<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>I agree; at least this association has a one vote per lot rule, so the delinquent member can only as an owner of the lots that are not delinquent. If it had a one vote per member rule, then not paying on one lot might well mean he or she could vote anyway if he or she owns another lot. My model bylaws language says, </span><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>“</span><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>This loss of [member in good standing] status will apply to the members personally as well as their rights with respect to each of their lots, if they own more than one lot.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>I know of no cases about this, others might. Much will depend on the language of the governing documents, of course. But then there is the correlated documents rule, which is handy in a number of circumstances (most of the cases cited are HOA cases, as is <i>Roats</i>), and seems to allow language in Bylaws to be considered along with the covenants unless contradictory:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt;text-indent:.5in'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>¶ 23 The governing documents of a corporation are interpreted in accordance with accepted rules of contract interpretation. <i>Hollis v. Garwall, Inc.,</i> 137 Wash.2d 683, 696, 974 P.2d 836 (1999) (covenants); <i>Langan v. Valicopters, Inc.,</i> 88 Wash.2d 855, 859, 567 P.2d 218 (1977) (bylaws); <i>Walden Inv. Group v. Pier 67, Inc.,</i> 29 Wash.App. 28, 30–31, 627 P.2d 129 (1981) (articles of incorporation). The purpose of contract interpretation is to determine the parties' intent. <i>Shafer,</i> 76 Wash.App. at 275, 883 P.2d 1387 (citing <i>Berg v. Hudesman,</i> 115 Wash.2d 657, 663, 801 P.2d 222 (1990)). Washington courts apply the “context rule” of contract interpretation in ascertaining the parties' intent. <i>Shafer,</i> 76 Wash.App. at 275, 883 P.2d 1387. This rule “allows a court, while viewing the contract as a whole, to consider extrinsic evidence, such as the circumstances leading to the execution of the contract, the subsequent conduct of the parties and the reasonableness of the parties' respective interpretations.” <i>Shafer,</i> 76 Wash.App. at 275, 883 P.2d 1387. “The ‘context rule’ applies even when the disputed provision is unambiguous.” <i>Shafer,</i> 76 Wash.App. at 275, 883 P.2d 1387. <b>In addition, articles of incorporation, by-laws, and covenants are “correlated documents” that are construed together. <i>Rodruck v. Sand Point Maint. Comm'n,</i> 48 Wash.2d 565, 577, 295 P.2d 714 (1956); <i>Lake Limerick Country Club v. Hunt Manufactured Homes, Inc.,</i> 120 Wash.App. 246, 249, 84 P.3d 295 (2004). Because the governing documents are correlated, the scope of a homeowners' association's authority is not determined based solely upon one such document; rather, such a determination requires analyzing the documents as a whole. <i>Shafer,</i> 76 Wash.App. at 275–76, 883 P.2d 1387.</b></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>Roats v. Blakely Island Maint. Comm'n, Inc.,</span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> 169 Wash. App. 263, 273–74 (2012).</span><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>Rob</span><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>Robert D. Wilson-Hoss <br>Hoss & Wilson-Hoss, LLP <br>236 West Birch Street <br>Shelton, WA 98584 <br>360 426-2999<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><a href="www.hossandwilsonhoss.com"><span style='color:blue'>www.hossandwilson-hoss.com</span></a><br><a href="mailto:rob@hctc.com"><span style='color:blue'>rob@hctc.com</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><i><span style='font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>This message is intended solely for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, you are hereby notified that any use, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or by telephone (call us collect at the number listed above) and immediately delete this message and any and all of its attachments. Thank you.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";text-transform:uppercase'>This office does debt collection and this e-mail may be an attempt to collect a debt, Any information obtained will be used for that purpose. </span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>To the extent the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692) applies this firm is acting as a debt collector for the condominium/homeowners' association named above to collect a debt owed to it. Any information obtained will be used for collection purposes. You have the right to seek advice of legal counsel.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Paul Neumiller<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 23, 2016 9:09 AM<br><b>To:</b> wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com<br><b>Subject:</b> [WSBARP] HOA Gurus<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hey!! Any law (or experience) out there on whether being delinquent on one lot stops the owner of multiple lots from voting and use of facilities. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I have a long established subdivision (RCW 24.03) with old stripped down CC&Rs. The CC&Rs and the Bylaws state that voting power means “that each owner shall be entitled to one vote for each lot owned.” The recorded Bylaws also state that “Nonpayment of dues may, ….., subject the member to both loss of voting privileges and use of the recreational facilities for as long as such indebtedness continues.” <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>So, an owner owns two lots but is delinquent on only one lot. Is the owner still entitled to vote for the one lot that is current in dues and still allowed to swim in the HOA’s pool?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>It is galling to the HOA that an owner who is delinquent for one parcel is still able to vote and swim just because the same owner owns another lot that is current on dues. But I am willing to tell the HOA that it is unclear unless clarifying language is adopted and the most conservative approach is that the owner may vote for the current lot. All thoughts are welcome. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><a name="Paul_Neumiller"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><img border=0 width=250 height=150 id="_x0000_i1025" src="cid:image002.jpg@01D1FD28.1FE203C0"></span></a><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. E-mail messages to clients of Paul A. Neumiller presumptively contain information that is confidential and legally privileged; e-mail messages to non-clients are normally confidential and may also be legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward or store this message unless you are the intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it back to the sender and delete it completely from your computer system.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'>E-mail communication on the Internet may NOT be secure. There is a risk that this confidential communication may be intercepted illegally. There may also be a risk of waiving attorney-client and/or work-product privileges that may attach to this communication. DO NOT forward this message to a third party. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact the sender.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>