Meeting Proxies Used to Cast Absentee Ballots

"9 forms of proxy forms"? Are you saying the president received 9 proxies from 9 homeowners (I assume it's one vote per house)? What do the proxies say - some state they're only to be used to help establish irum, some designate a person to attend and vote on their behalf (they may also specify how to vote on an issue or leave that up to the proxy. Our proxies allow people to establish quorum only, designate someone to vote fir them or authorize the president to do it, and they can also be used to nominate themselves or someone else (including a current board members) for a seat.

So without seeing the language on the proxy or asking whoever signed it as to what his/her intent was, I would have noted 9 proxies were received, but were not used towards the vote because there was no absentee ballot submitted.

By the way did you ask about any of this DURING the meeting? If so, what was the response? I don't know if you can look at actual proxies, so the only way to learn the intent would be to talk to the 9 owners who signed them and then it would be up to them to protest. Finally, what were homeowners voting for - if there was a clear majority vote for or against whatever, would disallowing these 9 make a difference? The answer to the last question might be the deciding factor for me as to whether I want to resort to legal action. It might be easier to request a recount using different people.

If not, it would be better to ask that the board clarify that a proxy is not an absentee ballot. - if you want to vote, you must complete a separate ballot. I'd also open proxies and ballots at the meeting and count them in front of everyone. Homeowners who aren't running and aren't on the board can be appointed to do the counting (obviously this wouldn't include saying who voted for who or what).

SheilaH, thanks for the reply and questions. The proxy states, " I/We, do authorize and appoint the chairman of the meeting to represent me on the issues to be discussed at the annual meeting of the members to be held............, and to address, on my behalf, the issues submitted to a vote at this meeting........

The ballot was for the purpose of electing 4 directors from 7 candidates. Up to 4 votes were allowed on each ballot. I have been informed by the person that supervised the counting at the Association management company that for every proxy that they received without a ballot and that gave their meeting proxy to the chairman, they duplicated the chairman's ballot and included those votes in the final tally. There were 9 such circumstances. Considering that each ballot was eligible for 4 votes, it's possible that 36 votes (9 x 4) were illegally cast. This in a race that was decided by one vote!! Remember, the vote was conducted by written ballot OUTSIDE the meeting. It's only a matter of convenience that proxies and ballots were distributed and returned at the same time, as they are totally unrelated activities (outside a meeting as opposed to within a meeting). My contention is that if the proxy form does not convey to the proxyholder, on its face, the explicit purpose of voting the absentee ballot, it is not valid for that purpose.

I could not have possibly asked about this during the meeting. No vote totals were announced, and no public announcement was made of the proxy votes. In the days that followed, the chairman refused to provide the final vote counts, nor acknowledge the proxy votes. I was forced to obtain this information through an official records request after the meeting's conclusion, which took almost 6 weeks and multiple inquiries.

Again - there were NO votes of any sort taken at the meeting - and most certainly not votes for directors.

If I approach the board on this issue, they will just lawyer up and find an attorney that will agree with them, and then claim attorney-client privilege/victory. To have any hope of a correction will most likely require a suit in JP court. I'm looking to this forum in the hopes of receiving assurance that my position is legally correct enough to risk the $$ it will take to initiate an action.

It's true they might lawyer up, but that doesn't mean you don't have valid concerns. However, if you want this fixed, you'll have to take some action. It's probably too early to hire an attorney, so you may as well go ahead and tell the board your concerns and ask for clarification. If they dont answer or refuse to, you'll have that on the record and then you can proceed.
Having an election decided by one vote doesn't necessarily mean something's amiss. You said the proxy authorized whoever was appointed to represent the homeowner in the discussion, which sounds like this also included the voting. Unless those homeowners SPECIFICALLY stated the proxy was to vote for A, B, C, and D, they may have authorized the president to vote as he saw fit, thus attaching his ballot to their proxy. You'd have to read the proxies to see exactly what those homeowners authorized and then ask them what their intentions were. It may be they gave the chairman permission to cast their votes the way he did. Once again, I don't like the idea of ballots being counted and the results announced outside the meeting, but if this is the way it's been done for years, are you now upset because you don't like the results?

This is also why I think a clarification of the rules may be appropriate or the proxy and the ballot should be on the same piece of paper, so the homeowners can be clear in what they want to do. I also think homeowners need to make more of an effort to at least attend the annual meeting to listen to the proceedings and cast their own vote for board elections - lately, I've seen several conversations on proxies, and there's always some sort of problem with them. That would include homeowners who don't read the thing at all and simply sign it and give it to whoever because "Mr. X has been on the board for a long time and he knows what he's talking about." How do you know that's not what happened here?

Have you spoken with any neighbors who are just as concerned about this as you are? If so, have them attend the next meeting with you - your questions may prompt more questions from than. It's one thing for a board to blow off one homeowner, but to blow off several could result in the word getting around and everyone calling for a new election - or a recall. If they push back and things start to get heated, it may mean hiring an attorney to blast them into resolving the problem - for that, you might pass the hat for a consultation from an attorney. Decide what you want to do, get some neighbors to help (there really is strength in numbers) and good luck to you.

are you run under TPC 209 or TPC 81/82?

Since the election was not voted up on at the annual meeting the proxies are useless. they state they are for use at the annual meeting.

therefore your HOA BOD cheated in the election and they know it.
by the way how the hell does anyone get people to return proxies? What does the letter say that goes with the proxy form? Return this form so the HOA can have a meeting an not raise dues? I'm super curious becuase I've read so many stories on how HOA BOD abuse proxies, but I'm still puzzled how they can get so many?

now back on topic good luck suing them. they all should be kicked out and not allowed to run again. Anti democratic fascists IMHO.

Yup.

In my community, the proxies are voted at the meeting and added to the number of homeowners who are there - if the total meets or exceeds the quorum percentage written in the documents, we have an annual meeting. I don't know why it doesn't occur to the board (or homeowners for that matter), why it's easier and more transparent to do these things at the meeting. The people doing the counting, shouldn't be affiliated with any candidate running (or re-running) for the board OR have one person representing each candidate. Or draw straws - pick people who will do what's required in front of everyone.

I've seen several conversations on this website lately about proxies, and it appears there's a problem with how they're written. If your documents permit them, at least take the time to find out their purpose and then determine how you want to use them. It shouldn't be about suppressing votes because some people have reasons why they can't attend. Use plain english to tell homeowners the proxy can be used to (1) establish quorum (2) designate someone to ATTEND the meeting and cast the vote on your behalf (3) cast votes for something or someone, or a combination thereof. People should be allowed to change their mind and attend the meeting to cast the vote personally (thus tossing the proxy) and co-owners of a home need to decide among themselves who will cast the vote and sign and date the proxy. And turn the thing in on time - maybe it's me, but it shouldn't be this complicated.

Well said