ByLaw & CCR Restatement/Amendment

A copy of the final restated CCR"s and Bylaws was not mailed to every member before the
vote at the annual meeting. Is this required by civil code 1355 (Amending the CC&Rs)?

Yes Kathleen, it IS required.
Here's the language of 1355:

For purposes of this subdivision, an amendment is only
effective after (1) the proposed amendment has been distributed to
all of the owners of separate interests in the common interest
development by first-class mail postage prepaid or personal delivery
not less than 15 days and not more than 60 days prior to any approval
being solicited;

Kathleen:
I certainly hope that by "restated" you didn't mean these bylaws were completely rewritten. This can be disasterous for a community as many times homeowner-unfriendly provisions are slipped in with the hope that no one will notice them.
Jeanne

that is exactly what happened but many of our members are older and the attorney sent a letter listing all the
reasons they should vote yes but did not mention the items giving the board more powers

Well, one thing that could be done (expecting that you against the changes) is a simple flyer stating the reason why and (depending on the cost) provide a copy of the proposed amendments.

I, too, read the part of 1355 that Tim cites. But, Kathleen, could you post the exact wording of your CC&Rs about amending them & owner notification? Something doesn't feel right here Davis-Stirling is so protective of Owners' right

Can you also tell us what the attorney left out in the letter to Owners that gives the Board more powers? It sounds like the attorney walked a very fine line by stating the positive aspects of the changes, but leaving out something important. I think it verges on "campaigning," which may not be done using HOA funds.

When our board, for example, needed Owner approval via their votes to obtain a nearly-$1 mill. loan for a huge emergency repair, we were very careful to include, in the letter that accompanied the ballots, both sides of the issue, which boiled down to the loan (which we hoped, couldn't promise, but ultimately did recoup from a construction defect settlement) vs. a special assessment.

Considering CC&R's are public documents it may be cheaper to not mail them. When we changed our CC&R's and by-laws, we did not send copies out. That being due to the extreme cost associated with doing that. The documents were probably 25 pages or more each plus adding on the cost to mail them. It was just cost prohibitive to us. However, we could charge a copy fee and provide a copy upon request. Otherwise since they were on file at the courthouse and public documents we didn't spend the money to mail any off. We also did have an electronic copy available upon request to help with cost a board member did on their own. That format may save you some money.

Carol-

I can see from your posts that your BOD tries to be fair and transparent. I like your use of the term "campaign" and I agree. But I'l go even further:

Sometimes a restatement is not really necessary. Some Boards rely too much on their legal team (or paid managers) because they are inexperienced, confused, too busy, or otherwise unable to make decisions in the best interest of the (usually apathetic) members. In these cases, the few thousand dollars which the board pays the lawyers to revise the CC&Rs, along with the fee they pay the attorney to "campaign" for the revised documents at a town hall meeting (with no allowance for debate) is just a down payment. The attorneys ususally DO consolidate power in the board, since it is in the attorney's best interest in the long run. They can secure a steady stream of back end income with the right provisions in the new CC&Rs/bylaws. The up front costs to the association are minor compared to the cascade of billable hours they can predict. I almost think those law firms should pay us to allow them to rewrite our ruling documents! It reminds me of the "free" wrinkle cream offerred in a late-night infomercial, delivered to your door, just for signing up for monthly bank account debits for future cosmetics...

This is an area where I would love to see some real community engagement in forums such as this one. If we were to discuss the particular provisions of our ruling documents which have proven the most effective, or the most problematic, then we could share best practices and avoid pitfalls. We're all owners, but I'm convinced that it is industry pros who benefit by pitting boards against mere owners, to the detriment of the entire neighborhood. Attempting to undermine the intent of Davis-Sterling by consolidating power further into the hands of Boards, and then counseling those Boards in ways that incite and prolong conflict, does NOT serve the long-term interest of owners in particular, nor of the whole CID housing system in general. That is a shame, since most new housing will continue to be CID as municipalities struggle with budgets.

Elaine