Delegates in some HOAs exercise voting rights of unit owners

Q. Our covenants, conditions and restrictions require a two-thirds vote of delegates to amend the documents. However, NRS 116.2117 requires homeowner votes of 51 percent to amend the declaration unless the CCRs require a higher majority. As NRS 116 overrules CCRs, it would appear that a vote of two thirds of homeowners (not delegates) would be required to change the declaration. What is your opinion?

Also, where can you obtain a hard copy of NRS 116? And, what professional or citizens groups has the best potential to affect the legislature in changing NRS 116 in 2008?

A. The reader needs to review NRS 116.31105. It states that in association communities of at least 1,000 units, the voting rights of the unit owners may be exercised by the delegates. The reader must review his governing documents and confirm the number of units in the association. The statement made by the reader that his covenant reads "delegates" would leave me to believe that he is living in a very large association (The reader did not send me his covenants to review). If this is the case, then his association would fall under NRS 116.31105 and there would not be a conflict.

To get a copy of NRS 116, visit state of Nevada on the Web. The ombudsman's office may have hard copies or you can contact the Legislative Bureau of the state in Carson City for a copy.

If I knew the best citizens group to effect change in the legislature, I would be the first one in line to contact them. There are just too many interest groups. You have homeowners, boards, managers, real estate sales people, attorneys, accountants and developers, just to name a few. Sometimes these groups come together to support a particular bill and at other times the groups can be on different sides.

I have recommended in the past that a committee be formed that would allow different voices on proposed laws or issues and see if the committee can reach a consensus. In politics, we need to seek optimum solutions; there are no perfect ones.

Q. I recall reading in your column that NRS 116 required a board to discuss both the pros and cons of an item on the agenda that is coming up for a vote? What happens if the board had no discussion and just voted? Can the vote be challenged if the discussion impacted the spending of resident funds?

A. Unfortunately, you misread the article. It was discussing a formal process that a board could adopt in controlling meetings. There is no state law that requires a board to discuss both the pros and cons of any item on the agenda.If the board just wants to vote without any discussion, the board can just vote. You cannot challenge a vote that impacted the spending of resident funds just because there was no discussion.

Not all issues need discussion. Often members of the board are in concert as to how they support or do not support an action item. It is proper form and highly recommended that the board asks for both pro and con discussion, but it is not mandatory.

Barbara Holland, certified property manager, is president and owner of H&L Realty and Management Co. She is a member of the Institute of Real Estate Management. Holland is a past president of the Greater Las Vegas Association of Realtors. Questions may be sent to Association Q. & A., P.O. Box 7440, Las Vegas, NV 89125. Her fax number is 385-3759. Questions may be edited for spelling and grammar.