Report Abuse

I'm sure you'll be fine by leaving the proxy name blank, the BOD will undoubtably vote as your proxy as you direct. However, the document you reference doesn't state what you wrote quite the way you wrote it. Paragraph two says if you name a proxy and your proxy isn't at the meeting then your vote will not be counted, but your ballot will still be included to establish a quorum. Paragraph one says if you don't name a proxy, the board will be your proxy. There are two reasons I recommend naming a proxy other than the default. First, I admit I'm a little paranoid about timeshare companies and boards, and legalese which enables them to interpret documents to their advantage. What concerns me about voting documents are words such as "... with full power of substitution ..." and "... full power to act for me ...". While some people have disagreed with me especially on Marriott ballots where additional words such as "as though I were present" or other additional qualifying info, I submit that any document with words using "full power" provide an entity the ability to change your vote. As such I prefer to name an owner with no business or employment relationship with the developer as my proxy when possible, If I know they will be attending. Second, I feel owners have more clout when addressing boards when they have the specific voting power large enough to exert pressure while attending meetings. I've attended a few now, and while a lot of lip service flies around about how much owners are important and appreciated, the structure of the meetings were subtly clear to me that we were impediments to be pacified and cleared out in a polite but structured manner. It would be nice for an owner our group of owners to attend a meeting with enough votes to affect the outcome of the meeting, and be present to met with board members so the board understands owners are properly organized and focused to the point boards must be more sensitive to owner input.