Interpretation Request AZ Petitions

First and foremost, if it's not a statute and part of the law - then it doesn't have to be followed. Since this bill was from the 2009 session, I would expect that the bill is dead.

When you look at legislation you need to not only read the entire passage but each section by itself to see if and how it applies. Click here for a thread in this forum that discussed this. Additionally it is dangerous to pull out just a small section without reading the whole bill.

If one were to look at the passage you identified closer:

4. Unless the community documents provide for a smaller percentage

This says that if the governing documents (note that it doesn't specify which document) provides for a smaller percentage then this bill (25%), then those documents will control. Otherwise, this passage will control.

or smaller number that is no lower than a majority of those eligible to sign,

This section of the sentence allows another option for the Associations governing documents to control. That option being if the documents require no lower then a majority (one would expect a simple majority)of those eligible (members in good standing perhaps)to sign, providing that that majority is lower than 25% of the membership. This section is very poorly written and could easily be interpreted to indicate the need for 51% of the membership. If this bill was passed as written, I suspect that this might be an issue for a court of law to decide.

the initiative petition shall be signed by at least twenty per cent of the members of the association

This section says that if this section controls then at least 25% of the membership must sign the petition to make it valid.

but no fewer than five members.

This section add the condition that if 25% of the membership is less than 5, at least 5 people must sign.

For property with multiple ownership, only one person may sign for that property and the signature of an additional co-owner is not valid.

Standard language for 1 signature per lot.

neither the board of directors nor the members of the planned community may adopt an initiative signature requirement that is greater than that prescribed by this paragraph.

I read this section to imply that if there is no prevision in your current documents, then, once the bill becomes law, the Association may not change the documents to something higher then what this bill calls for.

However, what you failed to include and is actually included in the bill states:

This passage would only take effect after declarant control.

This passage would apply despite the fact [notwithstanding] that there might be something within the governing documents about petitions. Which is actually contradictory to what is cited in the passage you provided.

It also specifies that prior to circulating a petition the member must propose the issue to the board. Sort of a first right of refusal sort of thing.

My personal opinion would be that the thought was good but that the language in the bill is poorly done - as exampled by the contradiction between the opening sentence of the bill and item 4 (which you quoted) which gives control to the governing documents.

As for an answer to your question - my Association only requires 10%.

Tom,

I think that the author intended to put in place a methodology for the membership to bring an issue to the membership for a vote and have the board be bound by that vote. However, as I said, there are so many contradictory statements within the bill that it's difficult to really understand what they were trying to actually say. You should be glad it appeared to die in committee.

If your really interested, find out who authored the bill and give their office a call. Point out the apparent contradictory statements and ask for clarification on what they were trying to do.

Tim