The SCA BOD Ballot Absurdity
In 2013 and 2014, the SCA GM wrote:
“Election of five Directors. Vote “For” up to FIVE candidates only by marking the box next to the name. The ballot will be invalid if more than five candidates are marked or if there are any other marks on the face of the ballot.”
Following was a listing of six candidates with boxes to be checked either ‘For’ or ‘Against’. However, checking any box ‘Against’ would invalidate the ballot per the above instructions.
In the ballot instructions written by the GM stated:
“On advice of the association’s attorney and in accordance with Arizona’s Nonprofit Corporations Act 10-3708, Action by Written Ballot, there is a provision to vote “For” or “Against” each candidate.” The SCA GM did not quote the statute nor did she provide a written statement from the attorney to support her contention.
There is no such provision in ARS 10-3708 to vote ‘For’ or ‘Against’ each candidate.
Furthermore, Arizona Revised Statute, Planned Communities, 33-1812. Proxies; absentee ballots; actually applies and states:
“ Notwithstanding section 10-3708 or the provisions of the community documents, any action taken at an annual, regular or special meeting of the members shall comply with all of the following if absentee ballots or ballots provided by some other form of delivery are used:
1. The ballot shall set forth each proposed action.
2. The ballot shall provide an opportunity to vote for or against each proposed action.”
‘Notwithstanding’ means ARS 33-1812 overrides the provisions contained in ARS 10-3708 and the community documents. A ‘proposed action’ is universally interpreted to mean voting on issues, not candidates.
Continental Ranch, the Highlands at Dove Mountain and North Ranch and no other association uses voting ‘For’ or ‘Against’ candidates.