SUSPICIOUS INSPECTORS OF ELECTION

SUSPICIOUS INSPECTORS OF ELECTION

QUESTION: The Davis-Stirling Act states that ONE or THREE independent third parties must be chosen as inspectors of election. Since tabulations must take place in public, it appears suspicious when there are only two at the table when the law requires one or three. If the Inspector brings someone to open the ballots, does he count as an inspector because he is touching and unfolding ballots? If the assistant SORTS the ballots (touching the ballots) and asks questions to the Inspector about ballots, does he become an inspector?

ANSWER: There is nothing suspicious or inappropriate in what you describe. The Davis-Stirling Act addresses the number of inspectors (one or three) not the number of assistants (unlimited). (Civ. Code §5110(a)). What's more, the Act actually requires that election rules:

Allow the inspector or inspectors to appoint and oversee additional persons to verify signatures and to count and tabulate votes as the inspector or inspectors deem appropriate, provided that the persons are independent thirdparties. (Civ. Code §5105(a)(6).) 

That means you can have one inspector and half a dozen assistants who register people, open envelopes and tabulate votes--all under the supervision of the inspector. Touching an envelope does not magically make someone an inspector. Under that reasoning, mail carriers become inspectors when they deliver envelopes to the inspector. I don't think the Post Office has that in their job description.

RECOMMENDATION. The British government distributed posters to the people of England during World War II to help get them through the Nazi aerial bombardment. One of them read, "Keep Calm and Carry On." That applies here. Don't over-think the inspector issue or you'll give yourself a stroke.

DOES DAVIS-STIRLING APPLY?

QUESTION: Does the Davis-Stirling Act pertain to a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation? I am told it only pertains to public nonprofit corporations.

ANSWER: An association's corporate status does not matter--if it meets the definition of a common interest development (CID), Davis-Stirling applies. By the way, most HOAs are nonprofit mutual benefit corporations not public benefit corporations. Some associations are not even incorporated and still fall under the Act. In addition, associations in existence prior to the Act are also bound by it.

PARTICIPATING IN BOARD MEETINGS

QUESTION: Our board says members are not allowed to speak until the end of the meeting. Therefore, we are not allowed to express our opinions before an action is taken on an item on the agenda. Should we not be allowed to speak when that item comes up for discussion?

ANSWER: Members have a right to observe board meetings but they don't have a right to participate in the board's discussions and votes. This is the same policy followed at city council meetings--once the public forum is closed, citizens cannot interrupt council meetings to comment on issues. It's even more restrictive on state and federal levels where there is no right to an open forum when the legislature/congress is in session.

Open Forum. The only time members have a right to participate in meetings is during the "open forum" portion of an open meeting (Civ. Code §4925, §5000(b)) and only for a reasonable time established by the board. Members can ask questions but directors are limited in how they can answer them.

Inviting Comments. Although members do not have a legal right to participate in board discussions, the president can invite comments from the audience on particular items of business if he so chooses. This is at the discretion of the board. Once comments have been received, discussion can be closed and a vote taken by the directors.
 

FEEDBACK

Drought Self-Help. A board member discovered a watering device on a homeowner's patio area. Water was dripping everywhere so the board member decided to climb over the wall and confiscate the watering device and refuses to give it back to the homeowner. What are the board's rights? -Reader

RESPONSE: I understand your board member's good intentions but directors should not be jumping fences and confiscating things from members' patios, balconies, yards, etc. It makes them vulnerable to legal action for trespass and theft. There are better ways to address water wasters. Start with a phone call or letter and proceed to hearings and fines. If this fails, bring in the lawyers. If your hyperactive board member continues to act without authority, you should censure him.