Senate Bill 323 added new Civil Code section 5105(h), which provides that “[e]lection operating rules adopted pursuant to this section shall not be amended less than 90 days prior to an election.”
It is unclear as to what date is meant by “an election.” Does this mean the date on which the ballots are distributed, the deadline for voting, or the meeting at which ballots are counted? New Civil Code section 5105(g)(4) and common sense suggest “an election” means the deadline for voting, but this interpretation is susceptible to others as well, including, potentially, the first exercise of any of the free speech activities controlled by said rules.
It is unclear as to what date is meant by “an election.” Does this mean the date on which the ballots are distributed, the deadline for voting, or the meeting at which ballots are counted? New Civil Code section 5105(g)(4) and common sense suggest “an election” means the deadline for voting, but this interpretation is susceptible to others as well, including, potentially, the first exercise of any of the free speech activities controlled by said rules.
The fun doesn't end there, however. Civil Code section 4340(b) currently provides that “rule change” means “the adoption, amendment, or repeal of an operating rule by the board.” If an association engages in a rule change, as defined, it generally must follow the 28-day notice period specified by law.
Here, however, new Section 5105(h) only bars amendments to election rules less than 90 days prior to "an election." Does this mean that boards may adopt and repeal election rules closer to election day - whenever that is - in order to carry out changes in election procedures? The law's shift in favor of enforcement suggests such tricks would be on par with juggling chainsaws, but the statute as written does permit it.
Here, however, new Section 5105(h) only bars amendments to election rules less than 90 days prior to "an election." Does this mean that boards may adopt and repeal election rules closer to election day - whenever that is - in order to carry out changes in election procedures? The law's shift in favor of enforcement suggests such tricks would be on par with juggling chainsaws, but the statute as written does permit it.