TABLE 8: CLARIFY RULES FOR RECORD REQUESTS AND ENFORCE THOSE
RULES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
KEY
FINDINGS: |
1 |
Overall 95.7% of respondents want the rules for requests to see HOA
records clarified and enforced. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
Boldfaced values in the rows of column
YESes and Noes differ significantly from the overall average as they are at
least 3 standard away from that value.
The disparities are particularly strong |
|
|
within all respondent traits except gender. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
All
but one of the Non-Owner Interest groups' percent YES and NO responses are
statistically significantly different from the corresponding ones of Owners
and Overall figures. Attorneys and |
|
|
Other were significantly more in favor of this recommendation than
respondents overall or Owners.
Conversely, Board Members and C.A.M.s were significantly less in favor. |
|
|
4 |
Some
percentage YES and NO responses in the Gender, CCFJ Membership, Region and
Additional Remarks Made sections differ significantly from the Overall
figures and one another. |
|
|
5 |
The
YES and NO percentage responses of CCFJ members differ significantly from one
another as well as from those Overall. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
The
respondents' traits of Interest and CCFJ memberships had potentially causal
influences on their responses to this question. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* * * * * * * * * * * * |
* * * * * * * * INTEREST * * * *
* * * * |
* * * * * * * * * |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* * * * * * *
REGION [8] * * * * * * * * |
* *
ADDITIONAL REMARKS MADE * * |
|
|
|
|
|
BOARD |
|
|
|
|
|
* * * GENDER [5] * * * |
|
CFJ MEMBER [7] |
|
|
|
WEST |
EAST |
|
|
PRIORITY |
COMMENT |
|
|
|
|
OVERALL |
OWNER |
MEMBER [1] |
LAWYER |
C.A.M. [2] |
OTHER [3] |
N.A. [4] |
|
MALE |
FEMALE |
D.K. [6] |
|
YES |
NO |
|
NORTH |
CENTRAL |
COAST |
COAST |
SOUTH |
|
ONLY |
ONLY |
BOTH |
NEITHER |
OVERALL TOTALS |
|
1033 |
|
740 |
130 |
7 |
13 |
8 |
135 |
|
584 |
380 |
60 |
|
196 |
837 |
|
35 |
202 |
156 |
137 |
503 |
|
176 |
131 |
418 |
308 |
% WITHIN CATEGORY |
|
100.0% |
|
71.6% |
12.6% |
0.7% |
1.3% |
0.8% |
13.1% |
|
56.5% |
36.8% |
5.8% |
|
19.0% |
81.0% |
|
3.4% |
19.6% |
15.1% |
13.3% |
48.7% |
|
17.0% |
12.7% |
40.5% |
29.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ADJUSTED # [9] |
|
1026 |
|
737 |
131 |
7 |
11 |
8 |
132 |
|
584 |
380 |
62 |
|
190 |
836 |
|
34 |
201 |
155 |
135 |
501 |
|
175 |
131 |
418 |
302 |
# OF YESes |
|
982 |
|
714 |
118 |
7 |
10 |
8 |
125 |
|
559 |
364 |
59 |
|
189 |
793 |
|
34 |
192 |
152 |
131 |
473 |
|
172 |
121 |
401 |
288 |
# OF NOs |
|
44 |
|
23 |
13 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
7 |
|
25 |
16 |
3 |
|
1 |
43 |
|
0 |
9 |
3 |
4 |
28 |
|
3 |
10 |
17 |
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COLUMN % YES [10] |
|
95.7% |
|
96.9% |
90.1% |
100.0% |
90.9% |
100.0% |
94.7% |
|
95.7% |
95.8% |
95.2% |
|
99.5% |
94.9% |
|
100.0% |
95.5% |
98.1% |
97.0% |
94.4% |
|
98.3% |
92.4% |
95.9% |
95.4% |
t-Test on %
YESes [11] |
|
|
1.8 |
-8.9 |
6.8 |
-7.6 |
6.8 |
-1.6 |
|
0.0 |
0.1 |
-0.9 |
|
5.9 |
-1.4 |
|
6.8 |
-0.3 |
3.7 |
2.1 |
-2.1 |
|
4.1 |
-5.3 |
0.3 |
-0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COLUMN % NO [10] |
|
4.3% |
|
3.1% |
9.9% |
0.0% |
9.1% |
0.0% |
5.3% |
|
4.3% |
4.2% |
4.8% |
|
0.5% |
5.1% |
|
0.0% |
4.5% |
1.9% |
3.0% |
5.6% |
|
1.7% |
7.6% |
4.1% |
4.6% |
t-Test on % NOes [11] |
|
|
|
-1.8 |
8.9 |
-6.8 |
7.6 |
-6.8 |
1.6 |
|
0.0 |
-0.1 |
0.9 |
|
-5.9 |
1.4 |
|
-6.8 |
0.3 |
-3.7 |
-2.1 |
2.1 |
|
-4.1 |
5.3 |
-0.3 |
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 STD.
DEVIATION [12] |
0.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% YESes Row [10] |
|
100.0% |
|
72.7% |
12.0% |
0.7% |
1.0% |
0.8% |
12.7% |
|
56.9% |
37.1% |
6.0% |
|
19.2% |
80.8% |
|
3.5% |
19.6% |
15.5% |
13.3% |
48.2% |
|
17.5% |
12.3% |
40.8% |
29.3% |
% NOs Row [10] |
|
100.0% |
|
52.3% |
29.5% |
0.0% |
2.3% |
0.0% |
15.9% |
|
56.8% |
36.4% |
6.8% |
|
2.3% |
97.7% |
|
0.0% |
20.5% |
6.8% |
9.1% |
63.6% |
|
6.8% |
22.7% |
38.6% |
31.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calculated
Chi-Squared Value [13]: |
0.0016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9889 |
|
|
|
"0.0046" |
|
|
0.0969 |
|
|
|
|
0.9324 |
|
|
|
Implication of
Chi-Squared Test |
|
RELATIONSHIP FOUND |
|
|
|
|
|
INDEPENDENT |
|
|
RELATIONSHIP LIKELY |
INDEPENDENT |
|
|
|
INDEPENDENT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 ROWS X 3 COLUMNS |
|
|
|
|
|
2 ROWS X 2 COLUMNS |
|
CELL < 5 |
|
|
|
2 ROWS X 3 COLUMNS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
© 2008 Cyber Citizens for Justice, Inc. Deland, FL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|