Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-03-2016, 11:24 AM
 
25 posts, read 56,258 times
Reputation: 24

Advertisements

At our 2016 annual meeting the BOD re-instituted positive voting, a tool that allows ballots to be mailed out, non-returned ballots are automatic "YES" to whatever they want passed.

I am wondering how this can be legal, if it is, our covenants say, "an instrument to be SIGNED by no less than 75% of members".

This seems like expensive endeavor ... thoughts ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2016, 05:35 PM
 
5,048 posts, read 9,586,810 times
Reputation: 4180
So did they need a majority vote to reinstitute the positive voting policy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:59 PM
Bo Bo won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Tenth Edition (Apr-May 2014). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Ohio
17,107 posts, read 38,038,481 times
Reputation: 14446
If it becomes a widespread practice in Texas or happens in the neighborhood of someone important, I bet the legislature will make it illegal. Seems kind of insidious on one hand, but after having served on a board that one had to collect signatures on a bunch of by-law amendment petitions, I will admit to being a little envious of the simplicity of that approach. I can definitely appreciate how much more efficient it would be to assume no response = a "yes" vote than knocking on dozens of doors and convincing people to sign a document affirming a vote in favor of a governing documents change.

Since you're thread title contains the word "HOA," I'm also sure it won't be long until the thread is joined by a delightful visitor who will remind us how HOAs are the root of all that is evil in the world. I'll just go ahead and say that I disagree with that notion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 08:35 AM
 
1,175 posts, read 1,434,383 times
Reputation: 1338
I guess that's why our neighborhood just has a requirement that 20% of the households are represented by either a live voter, or a proxy.
In the OP's situation, I would think it would be better to assume no return is a no vote.
In my several years of living with an HOA, and several years of not living with one, I still can't see the point of an HOA other than to cause a division in the neighborhood between the different factions. There's constant bickering and fighting about every possible issue it seems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 08:51 AM
 
6,693 posts, read 8,744,294 times
Reputation: 4846
I am certainly glad I don't live in a HOA neighborhood based on what I hear from others and read on here.

People should really decide if they want HOA before buying or renting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 09:05 AM
 
25 posts, read 56,258 times
Reputation: 24
Our HOA is at around 32 yrs old, from how I am reading covenants it changes from 80% to 75% vote to amend. We had positive voting before, I was for it till I saw how it was going to be used, it was abolished.
Another point I tried to make to BOD: This one ballot they plan to send out will be costly, $400 to start ball rolling via usps.
I have read amending CC&R's can be expensive but I guess that depends on lawyer you are using.

Here is the part I don't think they get. Covenants read amending them is allowed in first 30 years but can't be amended till last year of any subsequent 10 year term. This along with the fact it reads, "signed by no less than 75%", would lead me to believe their ballot will be fruitless.

Thank you all for your thoughts on this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 12:33 PM
 
5,048 posts, read 9,586,810 times
Reputation: 4180
Your docs should say something about the required number of votes to change anything.

Your going to positive voting is a change.

Did the board get the required number of votes for the change to not require so many votes? Even if it took time and effort, they should have felt it was worth it to...well, to follow their own rules but that's not always going to happen...but also to do it one last time for the easier goal they are trying to achieve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2016, 10:28 PM
 
3,435 posts, read 4,434,673 times
Reputation: 3668
Quote:
Originally Posted by breezeaire View Post
At our 2016 annual meeting the BOD re-instituted positive voting, a tool that allows ballots to be mailed out, non-returned ballots are automatic "YES" to whatever they want passed.

I am wondering how this can be legal, if it is, our covenants say, "an instrument to be SIGNED by no less than 75% of members".

This seems like expensive endeavor ... thoughts ?

It is not the least bit legit as described. The problem is that most homeowners don't challenge and the boards and attorneys that advise them know this. However, if they tried imposing more restrictions or granting the HOA corporation more power over you or your property with something like this, I wouldn't hesitate to sue as soon as they sought to enforce it.

It would be helpful to see the language of the actual restrictive covenant along with the ballot language.

A lack of a ballot response is neither a "yes" nor a "no" in the circumstance you described. If there were 100 lots and 60 lots voted yes and 10 voted no, the amendment would fail. The amendment isn't going to pass because they needed 75 in support regardless. You are fortunate that a signed instrument is required. The board doesn't get to impute an affirmative vote from homeowners that choose not to cast a ballot. Notably the board's scheme rewards the board for negligence or intentional misconduct when sending ballots out - and that's one of the reasons that signatures are required - to prevent unscrupulous boards, management companies, and HOA attorneys from lying about an outcome.

Out of curiosity, what is the board seeking to do with the amendment? Does it purport to add some new power or authority for the HOA board, create new obligations for the homeowner, etc.?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2016, 06:16 AM
 
5,048 posts, read 9,586,810 times
Reputation: 4180
It is also my understanding that the definition of positive or negative voting is, well, voting. Positive is voting for, negative is a process where one can actually vote against.

I think your association may better call what they are doing something like "assumed positive voting", as in, "if one doesn't physically vote it is assumed one votes yes because, well, that's the odd rules of the game right now."

And, yes, I know what assumed can mean.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2016, 07:10 AM
 
6,693 posts, read 8,744,294 times
Reputation: 4846
A few years ago, there was an attempt by the city of San Antonio to implement this kind of voting to make my neighborhood a historical district (and the first to be midcentury historical district in San Antonio). It was squashed real fast by some of the folks in my neighborhood with the councilman apologizing to a lot of angry people because he pushed for it in the first place.

I was kind of neutral on the neighborhood being historical, but I didn't like the way they were voting it in. "Assumed positive voting" as cully puts it, feels very sneaky and dirty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:05 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top