# Information on voting for 2019?



## PClapham (Sep 1, 2019)

i checked on Wmowners.com and all I could find was 2017.  I included my vote for 3 years but can’t remember the years!  Does anyone have an formation on the vot g?
Thanks

Anita


----------



## ecwinch (Sep 2, 2019)

As far as I know, WMOwners has yet to select a candidate to endorse. Myle Hammond - who they endorsed the past three election cycles - did not run this year. 

If you assigned your proxy to WMOwners in 2017 or 2018, then your three year proxy to WMowners will still be in effect for this election. If you assigned to them in 2016 - but not since then - it should expire right before the election, as it is for three years, and not three election cycles (since most people sign the proxy prior to the current election).


----------



## PClapham (Sep 3, 2019)

ecwinch said:


> As far as I know, WMOwners has yet to select a candidate to endorse. Myle Hammond - who they endorsed the past three election cycles - did not run this year.
> 
> If you assigned your proxy to WMOwners in 2017 or 2018, then your three year proxy to WMowners will still be in effect for this election. If you assigned to them in 2016 - but not since then - it should expire right before the election, as it is for three years, and not three election cycles (since most people sign the proxy prior to the current election).


So really no info?  Is the website wmowners.com now unused?
Anita


----------



## geist1223 (Sep 3, 2019)

I think management is still analysing and discussing the decision.


----------



## CO skier (Sep 4, 2019)

PClapham said:


> i checked on Wmowners.com and all I could find was 2017.





PClapham said:


> So really no info?  Is the website wmowners.com now unused?
> Anita


I guess that sums it up.


----------



## ecwinch (Sep 4, 2019)

The comment about wmowners.com being unused is not accurate. WMOwners is still an active forum with very dedicated volunteer moderators and daily postings. Yes, some of their mojo has been displaced by Facebook groups - a trend I suspect plays out with most BBS style forums. 

I personally visit the site at least every other day, and it is still a very useful site for WM info.


----------



## LisaH (Sep 5, 2019)

Well I asked questions on that forum and no one answered. I have assigned my proxy to WM Owevers Inc. on line but haven't received any confirmation email yet. Is this normal?


----------



## geerlijd (Sep 5, 2019)

LisaH said:


> Well I asked questions on that forum and no one answered. I have assigned my proxy to WM Owevers Inc. on line but haven't received any confirmation email yet. Is this normal?


The confirmation email from the WorldMark Proxy service goes to the email address you entered in the form.


----------



## LisaH (Sep 5, 2019)

geerlijd said:


> The confirmation email from the WorldMark Proxy service goes to the email address you entered in the form.


Thank you! It went into my Junk mail folder. Forwarded it to WM Owners Inc.


----------



## CO skier (Sep 6, 2019)

ecwinch said:


> The comment about wmowners.com being unused is not accurate. WMOwners is still an active forum with very dedicated volunteer moderators and daily postings. Yes, some of their mojo has been displaced by Facebook groups - a trend I suspect plays out with most BBS style forums.
> 
> I personally visit the site at least every other day, and it is still a very useful site for WM info.


I think the death knell for anti-Wyndham groups in WorldMark was the passage of the restated bylaws in 2016.

Passing the bylaws required an affirmative vote from 25% of the total voting power in the Club, not just a majority of votes in the election.  25% of all owners voting to approve something in most any timeshare is next to impossible, because not enough owners vote.  How many timeshares struggle just to get a 15% quorum?

What was particularly interesting about the 2016 election is that it revised the election process.  If an owner objected to that or just objected to the fact that it was an up or down restatement of the bylaws instead of individual votes on any changes, that owner would have voted against the bylaws restatement.

What happened instead is that the Vote-No-on-bylaws-restatement-groups were steamrolled by more than 80% of owners who voted and passed the bylaws restatement, exceeding the 25% minimum of the total vote power.

This despite 3 Owner communications sent to all owners with an email address on file during the election process; most of the communications decried the bylaws restatement.


----------



## ecwinch (Sep 6, 2019)

CO skier said:


> I think the death knell for anti-Wyndham groups in WorldMark was the passage of the restated bylaws in 2016.
> 
> Passing the bylaws required an affirmative vote from 25% of the total voting power in the Club, not just a majority of votes in the election.  25% of all owners voting to approve something in most any timeshare is next to impossible, because not enough owners vote.  How many timeshares struggle just to get a 15% quorum?
> 
> ...



I fail to see how you correlate the 2016 by-law restatement to being a death knell for anti-Wyndham groups.


----------

