after 28 years finally amended CCR's and Bylaws

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Got a notarized letter, and printed out the new bylaws and CCRs and mailed them to the register of deeds with a check for fees along with a SASE for them to return an offical copy back to me on 12/4/2024. Didnt' pay a lawyer $600 for this 20 min of work. Did pay a lawyer $1500 to help update the docs.

Even with a $400 check per owner and 50 days to vote it took till the last weeks to get enough votes to get 66% bylaws and 75% CCR's passed as needed. If one can barely get 66% even with a $400 check there is no way in hell it can normally be done. stupid laws, imagine if the USA government had to be run like that???

Luckly will only take a majority of owner occupied homes in the future was one change. so future changes will be "easier". About a dozen owners (mostly landlords) didnt' care about getting a $400 check. One person on facebook told me they would not vote for damned HOA to get a $400 check. He's always posting ideas on fun social events and never attends any.

66% percent said they want the HOA to spend money only on barebones necessities. board asked owners to fund 10 different projects they all failed, even cheap ones that were a few hundred, we have $90K in the bank. will be fun to see how they debate how to spend that. Spending it will be next to impossible since the new byalws now require any budget item over 10% to of the budget to get owner approval.

So glad we finally have a comprehesive ballot results that I can point other board members to and say, that's not what the community voted for.

vis ta vie

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

So what's the plan when owners vote down things like roof replacement?

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/21/2024 4:14 AM
So what's the plan when owners vote down things like roof replacement?

it's SFH not condo

if the HOA vanished the only people that would notice are the 11 people out of 150 that use the park more than once a month according to ballot data, cause the 1/2 acre of grass wouldn't get cut.

vis ta vie

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

Welcome to the wonderful world of cheap owners having the power to veto needed repairs. You know where is ship is sailing.

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 6:15 AM

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/21/2024 4:14 AM
So what's the plan when owners vote down things like roof replacement?

it's SFH not condo

if the HOA vanished the only people that would notice are the 11 people out of 150 that use the park more than once a month according to ballot data, cause the 1/2 acre of grass wouldn't get cut.

I guess you will just have to look the other way when driving by the 1/2 acre of common area so you you don’t see the how bad it looks.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

OK, forget roofs. Are the roads private? What about utility lines (water, sewer, electricity, gas)?

It isn't just looks and declining property values. Property that isn't keep up collects trash (blown there by the wind or dumped by people), varmints (which carry diseases including rabies), vehicles (parked or abandoned), and trespassers of various sorts. It's a health and safety issue.

I would not own a home in a community with CC&Rs and bylaws like this.

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059

Posted:

I'm trying to understand this.

You paid for yea votes?

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

My take is he paid for any vote? No just yes votes?

In my HOA, after several weeks of trying t get enough votes to rewrite the CC&Rs, we started offered a weekly drawing to entice owners to vote at all. B/c of screw ballots, there's is no way f knowing in Calif, HOW w owners voted until the meeting to open & count the secret ballots.

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/21/2024 6:57 AM
OK, forget roofs. Are the roads private? What about utility lines (water, sewer, electricity, gas)?

It isn't just looks and declining property values. Property that isn't keep up collects trash (blown there by the wind or dumped by people), varmints (which carry diseases including rabies), vehicles (parked or abandoned), and trespassers of various sorts. It's a health and safety issue.

I would not own a home in a community with CC&Rs and bylaws like this.

it's a forested park behind a row of homes anyone driving through the neighborhodo would not even realize there is a park tucked away behind the homes. once ever 2 years I spend 15 minutes picking up some trash in the park. it doesnt' get trash cause " no one uses it" there are no varmits and no one can drive back to it anyways

roads and utilities are public

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By TimB4 on 12/21/2024 7:54 AM
I'm trying to understand this.

You paid for yea votes?

said you had to vote to get the $400/home easement money. What you voted for didn't matter. just had to vote.

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By DeanJ on 12/21/2024 6:42 AM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 6:15 AM

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/21/2024 4:14 AM
So what's the plan when owners vote down things like roof replacement?

it's SFH not condo

if the HOA vanished the only people that would notice are the 11 people out of 150 that use the park more than once a month according to ballot data, cause the 1/2 acre of grass wouldn't get cut.

I guess you will just have to look the other way when driving by the 1/2 acre of common area so you you don’t see the how bad it looks.

it's not visible from the road, LOL. I personally like the look of tall grass. It's like ladies that say they dont' like guys with long hair, yet for most of history males had long hair, cultural whims not based on logic.

vis ta vie

ElleN (Idaho)
Posts: 1,334

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/20/2024 8:49 PM

Even with a $400 check per owner and 50 days to vote it took till the last weeks to get enough votes to get 66% bylaws and 75% CCR's passed as needed. If one can barely get 66% even with a $400 check there is no way in hell it can normally be done. stupid laws, imagine if the USA government had to be run like that???

The USA is in fact run "like that": The federal government collects money from taxpayers (just like your HOA does) and re-distributes it to those whom it thinks are more needy, e.g. those with student loans (and just like you decided to give $400 to some owners but not all owners).

I think the rationalizations in both cases (federal government and yours as HOA president-director) are remarkable.

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By ElleN on 12/21/2024 3:07 PM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/20/2024 8:49 PM

Even with a $400 check per owner and 50 days to vote it took till the last weeks to get enough votes to get 66% bylaws and 75% CCR's passed as needed. If one can barely get 66% even with a $400 check there is no way in hell it can normally be done. stupid laws, imagine if the USA government had to be run like that???

The USA is in fact run "like that": The federal government collects money from taxpayers (just like your HOA does) and re-distributes it to those whom it thinks are more needy, e.g. those with student loans (and just like you decided to give $400 to some owners but not all owners).

I think the rationalizations in both cases (federal government and yours as HOA president-director) are remarkable.

No not the analogy I was describing.
Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

vis ta vie

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

There is such a high barrier for changes to the CC&Rs for a few reasons.

One: all of the current owners bought their homes with the current CC&Rs in place. These CC&Rs are enforceable by the HOA (the board) and often by other owners as well. Changing them should require the owners to be fully informed about the proposed changes and to agree to them. It boils down to property rights since you're trying to change the nature of what people bought. Some changes affecting fundamental ownership rights may even require unanimous approval. You can see this in condo communities where all members own a fractional share of the entire condominium property.

Two, the high percentage prevents a small group from enacting changes that benefit them at the expense of the rest of the membership. This is one reason that I dislike provisions that allow CC&Rs to be changed by a majority of owners present at a special meeting, as opposed to a majority of the voting interests. Requiring attendance at a meeting creates barriers for the owners who can't be present for one reason or another. Use of proxies doesn't entirely address this, since the person who signed the proxy won't be present for any discussions that take place and that may have influenced their vote.

Third, changing the rules under which communities operate should require people to think about what they're doing and not change for the heck of it. Requiring a super-majority encourages people to think, because it forces the board to do a better job of explaining the benefits of approving the amendments. Poorly thought through amendments can tie the board's hands and can set the stage for future legal wrangling. Nether of these is good.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 8:49 PM

Posted By ElleN on 12/21/2024 3:07 PM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/20/2024 8:49 PM

Even with a $400 check per owner and 50 days to vote it took till the last weeks to get enough votes to get 66% bylaws and 75% CCR's passed as needed. If one can barely get 66% even with a $400 check there is no way in hell it can normally be done. stupid laws, imagine if the USA government had to be run like that???

The USA is in fact run "like that": The federal government collects money from taxpayers (just like your HOA does) and re-distributes it to those whom it thinks are more needy, e.g. those with student loans (and just like you decided to give $400 to some owners but not all owners).

I think the rationalizations in both cases (federal government and yours as HOA president-director) are remarkable.

No not the analogy I was describing.
Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

An HOA (a corporation) is not the same thing as a government. A better analogy would be comparing the HOA to another corporation with multiple owners. Changes to the legal agreements controlling the corporation's operations and individuals' ownership rights can easily require a super-majority or even unanimous approval.

Of course, owners of a profitable business are seldom as apathetic as HOA owners are, as the plots of numerous murder mysteries have shown. Perhaps we should be thankful...?

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059

Posted:

I'd be curious how your going to address the $400 in your tax return (an unintended consequence perhaps).

Although all members had an opportunity to the money, the funds were not actually given to all members.
Therefore, the funds can't be seen as a refund.

The board gave the money to members and did not pay an expense to maintain something.
Therefore, it would be hard (in my eyes) to identify the funds as an expense of the association.

Depending on the total amount, and how it's reported, the action may have prevented your association from filing an 1120-H this year.

Something to talk to your tax advisor about.

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By TimB4 on 12/22/2024 4:52 AM
I'd be curious how your going to address the $400 in your tax return (an unintended consequence perhaps).

Although all members had an opportunity to the money, the funds were not actually given to all members.
Therefore, the funds can't be seen as a refund.

The board gave the money to members and did not pay an expense to maintain something.
Therefore, it would be hard (in my eyes) to identify the funds as an expense of the association.

Depending on the total amount, and how it's reported, the action may have prevented your association from filing an 1120-H this year.

Something to talk to your tax advisor about.

yes tax advisor already told us to set aside 20 to 30% for taxes and that we'd have to do the more expensive 1120 form.

haven't gotten funds yet or dispersed them yet.

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/22/2024 4:43 AM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 8:49 PM

Posted By ElleN on 12/21/2024 3:07 PM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/20/2024 8:49 PM

Even with a $400 check per owner and 50 days to vote it took till the last weeks to get enough votes to get 66% bylaws and 75% CCR's passed as needed. If one can barely get 66% even with a $400 check there is no way in hell it can normally be done. stupid laws, imagine if the USA government had to be run like that???

The USA is in fact run "like that": The federal government collects money from taxpayers (just like your HOA does) and re-distributes it to those whom it thinks are more needy, e.g. those with student loans (and just like you decided to give $400 to some owners but not all owners).

I think the rationalizations in both cases (federal government and yours as HOA president-director) are remarkable.

No not the analogy I was describing.
Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

An HOA (a corporation) is not the same thing as a government. A better analogy would be comparing the HOA to another corporation with multiple owners. Changes to the legal agreements controlling the corporation's operations and individuals' ownership rights can easily require a super-majority or even unanimous approval.

Of course, owners of a profitable business are seldom as apathetic as HOA owners are, as the plots of numerous murder mysteries have shown. Perhaps we should be thankful...?

Even if legally HOA's are a corporation/business, in reality the services they provide are more like a government so your analogy is misleading

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/22/2024 4:26 AM
There is such a high barrier for changes to the CC&Rs for a few reasons.

One: all of the current owners bought their homes with the current CC&Rs in place. These CC&Rs are enforceable by the HOA (the board) and often by other owners as well. Changing them should require the owners to be fully informed about the proposed changes and to agree to them. It boils down to property rights since you're trying to change the nature of what people bought. Some changes affecting fundamental ownership rights may even require unanimous approval. You can see this in condo communities where all members own a fractional share of the entire condominium property.

Two, the high percentage prevents a small group from enacting changes that benefit them at the expense of the rest of the membership. This is one reason that I dislike provisions that allow CC&Rs to be changed by a majority of owners present at a special meeting, as opposed to a majority of the voting interests. Requiring attendance at a meeting creates barriers for the owners who can't be present for one reason or another. Use of proxies doesn't entirely address this, since the person who signed the proxy won't be present for any discussions that take place and that may have influenced their vote.

Third, changing the rules under which communities operate should require people to think about what they're doing and not change for the heck of it. Requiring a super-majority encourages people to think, because it forces the board to do a better job of explaining the benefits of approving the amendments. Poorly thought through amendments can tie the board's hands and can set the stage for future legal wrangling. Nether of these is good.

1. almost all owneres do not understand the CCR's and how abusive they can become in the wrong hands because almost all states do not have oversight. Literaly the wild west when it comes to legal issues. Assuming most know about CCRs is exactly opposite of reality.

2. A 50% majority is not a small group. Your example of 1/2 of quorum is farfetched for CCR amendments and probably not a single HOA has that provision. I've certainly never seen it. I've always seen it as a percentage of the entier community.

3. Requiring a supermajority does not encourage people to think. Poorly written original documents that cause the board legal issues are much more common than poorly written amendments. Glad NC only requires 10% for quorum and 2/3 of that to update bylaws.

By limiting board power and showing people that we now only need to charge them $20/year instead of $200/year I can easily see a time in the future where people vote to disband the HOA and are successful at it.

vis ta vie

ElleN (Idaho)
Posts: 1,334

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 8:49 PM

Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

Since you brazenly violated the covenant on spending HOA funds, I am not sure why you care.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/22/2024 4:26 AM
There is such a high barrier for changes to the CC&Rs for a few reasons.

One: all of the current owners bought their homes with the current CC&Rs in place. These CC&Rs are enforceable by the HOA (the board) and often by other owners as well. Changing them should require the owners to be fully informed about the proposed changes and to agree to them. It boils down to property rights since you're trying to change the nature of what people bought. Some changes affecting fundamental ownership rights may even require unanimous approval. You can see this in condo communities where all members own a fractional share of the entire condominium property.

Two, the high percentage prevents a small group from enacting changes that benefit them at the expense of the rest of the membership. This is one reason that I dislike provisions that allow CC&Rs to be changed by a majority of owners present at a special meeting, as opposed to a majority of the voting interests. Requiring attendance at a meeting creates barriers for the owners who can't be present for one reason or another. Use of proxies doesn't entirely address this, since the person who signed the proxy won't be present for any discussions that take place and that may have influenced their vote.

Third, changing the rules under which communities operate should require people to think about what they're doing and not change for the heck of it. Requiring a super-majority encourages people to think, because it forces the board to do a better job of explaining the benefits of approving the amendments. Poorly thought through amendments can tie the board's hands and can set the stage for future legal wrangling. Nether of these is good.

Well said.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/22/2024 10:38 AM
.... snip ....

1. almost all owneres do not understand the CCR's and how abusive they can become in the wrong hands because almost all states do not have oversight. Literaly the wild west when it comes to legal issues. Assuming most know about CCRs is exactly opposite of reality.

Laws are written assuming that buyers do understand. If states have inadequate or no community association laws, then contract and/or non-profit corporation laws will apply.

Quote:

2. A 50% majority is not a small group. Your example of 1/2 of quorum is farfetched for CCR amendments and probably not a single HOA has that provision. I've certainly never seen it. I've always seen it as a percentage of the entier community.

We had posters in the past who've claimed exactly that. Perhaps their communities were outliers, but laws governing an entire group have to account for the outliers as well. At any rate, quorum requirements are typically low. Combined with a requirement to conduct the vote at a special meeting (it happens), this will allow approval of amendments by much fewer than half the community. It's basic math, and it's why I cite it as an issue. if the vote is conducted by snail mail or electronically and no meeting is required, then quorum doesn't matter and the result depends on vote count.

Quote:

3. Requiring a supermajority does not encourage people to think. Poorly written original documents that cause the board legal issues are much more common than poorly written amendments. Glad NC only requires 10% for quorum and 2/3 of that to update bylaws.

It forces the board to communicate more if they want the amendments to be approved. Homeowners have to actively not listen if they wish to remain ignorant. But some of it is going to sink in whether people like it or not.

Quote:

By limiting board power and showing people that we now only need to charge them $20/year instead of $200/year I can easily see a time in the future where people vote to disband the HOA and are successful at it.

If the end game is destroying the HOA, then one wonders why you'd go through the effort and expense of amending the governing docs. I suppose Machiavelli would approve... /s

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Wendy

Please clarify for me:

1. What % of owners are required to establish a Quorum?
2. How may owners are there?
3. What % of owners are required to approve Covenant or Bylaw Changes?
3A. Is it a % of the Quorum or of a % OF ALL OWNERS?

To answer for my association:

1. 20%
2. 112
3. 2.3rds of ALL OWNERS to approve Covenant changes and 50% of ALL OWNERS to approve Bylaw changes

I think our numbers prevent a small group from controlling.

Thanks for answering.

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

I can't see that Wendy's covenants don't permit giving every owner who votes $400.

I agree with Wendy that it's very rare that a XX % of quorum present AT a meeting can change the CC&Rs or bylaws--from what I've seen here over the years.

I AM surprised that absentee owners do not get to vote!!?? And an HOA lawyer approved that??? In CA, any owner of record must be remitted to vote.

I applaude Wendy for continuing to learn more and more about HOAs.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By KerryL1 on 12/23/2024 7:31 PM
... snip ...
I AM surprised that absentee owners do not get to vote!!?? And an HOA lawyer approved that??? In CA, any owner of record must be remitted to vote.

We had a discussion some years ago where someone said that corporate condo owners did not have a right to vote in their state. Since many absentee owners are investors/LLCs, this may be the same thing. I also don't see how this doesn't create two classes of ownership or set condo associations up for litigation over vote results. And boards can't gripe about not making quorum if a chunk of the membership is disenfranchised.

Another instance of lawmakers not considering all of the consequences of their legislation...

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/24/2024 4:46 AM

Posted By KerryL1 on 12/23/2024 7:31 PM
... snip ...
I AM surprised that absentee owners do not get to vote!!?? And an HOA lawyer approved that??? In CA, any owner of record must be remitted to vote.

We had a discussion some years ago where someone said that corporate condo owners did not have a right to vote in their state. Since many absentee owners are investors/LLCs, this may be the same thing. I also don't see how this doesn't create two classes of ownership or set condo associations up for litigation over vote results. And boards can't gripe about not making quorum if a chunk of the membership is disenfranchised.

Another instance of lawmakers not considering all of the consequences of their legislation...

Upon further thought... this doesn't work.

The number of absentee owners/corporate owners is a variable number and outside of the control of the board. However, other parts of the governing docs such as those dealing with quorum numbers and the percentages of affirmative votes needed to approve whatever are based on the assumption that the number of voting members is fixed.

Which means that whether or not something is approved will be dependent on timing and how many absentee/corporate owners you have when the vote takes place. For low stakes decisions it may not matter much, but for the big stakes issues it should matter.

Some condo communities are mostly rentals. I vaguely remember a poster here saying that 75% of their units are rented. Do people think that amendments to the governing docs should be decided by 25% of the owners? And is it 25%, or is it a super-majority of 25% since the 25% are now the "Voting interests" (or were on the day of the vote, who knows about the number when election/amendment materials were prepared or what they are today)?

If you were trying to design software to handle elections and voting with these rules, it would crash. This is because the business processes that you're trying to automate are unstable. That can't be right. At the very least the CC&Rs and bylaws need to be re-written to account for variable inputs and make them consistent throughout. I'd like to see the lawyers try... /evil-grin

ElleN (Idaho)
Posts: 1,334

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/20/2024 8:49 PM

Luckly will only take a majority of owner occupied homes in the future was one change. so future changes will be "easier". About a dozen owners (mostly landlords) didnt' care about getting a $400 check.

I think someone mis-interpreted the above to mean that the HOA prohibits absentee owners from voting.

ElleN (Idaho)
Posts: 1,334

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 8:49 PM

Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

?

I think the CC&Rs are more like the U. S. Constitution. Inter alia to amend the U. S. Constitution takes the ratification of a whopping 3/4s of the states. Thirty-two years have passed since the last Constitutional amendment was passed.

What Congress does is closer to a HOA Board creating the policies and rules implementing the covenants IMO.

PatriciaL1 (California)
Posts: 78

Posted:

Curious - what's the downside to disbanding the HOA? Esp if it's only mowing the back acre....

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Wendy wrote: "Luckily will only take a majority of owner occupied homes in the future was one change. so future changes will be 'easier.'" And I did interpret it to mean absentee owners could not vote.

So that I can comprehend this better: Wendy, please cite the exact new wording on this point?

I still don't see why Wendy's covenants prohibit giving $400 to every owner who votes.

I believe that Cathy recalls a Texas post of about 1-2 years ago who stated that their Board did not want "snowbirds" to serve and made a rule or bylaw stating they could not serve as directors. I believe this poster said TX statutes permitted such a ban on these owners. But I think it turned out the snowbird OP was able to be elected to the Board.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PatriciaL1 on 12/24/2024 11:44 AM
Curious - what's the downside to disbanding the HOA? Esp if it's only mowing the back acre....

Off the top of my head, they will have to sell off any commonly owned property, and something like this often needs unanimous approval from the membership.

Assuming they're successful, they'll also have to be concerned about what the new owner decides to do with the land. It may end up being something that the homeowners won't be happy with. Fortunately, a small piece of land won't accommodate a strip mall or drive-thru. On the other hand, if the piece of land is too small, they may not have any interested buyers - especially if the owners in the existing community have been disinterested in maintaining their property.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 12/23/2024 2:30 PM
Wendy

Please clarify for me:

1. What % of owners are required to establish a Quorum?
2. How may owners are there?
3. What % of owners are required to approve Covenant or Bylaw Changes?
3A. Is it a % of the Quorum or of a % OF ALL OWNERS?

To answer for my association:

1. 20%
2. 112
3. 2.3rds of ALL OWNERS to approve Covenant changes and 50% of ALL OWNERS to approve Bylaw changes

I think our numbers prevent a small group from controlling.

Thanks for answering.

Identical to us including # of owners.

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

JohnC ??

ElleN (Idaho)
Posts: 1,334

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PatriciaL1 on 12/24/2024 11:44 AM
Curious - what's the downside to disbanding the HOA? Esp if it's only mowing the back acre....

The work in getting the city to approve (possibly) and 100% of the owners to consent; the HOA attorney's fees; selling the land; and possibly lower property values.

These days many cities require HOAs for all new developments. I think whether the city has to approve the disbanding of a HOA (before disbanding could occur) would be a case of first impression before the courts.

The very first call I would make would be to the city land use department.

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Are you sure about this, Wendy? "Glad NC only requires 10% for quorum and 2/3 of that to update bylaws."Please cite the statute.

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By ElleN on 12/24/2024 8:21 AM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 8:49 PM

Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

?

I think the CC&Rs are more like the U. S. Constitution. Inter alia to amend the U. S. Constitution takes the ratification of a whopping 3/4s of the states. Thirty-two years have passed since the last Constitutional amendment was passed.

What Congress does is closer to a HOA Board creating the policies and rules implementing the covenants IMO.

sorry the height of ones grass or the color of ones home or the height of a fence are all frivolous concerns, and shouldnt' be compared to the serious topics covered by the US constitution.

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By KerryL1 on 12/24/2024 6:34 PM
Are you sure about this, Wendy? "Glad NC only requires 10% for quorum and 2/3 of that to update bylaws."Please cite the statute.

North Carolina Planned Community Act (Chapter 47F):

Section 47F-3-109(a): "Unless the bylaws provide otherwise, a quorum is present throughout any meeting of the association if persons entitled to cast ten percent (10%) of the votes which may be cast for election of the executive board are present in person or by proxy at the beginning of the meeting."

North Carolina Nonprofit Corporation Act (Chapter 55A):

Section 55A-7-22(a): "Unless this Chapter, the articles of incorporation, or bylaws provide for a higher or lower quorum, ten percent (10%) of the votes entitled to be cast on a matter shall be represented at a meeting of members to constitute a quorum on that matter."

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PatriciaL1 on 12/24/2024 11:44 AM
Curious - what's the downside to disbanding the HOA? Esp if it's only mowing the back acre....

Anal Annie and Nosy Karen's wont' be able to send out violation letters and have a inept board handle their dirty work anymore is the main disadvantage.
Ballot also asked people how often inspections should be conducted and 2/3 choose not to have any paid violations reports and to only rely on self reporting. Our byalws also state along with NC law that we don't' have to enforce CCR's. the HOA's CCR's are so vague 30% of them have been thrown out by the courts. Our HOA is slowly becoming toothless. People seem to like it that way.

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 12/23/2024 5:17 AM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/22/2024 10:38 AM
.... snip ....

We had posters in the past who've claimed exactly that. Perhaps their communities were outliers, but laws governing an entire group have to account for the outliers as well. At any rate, quorum requirements are typically low. Combined with a requirement to conduct the vote at a special meeting (it happens), this will allow approval of amendments by much fewer than half the community. It's basic math, and it's why I cite it as an issue. if the vote is conducted by snail mail or electronically and no meeting is required, then quorum doesn't matter and the result depends on vote count.

LOL well if so many people are claiming that, then show me jsut one example of it. Its more likely an alternative truth cited to enforce a pro HOA narrative. sorry I dont' buy it and stand by the fact that if not even 2/3rd of the voting population votes for president, why the hell should be force 2/3rd to vote for pedantic HOA stuff? over 50% majority is fine.

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By ElleN on 12/22/2024 10:54 AM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 8:49 PM

Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

Since you brazenly violated the covenant on spending HOA funds, I am not sure why you care.

Nope it was a group effort supported by over 100 residents to get $400 refund checks and our covenants don't' say it's a violation.

vis ta vie

ElleN (Idaho)
Posts: 1,334

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/25/2024 7:51 AM

Posted By ElleN on 12/22/2024 10:54 AM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 8:49 PM

Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

Since you brazenly violated the covenant on spending HOA funds, I am not sure why you care.

Nope it was a group effort supported by over 100 residents to get $400 refund checks and our covenants don't' say it's a violation.

By your reading, the covenants also do not say it is a violation for you to give $5000 to neighbor Jones in exchange for his promise to attend every open board meeting next year.

In fact doing so does violate the covenants.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Wendy

Please answer for me:

1. What % of owners are required to establish a Quorum?
2. How may owners are there?
3. What % of owners are required to approve Covenant or Bylaw Changes?
3A. Is it a % of the Quorum or of a % OF ALL OWNERS?

Thanks

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By ElleN on 12/25/2024 10:45 AM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/25/2024 7:51 AM

Posted By ElleN on 12/22/2024 10:54 AM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/21/2024 8:49 PM

Imagine the USA government or state governments needing 75% of the population to vote to pass a law. Not even 75% of the voting population votes for President. HOA's CCR's are written to be impossible to change For the 1st 20 years our said we needed 90% to change them, even more insane.

Since you brazenly violated the covenant on spending HOA funds, I am not sure why you care.

Nope it was a group effort supported by over 100 residents to get $400 refund checks and our covenants don't' say it's a violation.

By your reading, the covenants also do not say it is a violation for you to give $5000 to neighbor Jones in exchange for his promise to attend every open board meeting next year.

In fact doing so does violate the covenants.

the bylaws now state that any expense more than 10% of the budget or $900 has to have board approval and the board would not approve that.

vis ta vie

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 12/25/2024 11:31 AM
Wendy

Please answer for me:

1. What % of owners are required to establish a Quorum?
2. How may owners are there?
3. What % of owners are required to approve Covenant or Bylaw Changes?
3A. Is it a % of the Quorum or of a % OF ALL OWNERS?

Thanks

1. 10
2. 150
3. 50% of total for covenant changes
3. 50% of qurorum for bylaws
3a. see above

vis ta vie

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/25/2024 6:32 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 12/25/2024 11:31 AM
Wendy

Please answer for me:

1. What % of owners are required to establish a Quorum?
2. How may owners are there?
3. What % of owners are required to approve Covenant or Bylaw Changes?
3A. Is it a % of the Quorum or of a % OF ALL OWNERS?

Thanks

1. 10
2. 150
3. 50% of total for covenant changes
3. 50% of qurorum for bylaws
3a. see above

I would like to see Quorum at 20% and Covenant Change at 2/3rds of all owners. 50% on Bylaw changes of all owners is fine.

WendyM5 (North Carolina)
Posts: 1,522

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 12/25/2024 11:08 PM

Posted By WendyM5 on 12/25/2024 6:32 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 12/25/2024 11:31 AM
Wendy

Please answer for me:

1. What % of owners are required to establish a Quorum?
2. How may owners are there?
3. What % of owners are required to approve Covenant or Bylaw Changes?
3A. Is it a % of the Quorum or of a % OF ALL OWNERS?

Thanks

1. 10
2. 150
3. 50% of total for covenant changes
3. 50% of qurorum for bylaws
3a. see above

I would like to see Quorum at 20% and Covenant Change at 2/3rds of all owners. 50% on Bylaw changes of all owners is fine.

no it's 50% of quorum for bylaws in other words 10% or 15 people could show up and 8 of them could vote to change the bylaws or boot out a bad director.
your stance is typicall of HOA board members, which is why nothing got done for 28 years in our HOA. you might as well write you want board members to have allthe control and membership to be at their mercy. Also only need 50% to dissolve the HOA instead of previous 75% and instead of the ridiculous 80% NC law for hoa's after 1999. Luckily we are pre 1999 and can make something more reasonable.

vis ta vie

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Wendy

I do not like the % being of the Quorum. As you said, a very small group could control.