100 signatures for a proposed amendment ?

A proposal to amend the bylaws requiring 100 signatures on any petition was unanimously passed by the Advisory Committee at their June meeting.
It's a scurrilous attempt to deter residents from proposing amendments. Since the inception of Century Village, 25 signatures were required , it served us well and there's no need to change it now. If this amendment is passed at the delegates assembly it pretty much leaves the majority of residents in the difficult situation of having to gather 100 signatures to get a proposal on the table. That is unless you are one of the chosen few sitting on the committee, in which case a single member can propose anything they want.
There's no good reason for changing the requirements other than deterring residents efforts to change what they think needs change. 
If the move to require 100 signatures is acceptable to the delegates , they should consider a further amendment permitting E signatures. That would make things a lot easier for residents and bring some balance to the issue. 
So far the committee has stonewalled the proposal to initiate one vote per unit owner in the election of officers, That proposal has been buried for two years. The committee agreed to deal with it , but subsequently sent a message that the inclusion of E signatures on a new proposal  is not Kosher. Giving them the further opportunity to deny it. David Israel made the case that if the one vote per unit amendment is passed it would require a lot of changes to the core documents. Though he said he thought it is a good idea, he undermined the proposal by suggesting it would be an onerous task to accomplish. 
Regardless of the feelings of the committee, it's an idea who's time has come. One vote per unit is the only true democratic way to elect officers .