Proper or Improper Process
Hello Dennis,
The language in one of our CC&Rs regarding Sub-Associations reads: “The Association shall have the right to form one or more subsidiary associations for any purpose deemed appropriate by the Board. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, one or more subsidiary associations may be formed for the operation and maintenance of any specific area located within the Property.”
Our Board has voted among themselves to proceed with the process of forming a subsidiary association for the operation and maintenance of the Courthomes in our community. This idea was not initiated by the members of the Association; rather it was fully initiated by the Board, specifically by 3 members of the Board.
Details of the plan were presented and debated during a series of 4 Workshops. During tonight’s Workshop, the Board member assigned to this process made a motion for the Board to accept the subsidiary; the motion was seconded; the motion passed 5:2.
My questions are:
Was the process improper by being initiated at the Board level vs at the member level, thereby violating CC&R 5.1.2 as I quoted above?
Was it improper for a formal Board vote to have taken place in the setting of a Workshop?
Thank you for your help, Dennis
About Post Author
4 Responses
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Rhonda,
If the board noticed the workshops 48 hours prior and allowed any member to attend and speak at those workshops but especially prior to the vote by the board than the workshops were conducted as meeting of the board and in compliance with the open meeting laws. As for the action of the board to create a Sub association they have to be very careful. While your CC&R’s allow the concept, I doubt that they describe what and how they can do that. Creating new assessments or restrictions or new administration could all be considered to require amendments to the CC&RS approved by the members to do so. While I’m not sure why they believe that a sub association is valuable and in the best interest of the community, but they have to walk a very fine line to stay in compliance with the CC&R’s.
If I recall correctly your community consist of a gated portion and a separate community of court homes outside of the gated community. This would make some sense but if it adds cost to either group it could be challenged.
Dennis
Thank you, Dennis
To clarify, we are not technically a gated community. We have one gate to reduce through traffic but the other end of that street is not gated. And while the majority of the courthomes are clustered in one geographical location, there are some smattered elsewhere.
Official notice of the meeting was sent out at 12:02 a.m. on the day of the meeting. When questioned, our President claimed ample notice had been provided at the previous Workshops and that the reminder notice sent out was “more of a courtesy” so that members didn’t have to search back through emails to find the Zoom information. He also falsely claimed the meeting information was on the community calendar accessible via the Management Company’s website. So much seems improper by my eye test.
As far as added expense, there will be! And it will all fall on the Courthome owners who never asked for a sub-association.
Rhonda,
Notice of a meeting of the board must be provided to everyone in the community. It this meeting was discussed at an earlier meeting to any member in attendance at that workshop it does not constitute adequate notice. Whatever approach the board uses to notice any other meeting was required to have been applied to this meeting as well. If they normally use a bulletin board or a web site to notice their meeting, they have to do the same for every meeting. 48hours is required prior to that meeting and not a minute less. Otherwise, how would anyone know where to look for a meeting notice. While not getting a notice does not invalidate the actions in the meeting the board is required to provide that notice and cannot just ignoir the law.
Dennis
Beautiful, Dennis. We knew we were interpreting 33-1804 correctly but our President is pretty slippery and we needed the assurances you have just provided!