bylaw-ccr amendment voting

Has anyone ever been successful (key word) in modifying outdated CCRs and bylaws? Our HOA consists of a little over 300 single family homes. The CCRs and bylaws were adopted when the neighborhood was built and completed in 2000. The current HOA board hired an attorney to write amendments to remove all references to the declarant, update the annual dues to the current amount, and place some limitations on the number of rental properties in the neighborhood. Our attorney required signatures on all ballots to be notarized. Also, non-submittal of a ballot counted as a vote against the amendments. Current CCRs state that 60% of homeowners must approve any changes to the bylaws/ccrs. We have sent out two ballots. The first was a dismal failure as we received only 40 ballots back. We sent out a second ballot, with some modifications requested by a few homeowners. The second ballot gave the board more time to canvas the neighborhood (around 60 days) for votes. We also made the provision that a “no” vote ballot did not need to be notarized. We received 106 ballots back the second time, with an overwhelming majority in favor of the amendments but we still didn’t receive the 60% (187 “yes” votes) needed for approval. It seems most homeowners simply do not care about the HOA.

We have spent around $5000 on this project so far and the board does not believe a third ballot will receive the response needed, even though most homeowners are in favor of the changes proposed.

My questions:

1. Is the requirement for notarized ballots a common practice or is this just something our attorney required?

2. Is there any way to pass these amendments based on the majority of “yes” votes received instead of the 60% of total homes in the neighborhood?

3. How does a board get homeowners engaged/interested enough to at least mail in a ballot? Knocking on doors and a free notary didn’t seem to help much.

Thanks for your feedback.

There is only one reason for requiring ballots to be notarized and is to suppress a vote.

Here is the process as required by our attorney:

Amendment proposal and ballot mailed to homeowners with a date for a “voting meeting”, at least 30 days from mailing. Instructions state that ballot can be mailed or submitted at voting meeting. All parties on home deed (such as husband and wife) must sign ballot and signatures must be notarized. No ballots are accepted after the voting meeting.

Some of the board members walked the neighborhood and knocked on doors, distributed flyers, and spoke with homeowners. We also posted on the HOA web site and a community web site. Still, the voting turn-out was around 33%.

Could the requirement for notarized signatures be a way for the attorney to drag out the process and increase legal fees? The process for changing bylaws is not spelled out in the current bylaws.

I think the attorney's intention was probably benign, and he or she probably recommended requiring notarization as a way of ensuring the validity of the results. On the other hand, I would bet requiring notarization has been a deterrent to voting.

I suggest the board get rid of the notarization process. Instead, maybe use an online voting service and extend the deadline as needed.

To change a Bylaw, we require 51% of all owners approving the change.

To change a Covenant, we require 2/3rds of all owners approving the change.

The percentage of votes needed to approve changes to bylaws or CCRs is spelled out but the voting process/procedure isn't.
The board felt that the requirement for notarized signatures kept many from voting. We are encouraged in that the
amendments were overwhelmingly approved by those that voted. We just didn't have enough ballots submitted.

My main question was how do you get homeowners to take enough interest in the HOA to at least submit their ballot.
We thought about offering a discount on HOA dues if a ballot was submitted (no matter how they voted) but that
didn't seem legal and seemed like bribing. Same with a voting party with pizza and beer.

The attorney has had a few complaints against him for running up legal fees for his own benefit.
Of course, this wasn't known when we paid the retainer.

Thank you for all your responses.

In our case, of all members. This is where many make a mistake thinking just a % of those attending a meeting. We have 112 owners. We need 51% (or 67) to approve a Bylaw change and 2/3rds (or 75) to approve a Covenant change. We do not care how many are at any meeting. The above % of all owners is the only way to change something.

That is just my HOA. Others can vary. I have seen cases where it is a % of those attending the meeting, assuming a Quorum was met. In our case if a Quorum (20% of all owners) is not achieved, then no business can be done.

We recently looked at a Covenant change and our lawyer said we could draw up a petition stating the change and take 6 months to gather signatures. I found that interesting. Of course he recommended he draw it up for us, which we would have done but we dropped the idea of a change. By the way, our lawyer heads a very large law firm specializing in HOA's so we find his advice to be unquestionable.

Be careful of many statements on this chat as they often apply only to the state where the HOA is and more importantly, to the poster's specific HOA docs.