Our Village

It seems that most owners, board members, and even the association’s attorney fail to see little or no difference when comparing Article IV (amending the Declaration of Covenants) to Article X (ratifying material alterations/substantial additions to common grounds).
To me these two Articles found in the Declaration of Covenants read totally different. 
Article IV, to amend the Declaration you need the affirmative vote of polling members, casting not less than three-fourths of the total votes of LIV’s membership.
Article X, to ratify a board motion you need the affirmative vote of polling members, casting not less than three-fourths of the membership PRESENT AT A CALLED MEETING. 
Both need a yes vote majority, but the big difference is that one needs three fourths of total membership while the other  needs just three fourths of the membership PRESENT AT A MEETING.
I believe the sole purpose of ratifying is to give concerned owners the power to keep in check nine directors who might wish to radically change the common grounds.
Example, a fourteen day notice of a special ratification meeting to pass a Board approved motion wanting a material alteration of the Rec. Hall floor (changing the white tile to a hard wood flooring throughout). If three fourths who attend this meeting don’t cast a vote, ratification fails and the motion may not go forward. If three fourths or more who attend this meeting do vote and the majority disapproves, ratification fails and the motion may not go forward. If three fourths or more who attend this meeting do vote and the majority approves the motion, the motion is then ratified and may go forward.
This consistent disregard of Article X (Declaration) and Article VII (Bylaw that repeats Article X) has to stop.
Director Vasquez vehemently talks about enforcing all the rules, so why not begin with this one.
Comments