EGP Announced Assessment Vote Results at Special Vote Meeting – November 15, 2021
EGP: There were 22,904 members in good standing. We needed 11,453 to reach a quorum. There were 11,718 proxies or ballots received, so we do have a quorum.
EGP: The total votes ‘for’ were 6,532. Which was 56%. The votes ‘against’ were 5,160 which was 44%.”
EGP: We received 26 proxies that were either blank or marked both ‘for’ and ‘against’. So those are not included either in the ‘for’ or ‘against’ numbers.
Board Chair Gives Closing Remarks at Special Vote Meeting
Board Chair, Joanie Corry: I encourage all of us to embrace the results of this vote. The Property Owners have spoken on how they want to move forward. The ‘yes’ vote means we are delivering on the community values that made Hot Springs Village our home. We will have the funds available to ensure our gates, police, fire department, emergency response systems are here when we need them and our infrastructure will be maintained the way it should be. We’ll be able to continue the level of service you have a right to expect from this community. We thank you all for coming today.
2021 Assessment Increase Vote Results
Assessment-Vote-Updates-results-2021-November-15* * *
Thank you for reading. If you like, please comment below. We love to hear your opinion, but comments must be made using your first and last real name, or they will not be accepted. If you would like to submit an article for publication, please contact us through this website. Be sure to bookmark this website.
Mrs. Katherine Miller
11/19/2021 — 5:18 pm
With each Cooper lot that sells, ten “for” votes are lost. If there had been 125 fewer Cooper lots voting “for” this time around, the overall result would likely have been “against” 5285 (=5160+125) to 5282 “for” (=6532-1250).
Linda Anderson
11/20/2021 — 11:23 am
Mrs. Miller, Good question. How many Cooper-owned lots were actually cast for the vote? How many POA owned lots were used? There was no mention of this. These are very important questions that need to be addressed.
mrs katherine miller
11/20/2021 — 3:41 pm
I am thinking that it might become difficult to substantially raise POA dues by vote in a future with fewer unimproved lots owned by Cooper.
In regards to POA-owned lots, they can only be counted if a quorum was not reached. Even then, they could only be used to match percentages so that only the totals would be increased to meet the quorum, not to affect the percentage for or against.
HSVP C
11/20/2021 — 6:49 pm
Katherine, absolutely in regards to it might become more difficult to substantially raise POA assessments as CCI (Cooper) sells its lots. This assessment increase would not have passed if it wasn’t for CCI votes, in my opinion. We supported him 3 years ago.
LLOYD SHERMAN
11/22/2021 — 7:39 am
I find the reporting to be somewhat confusing. For instance, Non-residents have both improved and non-improved. Why is that pertinent? It is one vote for living unit. Second, exactly how many ballots were actually mailed. I don’t see that number displayed anywhere. How many could not be delivered and thus didn’t get a vote. While I truly believe most property owners would like to trust the reporting, the absence of information just adds to previous issues with trust.
Susan Posner
11/26/2021 — 9:39 pm
The owners should have been issued ballots with all 3 options put to the vote with an option 4 for no increases. The option with most votes would been the decision by owners. Why could that not be done? A few board members decided the option; didn’t even choose the task force recommended option 3. Deficit board in fairly short time as task force showed no rush given the option 3 they recommended; all during major distracting pandemic. HSV will become a municipality after 3 years.
Kirk Denger
11/26/2021 — 10:11 pm
EGP: There were 22,904 members in good standing.
(members in good standing has nothing to do with achieving a quorum)
VOTES are what count when counting a quorum , NOT BALLOTS. Declaration, Article X, sec. 6.
… a majority of all VOTES of each class shall constitute a quorum.
If CCI had 125 ballots sent out from the POA multiplied by 10 = 1,250 VOTES less 125 proxies already counted = 1,125.
Add 1,125 to 22,904 = 24,029 VOTES.
A majority of 24,029 = 12,015
Only 11,718 votes were received less 26 not counted = 11,692 which is less than 12,015.
No quorum.
The vote is over, too late to change the votes cast.
VOTE FAILS
40% of Americans are controlled by Developer HOAs and POAs.
Look at the numbers, then look at the LACK of numbers hidden by the Developer and affiliated Board members.
The Vote is comprised of Class A Members and Class B member.
No accounting of EACH Class by EPG who is paid for by the ignoring POABOD.
Tucker Omohundro
12/18/2021 — 7:02 pm
Let one of your ignoring board members try to clear some things up here. We have two classes of votes. Class A and class B. Cooper has 23 class B lots. He voted them at ten votes each. Each class has to make quorum and be a majority to pass. 100% of class B votes were voted and voted yes. Coopers class a lots were in the total of lots in good standing. He voted them also. It was less than seventy and only one vote for each. Nothing was or is being hid by anyone. I hope this helps.
Kirk Denger
12/19/2021 — 8:18 am
33 days after the assessment increase vote of 11/15/2021, HSV Property Owners receive more partial data of the assessment increase vote from the Developer affiliated POA Vice-Chair. Conflicting partial data, the assistant POA secretary, at the 12/15/2021 board meeting, stated CCI cast 36 tenfold weighted, 360 votes, and also stated that the POA requested EGP to create a different spreadsheet than the original to show to Property Owners instead of the original spreadsheet with redactions of how individual Class A Members voted.
A quorum is not counted separately, that would be two Quorums. Article X, Section 6, states that a Quorum is achieved by a majority of ALL votes of each class.
The intent of the tenfold weighted provision for Class B in Article III, section 2, is that all votes be counted together not separately.
Simply providing the original EGP spreadsheet (redacted where necessary to protect Class A identities) as evidence to Property Owners who have a right to examine how the assessment increase vote was counted, is prudent.
The analysis of the evidence of the data, determine the outcome of the vote. The lack of evidence and conflicting interpretations of that evidence, combined with misunderstandings of the HSV POA Declarations, do not.