Board / ARB heavy Non Resident

Bylaws require 5 BOD.
Current board is 4 with a vacancy
2 of 4 are non resident - own rental prop

Board President appoints ARB
Board President - non resident but owns rental properties
2 of 4 ARB are non resident spouces of BOD

This does not sit well with me.

Any Thoughts

Thanks
Cat in the Hat

Your documents should define qualifications for a board member. What do your bylaws say/

Some don't even require owner/membership to sit on the board.

We don't allow spouses on boards, but spouses of board members CAN be committee members.

They are ok according to the bylaws. Non-residents can be on the board. It is that 1/2 the board and ARB are non-resident and unfortunately they seem closed to anyone new coming on. They want people who are going to agree with them. Do you think it is appropriate for an HOA to have 1/2 the BOD and ARB non-resident?

I appreciate your comment. It clearifies my thinking and I agree to an extent.

If it was a smaller percentage of the board it would be different.
If they didn't also line the ARB with their spouces, I would agree.
If the CCR didn't yield so much power to them.
Finally if they were not so protective of who is on the board.

Its the combination that has left myself and some other homeowners thinking that it is out of balance.

Thanks

Hi Mary -

I am beginning to shift my position. My concern was that too many positions are filled with non-resident on both the board and ARB. But I am really searching for the true thorn in the situation. I think that I am trying to put a measurable policy issue on this when it might boil down to a control issue. I and many others are not happy because the non-resident BOD and ARB have so much control over our community and further are not listening to the resident home owners.

"The ARB shall be the sole arbiter of such plans andmay withhold approval for any reason, including purely aesthetic considerations" Two of Three ARB are non-resident and did not contact the third but made a very quick decision on solar panals. The home owner had contacted 27 of his neighbors living closest to him, and had received an ok. There is not any appeals process because the CCRS are vague on this issue and the board has not put any policies or procedures to work for appeals. They do not want appeals to either board or homeowners. To me that is a little outdated.

Our CA is for the most part very quiet. But there has been issues in the past and a few going on right now where it would seem that instead of making decisions based on the good or consideration of the entire community, there seems to be some personal politics coming to play. I do not have a dog in the fight, but as an observer I am concerned that this type of thing stops. I think that the other homeowners are concerned as well and are wanting to change things up. Its similar to Washington when either party has to much power, there is a tendancy for us to want to dilute some of the power and balance it out. This board is a tight bunch who appoint and pick only who they want to hedge themselves. The sour fights in the past has created this situation and I would like to see it stopped and more balance on the board.

Willaim,
The problem with too many non-resident board members is a lack of involvement in the community apart from their board duties. I think that differs with the size of the community but we have found in our small community (48 units)that interacting with owners as neighbors (chatting, lending a shovel, opening doors, jump-starting a car etc.) improves their co-operation with the board and allows owners to see the board as people interested in the community as opposded to "wardens".
The other issue is landlords have a slightly different agenda than resident owners and will want to slant rules and bylaws to allow them to more easily manage and rent their properties. Condominiums were not intended to be used as rental units.
Our bylaws do not allow non resident owners to be president.

I am an officer in an HOA whose Covenants and By-Laws specifically state that ANY person may be appointed or elected as an officer and or a member of the BOD even if they are not a member of the Association itself. Only the President MUST be a member. There is no distinction at all between resident or non resident Board or Committee members. This, non-member BOD members, has actually only happened twice in 15 years so far as I know. We had a Treasurer once who sold his house and moved a mile away but was permitted to remain as the Treasurer. This lasted for several months without an incident until he resigned and bought a new house in another state. About 20 members signed a petition complaining about this, but that was less than 12% of the vote. In another year there was a problem on a certain street and the solution was having a friendly local police supervisor join the Board of Directors and fill a vacant slot. This allowed certain information to reach the police in a timely fashion. Not a single lot owner complained and after the problems took a taxpayer paid holiday a few months later the local police officer resigned and the Board continued as usual.

IMO the distinction between resident owner and absentee owner is, since the financial commitment is the same, a non-issue and quite basically I could see a lawsuit materializing if a BOD attempted to block a shareholder from exercising any control over what happens in the company his share is owned in.

The issue of wives serving on the Architectural Committee is also vague in my HOA. The BOD appoints such volunteers as it sees fit. Often those serving on the committees are the only ones willing to. In VA at this time VA (rather stupidly in my opinion) passed a law requiring that any and all homeowners be permitted to attend each and every meeting of a committee and that all such meetings be publicized. What that effectively did is totally murder many committees which previously quietly met in member's homes to decide such earth shattering things as should there be tulips or daisies planted by the gate? Suddenly 200 strangers show up and demand admittance. The result in my area was very few volunteer to host committees. A tip of the hat to your BOD for finding a way to keep the committees staffed.

I'm not sure why it matters that most of your Board is non-resident. That depends on the issues they are dealing with.

Sounds like the problem is a small group is controlling the Board. How are they controlling who can get elected? How big is your Association? What specifically are they doing that you don't like?

If these landlords own multiple properties (and if your Association gives one vote per lot), then they may have an advantage in numbers of lots/votes. If so, how big is that advantage? You may have an advantage in more easily speaking with your neighbors. You can learn a lot by discussing these matters with your fellow homeowners.

Wow Dave are you serious??

ALL landlords are bad? Just so you know they too are "owners" just not those living on the property.

They have the same interest you do maintaining the property. Like owners who live on the property some are good some not so good. But to put all in the unworthy basket seems a bit drastic and ________ to me.

I think that the sweet spot is once again in the middle. I don't believe that all landlords don't care. It likely depends upon how many they own and where. I think Daves point is that it is not typical for a landlord to care about property as much as a property owner. Argue with that I you are not in reality. Rental properties are becoming a real problem for communities. With the tenants as well as landlords. That is just the facts for a list of reasons. But the original question had to do with non-residents running the board which controls many things including the ARB. For a residetial community, I think that the board must be held by a majority of resident owners. It would be different with vacation rentals or such.

The situation that we have is that a non-resident board has for the most part taken control over the neighborhood and what makes it worse is that they are not listening to the residents. They do not live here, drive through here or are around to talk with the neighbors and such. So that is a performance problem and it likely going to be corrected.

Its not true in every case but don't be naive about the intentions of non-resident board members. Its not usually because they have so much time and love that they want to be on the board.

Take Care

I am a homeowner, landlord, property manager and an association manager. So I do speak from more than just a homeowners perspective on rentals. The OP was a little fun and vague because of possible litigation as well as a great deal of hear say that is going on and I don't know all who reads this great site. It has to do with my own neighborhood.

The real issue is that the board president and Secretary are non resident and have lined the board through appointment to their liking. The vacancy is because they are having a hard time finding another yes man.. This board, run by a non-resident President, has appointed the ARB commitee members of which two are their husbands, so once agian non-resident.

Their are to be four ARB but now only three because of same problem. The third ARB member is not always consulted because of being the third vote. How convenient.

There is no posting of positions open to the general homeownership.
No open meetings except annual meeting, and no news letters.
They appoint as needed and tie the board up.

Then they don't accespt home owners phone calls. Eveything is to go through the management company which was their choice.
Management company responds according to likes and dislikes of the board.

So basically two non resident families are running our neighborhood.. What is the motivation? Not really sure but I know that they are playing dirty to supress neighborhood understanding and involvement.

I haven't even really given you the good stuff. This group has some explaining to do and is likely is some deep trouble.

Thanks for your interest

Do you have copies of your governing documents? Have you sent a certified letter requesting financial statements and meeting minutes?

How much notice do they give before your Annual Meeting? How many of your neighbors feel as you do and are willing to serve on the Board?

Did the current Board give all members an opportunity to run for the Board last year? We had a Board that rigged an election, concealed spending, lied about what they were doing, and raised dues illegally; we threw them out by petition and replaced them. Like the man said, it depends on what the real problems are. (The real problems are not who these guys are or where they live, but what are they actually doing.) Like the man said, it depends not on whether you like your Board, but what are you willing to step up and do for your community.

You can email me for private discussion at [email protected].

I would not suggest making this about personalities or about where people live. If they are concealing their activities, taking community resources for themselves or illegally preventing other homeowners from running in fair and open elections to serve on the Board, and if you and your neighbors are willing to make the effort and do the job, then it may be worth the effort to do something.

Thanks for you comments and questions. I will keep your references. Take Care