Door prize drawings, all are eligible to win?

Charles W,
As expected I have very strong feeling about this, give a ways, or paid for Gifts.

"It is not your money," and no matter how you cut it, it is still not your money. The money belongs to the association (all of it, and all members).
The board can not give away what they don't own. No documents I have ever seen refers to any giftgiving, or the "Board" receiving gifts. The board does not own those gifts and has no authority to aaccept them.

Our Board throws a dinner and a breakfast at each annual meeting. I have demonstrated that this is illegal. The board ignores me and says it is good business practice, that may be if you are playing with your own money, they are not.

And why would anyone want to do this? Ask for trouble, and you are likely to get some. HOA's and condos especially have enough trouble handling the money they get and spend. No doubt in my mind whoever thinks these things up is about half way through the thinking process that needs to be done, to come up with the correct answer. You want to have a vegas night, bring your money and buy chips and cash them at the end of the night, don't give any to the board and don't expect the board to give you any.

Also, probably 100% of all boards have spent money unwisely at one time or another, that I can understand, I can not understand any Board having any desire to hand out something they don't have to try to get deadbeats to pay arrears so next time the Board will have more money to give away.

CharlesW1: Do your documents state anything about ...a member to be "eligible" must be in "good standing" which means they must be current on all assessments/fees--it doesn't matter what the situation is, eligible for voting or your name included in a drawing...whatever, if you are NOT in good standing you are NOT eligible...period.

Now, to the question on whether the assn. should be spending assessment funds on door prizes...I think not. It is not what the funds are to be used for, nor what the "paying" residents have, in good faith, paid their assessment for. You might also incur some future non-paying residents because of misuse of funds with this giveaway.

If you have a windfall of funds, however, at year end, or whenever all annual bills are totaled against annual income received and you have a surplus, then I think that would be a special time to 'give back' to the community--through gift cards, party, etc., and announce the situation to all. But not otherwise.

There really isn't any such thing as a 'windfall'. Any surplus should either be used to reduce member dues since the surplus means the HOA collected more than necessary, or, send it to the reserves where it truly will be the gift that keeps on giving...plus all members will benefit!

Now if you get community businesses to make donations, which promotes their business to local residents, and provides a door prize, that's a different thing.

Members are not paying dues to feed the pigs at the trough who need to be bribed to attend meeting in order to win a door prize. I'd be the first to stop paying dues if this is what they are being used for. l'll take my chances in front of a judge if that's what their doing.

DJ1: ..."There really isn't any such thing as a 'windfall'. Any surplus should either be used to reduce member dues since the surplus means the HOA collected more than necessary, or, send it to the reserves where it truly will be the gift that keeps on giving...plus all members will benefit!"

Thanks for your clarification. You are correct.

CharlesW1:
Since your PM & attorney are counseling that ALL members have the right to vote on amending the documents, then you may want to switch your focus from bribing them with gift cards to actually going door-to-door.

We're back to the old problem of having enough members to make quorum so a vote can be taken--that is to be your focus in this situation. And, again, this must be carefully planned prior to the meeting itself. Explain beforehand the seriousness of the changes that will be made to the governing documents which will affect ALL residents in the future.

The Board may need to "hoof it" to stir up interest and seek proxies for this "amendment meeting" from those who will not or cannot attend.

DJ1,

Your analogy is perfect, IMO. On this particular situation I’m with you, I too would take my chance in front of a judge.

Thanks
Chuck W

HaroldS

According to our Bylaws you CAN NOT be a board member unless you are a member in good standings, so you would be correct, along with several other requirements also specified in the governing documents.

Thanks
Chuck W.

DJ1,

That sounds good in theory however the majority of bylaws state that, “lot owners not in good standings are not eligible to vote” therefore, a violation doesn’t restrict their voting privileges. IF the violator doesn’t comply in the allotted time (governing documents), the homeowner COULD receive a fine at which point they would be a member with a fine “IF” the accused doesn’t pay the fine then they would be a member not in good standings.

I don’t see were you are going with that statement it is literally one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard…..Come on, be realistic.

Chuck W.

Question for DJ.
If you knew the board was acting in the manner you described in your association, I doubt you would tolerate it. You have dreamed up a problem in such a way that it is not a question, therefore has no answer. Maybe there are HOA's that have terrorists cells in them and are keeping people locked up in the fitness center, then what would we think of the Board that does that?

RobertR1, Charles made the point "a violation doesn’t restrict their voting privileges"

The CCR's I quoted provide the opportunity to do just that. It isn't a stretch for some boards to utilize whatever tactics they want to achieve a goal.

DJ1,

You are correct, what I had “quoted” can be abused (by board members), those who have an influence on voting privileges among members of their community. Although imaginable, certainly not very reasonable! There isn’t one judge (adequate evidence provided) in this world that wouldn’t side with the homeowner being accused and it would be hard for me to fathom any board proceeding as you have described.

I have heard/read many “HORROR” stories. As I’m sure you have! I am aware there are/have been SOME corrupt volunteer board members who are elected as board members. Many of who respectfully don’t share their views on this HOA discussion forum. However, there are various HOA forums that have been taken over by these very same people of which I speak of.

I sympathize with those individuals who are dealing with or have dealt with this misinterpretation/abuse of the documents that govern their association.

I’m in no way implying that YOU would/could manipulate the election, but if you were too, you certainly could. “If I was a corrupt board member looking to skew the election results I would ensure any member who is possible opposition to my position would receive a notice of violation for some CCR or another, just to ensure they are a member who is NOT in good standing. ”

I certainly appreciate your point of view. Although I don’t believe that I will need to take additional precautions within my community to avoid such abuse.

Chuck W

Gloria, aren't there already enough 'nuts' at the meetings without the Board supplying more?

CharlesW1 - In your re-writing the amendments I'm thinking you need to be careful that all votes cast won't be perceived as voting on questions to achieve one result. Unless of course everyone was mailed the re-written amendments. Just food for thought in your consideration. Dot your i's and cross your t's making sure there was nothing different in the actual vote question, and I mean nothing including punctuation, wording, etc. Second, since multiple mailings have not produced the necessary percentage to amend, at what point will you and the Board decide there is no support from the owners and pursuing the amendment is not their popular opinion and desire to vote. There's nothing wrong with the Board saying hey folks, we tried and so did your neighbors, if you wish to join everyone else, please vote one way or the other so the matter can be resolved for once and for all. If that doesn't net the necessary percentage to amend, than it really is time to move on.

CharlesW1: Since you are personally committed, it sounds like you may have to go door-to-door to retrieve the remaining ballots from residents who have not yet sent their ballot in. At least then you will know you've done all you can do to encourage participation, and then as another poster suggested, MOVE ON!

P.S. Retain ALL ballots (for and against), because if you do arrive at 2/3s collected ballots, they will be your 'proof' of the change/s to be made or not made. File them away--they declare your community's/resident "history"--with all other amendment paperwork you have compiled in this situation.

DJ1 lol, yep plenty of nuts to go around.

Charles:

Our communities usually go door to door to the Owners who haven't submitted their proxy ballot on amendments. We as MC do a spreadsheet of all the votes and then the board hets to see who has not sent in a vote and they divide the community up and go door to door. We have found this method not only to be successful, but gives the board the chance to meet Owners 1 on 1.

Per CW1: ...our governing documents state that ALL lot owners are eligible to vote on amending the association documents. We need 2/3 of the total association, which means WE NEED 184 VOTES, from 275 lot owners....
Also posted...It’s been several months and we have only received about ½ to either approve or to dismiss the amendments...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

CharlesW1: What have you been advised by your attorney and PM re the amount of time to 'wait' for returned ballots to reach 2/3s of residents' vote for amendment to be passed/dismissed?

Do the "proposed amendment changes" have to do with your Board's desire to change to a POA?

JoeW1

Call it what you may or how you see it, but, I feel that you are completely WRONG, with your speculation. “The people have spoken” If “they” (the people) had spoken the board would have received their ballot against all purposed, so for you to assume they have is a mistake on your part!

1.) 92 ballots have been collected thus far
2.) the most recent delinquency report shows 67 members not in good standings, rather high, if I do say so myself. However, the majority of those accounts have been are from previous years. Only 15 lot owners are delinquent in their assessments for the 07 year. Many of those accounts are actively being perused by our HOA attorney or payment plans have been established by the BOD.

3.)
TOTAL AGAINST 35 26 28 37 37
TOTAL FOR 57 66 64 55 55
TOTAL BALLOTS RECEIVED 92

4.) Without asking the lot owners individually I would have to say, those who voted FOR would be in favor of these amendments. (the majority, thus far).

I and the other two board members are certainly willing to dismiss the amendments all in all however, we feel that we wouldn’t be doing all that we could to benefit the community if we weren’t to exhaust every option available to us, now that would be a disservice to OUR COMMUNITY!.

Chuck W.

PaulM

There are numerous benefits in becoming a POA, all of which are already in place if adopted, and others that we hadn’t consider, but would certainly be beneficial to the association and to our property values.

The board felt it would be financial appropriate to adopt a POA oppose to individually amending every convent we felt would benefit the community. Amending each covenant separated would cost the associate more than it has already.

Our attorney/PM were the ones who suggested the “door prize” which made me question his legal advice.

I feel (other board members agree) that we’ll need to go door to door to solicit for the remaining ballots.

My main question is according to our documents ALL are eligible to vote, hypothetically what “IF” 100 lot owners refuse to submit a ballot either FOR/AGAINST? Obviously, that tells me that the POA would have to be dismissed. At which point the board would undeniably retire the purposed amendments (POA), as I and others have previously proclaimed. If the board has to request a ballot from all lot owner, WHY IS IT NOT REQUIRED THAT ALL LOT OWNERS SUBMIT A BALLOT EITHER FOR/AGAINST.

This would save the association money as well as all the time the board has already spent on perusing such.

Chuck W.

CharlesW1: Now we can address the root of the problem--owner apathy in returning their ballot for amendment change/s to reflect a vote for or against.
It sounds like you/Board has made it very easy for them to return in a stamped, addressed envelope; however, there is no second-guessing people or total lack of concern of association residents and why they just don't cooperate!!!.

Certainly you can REQUIRE all owners submit their return vote; doesn't mean it will happen as you are finding out. Just like all are required to pay their dues, follow rules, covenant dictates, etc.; doesn't happen.

But, if you are seriously considering going door to door, I would encourage you to communicate to the community that you will be collecting the unreturned ballots, list the proposed date/s (daytime/weekend), if they won't be home to give their vote in a sealed envelope to a neighbor to give to you, etc., etc.--cover all your bases. Also have with you copies of the ballot in case they tell you they lost or misplaced their copy. They can complete it as you wait on their doorstep.

Good Luck in your continued efforts and your perseverance!

JoeW1

You have severely confused me as too exactly what you are insinuating.
The numbers of which you have listed are of the 92 lot owners who have voted against that particular amendment.

That has been one of my questions all along. The board has been informed (attorney and PM) that ALL lot owners are eligible to vote, regardless of their statues. When it comes to amending the governing documents all are entitled to vote on such purposed amendments.

So again we need 2/3s of 275. (total association) We currently have 92 ballots collected,approximately ½ of the ballots needed, have been submitted although those returned not all are in favor of the purposed amendments nor are they 100% against them either. Handfuls at most are 100% against the purposed amendments, as the ballot return illustrated such.

Chuck W.

JoeW, I believe your math is faulty. There are 275 unit owners for which approval of 2/3 or 184 are required. To date there are 57 votes for and only 35 who have votes against. This leaves 183 (275 - 92) who have not voted. Of these 183 who have not voted approval by 127 is needed to pass.

RogerB - Appreciate the input but read the post, check your math. Chuck stated there are 67 members not in good standing. Subtract that from the 275 than do the percentages.

JoeW1: If you refer back to Chuck's earlier post, you would see that his concern was that they have sent ballots to every (275) member/owner, and they want a response/vote from ALL residents, even those presently 'not in good standing'. This is how they were counseled by their PM and Attorney--to give everyone the ability to cast a vote since it concerns the governing documents.

Roger,
Explain to me how this would work in a condo of say 105 units, all apportioned. Do we have 105 owners or do we have the total number of owners and co-owners (part owners of a unit with their names on the deed).

I would say we have to abide by the apportionment which means we take the vote of 105 units. We can not take the vote of all owners, they of course don't have equal value. In our condo all members, can attend meetings and enter discusions, they can hold office if the other owners agree that his vote respresents the interest of their unit. In fact if you had a unit with four owners on deed, they can not each vote 1/4 share, any more than husband and wife can each vote 1/2 share. In effect, it is not the owners or the members that have the vote, it is the units. Which of course can't vote. Does that confuse the issue further? I would guess reason would prevail as opposed to resonable thinking.

RogerB - Have to tell you that Chuck's posts regarding quorum, ballots, proxies, etc. have been numerous, not just to this string of communication. You post "you believe ever OWNER must be included...". Stress on the word "believe". What is Chuck's association's definitive position on that matter? Only his association can decide what is right for them and according to their laws and (god help me) interpretation thereof. As for your stating a member and owner are not equivalent, who says? In some associations owner and member are interchangeable because only an owner can be a member, and only an owner can vote. That's the way it is in my HOA/COA. Only Chuck can tell us what his by-laws state in his HOA. Be that as it may what we are taling about is voting population and what is left to achieve for or against approval.

What I'm trying to get at in my responses is that 92 have already weighed in, some for and against. Chuck needs to answer my question on the different measures 1, 2, etc. If my breakdown is accurate Chuck can then perform his own math to see how many he needs to achieve approval once he runs the numbers. All this is of course theoretical but interesting nonetheless. The long and short of my post is that if 92 have already voted and 2/3rd's of 275 are needed to approve than all Chuck's measures do not pass regardless as to how many votes are collected. If the lower threshold of 2/3rd's of those members in good standing is the total voting population, or 208 voters than guess what folks, my math shows Chuck's measures do not pass regardless as to how many votes are collected. My math could be wrong expecially since it's based upon someone else's unconfirmed figures but the bottom line is there is a finite number of votes left to collect and it seems that regardless as to how those votes are counted the measures do not pass.

Measure 1: Against 35 For 57 Total Voted 92
Measure 2: Against 26 For 66 Total Voted 92
Measure 3: Against 28 For 64 Total Voted 92
Measure 4: Against 37 For 55 Total Voted 92
Measure 5: Against 37 For 55 Total Voted 92

In addition to confirming or correcting the above Chuck's Association needs to answer as follows:

What is the total voting population, is it 275 or 208?? 208 is derived by 275 - 67 members not in good standing.

What is the total to approve or not approve, is it 2/3rd's of 275 or .67 x 275 which equals 184?? Or is it 2/3rd's of 208 or .67 x 208 which equals 139??

Once he gets an answer to these questions he can then run the numbers and see what's necessary to get approval or denial of any one Measure. Though it seems it doesn't really matter how the votes are tallied.

For example let's say the total voting population is 208 and 2/3rd's of that number is 139 needed to approve. It would follow that Measure 1 is NOT APPROVED because 92 voted leaving 47 left to vote either way. If 35 voted Against and the additional 47 voted Against in a door to door campain that would net 82 Against and 57 For. Vice versa it could net 104 For, and 35 Against. Either way the amendment is NO PASS because 2/3rd's or 139 didn't vote For or Against. See what I'm saying?

In the alternative let's say the total voting population is 275 and 2/3rd's of that number is 184 needed to approve. It would follow that Measure 1 is because 92 voted leaving 92 left to vote either way. If 35 voted Against and the additional 92 voted Against in a door to door campain that would net 127 Against and 57 For. Vice versa it could net 149 For, and 35 Against. Either way the amendment is NO PASS because 2/3rd's or 275 didn't vote For or Against. See what I'm saying?

Either way if 2/3rd's of 275 or 208 is needed to approve an amendment in Chuck's Association Measure 1 is not approved REGARDLESS as to who votes which way For or Against. Why bother with the door to door campain? It doesn't matter!!!!

Now let's run the numbers for the remaining Measures and see what results if 2/3rd's of 275 or 2/3rd's of 208 is needed:

IF 2/3rd's of 275 is needed to Approve there are 184 votes neccessary For or Against:
Measure 2: Against 26 For 66 Total Voted 92 * 184 less 92 = 92 remaining to vote * Against 26 + 92 = 118 * For 66 + 92 = 158 RESULT Measure 2 is NO PASS
Measure 3: Against 28 For 64 Total Voted 92 * 184 less 92 = 92 remaining to vote * Against 28 + 92 = 120 * For 64 + 92 = 156 RESULT Measure 3 is NO PASS
Measure 4: Against 37 For 55 Total Voted 92 * 184 less 92 = 92 remaining to vote * Against 37 + 92 = 129 * For 55 + 92 = 147 RESULT Measure 4 is NO PASS
Measure 5: Against 37 For 55 Total Voted 92 * 184 less 92 = 92 remaining to vote * Against 37 + 92 = 129 * For 55 + 92 = 147 RESULT Measure 5 is NO PASS

IF 2/3rd's of 208 is needed to Approve there are 139 votes neccessary For or Against:
Measure 2: Against 26 For 66 Total Voted 92 * 139 less 92 = 47 remaining to vote * Against 26 + 47 = 73 * For 66 + 47 = 113 RESULT Measure 2 is NO PASS
Measure 3: Against 28 For 64 Total Voted 92 * 139 less 92 = 47 remaining to vote * Against 28 + 47 = 75 * For 64 + 47 = 111 RESULT Measure 3 is NO PASS
Measure 4: Against 37 For 55 Total Voted 92 * 139 less 92 = 47 remaining to vote * Against 37 + 47 = 84 * For 55 + 47 = 102 RESULT Measure 4 is NO PASS
Measure 5: Against 37 For 55 Total Voted 92 * 139 less 92 = 47 remaining to vote * Against 37 + 47 = 84 * For 55 + 47 = 102 RESULT Measure 5 is NO PASS