After all, it is Halloween.
The unsigned memo we all received tonight is obviously a deliberate attempt to suppress the vote in this year’s coop election by making one type of legitimate vote look like a threat.
General proxies are a standard way to vote in all corporate environments, including coops. In fact, when general proxies aren’t encouraged, the result is often a turnout less than a quorum and postponement of the election.
Last year, there were approximately 909 votes cast for board candidates. More than a third were cast by general proxy — more votes were cast by general proxy than were cast by shareholders actually attending the annual meeting.
Traditionally at East River, challengers have favored general proxies over directed proxies. Why? Because the board, with memos like these, has created an air of mistrust around the election process, and cooperators looking to oust the incumbents aren’t comfortable relying on the Coop’s own lawyer to handle their directed proxies properly.
Vote however you like. Of course you should not feel pressured. But if you want to vote for our endorsed candidates — James Keenan, Faith Schreier, Julian Swearengin, and Mike Turner — feel free to do so with one of the proxies attached to our flyers (or download one here: for building 1, building 2, building 3, or building 4).
It is quite interesting that the Board would all of a sudden come out against general proxies when many of the incumbents have used them exclusively as a method for gathering votes. The section around the horrors of general proxies is worded in such a way to essentially support the process by which proxies are gathered by current board members but seek to make general proxies sought by other factions as immoral.
All of this being said, I personally am a fan of directed proxies. I believe turning your vote over to another individual is in most cases a recipe for disaster. Why give someone else full control over your ballot and allow them to cast your vote. The current process makes it pretty easy to vote for your chosen candidates via mail and is something I would encourage all shareholders to consider if you cannot make the meeting in person on December 1.
Also, I believe it is safe to assume that the memo was written by Dov Goldman, Rachel Ehrenpreis, and Michelle Amar. As per the March 15 Board Room minutes, the election committee is chaired by Dov and Rachel and Michelle are the other members. Frankly, I am very disappointed that as chair of the election committee, Dov would stoop this low in either penning or approving the election memo. I encourage anyone who runs into him to ask him point blank about it!
When the incumbents collect general proxies, it’s good and proper. When anyone not already on the current board collects general proxies, it’s lying and thieving? Love the double-standard (with that added spice of hysteria and spite).
Preaching what democracy is while doing your best to suppress it: way to go, ER Board! It’s called a campaign, we are allowed to ask for votes AND general proxies during an election, just as the incumbents do.
I never gave my proxy to anyone before last year, but at this point I do not trust that my vote is actually counted, given that the ballot box is locked in the general manager’s office overnight before the votes are tallied, and that the coop’s lawyer holds the key to that ballot box. Any trust I had in the legal representatives of this coop suffered a big blow after seeing that crazy lawyer letter, which showcases one of the coop’s legal representatives working for the incumbents and management, not for shareholders. Which is entirely wrong (as is locking the ballot box in the management office overnight instead of counting votes the same night, which used to be the procedure).