Spoonbill Courier
home Marsh Creek Community Bylaw Change Rebuttal

Bylaw Change Rebuttal

Brent Burkey
By Brent Burkey, Chair of the Ad Hoc Election Committee

Editor’s Note: Mr. Burkey is offering new factual information not part of our original 90 minute interview nor in the Board’s explanatory communication to the community. He also makes statements that are misleading. However, homeowners are encouraged to consider them carefully before voting. Comments can be left below.

It’s a shame that Brian Nelson, the Spoonbill Courier editor, did not accept my offer to review his article on the proposed amendments to the Marsh Creek Bylaws in advance of publication in order to avoid factual errors and creating erroneous impressions. Consequently, his use of prejudicial terms like “trove of items”, “white flag”, “surprising claim” and “Soviet style political engineering”, combined with mischaracterizing or misunderstandings of the Bylaw changes, tend to create the false impression that these changes are not in the best interests of the members.

Factual errors included claims:

  1. Stating that a quorum was reduced to 15% from 30% when no  change was made to the percentage required for a quorum. The 30% quorum requirement remains in effect. However a quorum has never been necessary for the election of directors. Presently, there is no required minimum number of votes needed to elect directors. Directors are elected regardless of how few members vote. The proposed change would require the vote of at least 15% of the members to elect directors, an increase in the required votes and not a decrease as represented. To make matters worse, however, under the current Bylaws all votes by secret ballot are discarded and not counted if a 30% quorum is not present. The First Amendment corrects this deficiency and counts all votes the same with or without a quorum.
  • Depicting the elimination of proxy voting for directors in corrupt terms when voting by proxy is actually prohibited by the Florida Condominium Act and is becoming the norm in current HOA bylaws.
  • Alleging that the ability to revoke a ballot has been removed when in fact it has never existed.
  • Alleging that the main dining room should have been used as the site of the meeting without realizing that the dining room is under construction and cannot be reserved. The Club has promised that they will make every effort to provide us with the largest space available if needed, including relocating outdoors to the back patio.
  • All Board members live north of Thunder Bridge, when in fact three of eight live south of the Bridge.

All of this was avoidable with just a little more effort from the Spoonbill Courier. Before voting residents should read the next addition of Association’s official newsletter, All aBoard, for a more complete explanation of the First Amendment.

Thank you, Brent Burkey

Chair of the Ad Hoc Election Committee

You Might Also Like

One thought on “Bylaw Change Rebuttal

  1. In response to Mr. Burkey’s rebuttal: 1. Regarding election of directors, the 15%, etc.–The most onerous change in the proposed amendments is the one that is ignored in the rebuttal, i.e., that none of the existing directors would be replaced and would continue to serve until the next election. The By-Laws now call for the existing Board to APPOINT a new Director. The By-Laws also state that directors are to serve no more than 6 years (i.e., 2 terms). The proposed change creates a potential conflict in the By-Laws.

    2. Mr. Burkey is correct that the Condominium Act prohibits proxy voting for directors. Chapter 7.18 of the FL Statutes deals with condominium real property. The applicable Act for HOAs is Chapter 7.20. It is the intent of the Legislature to differentiate between condominiums and HOAs.

    3 The ability to revoke a proxy is in fact clearly defined in Chapter 7.20.

Comments are closed.

Top