http://www.moresexvideos.net http://leakedpornvideos.com natural teen blows cock in pov and gets tight pussy rode. porn-spider.top

Why the $35/Month Increase Is Not Just “Dues” — It’s an Improper Assessment That Requires a 2/3 Vote

The 2025 Annual Meeting Notice includes a proposal that would raise assessments by $35 per month for 2026 and 2027. This is being presented inside the “budget” paragraph — but under our governing documents, this increase cannot be adopted as a simple budget item. It requires a homeowner vote under two separate sections of our CC&Rs.

Here is a clear explanation of why the increase is improper as currently noticed, and what owners need to understand before the meeting.


1. The Board Already Voted on a $65/Month Increase — Not $35

From the posted meeting minutes:

July 9, 2025 Board Meeting

“Voted to put the question of raising the dues by $65/month for two years before the membership.”

August 15, 2025 Board Meeting

“The proposed budget increasing dues to $65/month for two years…”

There are no posted minutes from September or October showing:

  • A change from $65 → $35
  • A reclassification of the increase
  • Any rescission of the July vote

The sudden shift to $35 appears only in the Annual Meeting Notice.


2. The Annual Meeting Notice Blends Budget Rules With Assessment Rules

The notice first quotes CCIOA’s budget ratification statute, which uses a majority veto rule.

But the same paragraph then says the Board will ask the membership to approve a $35/month increase.

That increase is treated like a budget line item — but our CC&Rs are very clear:

Budget ratification ≠ authority to raise assessments.

They are different legal mechanisms with different processes.


3. The Proposed $35 Increase Violates Two Sections of Our CC&Rs

A. Article VI — The 10% Maximum Annual Increase Rule

Article VI, Section 3(a) prohibits raising assessments more than 10% in a year without member approval.

Current dues: $59.38
10% limit: $65.32

A $35/month increase is a 58% increase, so:

  • The Board cannot adopt it unilaterally.
  • It requires owner approval by a majority of votes cast.
  • It cannot be buried in a budget paragraph.

This section alone invalidates the current notice.


B. Article IV — CPI Rule + 2/3 Member Approval Above CPI

Article IV, Section 4(b) allows increases up to CPI without a vote.

2025 CPI = 2.1%
Allowable without vote: $59.38 → $60.60

Anything above CPI requires:

  1. A meeting called for that purpose
  2. 60% quorum (first meeting)
  3. 2/3 vote of owners present (in person or by proxy)
  4. Increase is valid for two years only

The notice does not disclose any of these required steps.


C. If Treated as a Special Assessment — Still Requires 2/3 Vote

Article IV, Section 5 allows special assessments only with:

  • 60% quorum
  • 2/3 approval
  • Applies only for one year (must be re-approved)

But the Board never identified it as a special assessment.


Bottom Line

The $35/month increase:

  • Violates the 10% limit in Article VI
  • Violates Article IV’s CPI + 2/3 vote rule
  • Cannot be adopted through the budget

It must be voted on at the December 2 meeting — and it requires the correct quorum and vote thresholds.


4. The Reserve Study Being Used Is Inadequate

The Board’s 2025 reserve study:

  • Was done in-house, not by an independent reserve specialist
  • Expressly relies on “Board judgment”
  • Excludes major infrastructure, including stormwater drainage and culverts
  • Conflicts with the 2020 professional study
  • Shows our reserves declining from 38% → 23%, primarily due to discretionary spending

A multi-year assessment increase should not be based on an incomplete or non-professional report.


5. Participation Barriers Affect the Vote’s Legitimacy

  • No remote access
  • No email or drop-box proxies (unwritten rule; not in bylaws)
  • Nominations restricted to floor-only
  • Meeting scheduled one day after Thanksgiving travel weekend
  • Recordings banned, meaning owners must rely on minutes published nearly a year later

These restrictions suppress turnout and render a 60% quorum nearly impossible — except through mass proxy collection.

This benefits the Board, not homeowners.


6. HB25-1043: Strict Compliance Now Matters Even More

Colorado’s new law (HB25-1043) requires HOAs to strictly comply with:

  • CCIOA
  • Their own governing documents

before attempting to:

  • collect delinquent assessments,
  • send accounts to collections,
  • record liens, or
  • pursue foreclosure.

If the $35/month increase is not properly adopted:

  • It is not a lawful assessment.
  • Any collections activity becomes noncompliant.
  • The HOA could be legally prohibited from enforcing it at all.

This exposes the association to significant long-term financial risk.


7. What Homeowners Should Do

Vote NO on the proposed $35/month increase

Request correction of the 2024 Meeting Minutes

Demand a professional reserve study

Request revision of the Collections Policy to fully comply with HB25-1043

Support candidates who want transparency and legal compliance

Share this article with neighbors

Full citations, documents, and supporting materials are available on this site.
Feel free to reach out with questions or additional documentation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *