RECALL QUORUM

RECALL QUORUM

QUESTION: The battle goes on in our community… the second recall election in six months! If they can't make quorum, the petitioners believe they can adjourn the meeting to a new date with a lower quorum. I thought a recall died if it failed to meet quorum.

ANSWER: It depends on your bylaws. As you already know, special membership meetings are ridiculously easy to call. Only 5% of the membership need to sign a petition to trigger a recall meeting. That means quorum is the key issue.

Bylaws. Following is a typical bylaw provision: 

In the absence of a quorum at a Members' meeting, a majority of those present in person or by proxy may adjourn the meeting to another time... The quorum for such a meeting shall be at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the total voting power of the Association, present in person or by proxy.

No Exception. The provision makes no exception for recall meetings. Since recall meetings are membership meetings, a majority of those present can adjourn to a later date where the quorum drops to 25%. The unintended consequence is that a small number of members can recall an entire board. If only 25 of 100 members cast ballots, the recall meets the reduced quorum. Of the 25, only a majority, i.e., 13, are needed to approve the recall. 

I find it troubling that in a 100-unit association, five members can trigger a special meeting and 13 members can recall an entire board. This scenario lends itself to a great deal of abuse as described in my October 26 newsletter. However, a careful reading of the bylaws with the Davis-Stirling Act provides some balance.

Majority of Those Present. The bylaws state that "a majority of those present...may adjourn the meeting" and the Davis-Stirling Act provides that:

each ballot...shall be treated as a member present at a meeting for purposes of establishing a quorum. (Civ. Code §5115(b).)

That means ballots count as members in the room. If 30 ballots were cast and only ten members physically attend the meeting and all ten vote for adjournment, ten is not a majority of forty. Therefore, the motion fails and the recall dies.

RECOMMENDATION: Rather than go through mental gymnastics, associations should amend their bylaws. I recommend eliminating cumulative voting, proxy voting, and quorum requirements for the election of directors (which eliminates the need for reduced quorums). All other meetings (including recalls) require a majority quorum.
Easy-Peasy. With those amendments, elections are easy. There are no reduced quorums and no cumulative voting calculations to create confusion. It's a straightforward, two-step process. Did the petitioners make quorum? If not, the recall dies--there are no reduced quorum meetings. If they made quorum, did a majority approve the recall? It's a straight up or down vote to remove a director or an entire board. No further calculations are needed.

PANTY THIEF

PANTY THIEF

QUESTION: There is a man living in our complex who appears to have Down's syndrome. He goes to the laundry facilities and steals women’s underwear and bras. He has even tugged on a girl’s underwear as she was bending over. The board is afraid of lawsuits and refuses to send the owner a letter. If anyone complains, they say "go to the police." What can we do?
ANSWER: I passed this hot potato to attorney Jasmine Fisher. Following is her response:

Disability Rights. Your board may be unduly concerned about disability rights. Fortunately, the law only requires "reasonable" accommodation of disabilities. There is no law or case on record (yet!) that gives a disabled person the right to steal undergarments. That means your panty thief may create liability for your association if the board refuses to act.
Association Liability. While the association is normally not responsible for the criminal acts of a third party, Frances T. v. Village Green made an exception when the crime is foreseeable. In Frances T, the board knew about the increased crime in the area, failed to install exterior lighting Frances T. had requested (to make her unit safer) and actively prevented her from installing lighting. She was subsequently raped and robbed in her unit. The court found the association and its directors liable because the harm was foreseeable and they did nothing.
With your panty thief, it is foreseeable the thefts will continue and may escalate into something more physical. If so, your association could be liable for your board's failure to act. Simply saying “Go to the police” will not remove the liability exposure.
Board's Options. The courts provide a wide degree of latitude to board decisions so there is no right or wrong option, aside from doing nothing.The board can use the nuisance provision of your CC&Rs to call a hearing to warn the owner. If the behavior continues, fines can be levied (following another hearing). If that does not work, a letter from legal counsel threatening litigation can be next. Ultimately, a lawsuit may be necessary. If needed, the board can skip the early steps and jump to a lawyer letter and potential litigation.

Notice to Members. Should the members be warned? Notifying owners can be tricky. If you don't notify the membership and your panty thief escalates to sexual assaults, your board could be sued for failing to warn the members. If the board says too much, they could be sued by the panty thief. It's the same problem boards face when a registered sex offender moves into a complex. They can't post a notice that sex offender Dilbert Smith moved into unit 301. They must be more circumspect.

RECOMMENDATION: As JFK said, “There are risks and costs to action. But they are far less than the long range risks of comfortable inaction.” To minimize legal exposure, boards who are aware of criminal activity in the development should coordinate with legal counsel for appropriate (i) action against the perpetrator and (ii) notice to the membership.

DIRECTOR'S DUTY OF LOYALTY

DIRECTOR'S DUTY OF LOYALTY

QUESTION: Does the “duty of loyalty” mean I have to support, in public, a position reached by a majority of the board? Am I precluded from publicly dissenting and making adverse comments?

ANSWER: You can dissent and make adverse comments in a board meeting when the matter is under discussion by the board. But once a decision is made, it's time to move on. You don't have to become a cheerleader for the board's decision but a director goes too far when he undermines the board or the agreed-upon course of action. Such behavior can result in a breach of the director's fiduciary duties.

Business Judgment Rule. When a homeowner is elected to the board, he/she automatically becomes a fiduciary and must follow the business judgment rule. That means the actions of a director must be in good faith, in the best interests of the association, and with prudent care. (Corp. Code §7231(a).) Stating you voted against the motion but support the board's decision is okay. Disrupting operations, attacking fellow directors and undermining an agreed-upon course of action is not okay. It is harmful to the association and falls outside the Business Judgment Rule. When that happens, disruptive directors face personal liability.

Dealing with Rogues. If a director goes rogue, the board may have no choice but to censure him/her and, where appropriate, form an executive committee to exclude the director from sensitive issues. Any director who believes he must win all votes is really not suited to be on the board. If needed, the board can call a membership meeting to remove the director.

RECOMMENDATION: Once the board makes a decision, dissenting directors should either publicly support the decision or keep silent. They should in no way undermine the board. If the director cannot follow this policy, he/she should immediately resign from the board. Once off the board, the former director can publicly oppose the board's decision, provided he/she does not disclose any privileged information.

CHANGING RESERVE SCHEDULES

QUESTION: Our past board had a reserve study done. However, much of the information is inaccurate. As a new board are we bound by the study? Many items are in need of repair or replacement but we feel we may get in trouble if we act outside the reserve study. What should we do?

ANSWER: Facts on the ground, not the reserve study, dictate your maintenance needs. The study is merely a guideline and boards have the authority to take appropriate action when it comes to repairs. Moreover, they have the right to notify the reserve specialist of the changed circumstances so adjustments can be made to the study. If the reserve company refuses to update the study with more accurate information, it's time to change companies.