Proposed Bylaw change 2.6

I am sure that homeowner in the community received a small post card today with the proposed Bylaw change, Section 2.6.

Lets look at the proposed change.

Currently it states: "Removal of a Borad Member: The Unit Owners, by a two-thirds vote of all persons present or by proxy entitled [one vote per household] to vote at any meeting of the Unit Owners at which a quorum is present, may remove any Board Member with or without cause."

Proposed Bylaw change: "Removal of a Board Member: the Unit Owners, by an eighty percent vote of all persons present or by proxy entitled [one vote per household] to vote at any meeting of the Unit Owners at which a quorum is present, may remove a Board Member for gross negligence and/or violation of the Association's Declaration, the Bylaws or Code of Ethics."

The first difference: Going from two-thirds vote to eight percent vote.
To me this is the most interesting because there was not reason given as to why the proposed change. The meeting minutes from the last meeting still has not been posted. It is way past the deadline to post them on the locusthillcommunity.org website. I know I would like to see if this has been captured in the minutes and what discussion took place about this change. (I could not attend the meeting because I was out of the country). If someone reading this post was at the meeting, I would love for them to post what happened at the meeting with regards to this suggested change.

The second difference: Going from with or without cause to gross negligence and/or violation of the Association's Declaration, the Bylaws or Code of Ethics.
To me this change seems to make a lot more sense then the first one. My biggest question about this change is, who is going to define what gross negligence is? Unlike the Code of Ethics this bylaw is for the community (the Code of Ethic's is for board members). If this section is specifically for residents then we need to have the gross negligence clearly defined. On a side note the Code of Ethics is not clearly defined was to why a Board Member can be removed by other Board Members, but let's save this argument for the new Board in May.

Bottom line is why is this change being rushed thru without more time and comments from the community. I did talk to a board member today and they told me they were never involved with or knew about this suggested change. So really, why are the board member not communicating amongst themselved to make these changes. One would have to also ask "What is the real reason for this change?"

Tim Bongiovanni

Tim,
Just to clarify....the day after the February 22nd meeting, I made a call to Valerie to ask her what took place at the meeting (since I was not in attendance). She told me of the proposed change to 2.6, so I was aware that the board members present had voted to change it. But I was not involved in making this proposed change.

I knew that a notice and comment needed to be mailed out to homeowners at some point, but was not made aware by ANY of the other board members that a specific postcard was being mailed out and was not made aware of the fact that a "special" meeting was to be held on March 22nd until the postcard was already in the mail.

The question I posed to the other board members was why couldn't the notice and comment be mailed out with the call-for-candidate form that will be mailed out in the next week or two. Why was it imperative that we send this out immediately and waste more of the community's money?

Thanks for the clarification on this. I apologize for the misunderstanding. However, that still shows that members of the board is making decisions without consulting the entire board. This is crazy. How can a board function for the community without discussing changes amongst themselves. There needs to be changes and they have to come at the annual meeting.

It would have been really nice to get some explanation or background as to why this proposed change is being voted on. Seems there is more to this whole thing and something "stinks" in Locust Hill. Why are we spending money to send out these postcards without any explanation? Maybe it's just me but this board seems disfunctional. If they have to spend our money for a change that makes no sense then either there is some bad stuff going on or they have nothing better to do. Who is supposed to post the notes to the meetings?

genes6x6....I am the Secretary of the Board. At each meeting, I take the minutes and they are to be posted on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] within 15 days of the meeting. This past meeting, I was not in attendance, so Valerie (our community manager) took the minutes. I would imagine they would be posted to the website shortly. I and another board member were opposed to spending extra community money to send out a postcard, when in fact it could have been mailed out with the call-for-candidate form that is going out to all homeowners in the next couple of weeks. But for some strange reason, the other members of the board are adamant that this bylaw change take place in the month of March and that it couldn't wait until the April 12th meeting.

I, for one am tired of the cattiness of the board members. There is a level of conduct that should be held when you sit on the board. I understand a few just want to keep the homeowners informed, but at one time it seemed like a tantrum. At another meeting one member told another to shut up. I expect better behavior from my children, let alone elected members of an HOA. I agree alot needs to change, but you can still act respectfully.