Quote:
Posted By DorothyL1 on 03/20/2024 7:13 AM
At the first annual meeting, the members shall elect one director for a term of one year, one director for a term of two years, and one director for a term of three years, and at each annual meeting thereafter, the members shall elect one director for a term of three years, provided, however, that if at such first annual meeting, or at any subsequent meeting, owners other than the declarant are entitled to elect at least one director, then the number of directors on the Board will automatically increase to five, one of whom will serve for a one year term and one of whom will serve for a two year term. In such event, at each annual meeting thereafter, the members shall elect each director for a term of three years.
This was written in 2000 and the community is now composed of only homeowners, no developers, and no classes of membership.
I am going to re-write this to the way I interpret it, with regard to the number of directors:
At the first annual meeting, the members shall elect [three directors with staggered terms]. At each annual meeting thereafter, the members shall elect one director for a term of three years, with one big caveat: Once owners have the lawful right to elect at least one director (and so the declarant is almost done, per state statute and the bylaws), then the number of directors on the Board will automatically increase to five,. One of the two new directors will serve for a one year term and the other will serve for a two year term. At each annual meeting thereafter, the members shall elect each director for a term of three years. In my opinion the board has had five board seats for some time now. Elections should have been run to fill all five board seats. But they did not, so the board is left with kind of a mess. But do understand: This "mess" is as much the owners' fault as it was the fault of prior boards. After all, the owners have a copy of the covenants. The owners could have questioned the shortage of directors at any time.
If the board just recently figured out there should be five board seats, then the board really should have run an election. Instead the board appears to have simply filled the vacancy.
I agree with the others who say that calling this apparent new director a "Trustee" is just the directors being silly and not very smart. The sarcastic remarks about this directors' duties are particularly unprofessional. The sarcasm helps no one.