Hoa elections

The board had to change the location of reconvened election meeting due to the meeting apace being reserved. Now the election company is saying the location can’t be changed so they will either not come count the ballots or postpone for 30 days. The first election meeting did not meet quorom so a the board threw out a possible date and location. We already booked and paid for the new location? I don’t see why this is an issue. Homeowners were notified that the original location was booked out.

What Kerry said. I dont see why the election company can't switch gears - if they need more staff and it costs the association more money, then say so. Then check the contract to see if this is allowed.

You definitely need a better reason as to why they can't count the vote. If they can't, can the association hire other people to do it? Or designate homeowners to count the votes in front of everyone (those selected shouldnt have any connection to the candidates, including incumbent board members and perhaps the property manager).

It is too bad that you cannot find four trusted owners to count ballots.

In CA, boards must appoint/hire 1 or 3 inspectors of election. In my hOA, the board does appoint seasoned owner-volunteers to be the 3 Inspectors. In addition, as part of our retained er with our HOA legal counsel, our attorney attends our annual meting, says a few words, & helped the Inspectors if needed.

But many CA HOAs hire "election companies." I don't know anything about them, how much they charge, whether they are monitored by any agency or just grew in numbers since new CA HOA election statutes in 2020. I assume there is a contract between the E.C. & an HOA Board. That is why I asked the OP WHAT this contract says.

What I'm trying to ask the OP for: Is there wording in the contract about what happens if quorum is not made (when required for an election of directors) at the Annual Meeting?

See 3A, the association is responsible for noticing the continued election meeting location. IOE has no say.

Civil Code sec 5115.

d)

(1) A quorum shall be required only if so stated in the governing documents or other provisions of law. If a quorum is required by the governing documents, each ballot received by the inspector of elections shall be treated as a member present at a meeting for purposes of establishing a quorum.

(2) For an election of directors of a corporation that is a common interest development, and in the absence of meeting quorum as required by the association’s governing documents or Section 7512 of the Corporations Code, unless a lower quorum is authorized by the association’s governing documents, the association may adjourn the proceeding to a date at least 20 days after the adjourned proceeding, at which time the quorum required for purposes of a membership meeting to elect directors shall be 20 percent of the association’s voting members present in person, by proxy, or by secret written ballot received.

(3) No less than 15 days prior to an election authorized pursuant to paragraph (2), the association shall provide general notice of the membership meeting, which shall include:

(A) The date, time, and location of the meeting.

(B) The list of all candidates.

(C) A statement that 20 percent of the association present or voting by proxy or secret ballot will satisfy the quorum requirements for the election of directors and that the ballots will be counted if a quorum is reached, if the association’s governing documents require a quorum.

(e) An association shall allow for cumulative voting using the secret ballot procedures provided in this section, if cumulative voting is provided for in the governing documents.

(f) Except for the meeting to count the votes required in subdivision (a) of Section 5120, an election may be conducted entirely by mail unless otherwise specified in the governing documents.

(g) In an election to approve an amendment of the governing documents, the text of the proposed amendment shall be delivered to the members with the ballot.

In Calif, Dean, it's state law, not the declaration. Also in Calif, HOAs must have Election Rules, which specify these things. Even if to, in most states, I think? adjuring the annual meeting to a new date would be in the Bylaws, not the declaration..

I get terri'spoint that the IOE "has no say," at least not on this point, BUT if nOt in the contract with the HOA, THE IOCs don't have to show up where the HOA demands.AGAIN, I ADMIT MY IGORANCE ABOUT THESE CA ELECTION COMPANIES.

The IOE should have known there could be a lack of quorum necessitating a second meeting. I agree with others the contract probably covers that contingency. Regardless of what the contract says, the law says it's the association who determines what notice says about location, and the IOE is responsible for protecting the election materials. I would argue the IOE is under obligation to take instructions from the board since the election statutes supersede the contract.

There was no clause about changing the location. The location stated was not available. The election company got mad because candidates were constantly contacting them portraying themselves as board members and giving them a hard time about location change. Date and time were not changed, location a mile away was changed and paid for already due to the other location being booked. The election company stated to our management that they did not know whom they were speaking with and assuming these were legit board members and basically said they had to either do it at the non usable location or postpone 30 days. It’s been a nightmare with the new candidates medaling in all decisions , looking for management co replacement and landscape co replacements a month before even being seated to the board. Mind you only 1 incumbent was re running so it was all so unnecessary!

Are you on the Board SheilaR? Does your HOA have the CA-required HOA Election Rules??? These needed to have been updated in 2020. Btw, what size is your HOA SheilaR?

Why would any HOA Board permit non-director (or even director) candidates to contact the election company??? Why would any Board permit non-board members (these candidates) to contact mgmt companies, or any other vendor or prospective vendor?? These candidates have no authority to interact with any vendors or prospective vendors.

Why would any decent Election Company interact with individual non-director candidates for the Board? They were hired by a decision of the Board at a board meeting (one hopes to gawd)

From what you've written, your Board has permitted any owners who want carte blanche interfere with the election process as in your Election Rules or even as in your Bylaws. Despite the expense and time it takes, get you HOA's attorney's advice, which very well may be START OVER and do it right this time. The possible new Board members sound very bad and cannot possibly be healthy for your HOA.

I am not on the board but I did notify the Election company that they were constantly communication with non board members and that they were candidates RUNNING for the board. They were then posting the info on a community non hoa run facebook group. Inspector apologized and said she thought they were board members. I then gave her a list of the current board members. She proceeded on communicating with said candidates and allowed them to change the location back to the location that was booked, so they had the election in the grass outside the venue that was unavailable. The other place that was booked and paid for was a couple hundred dollars.

An aside and to keep it brief. I contacted a company to do some work for our HOA. Initial conversations went well but when he found out we were an HOA he declined any business as we were as HOA. He said HOA's are a PIA to do business with. They change personnel quite often and have to start all over. Often confusion as to who is in charge. Always looking to spend less then a proper job cost, etc. He said thanks but no thanks to HOA business.

I agreed with him.