Update on Raven Hills HOA 2023 Annual Meeting and Election

The following message was sent on 10/26 to those who provided Mary Jenkins with their proxy for the Raven Hills HOA's 2023 Annual Meeting. The message is authored by Haley Murphy. (Please note: A few details have been added and phrases have been altered from the original email for the benefit of supplemental context for our web viewers.) 

Hi there, 

First off - thank you again so much for your support and proxy for Monday's Annual Meeting. And to those of you who attended in person, I am so glad you were able to join us! It went much, much smoother than last year's, and I'm very thankful for that. 

Currently it looks like there were over 100 homes in attendance (proxies + in-person). It will not shock most of you to hear that Diversified provided some confusing records from the check in process, so we're still working on getting a firm count. Based on the current numbers, between proxies and in-person attendance, 45% of the neighborhood participated this year! That's nearly a 50% increase year over year - which is pretty cool. The Board - specifically the four newest members of this year’s Board (Nate T., Joseph S., Darren B., and Darren M.) - worked incredibly hard to make this event run more smoothly and to strengthen the fairness and integrity of the election. 

I attended the ballot count in person as an observer. Observation of the count was open for anyone from Raven Hills to attend and any homeowner could have accessed the count just as easily as I did. The entire count was also recorded and presumably this recording will be available to the community regardless of what happens next. All of this is to say: I'm fairly confident I'm allowed to share with you what happened. 

The 2022 annual meeting minutes were approved (84 in favor, 1 opposed), the 2024 budget was approved/ratified (92 in favor, 10 opposed), proposed bylaw amendment 1 passed with unanimous approval, and the proposed bylaw amendment 2 passed (93 approved, 10 opposed). 

Nate Tassler was reelected, and Stacie Warren was elected to the Board. Nate received 69 votes, Stacie received 51. Chuck Anderson was not elected as he received the lowest number of votes (45 votes) and only two seats were vacant on the Board of Directors. 

During the count, multiple ballots were identified with boxes next to candidates names not checked or marked, but Chuck's name had been written. Many of these ballots were "interpreted" as a vote for Chuck Anderson, despite concerns about what people may have intended (or not intended at all) by writing down Chuck's name. (E.g., Was someone just writing his name down as it was nominated from the floor so they would remember and have a complete list of candidates? Did they intend to vote for him but then fail to check any box for any candidate at all?) More than once, Chuck was given a vote despite no check occurring next to his name. In my opinion, that interpretation of these ballots was incredibly generous and to Chuck's advantage; I would argue that a checkbox is a vote and an unchecked box is not - but I was there only as an observer, and rarely spoke, as I didn't want there to be any question of interference on my part. 

Even with these questionable ballots ultimately being counted as votes for Chuck Anderson, Chuck still received the fewest number of votes for the Board of Directors. 

Once the vote totals were agreed upon, Chuck Anderson's wife, Kris Anderson, who is an outgoing member of the Board of Directors and was also present as an observer, announced that these results were "contested". She also said that she and another Board member, Susie Cooper, felt the HOA's proxy form was too confusing to understand. (Note: As Board members, both Kris and Susie would have had the opportunity to review the proxy form, and raise any concerns or suggestions for edits to it, prior to it being sent to the community with the Annual Meeting notice. They would have also been asked to vote  in approval of or objection to sending the communication, which included the proxy form, to the community. It is my understanding that neither Kris nor Susie raised any concerns or objections prior to the proxy forms being sent, and that they both voted in approval to send them to the community.)

So... Now things are sort of up in the air. Presumably the HOA will once again have to spend homeowner assessments on legal fees to navigate this, because neither state law nor the HOA's governing documents - as far as I can tell - covers what happens when someone challenges an HOA's election. Unfortunately, this is not the first time something like this has happened this year. As was pointed out at the annual meeting, the HOA has already spent thousands more than usual on legal expenses in 2023 (and I encourage you all to ask more questions about what the issues were that resulted in these expenses... I suspect you'll find a very clear and obvious common denominator). I'm saddened that our collective time, energy, and budget continue to be drained away in this way (which diverts resources away from the commons, fire mitigation, and other community improvements), but I suppose the Board wants to get a green light for moving forward rather than risk being sued by and/or because of those who are contesting the election, as the financial consequences of a lawsuit could ultimately be passed onto homeowners. This is likely why the community has not yet heard any official communications from the Board about the results. 

As the person who made the most amount of noise about the lack of integrity and full blown abuse of ballots in last year's election by last year’s Board members, I promise you, I would be making just as much noise this year if it were warranted. However, based on what I know and what I’ve seen, this was likely the most thoughtful and thorough meeting and voting process this HOA has had in years. From where I'm standing, a lot of work went into making sure this year's annual meeting and resulting vote was conducted with the upmost integrity. I believe the great efforts and resulting improvements were evident to anyone can compare this year's meeting to last year's. Countless hours were invested by unpaid volunteers for the sake of the Raven Hills community’s confidence in the process and results, and I am so thankful those volunteers felt this was a worthy cause. 

But I am not here to tell you what to think, and you don't have to take my word for it: Please, reach out to the Board and ask them the questions you have about the meeting and election and process and outcome. Ask them for their qualifications and experience, and the thought processes behind how things were done. I do not speak on their behalf but I do think they would welcome your questions and feedback and would rise to the opportunity to resolve any concerns you might have. 

Anyway, that's pretty much all I have to share for now. 

Thanks so much, 

Haley