Since I am going to attempt to make changes to the procedures, resolutions, and bylaws of Todd Creek Farms HOA in the next few years to make the Association more closely resemble the government entity it is, we should have an organized system for tracking these changes. I can’t find where we have any tracking system similar to that used at any other level of government. Perhaps there is a procedure and it is housed in the Policy Book, but since that Policy Book is not found on the web site it is difficult to tell.
All bylaws and resolutions should be numbered with a consistent form. Footnotes at the end of each bylaw, policy, procedure, rule and regulation, resolution and guideline should give the reader a logical and consistent path with which to follow the history of the document.
I haven’t seen in the bylaws where policies, procedures, rules and regulations, resolutions and guidelines are mentioned, they seem have been created in the Adopting Policy Resolution. So a resolution was used to create resolutions? It seems this should be in the bylaws.
I also have not seen a description of what these various categories are used for. Does a rule override a resolution? Does a resolution have the weight of law or is it just a statement with no lawful implications. All these terms should be defined along with the process of amending each. For instance how is a resolution initiated, does a board member have to propose it or can it be initiated by a resident of the community, if a resident can initiate the process does there need to be a petition.
There is so little defined that it makes all sort of mischief possible and probable. One of the things that should be considered in any discussion of the proper role of these various classifications is who is allowed to modify them. The bylaws for instance can only be modified by a majority vote of a quorum of homeowners. This would seem to be the proper place to put any restrictions on the powers of the board of directors since future boards can't change the bylaws unilaterally. Since a quorum is required and there are papers that need to filed with the county and letters sent to mortgage companies the logical time to make these changes is at the owner's meeting each November. Missing from the bylaws and state laws, or at least missing to my eyes, is how a change to a bylaw is initiated. It would seem counterproductive for a change to a bylaw to have to be initiated by the Board since this would give the board control of restrictions placed on it. Conversely if a single individual homeowner can put anything he wants on the ballot it would seem it could get a little anarchical. I would think a petition process would be the best balance with only a few signatures needed. But this still leaves all the other classifications in question.
It appears to me that several items that should have been put in the bylaws were tacked on in the form of a resolution. The applicable definition of a resolution is "4 : a formal expression of opinion, will, or intent voted by an official body or assembled group". This gives the impression the Board simply intends to abide by these resolutions, many of which are required by state law, from what I have seen recently that is probably accurate, they intend to follow the law, but if they don't, oh well.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Friday, December 25, 2009
August Executive Session
An executive session was called at the August 18, 2009 meeting. According to Colorado state law (38-33.3-308) the Chair must give notice that an executive session is about to commence and the general subject matter of what is about to be discussed must be announced.
The subject matter is also to be noted in the minutes of the meeting the executive session was held. In this case the subject matter was not announced and the August minutes don’t even show an executive session was held so obviously the subject matter is not mentioned in the minutes.
Since this meeting didn’t meet even the most rudimentary test of an executive session in terms of protection of citizens it should be declared a special meeting, the minutes of August 2009 should be amended to include the minutes of this special meeting.
Correction: the meeting was held on the 18th, not the 15, the change has been made to the text
(5) Prior to the time the members of the executive board or any committee thereof convene in executive session, the chair of the body shall announce the general matter of discussion as enumerated in paragraphs (a) to (f) of subsection (4) of this section.
(6) No rule or regulation of the board or any committee thereof shall be adopted during an executive session. A rule or regulation may be validly adopted only during a regular or special meeting or after the body goes back into regular session following an executive session.
(7) The minutes of all meetings at which an executive session was held shall indicate that an executive session was held and the general subject matter of the executive session.
The subject matter is also to be noted in the minutes of the meeting the executive session was held. In this case the subject matter was not announced and the August minutes don’t even show an executive session was held so obviously the subject matter is not mentioned in the minutes.
Since this meeting didn’t meet even the most rudimentary test of an executive session in terms of protection of citizens it should be declared a special meeting, the minutes of August 2009 should be amended to include the minutes of this special meeting.
Correction: the meeting was held on the 18th, not the 15, the change has been made to the text
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Vote Count At Owner’s Meeting
A vote for Board of directors was held at the annual Owner’s meeting in November, after the votes were tallied the winner was announced but the vote count was not given. This is in violation of Conduct of Meetings 1 (c) (4)
This is just one of a few problems I noticed in our voting process. The most glaring is that we do not include the questionnaire that the candidates fill out in the packet sent to homeowners a few weeks before the meeting. Not including this document increases the number of homeowners that vote “present” for quorum purposes without voting for a specific candidate. Now it is important that a voter have the right to not vote for a specific issue if he or she is not comfortable with their knowledge of that issue or candidate. The solution to this problem is to simply make the deadline for entering the board of directors race early enough to have these questionnaires included in the package that contains the financials. Write in votes would still be allowed and candidates would be allowed to give a small speech and answer questions from the floor but someone who is voting and not present at the meeting should have some idea of who they are voting for.
All these procedures should be discussed and included in a written document before the owner’s meeting takes place. Items that should be discussed include; who will count the vote, how the vote will be collected, how homeownership is verified, etc.
One item that needs to be discussed is how the votes are announced. The bylaws only state that they be announced. What should be discussed is if the breakdown of what votes for each candidate came from proxy or attending members should be announced. In addition vote counters should be instructed to not discuss the vote outcome.
Admittedly I have been remiss in attending these homeowner’s meetings in the past. I was however somewhat shocked at the unprofessionalism and chaos during the process. Todd Creek Farms has been in existence for over a decade now and the whole event seemed as if it were the first election ever held. I think part of this problem is there is no written procedure. There is a constant influx of new directors so the whole process is somewhat new each time, this is unacceptable. A procedure needs to be formalized and put into effect, the presiding president should follow it to the letter every year, and changes to the process should be made and documented at least one month in advance of the vote.
One last minor point, after the vote was taken, Jim announced the winner, he is not supposed to make that announcement, one of the homeowners should make that announcement.
From Conduct of Meetings
This says who should count the votes, specifically excluding the property manager, then from the quote above “The individual(s) counting the ballots shall report the results of the vote to the Chair” since the manager can’t count the votes, this leaves the homeowners to make the announcement, or at least inform the Chair, and the Chair make the announcement.
(4) The individual(s) counting the ballots shall report the results of the vote to the Chair by indicating how many votes were cast for each individual or how many votes were cast in favor and against any issue.
This is just one of a few problems I noticed in our voting process. The most glaring is that we do not include the questionnaire that the candidates fill out in the packet sent to homeowners a few weeks before the meeting. Not including this document increases the number of homeowners that vote “present” for quorum purposes without voting for a specific candidate. Now it is important that a voter have the right to not vote for a specific issue if he or she is not comfortable with their knowledge of that issue or candidate. The solution to this problem is to simply make the deadline for entering the board of directors race early enough to have these questionnaires included in the package that contains the financials. Write in votes would still be allowed and candidates would be allowed to give a small speech and answer questions from the floor but someone who is voting and not present at the meeting should have some idea of who they are voting for.
All these procedures should be discussed and included in a written document before the owner’s meeting takes place. Items that should be discussed include; who will count the vote, how the vote will be collected, how homeownership is verified, etc.
One item that needs to be discussed is how the votes are announced. The bylaws only state that they be announced. What should be discussed is if the breakdown of what votes for each candidate came from proxy or attending members should be announced. In addition vote counters should be instructed to not discuss the vote outcome.
Admittedly I have been remiss in attending these homeowner’s meetings in the past. I was however somewhat shocked at the unprofessionalism and chaos during the process. Todd Creek Farms has been in existence for over a decade now and the whole event seemed as if it were the first election ever held. I think part of this problem is there is no written procedure. There is a constant influx of new directors so the whole process is somewhat new each time, this is unacceptable. A procedure needs to be formalized and put into effect, the presiding president should follow it to the letter every year, and changes to the process should be made and documented at least one month in advance of the vote.
One last minor point, after the vote was taken, Jim announced the winner, he is not supposed to make that announcement, one of the homeowners should make that announcement.
From Conduct of Meetings
(3) Written ballots shall be counted by a neutral third party (which excludes the Association’s manager and legal counsel) or by an Owner(s), who is not a candidate, selected randomly from a pool of two or more Owners.
This says who should count the votes, specifically excluding the property manager, then from the quote above “The individual(s) counting the ballots shall report the results of the vote to the Chair” since the manager can’t count the votes, this leaves the homeowners to make the announcement, or at least inform the Chair, and the Chair make the announcement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)