What the heck ! PETITION DENIED

The petition to initiate one vote per resident has been turned away by the Advisory Committee . They say it's because the procedure is not in line with the proper way to get signatures. E signatures are not acceptable and are not allowed according to the administration. That may be so. Following the rules is a good thing. So why has the advisory committee buried a similar petition for two years?. The lost petition has  the required number of hand written signatures. Everything about it is legitimate and according to the bylaws that "TEAM DAVE"  is imposing to deny the latest petition they are duty bound to deal with it. There is no good reason for the administration to ignore it. But they have ignored it, continue to ignore it and it looks like they are going to keep on ignoring it.Perhaps it's because the petition was decreed as just another attempt by the malcontents to destroy the village, or some such nonsense.
Malcontents have been a thorn in the side of dictators since Moses led the Jews out of Egypt.  Without malcontents there would be no movement to change the status quo. 
 It's another case of selectively enforcing the rules that suit the administration while continually breaking them when it suits their purpose.We can be sure that if the petition was for something that solidified the position of the in crowd, there would be no hesitation, e signatures or not!
Every member of the Advisory Committee is well aware of the interest by residents in achieving a democratic form of electing officers. Yet not a single one of them has picked it up and moved it forward. Under a benevolent administration the petition would be considered despite the leaders angst about it.
It's obvious that "Team Dave" is doing their best to prevent residents from petitioning anything. Recent discussions on the committee suggested that the number of required signatures on a petition be raised from the current level of 25 signatures  to as much as 117. it's a good way to cement their bodies to their chairs on the committees.
They quoted the legalities of E signatures and claimed they are not valid unless all involved parties agree to allow them. Ok. We get it ! but wouldn't it be fair and decent to find a way to at least consider the petition instead of looking for ways to block all efforts?
It looks like another battle is brewing to get "all parties" to agree to accept E signatures. But don't hold your breath. We can all be sure that "Dave" and his " Team" will do whatever they can to stop that idea before it comes up and bites them. Look forward to the usual nonsense about malcontents and all the rest of the stupid propaganda that will no doubt be issuing from the offices  of the "Team".