Getting Votes to restate CC&Rs

That's a lot already, and you're correct that a targeted campaign to the absentee owners might be best. Perhaps that letter could include the information about getting a judge's approval, which ends up costing everyone more money. that's not fair to the homeowners who did their due diligence and turned in their ballots.

I know this has been discussed elsewhere, but would it be possible to tell those owners that if you don't hear from them by X date, the board will assume their consent and not go to court. To strengthen your position, send the letters certified with a return receipt requested - this way, they can't say they didn't receive the letter (what they did with it is another story). Run this by the attorney before you do anything.

Or move to an online vote - I believe programs like Survey Monkey can track who responds, so if you try to vote more than once, it'll kick it out. For that, you'll have to make sure the email is sent to whatever the association has on file - maybe there's a way to keep track of the bouncebacks and you can resort to letters again.

If that doesn't work, go to the legal option. Tell homeowners (everyone) how much this will cost - some may know these absentee owners and apply pressure for them to get off their ass and vote. Good luck!

for clarification, are you Restating or Amending?

You mentioned working with a lawyer and drafting many changes. That's not a restatement....

Getting an attorney who put the legalese in, to now have them remove it?

I have done a number of restatements in California. A law firm with purchase a boilerplate set of governing documents and then try to fine tune them to a specific community. If you have a "urban" community, it would not be uncommon for a number of "urban" high rises having similar CCRs.

I am curious if her association got the assessment formula and special benefit component done correctly before being sent out to homeowners.

Why not?

I think this is about semantics.

In my opinion regardless of whether it's a restatement or an amendment an attorney should be involved.

-- The law has its own language like any profession/trade has its own language.

-- An attorney writing to satisfy laypeople's reading skills is likely omitting the dotting of i's and the crossing of t's and so is not protecting her or his clients. What attorney would want to hold her- or himself out to a malpractice claim?

Didn't cost me a dime. Worked at a law firm who owned a management company. He charged a minimum of $5000.00 for a set of CCRs and Bylaws. Nice to see he has been disbarred and filed for bankruptcy.

And that's why so many people are as stupid as sheep. Like my mother always said - the easiest way to keep some people ignorant is to simply write down the information and hand it to them because they'll never read it! And yet they can remember EVERYTHING some fool posts on Instagram.....

Thanks to those who emphasized a target bailout to absentee owners and upping raffle prizes. I appreciate it. Anyone one else have ideas??

Shelia wrote re: getting approval from a judge IF we have a simple majority of yeses: "...if the goal is to ensure the documents address issues that weren't mentioned in the original, make it more in line with current state law and make it easier to read, it may be [we] should emphasize that. When you have clarity, it can help prevent misunderstandings and even more lawsuits..." Yes, we don't want to throw away the $5,000 we've already paid out GC + extras re: mailers & postage we can spend quite a lot more. (There's never been a lawsuit in our 22 years. There was one ADR a few years a go that was amicably settled by a mediator.)

So, per Shelia: "...a targeted campaign to the absentee owners might be best. Perhaps that letter could include...getting a judge's approval, which ends up costing everyone more money." Good advice and strategy! I think we'll move to it once we get close to having 50%+ of ballots. A simple majority will approve our Bylaws and there's nothing in their restatement that conflicts with our original CC&Rs. (We're aware not all secret ballots will vote yes.)

I learned in a course that a higher response rate is yielded when respondents have stamped envelopes. Even more true today when folks don't use stamps as much. Some absentee owners have voted. Many live far away, have someone managing their condo rental. But there are also some who plan to retire here and two who did live here whom I'll personally contact, though they've already been contacted.

To Augustin's points: Yes, a redlined version is on our protected website and shows all of the changes various boards have made over 4 years to the CC&RS. It's 110 pages. Our ca. 2000 CC&Rs are 93 pages + an Exhibit. Our Restatement is 77 pages + 2 Exhibits. We, should say, I, did reduce "legalese" considerably with our GC's OK of every word.

I agree that its length IS an obstacle to getting folks to vote. One man says it's too long for him to to read and he won't vote for something that he hasn't read. Maybe 3-4 pages were moved to the Bylaws, which are now 15 pages vs. 25. Still, an owner asked if I could explain the CC&Rs in one paragraph! Again, our expert GC couldn't see removing any further sections. We also added, I'd say, a total of 3 pages scattered in different sections. Smoking is forbidden everywhere at our buildings including in our units, for instance. He most certainly is NOT the original attorney.

One reason for its length is that 3.61% of our HOA is held by a Commercial Owner (our developer). A fair # of sections are only about them, e.g., a page re: what isn't permitted in their suites (no tattoo parlors!). What they contribute to the "Base" operating budget and what they contribute to Base reserves. Their maintenance obligations. Info about their own small reserve account, etc.

Good idea, Augustin, to increase raffle $. It's currently at $100 with about 4 drawings total. Our GC sees it not in conflict with our CC&Rs due to your own argument, which he's used in previous cases.

To Max's meanderings and unrelated side remarks: 67% of 211 is not 144. More, we don't have 211 units. How does "your" number, even if correct, help me get out the vote? We also are proceeding where only if a voter gives one of us their ballot with a note saying they're unable to deliver their vote in person to the inspectors' location, is it lawful. As I wrote above, every owner has been personally contacted by a board member or by me, some 2,3 or more times.

For JohnC & Adam: Our HOA attorney, whose been our GC for about 8 years--whose firm specializes in CA HOA's governing documents--says he's worked on about 100 of them and ours are among the top 10 most complex. His letter to Owners, which accompanied the ballots starts: "Enclosed for your review are the complete texts of the proposed Restated and Amended Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (“Restated CC&Rs”) for the Association and proposed Restated Bylaws. I have no interest in arguing with him on such a minor point. I don't see how the question's content helps us get out the vote????

Let me add a couple of things. Your first comment was to degrade the number of votes I calculated you needed, which I said 144, yet you stated it was "about" 143. A total of one! Again, my statement of the number of units is from what your association provided to the Secretary of State of California. The number of 211 units, does that also include the commercial units as well and do they have a vote in the matter?

It was you who wanted to be put in charge of this project with all your legal "expertise". You have 80 ballots with just 17 days before the deadline. You might have come to this group before ballots were mailed out, not 5 weeks or so after ballots sent out and facing the possibility of not having enough ballots returned. This failure is on you.

As I mentioned, I did a combination of 10 CCRs and Bylaws during 2011 to 2013. All were passed on the first try. We provided a game plan BEFORE ballots were mailed. The best I have heard from anyone is "let's raise the amount of the raffle". Good luck with that one. Your residents pay up to or more than $1200.00 a month in dues, and you think throwing them a dime is really the answer.

You can say what you want about me, but I ain't the one holding the short end of the stick!

Kerry
Change scares many people especially if they are doing just fine under present conditions. You have to convince people that the proposed changes are for their betterment especially the "changes".

This seems to puzzle me and why the courts haven't stepped in.

Most CCRs in HOA's require at a minimum of 67 2/3 to amend or restate. Many HOAs' will make a half ass attempt to get them passed only to throw themselves onto the court system and get them changed at a lower rate. If an HOA couldn't get them passed at the higher percentage, why doesn't the court have that percentage changed prior to giving a waiver. Look at the HOA that courts gave waivers to, they still have at least a 67 2/3 percentage approval rate.

I think this is a California statutory mechanism for amendment that does not exist in other states. At least, and with the exception of expressly racist et cetera covenants, I am not aware of other states that have a court procedure for amendments.

As has been noted in the past, more at https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/C/Court-Petition-Re-CC-Rs