State law does include HOA election results deadline

Q: I am curious as to why Nevada Revised Statute, Chapter 116, doesn’t require board election results to be posted within 15 days of the election.

Our association just had a board election on Aug. 5, and the 68 owners — 47 of whom voted — never received the results. I was told by the management company that Nevada law does not require it, nor does our bylaws. I came from California where it is required that elections results be posted on a community bulletin board or some other conspicuous place or owners be notified electronically or by regular mail, which is costly. Not posting the election results, to me, is highly unusual on any level. It undermines the idea of why we count ballots in the first place, to determine who won. Even the minutes of the annual meeting only announced who won but not the numbers. The numbers are important because they indicate in a contested election what percentage of the electorate is disenchanted with the governing body, as was the case in our election where close to 30 percent voted for the minority candidate, who was labeled “a trouble-maker” in a scurrilous, unsigned flyer distributed by those in power.

A: The simple answer is that no legislator has introduced such legislation as to the sending of the results of the election within a time frame and with notating the total counts of the election. It should be noted that many associations do include the counts in their annual minutes.

Q: I know you are very busy, but I just came from an event at our clubhouse and had a conversation with one of our members “who is in the know.” She said: “I liked (the director), but because he didn’t vote for the insurance renewal, so I have changed my mind.” I said I thought majority rules. She stated: The board had a closed meeting to vote on renewal of insurance, and it needed to be all “yes” votes to move forward. It had lapsed for a few days. The board is being directed by our management companies’ lawyer and is not getting good advice.

No food. No bus trips, and the beat goes on. There is liability! Yet, there is nothing in writing. Our clubhouse closes at 9 p.m., and no board member is allowed to have a key to have events later in the evening or on holidays. I have brought this up at our board meeting, but again the attorney said: “No, there is liability!”

So, you see this association is lacking in common sense and not understanding our covenants, conditions and restrictions and bylaws. I did do the research and found nothing except guidelines on “committees and clubs.”

A: It appears you are questioning why events cannot be sponsored by either the board of directors, committees or clubs. It looks like the association’s attorney is taking a very conservative approach that no activity should occur because of the potential liability.

In an “event” where the association is faced with a lawsuit, the insurance company for the association would decide if there is coverage. It also should be noted that most association insurance companies can include different types of event coverages, including the “one-day event.”

The board should contact their insurance company to find out what coverages and possible costs are involved for this association to have social events.

Note: The Nevada Real Estate Division issued a statement about Senate Bill 186, which addresses how HOAs communicate with their homeowners. The changes went into place Oct. 1.

By allowing for email to be the default means of communication for certain correspondence, the goal of the bill was to make methods of communication more efficient and less expensive for homeowners and associations. A review of the final bill language revealed inconsistencies with the conceptual amendment and legislative intent behind the change. The Legislative Counsel Bureau, under its statutory authority, will review SB186 in a manner consistent with the legislative intent and make necessary corrections before the language is codified under NRS 116.

To avoid any short-term fiscal, procedural and administrative costs associated with the application of the bill as it currently stands, the Nevada Real Estate Division will pause enforcement of section 1.7 of SB186 for 120 days or until certification of the revised statute.

The division, through the Ombudsman’s Office, will keep associations and homeowners informed and will provide additional guidance on the final revised statute when available.

Barbara Holland is a certified property manager and holds the supervisory community manager certificate with the state of Nevada. She is an author and educator on real estate management. Questions may be sent to holland744o@gmail.com.