I don't understand your logic.
The bylaws simply state that the board will
recommend the amount of M&O fees for membeship approval.
The covenants, which are legally questionable in my opinion, set the
date fees must be paid and address the possibility of a lien if fees are not paid,
and states that such fees can be changed by a "majority vote of the owners". Quite simply, an owner is an owner, whether or not the owner is a "member in good standing".
Therfore, to change the M&O fees requires a majority of all owners, not just members in good standing, and not just members who choose to vote. The absence of a vote does not eliminate the count of that owner when figuring the majority.
I don't know the actual numbers... but if there are 4000 owners, no matter what, 2001 votes to increase must be received. And if only 1500 owners return a ballot/vote, even if all vote for an increase.... there can be NO increase because 2001 votes are needed.
The board further messes up the ballot for having more than 1 option.... Again, to change the M&O fee, a majority of ALL owners must vote for that increase.... that's impossible when there's more than 1 option.
Except that whatever vote the board receives will be creatively misinterpreted to increase the fees. This is just like the messed up 1988 vote that established the covenants themselves which are not legally established.... despite being recorded.
As an owner, it is possible to win a lawsuit that the bylaws are the only legal document.... The covenants are not..... and CRE owes me a refund because I've overpaid my fees, the amount of which should never have been increased.
Does this make any sense to anyone.... or shall we let this board and others interpret our legal documents however they see fit to do??????
The "amount" of the M&O is addressed in the Bylaws. A change of the Bylaws requires only a majority of the vote by members in good standing.
The question of the M&O is addressed in the covenants. Some time ago we discussed having an M&O for each lot to increase the income. That would require a vote of the entire membership [not just members in good standing] and the vote would need a super majority to pass.
Exnodak maintains [in his legal gobblety goop] that the original covenant change [which addresses not only the M&O but the amount of the Roads Fee] was never ratified by a vote of the super majority required.
Now that no increase has been added... we have to consider that we will not have the 1099 members who have not paid their dues in the vote. That leaves us roughly 2000 people to educate on the need to hold steady until the economy turns or until we can force a covenant vote next year. The problem is, I wonder how many of the other families will choose not to pay their dues next year... if the economy stays the way it is.... putting food on the table is more important than paying to keep a worthless lien off your property in these hard times.... but only those who can afford to pay their dues can vote or be on the board....