illegal meeting

Barbara,

This age of electronic coversations will some day need to be addressed in how much a Board can communicate but for now, the manager is just a teeny bit paranoid about Board members communicating with each other. Boards always talk about issues before meetings. Technically, she could consider it a meeting so from now on, just don't tell her.

I think that the wording in the State Statutes meeting requirements sometimes holds Boards hostage from a healthy discussion. Not being able to assess information before making good judgement calls by having discussion among each Board member sometimes leads to uninformed and inaccurate decisions. Being a Board member is hard enough and then you get another reason to make it harder isnot good for everyone in the community.

Barbara,

As Anna has pointed out, as long as there are no decisions being made, there is no need to be afraid to share information and to discuss HOA business prior to the meetings.

Barbara....one additonal thing....as long as a quorum of board members do not meet to discuss ANYTHING..then it's ok. Anytime ( as I'm sure you're aware) that a quorum of board members meet to discuss association business, it's considered a "board meeting" and that can't happen without a properly noticed and posted meeting.

But if people are kicking around information and sending e-mails and NOT making decisions nor voting then that is permitted. NOTHING is decided or voted on until a Board Meeting.

Barbara,

Naw, you are good to go. Some of these P.M's are just as scarey in their inaccurate information as Boards that are out of control.

Barbara I agree with everyone as posted above … a meeting does not occur unless a quorum gathers to conduct association business.

720.303 Association powers and duties; meetings of board; official records; budgets; financial reporting; association funds; recalls.

(2) BOARD MEETINGS.—

(a) A meeting of the board of directors of an association occurs whenever a quorum of the board gathers to conduct association business. All meetings of the board must be open to all members except for meetings between the board and its attorney with respect to proposed or pending litigation where the contents of the discussion would otherwise be governed by the attorney-client privilege. The provisions of this subsection shall also apply to the meetings of any committee or other similar body when a final decision will be made regarding the expenditure of association funds and to meetings of anybody vested with the power to approve or disapprove architectural decisions with respect to a specific parcel of residential property owned by a member of the community.

(c) The bylaws shall provide for giving notice to parcel owners and members of all board meetings and, if they do not do so, shall be deemed to provide the following:

1. Notices of all board meetings must be posted in a conspicuous place in the community at least 48 hours in advance of a meeting, except in an emergency. In the alternative, if notice is not posted in a conspicuous place in the community, notice of each board meeting must be mailed or delivered to each member at least 7 days before the meeting, except in an emergency. Notwithstanding this general notice requirement, for communities with more than 100 members, the bylaws may provide for a reasonable alternative to posting or mailing of notice for each board meeting, including publication of notice, provision of a schedule of board meetings, or the conspicuous posting and repeated broadcasting of the notice on a closed-circuit cable television system serving the homeowners’ association. However, if broadcast notice is used in lieu of a notice posted physically in the community, the notice must be broadcast at least four times every broadcast hour of each day that a posted notice is otherwise required. When broadcast notice is provided, the notice and agenda must be broadcast in a manner and for a sufficient continuous length of time so as to allow an average reader to observe the notice and read and comprehend the entire content of the notice and the agenda. The bylaws or amended bylaws may provide for giving notice by electronic transmission in a manner authorized by law for meetings of the board of directors, committee meetings requiring notice under this section, and annual and special meetings of the members; however, a member must consent in writing to receiving notice by electronic transmission.

Also, if I search the Florida 2010 statutes with the word “email” no statute comes up.

I agree with Anna and Donna … Having a few HOA residents who decide to go to lunch or send emails to each other and happen to discuss or bounce ideas regarding the HOA to me is not officially “conducting” business as long as no decisions are made or implemented without a proper meeting. Conducting business would be proposing an issue to the floor at a proper meeting, issue discussed, decisions made, and voting on the decision.

Kelly has a good point on a scenario that may shed some light here. If I attend a local community event and a quorum of council members are standing around. What if I walk up and briefly discuss an issue regarding my city. They are just having a casual discussion with a local resident, not conducting business. No business can be conducted or decisions made outside a proper City Council Meeting.

If the PM sends you something in writing, I would like to know the statute … because I certainly have not found one.

I'm on the board of a HOA in Fl and have been researching the issue of the pertinence of sunshine laws, open meeting laws or any other kind of regulations as it pertains to HOA meetings and votes. I found this article today which explains it rather well:

Q: I am currently a condominium association
board member. Our board has five members. Our
president and management company continually do
business and vote on issues via e-mail. We
recently had a situation where our insurance was
due and at the last meeting it was decided that it
would be voted on by e-mail whether to finance it
or not. Obtaining the insurance was not the issue
that I had, it was how it was voted. We also
recently had a plumbing leak where the decision to
have the problem taken care of was voted on by email.
I contacted the Department of Business and
Professional Regulation and asked these questions.
They stated that nothing could be voted on by email.
Is this correct? C.A. (via e-mail)
A: Yes, the DBPR’s position is, in my opinion,
correct. The reason is that voting on association
matters must take place at a duly-noticed board
meeting, open to observation by owners, with a
limited exception for attorney-client privileged
matters. The “open meeting” requirements,
codified under Chapters 718, 719 and 720
(governing condominium associations, cooperative
associations and homeowners’ associations
respectively) serve to provide owners the
opportunity to participate in the discussion leading
up to the vote, and to observe the vote itself.
Holding a vote by e-mail does not generally give
owners a chance to participate nor observe, and
flies in the face of the open meeting requirement.
That said, I am aware of no prohibition against
board members and/or the association manager
discussing or debating association business by email.
But the actual vote on the item must take
place in an open meeting. In my opinion, at least
in most cases, such e-mails will constitute official
records of the association, subject to owner
inspection. However one DBPR arbitrator recently
ruled that e-mails existing on the personal
computers of individual directors are not official
records of a condominium association.
I have heard it argued that where a quorum of the
board debates association business by e-mail, a
board “meeting” is being held. Obviously, where a
quorum of the board is gathering in person, by
telephone conference, or in some other type of
“real time” setting (for example, a “chat room”
setting), a board meeting is being held. However, I
am not of the opinion that discussions or debates
by e-mail constitute board meetings because the
board is not gathering in “real time” such that they
can contemporaneously hear one another’s
comments and respond. However, I am not aware
of any court ruling or administrative agency
decision clarifying this point, one way or the other.
It is an area where the law should be clarified by
the Legislature.
There is no doubt e-mail is a helpful tool in our
daily lives. However, it should not be used to
subvert the transparency which is supposed to be
part of a community association’s decision-making
process.

First of all, my apologies once again for the double post. It happens almost every time I make a comment here and can't figure out why it's happening because I click only once.

Here's the link to that article:
http://www.becker-poliakoff.com/pubs/articles/adams/adams_2009_07_19.pdf

Here's another one I found useful:
http://www.imakenews.com/ortenhindman/e_article000703786.cfm?x=bcLh4H3,b4CySVHk,w

Sorry, Barbara. I thought that what I posted was pertinent to your original post: That said, I am aware of no prohibition against board members and/or the association manager
discussing or debating association business by email.