Sierra Canyon, Somersett, Villages, The Vue – Your Community Forum

CC&R Vote Count Status

Somersett United

Somersett United

On February 15th the BOD conducted a CC&R Amendment Ballot Count with the following results:

  • Number voting for Approval  – 999
  • Number voting for Disapproval – 483

Not having enough votes to determine the final outcome, voting deadline was extended to April 15, with subsequent voter mailings on the part of the BOD soliciting an approval vote.

On April 25, another ballot count was performed with the following results:

  • Number voting for Approval of the proposed CC&R changes – 1188
  • Number voting for Disapproval – 544

The vote count required to either approve or disapprove the ballot measure is 1240.  Therefore, the voting deadline has been extended to June 13th.  However, given that vote counts will now be conducted on a weekly basis, given the trend, it is possible that the required number of approval votes will be reached earlier.

To date, the BOD ballot mailings calling for an approval vote were disseminated without any opposing viewpoints, as is permitted by Nevada Law and discussed in the previous blog article entitled “The CC&R Circus Continues…”   An owner request for dissemination of opposing viewpoints was made to the BOD on January 24th, and just acted upon on by the BOD at the April 23 meeting.  In this regard, the BOD has agreed to disseminate an opposing viewpoint statement prior to the deadline for ballot submittals.  However, it should be obvious to all that this is a little late in the process to have any impact, and that the required number of approval votes may be received before it is disseminated. One can only speculate as to what the vote count would have been if opposing viewpoints had been disseminated earlier.

This is an important lesson to be learned for future ballot initiatives such as is being proposed for the Country Club Purchase Agreement.  If one has alternative or opposing viewpoints to what is being presented by the BOD, it is imperative that these be disseminated to at the same time as the ballot mailings to give voters a fair look at both sides before submitting their ballots.

With permission of the authors, a CC&R Amendment Opposition Statement, which the BOD has now agreed to disseminate, may be accessed by the following link:

Opposition to Proposed CC&R Amendments

Advertisements

Comments on: "CC&R Vote Count Status" (4)

  1. Joe Bower - Del Webb Owner & Member SOA said:

    I believe owners are voting to Approve because: (1) they believe anything a board supports is just great as after all the members are volunteers who don’t get paid and only have the best interests of the community at heart; (2) they are “golf people” who are trying to fix the upcoming vote on the New Agreement between the Association and the Club by voting in the first CC&R change (20% quorum vote for mail-in ballots) while paying little or no attention to the other three changes; (3) they are developers who are convinced a private golf club will help their sales – even though their other communities sell out without a golf course; and (4) they received no official information presenting any opposing views so they were unable to have an intellectual debate with themselves before voting while at the same time feeling that voting is an obligation they want to fulfill so how else to vote but approve.

    I believe those who haven’t voted (1) are apathetic; (2) find it too much trouble to get another ballot, if their first one was misplaced; (3) falsely believe a non-vote is a no-vote; (4) don’t realize that even if they are opposed to the association supporting and/or buying the golf club that the approving vote of a majority (10%+1 – about 250) of 20% of owners (about 2,500) will obligate all owners; (5) could care less because they aren’t a club member, don’t play golf, and don’t see the golf course, but don’t realize the effects on their pocketbook or the association-at-large.

    The two matters of CC&R changes and New Agreement with the Golf Club are intermingled. Once the First Vote (CC&R’s) is completed hopefully eyes will be opened for the Second Vote (New Agreement).

  2. Mike Slattery said:

    I have read the “opposition to the proposed CC&R amendments” and find nothing new in the document.
    (1) The facts related to a quorum have been know and expressed at many meetings. Quorum requirements were defined by the State, not the board,
    (2) Proposed $250K verses $500K for purchases. Who came up with that. With almost 2,500 owners, That works out to about $100 per homeowner verses $200 per homeowner,
    (3) I did not see the names of the people who are in support of this opposition. Why?

    In my opinion, since everything in this document is “old hat”, had it been disseminated earlier, the outcome of 3 to 1 in favor would have been the same,

    • Jim Haar said:

      Mike,

      With regard to your comments:

      1) Be advised that the state does not define voting requirements (Quorums), the associations governing documents (CC&R’s) do. When the governing documents do not provide for otherwise, NRS 116-3109 then defines a Quorum as 20%. Bottom line, the 20% Quorum figure is not mandated by the state. The proposed CC&R Amendment could have specified whatever Quorum, or owner approval percentages the BOD felt appropriate for real property acquisitions. They chose to default to the NRS 116-3109 20% value without identifying such in the ballot mailing publications.

      3) If and when the BOD disseminates an opposing viewpoint (albeit a matter of principal, as we all know it was acted on too late), names will be included.

      Your assessment of the outcome regardless of opposing viewpoints may indeed be correct (BTW – the current ratio is about 2 to 1, not 3 to 1). However, that is not the issue, The issue is that (as in most ballot initiatives) voters should have access to both pro and con viewpoints before casting their ballots. Providing the opportunity for more informed decisions.

  3. Nettie Wong said:

    Make sure that no one is sending in more than one ballot.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: