Image Up Advertising & Design

By Leighton McLaughlin The Rules and Regulations Committee is debating whether to attempt a repeal of the district delegate system of electing HOA Board members. The system has been criticized for being cumbersome, confusing, expensive, and carrying the danger of one delegate deciding an election – without his or her district's vote even being counted. The delegates act much like members of the Electoral College in U.S. presidential elections — with one major difference. A delegate from a district that does not meet quorum may vote the district's entire voting power for whomever he or she pleases. If the quorum is not met the district's ballots are not counted — they are not even opened. In a close election, that makes it likely one or two delegates could overturn the majority vote of the community and decide for themselves who sits on the Board. In districts that meet quorum, the delegate must vote the district's total voting power in the same ratio as votes cast. HOA General Manager Jeri Mupo said the delegate system was begun when state law required common interest developments, like Four Seasons, to hold town-hall type elections. Because it was impossible to get all members of a large community into one room, smaller districts were set up where the district vote was taken and relayed by delegates to the larger community. The delegates' only duty is to vote for Board members. The Legislature then changed the law to allow voting by mail and most of the reason for delegates went away — but the requirement for them remained in the CC&Rs and bylaws of many communities, Four Seasons included. Selecting delegates is a costly, complex and lengthy process. First, a nominating committee is selected by the Board from among volunteers. The committee was found necessary to find candidates because not enough came forward otherwise. Once a slate of delegate candidates is formed, a "Meet the Delegates Night" is held in the Lodge to acquaint voters with the aspiring delegates. That is followed by the first delegate election with a quorum requirement of more than 50 percent. In districts that fail to meet quorum, a second election is held with a 25 percent quorum. The highest vote-getter is elected delegate, the second highest is alternate delegate. If a district fails to meet the 25 percent, the Board appoints the delegate and alternate. That creates a conflict of interest – the Board selecting the delegates who vote to determine who sits on the Board. Each of these steps costs money. This all happens before a single vote is cast for Board candidates. Another conflict arises during the Board election itself. Delegates are supposed to encourage residents in their district to vote. In the past they have done that, but in the future a delegate who supports a Board candidate might discourage voting, to keep from reaching quorum, so he could cast all the district votes for his choice. Resident Avi Greene, who supports the repeal, said the delegate system has "lots of potential for abuse. It adds burdens, adds steps and creates confusion." Greene spoke at a recent Board meeting and said that the fact the community reached quorum for two elections in a row shows there is sufficient interest in elections in the community without delegates. The present system makes it possible that very few people can control the votes "of thousands of us," he said. Changes in the CC&Rs and Bylaws require a community-wide vote with majority of all homeowners voting in favor – not just a majority of those voting, but all homeowners. Two previous votes to change the CC&Rs took campaigns of over two years in the first case and nearly a year in the second by the Board and the Rules and Regulations Committee to achieve passage. The changes eliminated the supermajority of 67 percent to amend the CC&Rs, tightened residency requirements and altered some language to comply with the California civil code. After its passage, a few residents challenged the supermajority amendment in court, but lost the case. There are costs involved in such a repeal election, but they are one-time, not yearly as with the district delegate system. The committee would like to know what residents think of changing this system. Unless there is sentiment in favor, the committee is unlikely to recommend the Board approve the long task of informing residents of the issues involved before a vote is taken on the issue. Put your thoughts in writing and mail, email or hand deliver them to the Lodge office. foUr SEaSonS SPotLiGHt 6 FOUR SEASONS BREEZE | JULY 2015 REMINDER: Residents must get approval from the Architectural Review Committee before making any improvements to the outsides of their homes. It can be very costly to put in an improvement that has to be changed or removed to comply with the community-wide architectural guidelines and standards. Forms to apply for ARC approval are available at the Lodge desk or on the Four Seasons website. HOA Executive Assistant Fabiana Spinelli specializes in ARC issues and is happy to answer resident questions about the approval process and what improvements are likely to pass review. Another source of information is the ARC Guidelines and Standards section in the Community Guidelines book. Changes to the interiors of homes need no approval. ~ Leighton McLaughlin, for the committee Possible Repeal Of Delegate System Under Discussion Rules & Regulations Committee

• Cover