Yes on Electronic voting...
I received my ballot in the mail on 10/29 2018. You should be getting yours soon also. If you do not, contact the Business Office.
I will vote NO on the budget, mostly as a protest on how our money has been spent, is being spent, and how it will be spent. Wasteful spending, excessive spending, legal fees and criminal investigations, lack of oversight, poor management, and an ignorant self interest Board, are some some of the reasons to vote no. I have zero confidence that there will be changes made. To vote yes would be to say.."here is more money to continue". If every one of the expected 300 to 400 who vote, all voted no, the budget would still pass.
I will vote YES on electronic voting, even with many questions about the legality I have on this voting process. It is obvious that an attorney was never contacted about this. In the end, the results of this vote could be declared void. At the least, we are voicing how we feel about member voting.
Probably just wishful thinking on my part that any vote or voice will have any impact on the current Board. Time and again they have failed the members, and I expect this will be no different.
Note the wording below that states "a majority of the votes in the association". This is not a simple majority of members voting and there does not even have to be a quorum present. It would take over 900 members to reject a budget. We have for a fact recently had a majority of those voting, reject the budget, but because of the law, the budget was adopted.
From RCW 64.38.025
(3) Within thirty days after adoption by the board of directors of any proposed regular or special budget of the association, the board shall set a date for a meeting of the owners to consider ratification of the budget not less than fourteen nor more than sixty days after mailing of the summary. Unless at that meeting the owners of a majority of the votes in the association are allocated or any larger percentage specified in the governing documents reject the budget, in person or by proxy, the budget is ratified, whether or not a quorum is present. In the event the proposed budget is rejected or the required notice is not given, the periodic budget last ratified by the owners shall be continued until such time as the owners ratify a subsequent budget proposed by the board of directors.
Bylaw's Article I
Purposes
Section 3
Section 3. The purposes for which this corporation was created may be altered, modified, enlarged, or diminished by the vote of two-thirds of the members at a meeting duly called for such purpose, notice of which meeting shall be given in the manner provided by the Bylaws of giving of notice for the election of trustees.
37 comments:
You can be assured my vote is NO on budget. A strong YES for electronic voting from me.
I think I would prefer to see the electronic voting taken off the table for now. This was intended to be an effort made by an unbiased Tech. Comm., and not by the Business Office. Without a Committee to research and put this in place, if approved, the BOT and Business Office could not be trusted to make a serious effort to put an effective system in place.
I haven't seen the mailing, but the president accompanied the announcement of the meeting with a statement of opposition to the electronic voting, claiming "the BOT" agrees this is a waste of money and our current system works fine." There is no record of the Board voting in opposition to this, so this statement appears to be false.
What we can probably assume is, should electronic voting be put in place, it will take a year or two to show its' potential. We also know that this would facilitate a simple operation to vote without concern for mail deadlines and missing ballots.
What should be perfectly obvious is, no statement from the BOT should have been sent to owners without a statement of support of the issue. The legal question of proper procedures needed to put Electronic Voting in place need to be determined before voting on this important matter.
There's just no point in screwing this up by rushing into it, when this is really a promising next step for the community, in trying to draw more interest in our governance, budgeting, and annual elections.
Establishing a restrained and non-invasive online connection with the membership is our best bet for making Surfside a happier place, seeking a much better working relationship with the Board. We need to be able to ask for owner's opinions on our community, and that is best done through short simple surveys.
The Tech. Committee's first survey was too timid, but they were intending to test the response, and try to address more issues in surveys to come. this is still a promising goal.
Research the legal requirements in our docs, rebuild a Tech. Comm., establish an online presence and a voting system if member approval can be achieved.
Well said Steve
I can't find the detailed proposed budget on the Surfside website. Without detailed budget information, I cannot make a reasoned vote to approve it.
Electronic voting is merely a mechanism to achieve voting. While it could make it easier for some members to vote, it would exclude some members who do not use computers or smart phones. What is truly needed is a transparent flow of information readily available to all members so that intelligent votes can be made. The BS newsletters and hard to use website must be improved if we are ever to have intelligent voting happening.
As I understand it, with electronic voting, the choice to vote by paper ballot would also be an option. Not that big a deal to have both methods at the same time. Don't listen to those who want to try and make it confusing. They are just trying to block information to and for the members.
I agree with some of what Steve has said but also have other questions. I was at all board meetings when the tech committee was active and I do realize it was early in the work up but I never really got an answer as to the cost and security if this was going to be put in place. Not to mention who was going to oversee it.
Calling the first survey timid is being kind. If they were testing the response then unfortunately for them since there was such a poor one they gave credence to those who say the majority aren't interested.
Thanks Steve for speaking out and having the courage to use your name. Don't be discouraged by those who attack the messenger as they have done to Patrick, Deb and George. You have our respect for speaking out and willing to admit when you make an error. That is also a characteristic admission of an honest person seeking the truth. I wish I had your courage.
You should be able to go to the business office and see the budget, or you should be able to request it be sent to you electronically. Can't vote YES for something you don't know anything about. Generally with the exception of increasing the budget for legal fees to $75k (probably Kirbys input, which I suspect some of which will be used for expenses incurred this year) it moves most everything to the right for a year, save some small funding. This was to keep the increase assessments down. Next year will be a different story as things can be delayed only so long. So look for some hefty increases in the years to come. Don't believe the Board voted on the electronic voting issue as they have been forced in presenting it to the members as a result of actions at the annual meeting. They (specifically the President) are not in favor of it and take every opportunity to "bad mouth" the project.
George it would take well over 1,000 NO votes to fail a budget. 50% +1 NO votes to be exact. Please provide better information if that is even possible.
To be exact, it would take 1013 no votes to reject the budget. That is NOT "well over". There are 2025 members at this date. That can increase or decrease as the number of member owned multiple lots can change due to purchase or sell. My estimate of over 900 was closer to fact than your "well over". I find your comment "Please provide better information if that is even possible", as disrespectful and offensive. I spend a lot of time providing information that is as accurate as I can, without exaggerating, as you have done. What do you provide?
The electronic voting ballot measure is to amend the Articles etc. to allow electronic voting. It will not eliminate the proxy vote. This is what I suggested in my member request form. The last election ballot we spent at least $1741.00 in postage alone. That does not include printing, hiring the DECC, labor to stuff ballots, the amount of time it takes at the annual meeting to count and have members sign their proxies, if they are even present.I contacted a firm that provides this service and found they provide for 2 elections, plus you can do surveys. I can't quote dollar amounts as I lost the info I received. I do think it was cheaper than what we spend.This is a win. Please support it. Thanks P.S. Since I have been here the proxy ballot has been rewritten twice and I believe it is still confusing to some.
For those that are going to be in town during the November meeting make sure to attend. They go over the budget and open the floor for questions before the vote.
Won’t change the budget though, if they wanted your opinion, they’d beat......never mind the don’t want it.
First, the budget sent out with the mailing is entirely too vague. Doesn't itemize anything. Where is the money to pay the fines? Where is the money that can be given to Committees at $3000 per pop. Why are we upping the legal budget to $75K? Folks, this is your money. Would you do your household budget this way? Secondly I feel it totally inappropriate for the Board to use this mailing as a bully pulpit to give out their and only their view on the electronic voting. This country does not limit expression, we should have the positive side as well as their continual negative approach.
Welcome to the Soviet Republic of Surfside
Hypothetically speaking, what happens if the budget isn't approved?
We all fall over in astonishment.
STILL NO DETAILED BUDGET INFORMATION ON THE SURFSIDE WEBSITE. WITHOUT ADEQUATE INFORMATION AN INFORMED VOTE IS IMPOSSIBLE. TO MY EXPERIENCE, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS BEEN THE CASE SINCE THE SURFSIDE WEBSITE WAS STARTED. YOU GOT IT FOLKS, THINGS ARE GETTING WORSE NOT BETTER. THE BEST WAY TO SEND A MESSAGE TO THE BOARD THAT THEY ARE DOING A TERRIBLE JOB IS TO FAIL TO RETURN ENOUGH BALLOTS TO ACHIEVE A QUORUM.
A quorum is not needed to pass or reject a budget. Below is from RCW 64.38.o25 State of Washington RCW's concerning homeowners associations. The best things you can do is to vote NO.
Unless at that meeting the owners of a majority of the votes in the association are allocated or any larger percentage specified in the governing documents reject the budget, in person or by proxy, the budget is ratified, whether or not a quorum is present. In the event the proposed budget is rejected or the required notice is not given, the periodic budget last ratified by the owners shall be continued until such time as the owners ratify a subsequent budget proposed by the board of directors.
THANKS FOR THE NO VOTE INFORMATION GEORGE.
Can’t stomach going to meeting where input doesn’t matter, any suggestions for an honest proxy holder?
Tums
I can't really see a quorum being present at the Nov. 17th meeting, but I guess it makes as much sense to approve electronic voting as not. The measure is not written well and is a perfect set-up to be as quickly eliminated if approved, as the Tech Comm., which proposed it.
The election notice went out with a statement from Gary Williams in opposition, claiming falsely that "the BOT agree", and NO statement of support. That's the president's sense of fair governance. He decides.
The vote is basically a mockery to pretend the measure is opposed, when there really needs to be a Tech Comm. in place to shop for a reliable site for the voting, and manage limited online communiques w/ owners with established noninvasive guidelines.
It seems that a very short list of intended transmissions to owners annually could be made, such as sending one Annual Meeting reminder 30 days prior, one notice of a Special Meeting if one is scheduled, basic election information in a transmission, allow for as many as (?) 4 short surveys,...By setting specific limits this could help the community learn about itself, avoid transmitting propaganda or opinion pieces, and expand our voting base.
Mike, are you referring to the electronic voting ballot only or all including budget?
Important Fact Check...
Do NOT send your ballot ("voting information") to any member. For your vote to count, the proxy voting form, completed and signed, must be brought or sent to the Business Office, or go to the meeting and cast your ballot there in person.
There is no other way. The office has to validate that you are a member in good standing. (your dues and assessments are currently paid.) On the proxy for, you can name the person who is your proxy. They will date and sign the form to validate you have voted.
Can we proxy u George?
No, do not use me. Not sure if I can or will be there. I am going to assign my proxy to Mike Riley. Sounds like he will be there.
Yes, Mike will hand carry your ballots to meeting. Thx Mike!
I will gladly accept any proxies. I'm a business owner in the BIG downtown of Ocean Park, as well as a second generation owner in Surfside. I will promise to honestly represent you and your vote. Contact me at hearingaidctr@gmail.com or through this blog if you'd like me to accept your proxies.
PS~ I see George's comment about the proxies are required to be turned into the Surfside office. My offer stands. If you would like me to be your proxy, my name at the office is officially Rebecca Winters. Thank you.
Fact check...
I appreciate that there are those who offer to cast your ballot and/or take your ballot to the meeting. If you want your vote by proxy to count, Read the bottom of the letter sent to you that contains your ballot. The meeting is on Nov, 17th. The deadline for proxy is Nov, 16th.
"your proxy appointment form must be received at the below address no later than November 16, 2018 at 4:00 pm for your vote by proxy to be counted"
Send to "Budget
Surfside Homeowners Association, 31402 H Street, Ocean Park, Wa. 98640" Or you can hand deliver it yourself. You can also take someone else's with you. The deadline applies to all.
Where did this baloney about the need to change the Articles come from ? Nothing about voting would change if it is handled electronically. Since it would be necessary to allow voting in the conventional way as an option, there is nothing else to be changed. The Bylaws allow for changes to be easily made, and the simple majority is enough.
This complicated changing of the Articles has not been demonstrated to be necessary, but has been put in place by the President, in his effort to prevent any efforts to broaden communications in Surfside, to reach out to disenfranchised owners who do not vote. This measure will fail when it really should be whole-heartedly supported by a Board that wants transparency and member involvement.
3:12 - Sorry I didn't express my appreciation of your supportive remarks. It means a lot to me. Thank you !!
They are changing the Article because it doesn't take the amount of votes that a By-Law change would take to change.
This claim that the Articles must be changed is FALSE. Nowhere in the Articles is there any restriction on changing the Bylaws. The only mention of a requirement of a 2/3 member approval is in the Bylaws, and DOES NOT come to bear on the change to electronic voting, nor voting in general.
That provision is preceded by Art. IX of the Articles which states:
"The purposes for which this corporation was created may be altered, modified, enlarged, or diminished by a vote of two-thirds of the members...."
This has nothing to do with the change of voting methods ! It is preceded by the statement in the Articles (which holds precedence OVER the Bylaws):
Art.IX Art. of Incorp./Sec. 3
"Bylaws of the Corp. may be amended at any regular or Special Meeting of the Corp., after notice is given, by a MAJORITY VOTE of members present at the meeting or represented by proxy."
and this is mirrored by Art. X of the Bylaws:
"These Bylaws may be amended at anytime by a vote of a majority of members of the Corp."
This establishes that a simple majority is all that is required to approve the change of Bylaws, providing for the option of member voting by an established electronic means, approved by the membership. We have no reason to change the Articles in order to add the electronic voting option.
This is a big fat lie, blatant deception and obstruction of member rights !!
Crud, I mis-labeled the first quote, which is in the Bylaws, Art.I, sec.3. It has nothing to do with the measure being voted on, as the purpose of electronic voting is NOT to change the purpose of the Corp.. It also is preceded by the Articles IX, which states that a simple majority can change the Bylaws at any time.
Post a Comment