Based on some recent comments from our members, it appears that there still is some

misunderstanding about voting requirements for CC&R elections.   The explanation that

follows will hopefully clarify this. 

 

General CC&R Election Background

 

Unlike a Presidential election or a Congressional election, where a majority of those voting prevails,

 a CC&R election by law must account for all those eligible to vote in the final count. The state of

California mandates that common interest associations (like BVRI) cannot change CC&R's

without the approval of a majority of the affected owners. The intent of the law is to protect

owners from rule changes enacted by a minority of the owners. 

 

Our CC&R elections are conducted according to Article XIII,  Section 1, of the CC&Rs. 

The text of this section follows -

 

"Section 1. Amendment in General. This Declaration may be amended or revoked in any respect

by the vote or assent by written ballot of not less than a majority of the Owners of Lots within

the Properties and a majority of the Owners of Lots improved by a Residence."

 

In order to amend the BVRI CC&Rs, two things are required to occur -

   - First - a majority of all lot owners (improved, not improved, BVRI, or not BVRI) must agree, AND

   - Second - a majority of improved lot owners (BVRI or not BVRI) must agree.

 

These are the procedures that BVRI must follow in order to change the CC&Rs,

 

BVRI's Recent Polls to Determine Support  for CC&Rs Change

 

The two polls taken were done on a less formal basis than a CC&R election because the

Board wanted to get a feel for the community consensus before spending the money on

a true CC&R election, which could run to $10,000. State law requires that, whenever CC&R's

are changed, associations like ours must bring their CC&R's up to current state law. That

means that an attorney must review the entire body of the CC&R's, not just the proposed

changes, and incorporate any other state-required changes. This must be done before the

election, so most of the money would need to be spent regardless of the later results of the

election.

 

Note that this refers to "lot owners" whether they actually vote or not.  Since there is one

vote per lot, and a majority of all the lots must agree, a non-response is considered the

same as a “No” vote. The responses received were:

 

  • “Yes” 160 or 38%
  • “No” 98 + “No” due to non-response 168 or (266 “No” votes) or 62%

So, while a majority of those responding favored changing the CC&R's, the number was far

short of the number of votes required to change the CC&R's. Rather than focusing incorrectly

on the 160 for changing vs. the 98 against in the returned ballots, the Board must consider

the 160 for changing and the 266 who have so far not supported changing the CC&R's. The

second poll informed the property owners that a ballot not returned would be counted as a

vote against changing the CC&R's.

 

Based on these results, the BVRI Board of Directors has decided not to pursue the issue

of a change to the CC&Rs limiting home size in the new subdivision. We feel quite certain

those property owners who felt strongly on both sides of the issue probably voted, and, it is

unlikely that sufficient additional “yes” votes could be obtained from the 168 owners who did

not vote.

 

The Board feels that it has acted prudently in not going immediately to a CC&R election

without some assurance that a proposal to change the CC&R's stands a reasonable chance

of success, warranting the expenditure. The Board further feels that it has not been

demonstrated conclusively that a proposal to change has a fair chance of succeeding, but

is, in fact, not favored by a margin of 266 to 160 when counted as the state requires us to count

the ballots in a true CC&R election.

 

GO BACK TO HOME PAGE