Pine Mountain Club, CA (Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 6:30 p.m.)—PMCPOA confirmed this evening that its BYLAWS election Ballot #2 has a clerical error and that ONLY the “Board Amendments to Bylaws” ballot is canceled. See the story in Thursday morning’s Mountain Enterprise newspaper for instructions to proceed with your ballot.
Pine Mountain Club, CA (Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 6 a.m.)—”Hold on to your ballots,” still remains the best advice to PMCPOA voters this morning. Don’t send them in yet to the Inspectors of Elections. Last night it was confirmed that the ballot sent to all members by the PMCPOA is definitely “broken.”
The ballot has 10 bylaws to vote on, but only 9 bylaw amendments are submitted. The problem is misleading to voters and could invalidate this section of the election in the view of voters. The election packet pamphlet is also misleading, turning “#5” into a “bylaw amendment” rather than what it was intended to be: A preface to explain items “6” and “7.”
General Manager Karin Shulman said in a note she is working to “fix it.” No details have been offered as to how that may be done without issuing a corrected ballot.
The question also arises about whether directors read the ballot packet before voting to approve it. Many members perceived the problem immediately.
Pine Mountain Club, CA (Monday, May 21, 2018 at 5:25 p.m.)— An emergency executive meeting of the Pine Mountain Club Property Owners Association Board of Directors has been set for Wednesday, May 23 at 5 p.m. in the PMC clubhouse pool pavilion. The single item on the agenda is “Possible Litigation.”
Pine Mountain Club, CA (Monday, May 21, 2018 at 4:42 p.m.)— The Inspectors of Elections said that they have to research the situation further if there is an error in the ballot that makes it out of compliance with Davis-Stirling. But Partner Curtis Peterson also said the PMCPOA “is where your concerns should be sent.” Peterson also said that once a ballot has been received by their company, “it is irrevocable.”
He had not yet heard about the “Bylaw Amendment #5” problem explained below.
One member sent an email to the company today, May 21, requesting reprint of the ballot. A similar request was sent to PMCPOA on Friday, May 18. The PMCPOA board interrupted their 8 a.m. Lilac Festival meeting to go speak with legal counsel about whether they needed to incur the $20,000 expense (they said) to reprint and resend the ballot. They decided, with counsel, that was not necessary, mentioning the website info about the bylaw amendments can be found online…not disputing that the bylaws are not included in the election packet. Karin Shulman said “They are in the members’ section of the PMCPOA web site. Click on Notices and Postings to get to Proposed Bylaws.”
The company and its contact is:
The Inspectors of Election – 1709
2794 Loker Ave W, Suite 104
Carlsbad, CA 92010
Pine Mountain Club, CA (Monday, May 21, 2018)— It appears the ballot ended up confusing voters by asking homeowners to vote for two different versions of the same bylaw—without printing out either of the versions. Katherine King, who is a former member of the board and an 8-year veteran of the governing documents committee, has issued this notice:
HOLD YOUR BALLOTS! the board has inserted an extra bylaw amendment (#5) that should not pass (and seems illegal). #5 asks you to ratify amendments to 10.02 and 10.03 (budget process) that were passed by the BOD last year and modified in some unspecified way. It does not say that the modifications are those voted by the BOD vote in February of 2018. They are asking you to vote on two different versions of the exact same bylaws without explaining what your vote means.
Vote NO on #5! Vote YES on 6 & 7.
If someone would like to write an email to Editor AT MountainEnterprise.com to argue on behalf of #5, please do, right away (and include your telephone number). At the moment, we do not know if this was a mistake by the board and the POA administrative office or if this is an actual effort to confuse the voters. Voting “Yes” on #5 could lead to members losing their rights to receive budget information and financial reports prior to boards voting for a new budget. As on the 2017 ballot, voting “Yes” on #5 could lower the numbers of voters needed to change the member protections in the very critical bylaw 10.02.
Pine Mountain Club, CA (Wednesday, May 17, 2018)—Ballots for property owners of the Pine Mountain Club Property Owners Association (PMCPOA) election are being received this week. Voters will select three people for three-year terms and one person for a two-year terms.
Vote for 3 three-year term candidates and 1 two-year term candidate
The directors whose three-year terms on the PMCPOA Board are ending are Doug Wilde, Stephen Bates and Gary Kemmer. Richard Ballard was appointed to fill Michael Glen’s unfinished term (Glen resigned after serving less than a year of his second term). Ballard will step down when his house, which he is selling, clears escrow, General Manager Karin Shulman said.
Bylaw changes inadequately explained on ballot
Candidate Bill Lewis, who is a member of the PMCPOA Governing Documents Committee, has complained that the format for presenting the proposed bylaw amendments on the PMC ballot does not adhere to the format established by the committee to fully inform the voters about proposed changes in their governing documents. General Manager Karin Shulman has put a clarification about the ballot proposals online at the POA website. On Wednesday, Lewis wrote: “just now checked to see if the proposed bylaw changes had been posted. They are—in the members’ section of the PMCPOA web site. Click on Notices and Postings to get to Proposed Bylaws.”
This is appreciated, but it is an inadequate remedy, voters who have called The Mountain Enterprise with questions said. Some are calling for the ballot to be re-issued.
—Patric Hedlund, TME
This is part of the May 25, 2018 online edition of The Mountain Enterprise.
Have an opinion on this matter? We'd like to hear from you.