💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

MargaretA2 (Arizona)
Posts: 8
Posted:
When state statues say the articles of incorporation OR bylaws may provide for staggering of the directors' terms, do the articles have to specify it before you can put it in the bylaws since the articles take precedence over bylaws?
MichaelK11 (Texas)
Posts: 432
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MargaretA2 on 08/24/2009 2:49 PM
When state statues say the articles of incorporation OR bylaws may provide for staggering of the directors' terms, do the articles have to specify it before you can put it in the bylaws since the articles take precedence over bylaws?
I'm pretty sure that means that if the Bylaws provide for directors terms and the Articles say nothing about it, then that is OK.

My HOA's Articles, Bylaws and Declarations provide for precedence, but only when there is a conflict; when they can be taken as coherent and consistent, then that is how they should be interpreted (that's how our rules of precedence are stated); when there is no conflict (a matter is only covered in one, as in your case), then precedence is not an issue (that's what I think makes sense).
MargaretA2 (Arizona)
Posts: 8
Posted:
I kind of figured that too, but the law is so ambiguous. Thanks.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Margaret,

I see you are quoting from a nonprofit corp statute -- 10-3806. What is actually meant is that the requirement may be found in either the articles or the bylaws; if not in either then the board cannot stagger the terms.

IMO, this is a provision that would be found in the bylaws. And, no it does not need to be in the articles before it can be put into the bylaws. The articles generally do not go into great detail about the corp's organization; that is generally left for the bylaws. Of course there are exceptions to every rule!!
MargaretA2 (Arizona)
Posts: 8
Posted:
Thanks very much. I am assuming then, that the bylaws can be changed at any time by the board to include this option even if the option has not been in any of the previous bylaws.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Margaret,

Correct, BUT only if the board is authorized to amend the bylaws. Although I believe a large majority of bylaws do give this authority to the board, some do require a vote of the members. Just make certain this a function the board can perform w/o a member vote.

MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Right, Mary.

Our By-laws require the same approval process, and authority, as our CC&Rs, which is to say both require 51% of those association members eligible to vote to pass and/or amend.

Our board cannot change/amend the By-laws on its own.
MargaretA2 (Arizona)
Posts: 8
Posted:
So, if our CC&Rs say, "Neither the articles nor the by-laws shall for any reason be amended or otherwise changed or interpreted so as to be inconsistent with this Declaration.".....and there is no specific language in the CC&Rs allowing for staggered terms....

We can't then amend the bylaws?
MargaretA2 (Arizona)
Posts: 8
Posted:
I guess I should have said....does this mean we can't amend the bylaws to incorporate staggered terms?
MichaelK11 (Texas)
Posts: 432
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MargaretA2 on 08/24/2009 4:42 PM
So, if our CC&Rs say, "Neither the articles nor the by-laws shall for any reason be amended or otherwise changed or interpreted so as to be inconsistent with this Declaration.".....and there is no specific language in the CC&Rs allowing for staggered terms....

We can't then amend the bylaws?
If your CC&Rs don't say anything about staggered terms, then amending your Bylaws to stagger the terms does not make them inconsistent with your CC&Rs. Therefore, you could amend your Bylaws to stagger terms, using whatever procedure the Bylaws provide for amendments.

If your CC&Rs specify terms of Directors in such a way that clearly does not have them staggered, then you would have to amend both your CC&Rs and your Bylaws so that staggered terms does not make the Bylaws inconsistent with the CC&Rs.

The amendment procedures for the CC&Rs may be different from the Bylaws. For example, our Declarations of CE&Rs require 90% of eligible voting members to approve, whereas amending our Bylaws only requires 51% of eligible voting members.
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posted:

Margaret,
In my experience rewritting a set of documents, the Articles of Inc should contain how the Board numbers and term limints and percentage of votes for elections, etc. Then the Bylaws are a more explicit set of how to's for elections, term limits, etc. So in other words, to add to the bylaws, you will need to address the Articles as well. As long as you are getting a vote out for one item, it is totally easy to have them both done at the same time.
MargaretA2 (Arizona)
Posts: 8
Posted:
Thank you very much. Our CC&Rs say we must have 6 members on the board, President, Vice President, Secretary Treasurer and 3 directors. We believe that to mean that all 6 are "directors", 3 of which will be officers. It goes on to say that the board may elect officers in accordance with the Articles and By-laws as the same may be amended from time to time.

Ergo, I think amending the bylaws to allow for staggered terms is not inconsistent with the CC&Rs. BTW, the bylaws state that they may be amended or repealed and new bylaws adopted by a majority of the directors.
MargaretA2 (Arizona)
Posts: 8
Posted:
Thanks, Donna. Great idea.
MichaelK11 (Texas)
Posts: 432
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DonnaS on 08/24/2009 5:06 PM

Margaret,
In my experience rewritting a set of documents, the Articles of Inc should contain how the Board numbers and term limints and percentage of votes for elections, etc. Then the Bylaws are a more explicit set of how to's for elections, term limits, etc. So in other words, to add to the bylaws, you will need to address the Articles as well. As long as you are getting a vote out for one item, it is totally easy to have them both done at the same time.
Our Articles don't say that much at all -- just the parameters of the HOA, its purposes, and membership. Several sections simply refer to the Bylaws and Declarations. These Articles of Incorporation specify a BoD of 3 Directors but specifically permit that to be changed by amendment of the Bylaws, and they contain nothing about terms, limits or voting details, other than cumulative voting is prohibited. So, although the Articles take precedence over the Bylaws and Declarations, there's not much there to conflict with those. I suspect this is the usual situation.
Quote:
Posted By MargaretA2 on 08/24/2009 5:10 PM
Thank you very much. Our CC&Rs say we must have 6 members on the board, President, Vice President, Secretary Treasurer and 3 directors. We believe that to mean that all 6 are "directors", 3 of which will be officers. It goes on to say that the board may elect officers in accordance with the Articles and By-laws as the same may be amended from time to time.

Ergo, I think amending the bylaws to allow for staggered terms is not inconsistent with the CC&Rs. BTW, the bylaws state that they may be amended or repealed and new bylaws adopted by a majority of the directors.
Your reading of the 3 Officers plus 3 [implied at-large] Directors seems reasonable to me, as does the Board electing the officers from among the Directors, but other things look a bit strange. Please, could you post-quote those provisions of the Bylaws, here?

If you amend your Bylaws to stagger terms, then I would also change the number from 6 to 5 or 7. A common and recommended practice is to have an odd number of members of any governing body, in order to reduce the likelihood of tie votes.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Margaret,

If your articles do not address how the board is elected and do not say anything about staggered terms then the bylaws do not need to reference the articles. The only time ref to the articles would be made is if whatever is being addressed is mentioned in the articles. Here is a summary of what the articles and the bylaws generally contain. Of course the developer can put whatever he chooses into either document, so it will vary from assn to assn but what you will read below is the generally accepted listing:

Articles of Inc.:
Corporate name; name of the incorporator; whether it is a stock or non-stock corp; the purpose of the corp; if a nonstock corp whether it is for profit or nonprofit; the number and names of the initial board of directors; the name of the registered agent; the location of the corp's registered office.

Generally the articles to not go into great detail about the corp's operations.

Bylaws:
How directors are elected; how meetings of directors are conducted; how meetings of members are conducted; what officers the organization will have and a description of their duties; how elections shall be held; how meetings of the members are conducted; how elections are conducted; what the powers and duties of the BOD are.

The bylaws generally contain the most fundamental principles and rules regarding the nature of the org. In most states, the org. does not formally exist until the bylaws have been adopted.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Margaret,

Sorry, I forgot to mention that the articles of inc. generally require a vote of the members -- perhaps 75% or higher.
MichaelK11 (Texas)
Posts: 432
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MargaretA2 on 08/24/2009 4:42 PM
So, if our CC&Rs say, "Neither the articles nor the by-laws shall for any reason be amended or otherwise changed or interpreted so as to be inconsistent with this Declaration.".....and there is no specific language in the CC&Rs allowing for staggered terms....

We can't then amend the bylaws?
You started by discussing your Corporate Articles and Bylaws, then you mentioned your Declarations here, and then we went back to your Articles and Bylaws. There are three documents, not two. Generally, the procedures in question are specified in the Bylaws, but could you also post anything from your CC&Rs and your Articles that might conflict with or restrict your Bylaws. If you have softcopy and don't need to keep them confidential, you could append them as attachments to a post.
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posted:

Mary,

You have got to stop making general statements like above--"Sorry, I forgot to mention that the articles of inc. generally require a vote of the members -- perhaps 75% or higher. "

I have documents from my 5 associations and ALL , I repeat--ALL require the same percentage of a members vote to change the CC&Rs, the Articles and the BYlaws. If one requires 2/3rds, all parts require 2/3rds to change by a vote of the members.

If Articles address anything about voting, changing, Directors, percentages or bylaws, changing the Bylaws requires the Articles to be addressed as well so they do not conflict any other documents. The Articles have precedence over the Bylaws. Your statements many times are typical of Arizona but are not typical of most other States.
RogerB (Colorado)
Posts: 5,067
Posted:
Donna, I found Mary's comment to be accurate in that the Articles do require a significant number of the unit owners approval to amend.

I think we all make generalized statements based on our experience. For example you stated "ALL require the same percentage of a members vote to change the CC&Rs, the Articles and the BYlaws.If one requires 2/3rds, all parts require 2/3rds to change by a vote of the members." This is not correct. Each document should state what is required to amend that document and the CC&R's requirement may have been modified by a later State statute (such as in Colorado). For example, the members (not the owners) can amend the Bylaws and it may take considerably less (such as 2/3 of those members present at a meeting) than the CC&Rs and the Articles (which will require, at a minimum, over 50% of all owners).

MargaretA2 (Arizona)
Posts: 8
Posted:
Our bylaws are easy. They say the board can amend them. Our Articles are silent so we must go by state law.

Our state law says, "the amendment to be adopted shall be approved by two-thirds of the votes cast or a majority of the voting power, whichever is less."

Can I interpret that to mean two-thirds of "eligible" voters, or a majority of all members if everyone can vote, regardless of status?
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posted:

Thank You Roger for the correction. My experience with our Florida documents all use the same percentages so I based my statement on that. I forget that every State has unique ways of rules and laws for HOAs.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Donna,

Well, I guess you need to stop thinking every state operates like FL. The info I posted does not just apply to AZ, however, if you really think it does just keep in mind the fact that the OP IS from AZ. How FL does it won't do her any good!
MichaelK11 (Texas)
Posts: 432
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MargaretA2 on 08/25/2009 8:16 AM
Our bylaws are easy. They say the board can amend them. Our Articles are silent so we must go by state law.

Our state law says, "the amendment to be adopted shall be approved by two-thirds of the votes cast or a majority of the voting power, whichever is less."

Can I interpret that to mean two-thirds of "eligible" voters, or a majority of all members if everyone can vote, regardless of status?
Margaret, I think that means two-thirds of votes cast at a meeting with a quorum or by written ballot without a meeting, so you have to see how many you need for a quorum or the procedure for a written ballot (if permitted).

A majority of the voting power could mean over 50% of those eligible to vote (paid dues, in good standing, etc.). Our Bylaws specify that quorum and voting percentages are all based on number of eligible votes cast vs number of eligible voters; but your may mean that or may mean eligible votes cast vs number of members.

I still don't think you need to amend your Articles (nor probably your CC&Rs or Declarations) if they are silent on staggering of terms. I still think you should just post the relevant sections. Just copy and paste them, or attach the entire documents if you have them as computer files.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Margaret,

First of all, the statute you are quoting (10-11003) is a nonprofit corp law. Those laws pertain to all nonprofit corps, not just HOAs. Except for the HOAs, the members of those corps do not pay dues so whether or not they are delinquent does not apply. Secondly, the statute states "a majority of the voting power". "Voting power" being the key phrase, tells me it means all the members. Because of these two factors I interpret "majority of the voting power" to mean ALL the members are entitled to vote.

I interpret the whole statement to mean, if 2/3 of the actual votes cast is less than a majority of all the members then that is the number of votes needed. If your membership equals 100 members, a majority would be 51. If only 70 cast a vote, only 46 votes in favor of the issue would be needed (70 x 2/3 = 46).

Of course, that's just my opinion!

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here