Our planned community in north Glendale is having it’s annual BoD election where there is no provision on the digital election form for a write-in candidate which we have had since the extense of our community in 1997.

Further research in the community bylaws and CC&R’s do not mention or address write in candidate. Contact with the property manager’s VP they have stated the following:
“Thank you for your email and for sharing your concerns regarding the current Board of Directors election process.

At the close of the nomination period, only one individual submitted their name to run for the Board. As such, the ballot reflects that single candidate. While we understand the desire for a write-in option, write-in candidates are no longer permitted for the annual election, as doing so would not provide the entire community with an equal opportunity to consider and vote for that individual ahead of time.

This process aligns with the community’s governing documents and is intended to ensure fairness and transparency.

Please also note that Petra Paul is no longer with PDS. Amber Sharp is the other Vice President of Management Services and can be reached at asharp@pdsaz.com.

We appreciate your engagement and continued involvement in the community.”

Research has shown A.R.S. § 33-1812 does not address write in candidates where the VP responded with teh following:
“A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(2) states: “The ballot shall provide an opportunity to vote for or against each proposed action.” Allowing write-in candidates does not provide all owners with a fair and equal opportunity to vote for or against each candidate, as write-ins are not presented uniformly on the ballot.

It’s also important to note that this approach is consistent with best practices and standard procedures used in planned communities across Arizona.

A.R.S. § 33-1812 focuses specifically on voting procedures, and the current ballot format fully complies with this statute. It allows owners to either vote for the listed candidate or to select the quorum-only option—meaning their ballot counts toward establishing quorum without casting a vote for the candidate. This satisfies the statutory requirement to provide a method for voting against the proposed action, as abstaining from selecting a candidate is a recognized form of dissent.

Lastly, any owners interested in appearing on the ballot had the opportunity to do so by submitting their candidate form by the designated deadline. For any remaining vacancies, the Board has the authority to appoint a qualified owner at the following Board meeting.

There seems to be self implied interruptation of this statutue and the VP is jumping around with different positions that don’t appear to legally based.

What is the fact about board elections in regard to write-in candidate(s)? Is this property manager correct in their unilateral interruptation with no legal foundation found?

Steve