Debunking More LLC Propaganda

I've heard that some representatives of the LLC are unsympathetic to the community's call for equity in voting powers.  They seem to believe that we owners knew what we were agreeing to when we bought our properties, because it's spelled out in the covenants.  But is it?

I've reread the covenants with this idea in mind.  It's not obvious at all that the homeowners association is effectively run and controlled by a corporation, or that homeowners get to pay a disproportionately higher portion of assessments for the privilege of being dictated to by the LLC.  There's nothing in the covenants or bylaws that even hint at the voting powers inequity.  So how could they be so daft as to even consider this idea?

Here's how!  The first part of the covenants includes this:

KAHLER GLEN GOLF AND SKI RESORT LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company, (‘Declarant’), the owner of real property located in Chelan County, Washington, and described as follows:

The Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 33, Township 27 North, Range 17 E.W.M., Chelan County, Washington (Kahler Glen Phase 1&2); and the Southeast quarter and East half of the East half of the Southwest quarter, Section 33, Township 27 North, Range 17 E.W.M., and amended Blocks 1,2,5,6 and 7 of Phase 3, Chelan County Washington (Kahler Glen Phase 2,3,4 and Second Amendment of Phase 4) with the exception of: (all lands east of Nason Creek)

Does hereby establish the following protective covenants, conditions and restrictions for said property ("Property"), said covenants to run with the land:

Since there are no other restrictions in the document, all property detailed above defines the community association.  And this is a legal basis for their argument.

It's obvious that the defined land includes a mountain, golf course, and 27 acres by Nason Creek, etc. isn't it?  Ok ok, it's not obvious to me either.  And when the bylaws state "Golf Course shall be assessed as ten (10) lots", it's obvious that these 10 lots are actually the legally-defined property shown above, right?

In fact, there are very few consumers who would be able to put these pieces together, and interpret them in the way that the LLC does.  I have it from a good source that the chances of a judge agreeing with the LLCs argument, i.e. that we knew what we were buying into at the time of purchase, is close to nil. So while there might be a legal basis for their argument, in practical terms, it's not one that will carry weight in the courtroom.