3 Columbia Association board members removed over alleged ethics violations

The Columbia Association board removed three of its members Thursday evening after an outside investigation determined they had violated the association’s ethics rules.

Board members Reg Avery of Long Reach, Karin Emery of Oakland Mills and Eric Greenberg of River Hill are no longer members of the board of directors, the Columbia Association said in a news release.

The three members had filed an ethics complaint last fall against board Chair Collin Sullivan and board member Bill Santos arising from what they said were improper disclosures in a closed session, but the county’s ethics panel found the men had not violated the code of conduct. Sullivan responded by filing a complaint accusing the three of weaponizing the ethics process.

The county’s ethics panel concluded the three had not only filed a “frivolous and retaliatory ethics complaint,” but sought to interfere in the panel’s investigation of the matter, according to Sullivan. He said the panel found “serious misconduct that amounted to [the members] failing to uphold their fiduciary duty.” The removals culminated a months-long feud on the 10-member board.

The panel reported its findings to the full board April 9, including a recommendation to remove the three members. The board adopted that recommendation during a closed session Thursday evening, after which Sullivan addressed the decision in open session.

“This recommendation was based on their professional opinion that those three board members violated the code of business conduct and failed to uphold their fiduciary duties to the Columbia Association,” Sullivan said.

In response to a request for comment, Emery wrote in an email: “Today three CA Board members, Karin Emery, Reg Avery, and Eric Greenberg were inappropriately removed from the CA Board thereby disenfranchising the residents of Oakland Mills, Long Reach, and River Hill.

“The Board members believe that the expulsion was retaliation for filing an ethics complaint against the Board Chair, Collin Sullivan,” the email reads.

‘An unusual moment’

Each of the 10 villages has a representative on the board of the Columbia Association, a massive homeowners association that functions much like a local government. Columbia has more than 100,000 residents and is Maryland’s second-most-populous community.

The association’s ethics panel, established in 2023, consists of three attorneys who, according to Sullivan, “have no affiliation or interest” in the association. The panel’s purpose is to ensure that association leadership, including board members, is held to the highest ethical standard.

“I recognize this is an unusual moment,” Sullivan said Thursday night. “I want to acknowledge that directly. This board takes its obligations to the Columbia Association and the Columbia community seriously, and that includes maintaining the integrity of our governance. Tonight’s action reflects that commitment.”

The ethics allegations stem from a Sept. 18 closed session during which the board discussed three topics, Sullivan said. The topics were “the importance of ethical, professional and respectful behavior,” the failure to meet those standards and the importance of fellow board members holding each other accountable to the standards of conduct.

“This closed session highlighted multiple examples of Mr. Greenberg’s failures to meet these standards of behavior,” Sullivan said.

The board passed a new ethics policy Sept. 25. Greenberg, Emery and Avery voted against the motion.

The following day, Sullivan said, the three members filed a joint ethics complaint alleging Sullivan and Santos, who represents Wilde Lake, had violated the code of conduct at the Sept. 18 meeting by improperly disclosing confidential information about Greenberg. The ethics panel hired an independent law firm to investigate, then reported in December that neither Santos nor Sullivan had violated the code of conduct because the information about Greenberg was common knowledge, Sullivan said.

“The investigation further concluded that the allegation was filed frivolously and likely in retaliation for actions Mr. Greenberg, Ms. Emery and Mr. Avery disagreed with,” Sullivan said.

The panel’s findings were shared with the greater association board members in early January. On Jan. 9, Sullivan filed a complaint alleging Greenberg, Avery and Emery “violated the provision of weaponizing the ethics policy, filing frivolous claims and using it for retaliation.” The ethics panel again retained the services of an independent law firm.

The ethics panel found the three had violated the code of conduct and recommended their removal.

The association’s board met in closed session April 14 to review the latest report and the “disinterested” members — Sullivan, Emery, Greenberg and Avery were not allowed to vote — agreed to accept the recommendations and move forward.

Per the ethics process, the three were allowed to ask the board “to reconsider the removal decision” but none provided written requests to do so, Sullivan said.

On Thursday night, Sullivan said, “the disinterested members of the Columbia Association unanimously voted to implement the recommendation of the ethics panel.”

At the start of the open session, Sullivan read a short statement explaining that the members had been removed, then asked the three to leave the board table. As some of them vocally objected, Sullivan declared a recess. When the meeting resumed, he asked the three, “Please leave the dais.” They questioned the fairness of the process as they filed out.

Sullivan said the three members’ communities may use whatever process they choose to select new representatives. But he noted that any board member who is removed because of an ethics violation cannot be reappointed in the future.

Remaining board members unanimously voted in open session Thursday to release the ethics panel’s report with “redactions appropriate.” The documents will be published as early as Friday morning.

Harper’s Choice board member Ashley Vaughan said, “when there’s a substantiated ethics complaint, it makes sense for the community members to have an opportunity to be aware, and we are certainly not trying to do anything behind closed doors.”

The association has a $91 million budget that comes from a 68-cent annual charge on every $100 of state-assessed property value. The money pays for the amenities — the pools, paths and programming — that help Columbia consistently rank among the best places to live and raise a family in national surveys.