage you to sign the recall ballot, allowing Celebration to change course and thrive, ushering in the future of our experimental community and rising back to the pinnacle example of an American town we were destined to be.