Eliminating or Reducing the Quorum


7/21/20231 min read

One of the first surprising things I learned after moving to PVE was the method by which our PVHA board self appoints themselves year after year after year. It is a very interesting process: During a meeting February the members of the board take turns complementing each other and patting themselves on the back. They then self select themselves for another term. It is unlike anything I had seen anywhere else- except maybe in China, Cuba, Russia, or North Korea.

Unlike most elections that we vote in (City Council, Congress, President, etc) the candidates for PVHA board elections that receive the most votes have not been declared winners since 2009. Our HOA bylaws that date back to 1923 say that only if more than 50% of the electorate participate is an election valid and the votes counted. They call this the quorum. Back in 1923 this might have made sense- today it does not. Most elections, except maybe for presidential ones rarely reach a 50% turnout. Could you imagine the Mayor or a Senator refusing to even open ballots, tally votes, and then self appointing themselves?

The PVHA could easily change our quorum rule if they wanted (I've written and spoken about this numerous times)- but they do not. This morning while researching the issue I happen to come across a website maintained by a law firm called Adams Stirling- this caught my attention because this is the same law firm the PVHA uses. It turns out that Adams Stirling has their own opinion about Homes Association Quorums and ironically- they are in favor of abolishing them. They note that there is "No Benefit to Quorum," and that "requiring a quorum only causes aggravation and expense". They go on to say that Quorums have a bad impact on elections and that "People who care about the election should decide the outcome."

How about that? I couldn't have said it better myself. If only the PVHA would follow their lawyers advice. Thank You Adams Stirling.