CCRs > HOA Forum > HOA Talk.com

Unanswered

Active Topics

Forums

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions

Subject: CCRs

Prev Next

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Author

Messages

PaulM
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:1347

12/19/2007 3:08 PM
JillC: You have posted concern over 2 separate issues. 1) Your Parked/stored truck in your driveway which the Board says is in 'violation'. Based on your assn's wording...."A reasonable number of trailers, motorhomes, trucks, campers, boats and other such recreational vehicles, and inoperable vehicles belonging to an owner, may be stored within the project if kept within a fenced side or rear yard area or within an accessory building constructed upon the Lot". It clearly states that the noted vehicles, operable/inoperable, may be stored IF KEPT WITHIN A FENCED SIDE OR REAR YARD OR WITHIN AN ACCESSORY BLDG. ... Since your truck (whether its the same as any other or different from other trucks) is in your driveway on a regular basis for regular use, this is against what the docs state is allowed. Further, you state you cannot store the truck behind the fence since you already have an RV STORED/PARKED BEHIND THE FENCE. And, you have 3 other cars on your driveway. I don't think a debate on the meaning of 'store' vs. 'park' is relevant to this situation UNLESS your documents also have a reference to PARKING VEHICLES and what is allowed/where. If PARKING is not referred elsewhere,we have to take it as parking and storing being one and the same for document purposes--again, only if there is no other reference to PARKING VEHICLES when and where. 2) The ability of the Parking amendment to pass/not pass. Your docs state 67% of owners TO VOTE YES to pass an amendment--67% of 45 owners is 30 owners to vote yes. The amendment did not pass. If there are 'other trucks' parked/stored on the driveways and you believe you are being singled out unnecessarily, I suggest you take photos of the other trucks and mail them to the Board with your concern over selective enforcement. , as one and the same for document purposes. given.what your docs state on parking vehicles. Is the only reference the one you noted above? If so, this is clearly--UNCLEAR!

JillC
(California)

Posts:26

12/19/2007 3:24 PM
Boy, did I learn today!! There are no other vehicle restrictions than the ones noted, that was the main reason we bought in an ASSociation. Now regardless of my vehicle, the BOD has chosen to pick me out because of the look of my truck/commercial vehicle. Also, Commercial is not defined but our CCRs do say all state vehicle codes apply and we got the definition there that includes pickup trucks big and small to be registered commercial, So the BOD has to deal with selective enforcement now. I thank everyone for their opinion and comments.

GeraldT4

Posts:1022

12/19/2007 3:31 PM
Posted By MicheleD on 12/19/2007 1:39 PM GeraldT, yes, they are. That is the point. If someone pulls their car into their garage, they are storing it in the garage until the next time they use it. They are also parking it there. The definitions are not mutually exclusive. There is not inherent "either/or" about them. They are synonyms. Conversely, if you do NOT park your car (truck, motorcycle, whatever) in the garage, but on your driveway instead, you are opting to "store" "park" "place for safekeeping" "position" "put" "station" "leave" etc, the vehicle in that location. MichelleD - You are saying that Jill is compliant? How do you interpret Jill's cc&r as follows to mean parking her truck in the driveway is compliant: "...may be stored within the project if kept within a fenced side or rear yard area or within an accessory building constructed upon the Lot."?

RobertR1
(South Carolina)

Posts:5164

12/19/2007 3:31 PM
To the great quorum debate. If it has been mentioned here I didn't see it and apologise. But, if you association is a condo it is likely that to establish a quorum, you are not likely to reach 100% of the vote because it is an apportioned vote. You have to count the value of each vote and that total will give you the %. The same should hold true for votes for elections. We do the first, don't do the second and our president likes to do a show of hands, which doesn't mean copy what we do.

GeraldT4

Posts:1022

12/19/2007 3:37 PM
Posted By HaroldS on 12/19/2007 2:03 PM Donna - we are wasting our time. Harold Quote from DonnaS - "Yes we are Harold." Gotta love the sidebar and the fact that neither of you are willing or able to answer the questions or explain how you interpret that a non-vote means it is a no vote. What you are basically doing by believing this and perhaps unilaterally governing that way is that a non-vote is equal to an owner that takes the time to participate by person or by proxy and vote "no". To me, a yes or no vote is greater than a non-vote. A no vote means no, a yes vote means yes. A no vote means nothing, doesn't count other than towards the total possible votes for or against a measure or a matter put to the association. Thankfully, my HOA concurs, and more importantly all our government.

RobertR1
(South Carolina)

Posts:5164

12/19/2007 5:26 PM
Suppose you put the subject of the vote this way. Bill Gates has decided to give our association 5 million dollars. The offer has been verifed and determined it to be a true offer. The Board is 100%in favor. A yes vote is recommended. You have 100 members, and 49 vote yes, 2 vote no, and rest(49) don't vote. Do you refuse the money?

MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491

12/19/2007 6:09 PM
No Gerald, I'm saying just the opposite. I thought my post was going directly below your post where you stated this: "I agree with you on the distinction between storage and parking, and your comparison that if you are storing your vehicle, so is everyone else." And I was commenting that we do not make a distinction. If the vehicle is stopped somewhere and left there until it is used again, even if it's used daily, it's still "stored" at that location, per our HOA and CC&Rs and BOD. But it seems that in the meantime the O.P. posted the actual CC&R regarding vehicles and that confirmed that she was not compliant, per the CC&R she posted. So, long-story short: Nevermind.

GeraldT4

Posts:1022

12/20/2007 5:03 AM
RobertR1 - Technically, the association must refuse the money IF a vote is to receive the gift is actually required. What you do is send it out as a ballot by mail until you receive the required percentage in favor. Notice how DonnaS and HaroldS haven't replied with a reason why they consider a non-vote to be a no vote? I guess we should all consider their non-response to mean "no", they can not supply a reasonable explanation.

PaulM
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:1347

12/20/2007 5:29 AM
Re: a non-vote being a 'no' vote. For the purpose of Jill's original concern over how many votes are needed to pass an amendment, the docs state 67% of "yes votes to pass". For amendment change purposes (as above), all deed owners are to be supplied info and are 'invited' to cast a vote. Jill's post stated there are 43 members--some voted no and some voted yes. With respect to all who have posted their opinion on how a non-vote is counted (or not)....IMHO, a non-vote can only be counted 'no' IF THE OWNER received amendment info to cast their vote but they chose to ABSTAIN from voting. Jill did not state whether the ability to vote was offered to ALL owners in the assn. or if a vote was held at a meeting whereby ALL owners were not present (or by proxy), and the vote was taken only from those present. If its the latter, it may not have been a valid vote at all for the reasons noted above. That's what I have learned from being involved with posters and postings from this site. Pls. correct if my interpretation is wrong...

GeraldT4

Posts:1022

12/20/2007 6:30 AM
PaulM - Counting a non-vote as a no vote is personal opinion/interpretation, not necessarily wrong but unable to prove correct. To me (at this time) it is illogical because a non-vote being counted as a no vote would hold the same weight as a no vote. Doing so may actually communicate to those that take the time to vote "no" that they should just abstain from voting since it will be counted the same as a no vote. Why take the time to vote "no" at all? Additionally by assigning a decision (yes or no) to a non-vote, you will be arbitrarily making an assumption for or against something and playing with the percentages for or against a matter. Lets say that a vote is to occur and 25% of 100 members is needed in person or proxy towards quorum and 67% yes votes are needed to amend. Lets say that 25 owners submit their votes and they are all "no" towards the amendment. Another 42 votes are needed all of which need to be yes to amend. Is the Board going to count all those that didn't vote as a "no"? Especially after all the expense and work towards notification? I doubt it.

JillC
(California)

Posts:26

12/20/2007 6:49 AM
The amendment went to all homeowners in the mail requesting that they vote and return by a certian date. It stated that if they did not get the required votes they may have to revote. Again 45 homeowners 18 in favor 13 against No section to obstain. But 14 ballots not returned. The only section that states they need 67% is in the section under "Rights of Institutional mortagage holders" Does that mean they need the 67%? They said they need 50% plus one Im SOOOOO confused.

DonnaS
(Tennessee)

Posts:5671

12/20/2007 6:51 AM
Gerald, Which came first, the chicken or the egg? We can argue this and if a non vote counts as a no or yes, until the sun goes down. The point here is that all of our opinions do count, we mix it up and hopefully still consider ourselves as partners in this site. Once it is evident that there can be no solution or proof of an answer, and it starts to become negative in feelings, most of us who have posted for a very long time will "back off" as Harold and I have done. It is evident that you feel different than we and Gloria and Roger and many other posters do. THAT'S OKAY, but do not post a challenge to an individuals intellect because we are here to solve problems, not to come down on each other. Donna

RobertR1
(South Carolina)

Posts:5164

12/20/2007 7:11 AM
You got that right Donna. Take what you can get out of the postings and move on. I wish someone would declare themselve final word and set Poor Jill straight. My answer to her is the vote does not pass, if her husband is big enough threaten everyone with bodily harm if they don't agree. If the board wants to vote again, they are sore losers, so if they did it I would try and make sure everyone knew what was going on and if that required personal contact, phone or e-mail or visit, I would do it. Jill is intitled to have her argument against the vote, I am sure we agree on that.

DwightT
(Idaho)

Posts:653

12/20/2007 7:37 AM
Re: no vote / non vote IMO: You are both correct, and you are both wrong. I think you are really arguing semantics. A non-vote is not a "No" vote. It is just not a vote. But for the purposes of deciding if a measure should pass, it has the same EFFECT as a "No" vote. Measures are supposed to be worded as questions: "Shall the Covenants be amended to allow...." In order to pass, a certain number of "Yes" votes must be received. Until that number of "Yes" votes have been received, the measure does not pass. So in this respect, a non-vote is the same as a "No" vote. However, as long as 100% of those eligible have not voted (and any specified voting period is still open), those who want to get the measure to pass can go talk to the people who have not voted yet and try to get them to vote in favor of the measure. So in this respect, a non-vote is NOT the same as a "No" vote. Actually, those opposed to the measure can also try to convince the non-voters to vote against the measure. If enough "No" votes are cast to prevent the "Yes" requirement from being met, then the measure fails. IE: if 67% is required to pass, but 34% have voted "No", then the 67% cannot be achieved.

RobertR1
(South Carolina)

Posts:5164

12/20/2007 7:48 AM
o all who commented here, I would be interested in hear a critique on how this vote counting should be carried on in condos. Both for quorum and for elections using apportioned voting.

GeraldT4

Posts:1022

12/20/2007 8:36 AM
DonnaS - I'm not coming down on you, or challenging your intellect, merely asking for your reason why you count a "non-vote" as "no", rather than "yes", or rather than for what a "non-vote" really is meaning an abstain vote. To me it's an important sticking point and it's important to try to push the matter since two of the purposes of this site is to educate and explain. If there is no proof of an answer than the answer is interpretation. My proof that a "non-vote" can't be counted is that attributing a "yes" or "no" to a "non-vote" would diminish the effect of someone actually voting "no" because doing so will mathematically equate the two towards an outcome, a "non-vote" is an important category as a reflection of community input or lack thereof, because of that a "non-vote" should be tallied as such and not attributed towards a "no" vote.

DwightT
(Idaho)

Posts:653

12/20/2007 8:54 AM
Posted By RobertR1 on 12/20/2007 7:48 AM o all who commented here, I would be interested in hear a critique on how this vote counting should be carried on in condos. Both for quorum and for elections using apportioned voting. Robert - Personally, I wouldn't buy into an association with apportioned votes in the first place. IMO: it should be one vote per unit, regardless of size. Having said that though, if I were setting up the apportioning system, then it would be based on whole votes. Instead of one unit having 1 vote while another one had 1-1/2 votes, I would set it up so that the first one had 2 votes and the larger one had 3. Percentages (both for quorum and for elections) would then be based on the total number of votes available. Bottom line though, especially if your Association uses apportioning, the procedure should be spelled out in your documents.

PaulM
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:1347

12/20/2007 11:48 AM
JillC: From what you have quoted, ..."Rights of Institutional Mortgage Holders that it is 67% to vote in favor to amend". This is a vote for which ALL MORTGAGE HOLDERS/DEED OWNERS are eligible to cast their vote--and it is 67% (of ALL MORTGAGE HOLDERS) to vote in favor to amend. It is stated clearly. An amendment vote is not to be confused with a percentage of members needed to hold 'quorum', nor a percentage needed to elect a candidate, nor a vote on whether to hold a social gathering. This is a vote to amend/change the intent of the OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS and ALL owners are to be given the ability to vote--but in order to pass, docs state it will take 67% of entire community to vote yes. Now, you post YES, the info did go out to all owners--and only few yes/no votes were returned, and certainly NOT 67% voting yes. Those who did not return their vote ABSTAINED from voting which resulted in not securing 67% of owners to pass the amendment change. It is not uncommon for a Board, in order to get the percentage required for an amendment change, to go door to door to all owners for their vote. Good Luck with your Mission!

JillC
(California)

Posts:26

12/20/2007 1:25 PM
Thanks for the response. I guess I thought that Institutional Holders of Mortgages were banks that held the loans not homeowners. Am I correct in assuming that homeowners are included in this? As I read on It states That the provisions are for the "benefit of Institutional Holders,Insurers, and Guarantors of first Morthages on Lots " So that does include the homeowner as the guarantors????? So many years of education and I cant figure this out!!! So thanks agian to all and Merry Christmas Jill

CharlesW1
(Georgia)

Posts:826

12/21/2007 6:15 AM
Posted By DwightT on 12/20/2007 7:37 AM Re: no vote / non vote IMO: You are both correct, and you are both wrong. I think you are really arguing semantics. A non-vote is not a "No" vote. It is just not a vote. But for the purposes of deciding if a measure should pass, it has the same EFFECT as a "No" vote. Measures are supposed to be worded as questions: "Shall the Covenants be amended to allow...." In order to pass, a certain number of "Yes" votes must be received. Until that number of "Yes" votes have been received, the measure does not pass. So in this respect, a non-vote is the same as a "No" vote. However, as long as 100% of those eligible have not voted (and any specified voting period is still open), those who want to get the measure to pass can go talk to the people who have not voted yet and try to get them to vote in favor of the measure. So in this respect, a non-vote is NOT the same as a "No" vote. Actually, those opposed to the measure can also try to convince the non-voters to vote against the measure. If enough "No" votes are cast to prevent the "Yes" requirement from being met, then the measure fails. IE: if 67% is required to pass, but 34% have voted "No", then the 67% cannot be achieved. DwightT THANK YOU! That was literally one of the best posts, I had read this morning. Being in a very similar predicament, I agree 100% with your explanation, who can (sensibly) argue with the reality of association living? Those who are eligible to vote, but haven’t, shouldn’t be counted as an automatic NO, unless your governing documents states otherwise. THAT IS JUST WRONG, MORALLY AND ETHICALLY! I feel as though Jill and her board would be doing a disservice to their association and those who have “voiced their opinion”, either for/against the amendment. If the board doesn’t attempt to solicit for votes from each member (eligible to vote on the matter), who hadn’t submitted a vote yet, who is too say (the amendment really passed or just failed, by default)owner apathy? Once the board has received every vote, then they can total the results and determine whether the purposed amendment(s) passes or fails! Chuck W.

Charles E. Wafer Jr.

GeraldT4

Posts:1022

12/21/2007 8:59 AM
CharlesW1, You stated "Once the board has received every vote, then they can total the results and determine whether the purposed amendment(s) passes or fails!". That may be the ideal goal, but receiving "every vote" may not necessarily be required unless the governing documents say so otherwise. Typically, as I'm sure you know, only a percentage of the total possible votes is required. So, if say 67% yes votes are needed, the other 33% are not IF 67% votes received are all yes. Typically once a Board reaches the required percentage to approve or not, they are done. I am delighted to see you agree that those who are eligible to vote, but haven’t, shouldn’t be counted as an automatic "no". I have pressed, pressed, and pressed for some to explain why they choose to count a "non-vote" as a "no", why not count a "non-vote" as "yes". I don't agree that doing either is correct, but have pressed to little avail except statements to the effect, "You got that right Donna. Take what you can get out of the postings and move on.". It's amazing to me how those who don't seem to have or provide a reasoning behind their logic throw stones, and will still continue to do so without providing reasoning.

DonnaS
(Tennessee)

Posts:5671

12/23/2007 3:46 PM
Gerald, It took me a while to get this as I was away for 3 days but here is what almost every association uses as it's basis for counting "abstaining or missing" ballots. Don't forget, this is used ONLY where a percentage or number of votes are required for amendments and changes are needed, where every member is given the chance to vote. Proof of a total number of ballots being sent to the membership is in the final counting--fors, against and no opinion. EVERY ASSOCIATION THAT I HAVE EVER HEARD OF USES THIS IN THIS WAY. This is from Roberts Rules, 2007 edition. Question 6: Do abstention votes count? Answer: The phrase "abstention votes" is an oxymoron, an abstention being a refusal to vote. To abstain means to refrain from voting, and, as a consequence, there can be no such thing as an "abstention vote." In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "no" vote. Even in such a case, however, an abstention is not a vote. [RONR (10th ed.), p. 387, l. 7-13; p. 388, l. 3-6; p. 390, l. 13-24; see also p.66 of RONR In Brief I know that you feel differently but you asked me where I got my opinion from.

GeraldT4

Posts:1022

12/24/2007 5:06 AM
DonnaS - You've made a statement to the effect that almost every association counts abstention votes as no votes, and you've sighted Robert's Rules of Order. Unless an association's governing documents require Robert's Rules be followed, the rules are irrelevant. There is no federal, state, or local requirement that Robert's Rules be followed. You are basing your opinion, upon an opinion, and you cannot make a statement that almost every association counts abstention votes in the manner you do without proof, of which you will never acquire. Bottom line though, even Robert's states an abstention is not a vote. Therefore, it's not a yes or no vote. What Robert's talks about is the EFFECT of an abstention vote. Robert's does not state you can count an abstention vote as a no vote.

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > CCRs