Since Bannockburn was founded there have been two separate metrics for who could vote on Bannockburn Bylaws and Covenants. Changes to the Bylaws required approval by 66-2/3% of the “Members in Good Standing” while amendments to the Covenants required approval by 66-2/3% of the “Resident Owners”. This difference in voting requirements for the separate documents is not uncommon and there are good reasons not to change it.
In 2012, the Board decided to use the “Resident Owners in Good Standing” metric to approve changes to the Covenants, even though this was clearly prohibited by the Bylaws and Covenants then in effect. The result was that several Covenant amendments were improperly “approved” with fewer votes to approve than required by the “Resident Owner” metric. See Article XI, 2. Separate Instrument of the 1998 Bylaws, and Article III, 2. Voting, Article X, 4. Amendments and Article X, 5. Manner of Voting in the 2002 Covenants.
The 2012 Ballot Cover letter announcing the Board’s decision to use approval by 66-2/3% of the “Resident Owners in Good Standing” as the metric for approving the Covenant amendments. Note that this term is not defined in the Covenants and the “Separate Instrument” clause of the Bylaws, referenced above, strictly prohibits using any provision in the Bylaws to interpret the meaning of the Covenants. See 2012 Ballot Cover Letter and Article XI, 2. Separate Instrument of the 1998 Bylaws.
The Board’s decision in 2012 was predicated on advice of “According to Mr. James Bull, the Bannockburn Homeowners Association attorney.” The Bull opinion was highly and fatally flawed. These concerns were validated in 2020 by Bannockburn’s erstwhile legal counsel, Aaron Goodlock of Orten, Cavanagh & Holmes. See 2017 Letter from James Bull, Concerns Regarding Bull Opinion – Summarized and 2020 Voting Rights.
On December 31, 2011, there were 172 Resident Owners in Bannockburn, as determined by Douglas County Records on that date. This number is the most recent available prior to the 2012 Covenant vote in the March-April time frame. Approval of Covenant amendments by 66-2/3 of these Resident Owners would have therefore required 115 votes to approve. See 2012 Resident Owners for details on the Douglas County records for December 31, 2011.
Some of the proposed 2012 Covenant amendment items received approval by 66-2/3% of the “Resident Owners” (115 or more votes to approve), as required, and were appropriately added to the Covenants.
Others items received 104 to 110 votes to approve by “Resident Owners” and therefore FAILED to be properly approved. Nevertheless, the Board deemed them “approved” on the basis they had received approval by the lesser number of 66-2/3% of the the 152 “Resident Owners in Good Standing” (102 or more votes to approve). These items were improperly added to the Covenants. See 2012 Covenants and 2012 Covenant Ballot Summary.
Worse, one complete paragraph in the previous 2001 Covenants was replaced in its entirety in the 2012 Covenants – without a single vote to do so. This was the first paragraph in Article V, 3 Animals. See 2012 Covenants Article V Amendment. See 2012 Covenant Animal Amendment
When the 2012 Covenants were recorded with the Douglas County Clerk and Recorder, the Recital page certified that all items had been approved by 66-2/3% of the Resident Owners when, in fact, various items failed to meet this requirement. See 2012 Covenants and 2012 Covenant Ballot Summary.
2012 Covenant items that were APPROVED (115 or more approval votes):
Roofing 1 — (APPROVED) Prohibit shake shingles.
Roofing 2 — (APPROVED) Change warranty to 30 year for asphalt shingles.
Roofing 3 — (APPROVED) Add metal roofing panels.
Fencing 1 — (APPROVED) Prohibit privacy fencing on road frontages.
Fencing 2 — (APPROVED) Change Fencing restrictions within 25 feet of Lot boundaries.
2012 Covenant items NOT APPROVED (Less than 115 votes to approve):
(Items in red FAILED but were added to 2012 Covenants regardless.)
Fencing 3 — (FAILED) Allow Vinyl Ranch Style fencing on road frontages.
Buildings 1 — (FAILED) Increase allowed out buildings to three
Animals Allowed A — (FAILED) Allow Donkeys.
Animals Allowed B — (FAILED) Allow Alpacas.
Animals Allowed C — (FAILED) Allow Goats
Animals Allowed D — (FAILED) Allow Chickens.
Animals Allowed E — (FAILED) Increase allowed corral size to 3000 sq. ft.
Animals Allowed F — (FAILED) Allow 1 beef animal.
Voting % 1 — (FAILED) Reduce amendment approval requirement to 51%.
Help stop out-of-control Boards.
Join Bannockburn-Watchdog now!
Documents and pages referenced on this page:
1998 Bylaws
2001 Covenants
2017 Letter from James Bull
Concerns Regarding Bull Opinion – Summarized
2012 Covenant Ballot Cover Letter
2012 Resident Owners
2012 Covenants
2012 Covenant Ballot Summary
2020 Voting Rights
Join Bannockburn-Watchdog