Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!
Tuesday, August 20, 2019
Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!
Only members have access to all features.
Click here to join HOATalk for Free! Members click here to login and access all features.
Subject: Petition for Rule Change
Prev Next
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Author Messages
ThomasC11
(California)

Posts:209


08/04/2019 12:16 AM  
My fellow Board members and I implemented a parking policy and it (no surprise) was met with resistance. 5% of homeowner filed petition, special meeting took place 2 weeks ago, only 168 of 914 voted.

That is less than 25%. New attorney says meeting can be adjourned, and based on our reduced quorum provision in Bylaws on reconvened meetings, the rule change quorum drops to 25% as well?

I understand why this reduced quorum applies to the Annual Election, but for a rule change? That means that 13% of the members can control the Association and its rules the way they seem fit.

Seems illogical and incorrect.

Anyone know if this is really the case?

thank you
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:8396


08/04/2019 5:50 AM  
Apathy

Former HOA President
KerryL1
(California)

Posts:6534


08/04/2019 8:13 AM  
I don't have time to look it up, Thomas, but check davis-stirling.com for CA statutes on how Owners may overturn rules. Look under "rules" in their index.

Did your board make the rule legally (in CA)? Did the board propose it at one meeting, send it our for Owners' 28-day review & comments, and then discuss the proposed rule again at a 2nd open meeting, where it permitted Owners' comments, and vote on it at that time.
ThomasC11
(California)

Posts:209


08/04/2019 8:32 AM  
yes we followed all requirements, had 3 attorneys review and approve.

just need to know if 25% reduced quorum is allowed here.

RichardP13
(California)

Posts:3763


08/04/2019 8:34 AM  
Let's look at the numbers. A minimum of three Board members can dictate rules upon 914 homes, yet it's not fair that at least 115 can reverse a rule. That seems highly unfair. You may have Board members that have never been even elected, but were just appointed into office.

And yes, it is legal, California Civil Code §4365(d)

Been there, Done that
ThomasC11
(California)

Posts:209


08/04/2019 8:45 AM  
thanks for the victim point of view, the #'s are less than that 13 % would be majority of 25%. That is not the majority of homeowners.
RichardP13
(California)

Posts:3763


08/04/2019 9:13 AM  
Posted By ThomasC11 on 08/04/2019 8:45 AM
thanks for the victim point of view, the #'s are less than that 13 % would be majority of 25%. That is not the majority of homeowners.



Again, .0033 percent can enact a rule change, possibly without following rules, and 115 people can object to the rule change and you feel that is unfair? If you don't like the law, then change the law.

You should know what the rules are BEFORE you start the process. You also need to get consensus from voters before you start.Homeowners exercised their legal rights in trying to reverse something they didn't believe in. What did you count on, people sleeping?

Been there, Done that
KerryL1
(California)

Posts:6534


08/04/2019 10:40 AM  
So, Thomas, here's Richard's citation:" Civil Code §4365. Veto of Rule Change by Members. (d) The rule change may be reversed by the affirmative vote of a majority of a quorum of the members, pursuant to Section 4070, or if the declaration or bylaws require a greater percentage, by the affirmative vote of the percentage required."

So it looks like the members need a majority of quorum to overturn the new rule. So, the question is, at least In think it is, what % of all voters is quorum in your HOA? Read the rest of 4365 too.


Not sure why Richard is being so snarky.
ThomasC11
(California)

Posts:209


08/04/2019 1:04 PM  
Because DICK is short for Richard.

Bylaws say 51 % is quorum. On reconvened meeting it is 25 %. Fitting for an election, not a rule change. Show me case law where this has occurred DICK.
JohnC46
(South Carolina)

Posts:8550


08/04/2019 1:24 PM  
Posted By ThomasC11 on 08/04/2019 1:04 PM
Because DICK is short for Richard.

Bylaws say 51 % is quorum. On reconvened meeting it is 25 %. Fitting for an election, not a rule change. Show me case law where this has occurred DICK.




My personal opinion is a Special Meeting should be run under the Annual Meeting Guidelines so I say the attorney is right.
RichardP13
(California)

Posts:3763


08/04/2019 2:31 PM  
Posted By ThomasC11 on 08/04/2019 1:04 PM
Because DICK is short for Richard.

Bylaws say 51 % is quorum. On reconvened meeting it is 25 %. Fitting for an election, not a rule change. Show me case law where this has occurred DICK.



And you're an asshole. Find it yourself!

Been there, Done that
RichardP13
(California)

Posts:3763


08/04/2019 2:32 PM  
Posted By JohnC46 on 08/04/2019 1:24 PM
Posted By ThomasC11 on 08/04/2019 1:04 PM
Because DICK is short for Richard.

Bylaws say 51 % is quorum. On reconvened meeting it is 25 %. Fitting for an election, not a rule change. Show me case law where this has occurred DICK.




My personal opinion is a Special Meeting should be run under the Annual Meeting Guidelines so I say the attorney is right.



And I assume you're a, whatever is derogatory for John.

Been there, Done that
RichardP13
(California)

Posts:3763


08/04/2019 2:34 PM  
Posted By ThomasC11 on 08/04/2019 1:04 PM
Because DICK is short for Richard.

Bylaws say 51 % is quorum. On reconvened meeting it is 25 %. Fitting for an election, not a rule change. Show me case law where this has occurred DICK.



In case you're interested, the meeting would have been a Member meeting and those rules apply. You're more than welcome to work to change the law, versus crying in your koolaid.

Been there, Done that
ThomasC11
(California)

Posts:209


08/04/2019 2:44 PM  
thanks DICK.
AugustinD


Posts:1886


08/04/2019 3:06 PM  
Posted By ThomasC11 on 08/04/2019 12:16 AM
based on our reduced quorum provision in Bylaws on reconvened meetings, the rule change quorum drops to 25% as well?

Posted By ThomasC11 on 08/04/2019 1:04 PM
Bylaws say 51 % is quorum. On reconvened meeting it is 25 %.


Thomas, can you please quote your Bylaws verbatim on this point, including the heading of the section where this quorum reduction bylaw is listed? Alternatively, if you can attach a copy of the page(s) of your HOA's Bylaws that speak about quorum and reducing it, this might be best.

I looked at the davis-stirling.com site for some case law, but of all the cases listed at https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/Case-Law/Case-Law-Intro, nothing leapt out at me.

This site seems to me to reinforce what your HOA's attorney said: https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/Member-Quorum

ThomasC11
(California)

Posts:209


08/08/2019 10:28 PM  
Bylaws section below, thanks!

The presence in person or by proxy of fifty percent (50%) of the Record Date members shall constitute a quorum. If any meeting cannot be held because a quorum is not present, the Record Date members present may adjourn said meeting to a time not less than forty eight (48) hours or more than thirty (30) days from the time the original meeting was called; at said adjourned meeting the Record Date Members, holding twenty-five percent (25%) of the voting power present in person or by proxy shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
AugustinD


Posts:1886


08/09/2019 4:38 AM  
What's the heading on this Bylaw section?
Else so far, it looks to me like the attorney is right.
RichardP13
(California)

Posts:3763


08/09/2019 7:13 AM  
So now you have solved the issue with reduced quorum, who actually votes to adjourn the meeting. It isn't the attorney, it's not the president, nor the Board, it is actually the members that actually showed up to the meeting. The presiding officer, or a member makes a motion and the members will vote yes or no. I have seen instances where the members actually voted no. To succeed, you have to know how the game is played and the rules that you play with.

DICK

Been there, Done that
ThomasC11
(California)

Posts:209


08/09/2019 7:27 AM  
Thanks Richard, homeowners who really wanted parking should have gone out and voted or collected proxies.

MEMBER'S MEETINGS
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > Petition for Rule Change



Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!



News Articles Provided by: Community Associations Network
News, articles and blogs about condos/HOA's

Only members have access to all features.
Click here to join HOATalk for Free! Members click here to login and access all features.







General Legal Notice:  The content of forum messages are from the posting member and have not been reviewed nor endorsed by HOATalk.com.  Messages posted by HOATalk or other members are for informational purposes only, are not legal or professional advice and do not constitute an attorney-client relationship.  Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.  HOATalk is not a licensed attorney, CPA, tax advisor, financial advisor or any other licensed professional.  HOATalk accepts ads from sponsors but does not verify sponsor qualifications nor endorse/guarantee any sponsor's product or service.
HindmanSanchez Legal Notice:  (For messages posted by HindmanSanchez) This message has been prepared by HindmanSanchez for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Members of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send us confidential information unless you speak with one of our attorneys and get authorization to send that information to us. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in our firm. Our attorneys are licensed to practice law in the state of Colorado only.

Legal Notice For Messages Posted by Sponsoring Attorneys: This message has been prepared by the sponsoring attorney for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send any sponsoring attorney confidential information unless you speak with the sponsoring attorney or an attorney from the sponsoring attorney’s firm and get authorization to send that information to them. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in the firm of the sponsoring attorney. Sponsoring attorneys that post messages here are licensed to practice law in a specific state or states as indicated in their message signature or sponsor’s profile page. (NOTE: A ‘sponsoring attorney’ is an attorney that is a HOATalk.com official sponsor and is identified as such in the posted message or on our sponsor page.)

Copyright HOA Talk.com, A Service of Community123 LLC ( Homeowners Association Discussions )   Terms Of Use  Privacy Statement