Hidden Hands in HOA Elections: Why Transparency Matters
Imagine feeling a growing unease as you realize critical decisions about the building you call home are being controlled by a single board officer. At 175 E Delaware Pl, residents are facing this unsettling reality as the Board President’s unilateral control over the process to identify the election services provider lacked transparency after past election issues raises serious questions about whose interests are being served.
Brought to you by Drew McManus, your neighbor in 7908.
The fundamental strength of any community association lies in its commitment to transparent, collaborative decision making. Yet residents at 175 E Delaware Pl find themselves facing a deepening crisis of governance: Board President Scott Timmerman has apparently taken unilateral control of the process that recommended a new accounting firm to handle the association’s elections.
This was hot on the heels of an election process fraught with so many problems it attracted local news coverage from Loop North News in December, 2024.
Why This Matters To Your Home And Life
When trust in community governance erodes it is not just about abstract principles, it directly impacts your property value and quality of life.
When a single board officer exercises extreme control, homeowners feel unheard and excluded from fundamental processes like fair elections. All of which undermines the sense of collective ownership and pride that makes 175 E Delaware Pl a place we want to live.
A Pattern Of Exclusion
Despite multiple inquiries seeking clarity on the election services provider selection process, Timmerman has provided minimal information:
- When asked who participated in the selection process, Timmerman acknowledged only that final interviews were conducted by himself, the association’s attorney, and two property management representatives.
- No other board members were involved in the evaluation process.
- No homeowners were consulted despite their direct stake in election integrity.
- Timmerman has ignored multiple emails requesting clarification on his selection process.
- Repeated requests for information about evaluation criteria have gone unanswered.
History Of Resistance To Transparency
This latest development follows a concerning pattern established months ago:
- In December, Loop North News highlighted serious irregularities in the HOA’s election process.
- Documented issues included, but are not limited to, sample ballots sent to owners by Timmerman counted as real votes, unexplained changes in vote totals, and missing ballot timestamps.
- When presented with a detailed proposal for an ad hoc committee with balanced representation of board and non-board members, Timmerman rejected it citing “The Board is already handling this issue directly.” These are the same board members who benefited from the election’s documented irregularities.
- Timmerman never took accountability for these serious election problems by informing owners of the specific issues that benefitted his candidacy.
Technical Expertise Gap
The selection of election services requires specialized knowledge that the current process ignores:
- Voting systems demand technical expertise a single board office may not possess.
- Community members who have researched potential solutions have been systematically excluded.
- Questions about troubling reviews and track record for Timmerman’s preferred provider and the one the board ultimately approved, CondoCPA, remain unanswered.
- No explanation has been provided for why election and accounting services are bundled rather than separated.
Structural Conflicts Of Interest
The current approach creates serious ethical concerns that should alarm every homeowner:
- Self serving power structure: Timmerman personally controlled the process to identify which election provider was recommended to the board, which then votes on the provider that ultimately counts the votes that keep him in power.
- Circular authority: Board members who vote on Timmerman’s recommendation need his endorsement to be re elected themselves.
- Silencing critics: This system makes it politically risky for board members to question the president’s decisions.
- Blocking oversight: By refusing homeowner participation and revealing is evaluation criteria, Timmerman prevents independent verification of his choices.
- Questionable vendor selection: CondoCPA has concerning reviews specifically about election mismanagement that Timmerman refuses to acknowledge or address.
- Hidden decision making: The entire selection process happened behind closed doors with no minutes, records, or transparency.
Drew, 3/15/2025
Dear Scott,
I have a few questions regarding the selection process for the new auditor and election provider, as well as a request for relevant documentation related to the process:
Selection Process: What criteria were used to identify and evaluate alternative firms? How many firms were considered, and were any contacted beyond those being presented for a vote?
RFP and Evaluation Documentation: To ensure transparency and understanding, I would like to request a copy of the RFP (Request for Proposal) sent to potential candidates, as well as any related evaluation criteria or scoring systems used to assess the firms. Please include any supporting materials that outline how the final decision was made to recommend CondoCPA, especially in light of the concerns raised in recent reviews.
Decision-Making Process: Can you explain which individuals participated in the process for the new auditor and election provider? Specifically, please provide the names of all members involved in evaluating these firms, and whether any input was solicited from owners, any ad hoc committee was formed to oversee the process, or any independent service procurement consultant.
Interview Process: Who participated in the interviews with the final candidates, and what specific criteria were used to determine that CondoCPA was the preferred choice?
CondoCPA’s Track Record: I reviewed several Google reviews about CondoCPA’s election services, many of which raise concerns about their handling of condo elections, including ballot mismanagement and election process errors. Please provide details on the due diligence process regarding these concerns? How were these issues addressed, and how did CondoCPA respond during the interview process? Additionally, were references for CondoCPA checked, and if so, can you share the feedback that was received?
For your reference, here are the review links I found:
Review 1: I would not recommend using this CPA firm. They were hired to audit the election of my condo association. In doing so, they colluded with the board to violate Illinois law by removing the ballots from the principal office of the association as well as prevented the candidates from witnessing the counting of the ballots. I would only recommend doing business with companies who set and respect ethical boundaries, and this is not one.
Review 2: Condo CPA was hired by The Board of Directors of our condominium association to administer our election on June 15, 2022. CondoCPA refused to announce the results of our election once they finished counting the ballots. They claimed that they needed “a fresh pair of eyes” to recount the ballots. They claimed that they had to take our ballots back to their office to recount and they would announce the results the following morning. They would not even tell us the number of ballots they collected so that we could verify for consistency upon presenting their results. CondoCPA as of the following day 4pm has not given us election results and they are not answering their office phones. If you are looking for a fair and impartial third party my advice is to STAY AWAY FROM CondoCPA! I will be filing a complaint with their regulatory body. Video to follow.
Review 3: CondoCpa has audited and monitored elections at our building for the past few years. Business was not handled as it should have been and other owners including myself were not satisfied with the results. I can’t recommend that they be selected to monitor out upcoming election.
Review 4: CondoCPA has audited the elections for my condominium association for about 5+ years and was always professional, unbiased, and fair until the last 2 elections beginning 2019. They have always provided the results the same day as the election and allowed for candidates to review the ballots without accruing fees for this service. I don’t know what has changed with this organization, but it has not been for the better. I understand that you take “direction from the Board President and Attorney” as far as how the election results are disseminated but know your audience before you commit to being on board with such practices. This last election on June 15, 2022 spoke volumes. It was not a just and fair election tabulation by any means. When you participate in practices that seem to be unethical, such as delayed tabulation of votes when a designated date and time were confirmed, evading direct questions regarding tabulation practices, and dismissing homeowners’ concerns, you appear to be unethical. Truthfully, condo associations do not need an accounting firm to tabulate election ballots. I know you are a reputable business. Keep it that way by continuing to do what is right, not by how much you are paid.
Past Affiliations: Was there any investigation into whether current employees at CondoCPA have previously worked at Picker & Associates? If so, what was the outcome of this investigation, how did it factor into the decision to recommend CondoCPA, and would any of those individuals be involved in work related to our Association?
Current Legal Action: Is CondoCPA currently involved in any ongoing legal matters or litigation related to its election services or any other services provided to other condo associations? If so, what details did you confirm about the nature of the legal actions?
Separation of Duties: Why are election duties being combined with auditing duties when there are multiple providers that specialize solely in election processes for buildings the size of our Association?
Previous Election Issues: Given the well-documented issues during the 2024 election, it is concerning that an ad hoc elections committee was not formed to address those concerns or ensure a more robust election process this year. The decision to continue the practice of combining the election duties with the audit contract, rather than engaging a specialized provider solely for elections, further complicates the matter. Why was there no effort made to separate the election duties from the audit function or establish a committee to oversee and manage this critical aspect of our HOA governance? Considering the significant election challenges we faced last year, this decision seems to undermine efforts to build trust in a process that must be transparent and above reproach. Without a dedicated election provider or a formal committee, your decisions risk projecting an image that the HOA is not taking the necessary steps to ensure the integrity and credibility of the upcoming election.
Other Providers: Please provide the names of any other firms that were considered for the audit and election process, even if they were not selected.
Lastly, I request all relevant materials, including the RFP, evaluation criteria, and any documentation supporting the selection process, as well as an explanation of how the individuals involved in the process were chosen. Moreover, I request that the same materials be made available to all owners before the board considers the motion in order to ensure transparency.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and please include a copy of this message and any subsequent messages in this thread in the board packet.
Best,
Drew
Drew, 3/19/2025
Dear Scott,
I am writing to you regarding the process for identifying and recommending a provider for our Association’s audit and election services.
It appears that the only individuals involved in the interview process were yourself, the Association’s attorney David Sugar, Community Association Manager Jennie Kobzarev, and Community Association Assistant Manager Timothy Sweany.
Could you please confirm whether this is accurate regarding the entirety of the individuals who participated in the interview process? Likewise, could you please confirm exactly which individuals were involved in any capacity in the identification, evaluation, or recommendation of these service providers or was it the same four individuals?
I appreciate a clear and direct response to this specific question is requested to ensure transparency regarding the decision-making process.
As a reminder, I have yet to receive a reply to my email from March 15 asking about this process and specific questions related to CondoCPA. Thank you in advance for your prompt reply to those questions in addition the the questions in this message.
Blue skies,
Drew McManus
Unit 7908
Scott Timmerman, 3/19/2025
This was a Board decision and the Board has been looking at service providers for several months. For the final two providers, the interviews were performed by the four you mention.
Scott Timmerman
Drew, 3/19/2025
Dear Scott,
Thank you for your response. While I appreciate you confirming that the four individuals I mentioned conducted the interviews for the final two providers, your reply does not fully address the questions I raised in my previous email.
Specifically, I would like to reiterate the following points that remain unanswered or unconfirmed:
- Identification, Evaluation, or Recommendation Involvement: My second question asked for confirmation of exactly which individuals were involved in any capacity in the identification, evaluation, or recommendation of these service providers. Your response only addressed the interview process for the final two. Could you please clarify who else, if anyone, was involved in the earlier stages of selecting these providers?
- Response to March 15 Email: I also specifically mentioned that I had not yet received a reply to my email from March 15th regarding the process and specific questions related to CondoCPA.
While I understand this was a Board decision, this was not in question. My questions were specifically aimed at understanding the process and the individuals involved in the selection, evaluation, and recommendation of the audit and election service providers.
Please provide a more detailed and specific response that addresses these points directly to ensure transparency in this important matter, including the questions from my email to you on March 15, 2025.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Blue skies,
Drew McManus
Unit 7908
It shouldn’t be surprising if homeowners feel these exchanges demonstrate a consistent pattern of evasion and unwillingness to provide basic information about a process that affects every resident.
When pressed for details about who was involved in the selection process, how CondoCPA was evaluated despite concerning reviews, and whether any ad hoc committee would be formed to ensure proper oversight, Timmerman continues to refrain from providing replies.
Path to Rebuilding Trust
For 175 E Delaware Pl to restore confidence in its governance, leadership must:
- Separate election services from accounting functions.
- Establish independent oversight mechanisms with homeowner participation.
- Ensure no single individual controls processes fundamental to community governance.
- Address the documented irregularities from past elections with clear remediation steps.
- Create meaningful accountability for board members who put personal interests above homeowner rights by adopting a formal ethics policy.
Without these changes, the foundation of trust essential to any successful community association will continue to erode, threatening our property values and increasing the likelihood of expensive legal challenges.
Make Your Voice Heard
Your active participation is essential to creating positive change in our community governance. If you share these concerns about election integrity and the lack of transparency in the vendor selection process, please consider sending a message to Board President Timmerman expressing your views.
By working together and making our voices heard, we can help restore the integrity and transparency essential to our community’s governance.
Below is a sample message you can customize and send directly to the Board President:
Be respectful, concise, and clear in articulating the negative impact it has had on you and your fellow homeowners. You are welcome to use the example language as-is, but feel free to personalize the example message before you send.