Court Steps In to Enforce HOA Elections: A Lesson for Boards and Members
When homeowners’ associations (HOAs) delay or avoid holding regular elections, it can lead to frustration, mistrust, and legal battles. A recent court decision serves as a reminder that both board members and homeowners have responsibilities—and rights—when it comes to fair and timely elections.
The Background: Years Without Elections
For more than a decade, the board of directors at a condominium community failed to hold regular elections. Control of the three-person board remained with a single owner and his son, who together owned a significant number of units. This lack of turnover meant other homeowners had no opportunity to participate in the governance of their community.
In late 2020, an annual election was finally scheduled. A third-party inspector of elections sent out ballots and notices for a virtual meeting to be held in January 2021. However, what happened next set the stage for a legal showdown.
The Controversy: Counting Ballots and Quorum Confusion
-
Missed Meeting: The first meeting on January 20, 2021, was adjourned because the property manager claimed there was no quorum (the minimum number of members required to proceed).
-
No Inspector Present: The independent inspector, who was supposed to oversee the ballot count, had been told not to attend the first meeting “to save money.”
-
Ballots Ignored: Even though 166 ballots were already submitted, the board canceled the follow-up meeting where those ballots were supposed to be counted.
Homeowners pushed back, submitting a petition signed by 15% of the community asking for the ballots to be counted. The HOA refused, claiming the election had “failed.”
The Homeowner’s Legal Action
One homeowner turned to the courts, using a California law that allows members to request a court order when a nonprofit corporation like an HOA fails to hold an election within the required time. The homeowner’s request was simple: count the ballots that had already been submitted and certify the results.
The trial court agreed, ordering the HOA to count the ballots. The HOA appealed, arguing that the court could only order a new election, not count ballots from a past meeting.
The Court’s Ruling
The appellate court upheld the trial court’s order, making several important points:
-
The law protects against boards “perpetuating their own power.” Courts can intervene to ensure elections take place.
-
Counting ballots is part of conducting an election. An election isn’t complete until the votes are counted.
-
Failing to hold a valid meeting (or adjourning it improperly) is the same as not holding one at all. In this case, the court had the authority to order the HOA to complete the election process.
What This Means for HOAs and Homeowners
This decision is a wake-up call for both HOA boards and community members:
For Boards:
-
Annual elections are not optional. Skipping them can create legal risk and erode trust.
-
Independent inspectors of election should handle ballot counting—boards and managers shouldn’t cut corners.
-
Proper quorum calculations matter. Both ballots and live participants must be counted.
For Homeowners:
-
Apathy enables problems. When homeowners don’t vote or attend meetings, it becomes easier for entrenched boards to avoid accountability.
-
State laws provide remedies. If a board fails to hold an election, homeowners can petition the court to enforce their rights.
-
Engagement matters. Even a small group of owners—15% in this case—can demand action.
The Takeaway
Elections in an HOA aren’t just formalities—they’re how communities stay fair, transparent, and functional. When elections don’t happen, it can leave the same people in charge for years, sometimes to the frustration of everyone else. This case is a reminder that HOAs work best when both the board and the members do their part.
-
For board members: Treat elections as a responsibility to the community, not just a checkbox. Skipping them or mishandling ballots can create distrust and legal trouble.
-
For homeowners: Staying silent or not voting makes it easier for things to stay the same—sometimes for the worse. Even a single vote or showing up at a meeting can make a difference.
At its core, this decision is about participation. A healthy community isn’t run by a few people behind closed doors—it’s built when everyone cares enough to have a voice.
California Appellate Court decision (April 21, 2023).
See case decision: Takiguchi_v._Venetian_Condos._Maint._Corp