Homeowners don’t have to change voting rules

Q: Our homeowners association board has attempted to lower the supermajority vote requirement for about two years. Over that time they would contact members to turn in their ballots, hoping to reach the required percentage and include information in the monthly newsletters.

They even sent a letter to those members who voted “no” to attend a meeting with time and place designated for a board member to talk to them regarding their “no” vote. Many of the members have stated in print their unwillingness to vote to lower the supermajority.

Obviously, the vote received by the board validated the member’s unwillingness to change. The subject has not been discussed in the monthly meetings or not appeared in our association newsletter for many months. The agenda we just received for the next monthly meeting states under New Business — “Apply to Courts to Lower Supermajority.”

My question is how can the board ethically discuss and vote to spend major association funds when the members of the association have stated through their vote they do not want to lower the supermajority?

What can the membership do to curtail this activity?

A: NRS 116.21175 pertains to the procedure for seeking confirmation from District Court of certain amendments to the declaration (covenants). This law was passed with good intentions; it is not an easy task to accomplish.

Many older associations had restrictions as to the number of votes needed to change the covenants, some were even as high as in the 90 percent. It does not take a rocket scientist to know that obtaining 90 percent on a vote by the homeowners on any matter is not realistic.

The above “standard” percentage has crippled many associations in making intelligent and timely changes to their rules.

You did not say why the board is so adamant in changing the percentage to amend the covenants. What the board is doing may not be politically correct and it could face the consequences of a recall election to remove members.

The homeowners of this association need to express their displeasure over this proposal at the next board meeting.

Could the board be stopped? Perhaps, as the issue may be under the jurisdiction of the Nevada Real Estate Division and the Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels Commission.

Q: I live in a large gated community that has a HOA. I have read the conditions, restrictions and covenants and I know that owners are allowed to rent their houses out as some have done after the recession. I have heard that some have rented to Section 8 people. I see nothing in the rules that specifically call out this type of renters. Could you shed some light on what exactly is Section 8 and the impacts, if any, on a quiet middle-class community.

A: Section 8 is a federal program that is a rent voucher program administered by local city or county housing authority offices within each individual state.

It is a subsidy program based on financial needs of the applicant. The amount of assistance is based upon the income level of the applicant. It was originally passed in 1937, Section 8 of the Housing Act (42 U.S. C. No. 1437f). It is the federal government’s major program to assist low-income and elderly families.

As to the impact upon your community, most Section 8 renters do not want to lose their Section 8 funding. That, by itself, allows the landlord to have more leverage over his residents as to abiding by the lease agreement and the governing documents of an association.

Barbara Holland, certified property manager, broker and supervisory certified association manager, is president and owner of H&L Realty and Management Co. Questions may be sent to the Association Q&A, P.O. Box 7440, Las Vegas, NV 89125. Fax is 702-385-3759, email is support@hlrealty.com.