I have already stated the method proposed would be allow the executive to take a vote from ‘every’ member, if the one member is disruptive, then the others will out vote. Is that not the way it should work… In simple terms. As tedious as it sounds, I am sure that’s the way the legislature was formed.
Anyhow, I stand by my first comments and would never endorse any action to purposely reject an owner, even if they are disruptive. They most likely have valid concerns just like anybody else. Ganging up on them to make sure they are not represented is not a good thing… In my book, I’d rather do the right thing.
There are many cases that have been appealed to the district court from CTTT to be decided by a judge. Adjudicators don’t have to apply the law, if they choose not to. I also point out ALL of my previous cases to the district court have been judged in my favour, with costs and damages awarded. This might be the reason I condone behind the scenes actions, it’s not transparent.
It appears that having an opinion or expressing concern is not a good quality to have so ill bow out and wish you luck with this site Jimmy T.