HOA Fee Increase Voting/Quorum

My question is, should the owners that were at the Proposed Budget/HOA Fee Increase meeting in person along with proxies been allowed to vote against the proposed budget and subsequent increase in monthly HOA fees? The board is interpreting the Bylaws differently than the owners. The wording is confusing and is left open to interpretation, it's not clear. The board ratified the budget and stated there wasn't enough unit owners at the meeting, therefore budget and increase passes. Please help!

The board issued this statement when questioned as to why owners did not get to vote: "opportunity for all the Unit Owners to attend or provide a proxy if they wanted to reject the 2023 Adopted Budget. According to the last paragraph of the Bylaws Section 6.2 The budget is ratified unless at the meeting a majority of all the Unit Owners votes to reject the budget". "The bylaws do not say that it could be rejected by a majority of the owners PRESENT at the meeting; it had to be a majority of ALL Unit Owners. Since there are 170 units there needed to be a majority vote of 86 unit owners to reject the 2023 adopted budget. A quorum was not necessary because a rejection vote required a fixed number of voting units".

However, this is what our Bylaws say:
“The Board of Directors of WW Townhomes (“Board”) has general authority to levy assessments under the CC&Rs (See CC&Rs, Article. VI, Section 6.1) and the Texas Property Code. However, if the Board is seeking to increase assessments from a prior year’s budget, the Board needs to circulate the new proposed budget and hold a meeting wherein the unit owners get to vote on the increase. The Board needs a majority of the present unit owners vote to reject the budget (See Bylaws, Article. VI, Section 6.2). (NOTE: That meeting does not need a quorum. And, the vote is based on a majority of those unit owners present at the meeting.)

If the Board is seeking to levy a special assessment, then it must obtain a 2/3 approval of all voting members to approve such special assessment (See Bylaws, Article. VI, Section 6.4).”
.
WW-bylaws: Within 30 days after adoption by the BOD of any proposed budget for the Condo, the Board shall provide a summary of the budget to all unit owners and shall give notice of a date for a meeting of the unit owners to consider ratification of the budget not less than 14 days no more than 30 days after mailing of the summary and notice. A quorum need not be present at the meeting. The budget is ratified unless at the meeting a majority of all the Unit Owners votes to reject the budget. In the event the proposed budget is rejected, the periodic budget last ratified shall be continued until such time as the Unit owners ratify a subsequent budget proposed by the board.

However, this is what our Bylaws say:
“The Board of Directors of WW Townhomes (“Board”) has general authority to levy assessments under the CC&Rs (See CC&Rs, Article. VI, Section 6.1) and the Texas Property Code. However, if the Board is seeking to increase assessments from a prior year’s budget, the Board needs to circulate the new proposed budget and hold a meeting wherein the unit owners get to vote on the increase. The Board needs a majority of the present unit owners vote to reject the budget (See Bylaws, Article. VI, Section 6.2). (NOTE: That meeting does not need a quorum. And, the vote is based on a majority of those unit owners present at the meeting.) “

Is this REALLY a quote from your official bylaws? Because it certainly does not read like any official document I’ve ever read. It reads more like a layman trying to summarize bylaws.

Passive voice, “needs to” instead of “must” or “shall”, starting a sentence with “And”; this is not something a lawyer wrote or approved.

The Bylaw that you cited, Zach does seem to give the Owner the right to reject the proposed budget if a majority of owners in attendance vote against it. Two things puzzle me.

Your mention proxies. I have never seen on this forum that proxies are permitted at the budget ratification meeting.

Next, the language of the Bylaw cited seems oddly casual. Are you certain it's from your official Bylaws? For instance, it notes "present owners" when every one I've seen here and my own would say "owners present." And, "unit owners get to vote," just doesn't seem like typical language in bylaws.

And Wendy's question matters, too.

I found this under Washington rules for adopting a budget, which looks very similar to what the OP posted.

Under WUCIOA (RCW 64.90.525), the board must:

1. Adopt a proposed budget.
2. Within 30 days of adoption, provide copies of the budget to the owners along with a budget summary.
3. Set a meeting between 14 and 50 days after providing the budget to the members.
4. Give owners an opportunity to vote on the budget at that meeting.
5. The budget is ratified unless a majority of the total votes in the association (not just the votes of the members present at the meeting) reject the budget. Even if there is no quorum, the budget is ratified.
6. If the budget is rejected, or if notice is not provided, the last budget to be ratified remains in effect until a new budget is ratified.

$120 which went to $150 this year, proposed is $205.

It's dead on, but ours becomes unclear at 4. Opportunity to vote was given at annual budget meeting 5. Budget was ratified because not enough owners (even with proxies) were present. 6. Budget wasn't voted on therefore rejected due to owner turnout at the meeting.

But, is this what the By-laws read? It states "A quorum need not be present at the meeting". But below that it states "The budget is ratified unless at the meeting a majority of all the Unit Owners votes to reject the budget".

I like to do that with most anything they write.

Zach,

Your budget is approved for 2023

Wrongo and I am in SC.

nope - one may NOT ammend a CCR without a signed DIRECT vote either by the actual member/owner or a person holding their power of attorney

a member MAY designate a proxy to vote on corporate matters

do not confuse proxy vote and absentee vote (said absntee vote must ALSO be directly signed)