Security guard at BOD meetings

Actually, if you're following Roberts Rules, you can't. The chair has no authority to ask (or order) a member of the body that is meeting to leave the meeting. A motion to have the offending member leave the meeting must be made and voted on. In other words, at a board meeting, the chair (president) may not ask a board member to leave. The board must vote to have the board member leave.

Now, if a homeowner is attending a board meeting and becomes disruptive, the chair may require the offending homeowner to leave. The homeowner is not a member of the body that is meeting and the chair does have the authority to have such a person leave.

Roberts Rules contains a section on disciplinary procedures.

I'm sorry that you're going through this, Beth. Given Bruce's remarks, see if the the other two "good" directors will support a motion instructing the disruptive directors to leave the meeting. Then try it after Director A is disruptive and you've already called "point of order" because s/he's not following the agenda.

At the beginning of the meeting, remind directors that in Calif., open meeting agendas must be posted publicly 72 hrs. before the meeting and NO agenda items may be added at the meeting (with few exceptions). You also may wish to put the 2 directors on notice that one or both will be instructed to leave if they are disruptive.

Do you have a property mgr. who attends your meeting? How many homes or condos are in your HOA?

Gotta go, but meantime, see davis-sterling.com's Index and scroll down to "Disruptive Directors," where you'll see the possibility of censuring them.

To continue, Beth: Since you will be contacting your HOA attorney on another matter, ask her/him for ideas about your disruptive directors. Our attorney doesn't charge us for phone calls.

Our bylaws don't permit any director or officer to hire a security officer (or purchase anything) without board approval. Why not call an executive session that you know the two good directors will attend, and seek their authorization to hire an officer.

First, though, try to ask one or both disrupters to leave the meeting when they are out of order. Also compose your agenda very carefully so that they don't try to sneak in their pet rants or revisit decisions that already have been made. For the latter, only directors on the prevailing side of the vote may move to reconsider a decision already made.

If business cannot be conduct, adjourn your HOA meeting and go home with the agenda unfinished. The end result is the same, business-wise, and you'll maintain sanity. Then consider dialing back on the frequency of meetings.

The monthly meetings I was presiding over in 2010 were breeding a similar sentiment w/ our property manager finally saying she was personally rattled by our meeting environment. Her boss nearly offered to break our contract.

First, I made board behavior a meeting agenda item, which made discussion documented in the minutes - which we post online. The fact was that our property management company had notified me, as president, that a director's repeat behavior was creating a breach of contract situation - that is ABSOLUTELY a business matter.

Second, our by-laws actually call for a minimum meeting schedule of once every three months, so I began working towards quarterly meetings with longer business agenda items to consider.

It has worked well though some meetings are a bit tedious. It's manageable.

Its unlikely a police officer will throw anyone out of a meeting unless you are willing to press charges. To keep the peace, the officer will likely suggest you end the meeting instead of creating a legal mess.

The police will not get involved with an HOA meeting where board members are being rowdy but, otherwise, non-physical. Adjourn your meeting and go home. It's just HOA. Keep the perspective and don't get abused.

Beth ... Also during disruptive period the board needs to be sure not to respond. Don't get into a back and forth argument just state their concern will be taken into consideration and move on with no questions or comments to what they have stated.

As all states vary in what laws permit I would be careful when giving advice that MAY pertain to your locale but not that of the OP.

Here in NY private security CAN remove people. Happens all the time at bars, restaurants, shows and concerts.

We have used private security and if you consider that route I would ask THEM as they would have knowledge of what your state and local laws permit.

Now as to police. He might call the local department of sheriff's office and see if they have off duty officers avaialbe to act as security for your meeting. Not sure how the rest of the world operates but we have doen this too successfully. And one year the officer did in fact remove physically a life long idiot who doesn't have the ability to act properly. He was in fact later charged due to his behavior with the officer after being taken out.

And finally if a meeting is being held and the party that organized the meeting and has authority over its operation were to call the police for someon refusing to act in a civil manner if those holding the meeting requested I would think from my expierence the officer wouold act.

More to the root of this problem if it does exist as the OP suggests why does the Board and the owners not act? How did these people get to hold Board positions? Why not work to vote them out or have them removed?

Many times the mere presence of security or police will quiet even the biggest A-hole loud mouth.

We have one alcohol challenged big mouth who has trouble forming complete sentences. Each year at our annual meeting he arrives toasted, his state 365 days each year and begins to foam at the mouth.

Booze and a limited gene pool have reduced this man to little more than one cell organism that sucks up good air. Wasting it.

This year our THREE private security guards were present. Meeting hadn't started and we're off with the loud mouth nonsense.

The three guards all walk up behind him tell him to have a seat if not he will be leaving. Period.

He sat down and we never heard another word.

We worth the few bucks we paid to settle this type of nonsense.

There's a different kind of justice out in Kansas, Brad.

I think too many who have posted in this thread have lost sight of two critical facts:

1. The parties complained of are minority members of the board of directors attending a meeting of the board of directors. As such, they have a lawful right to be in attendance and if someone knows of a statute authorizing one group of directors to eject another group of directors this is the time to post it. The two allegedly disruptive directors were (presumably) elected by the members. Ejecting the directors is, in effect, disenfranchinsing those members who voted them in. Any discussion about unruly homeowners, while amusing, is irrelevant to this thread.

2. The conduct complained of is that the two board members "disrupt our board meetings" by disregarding Robert's Rules, speak when the other board members "tell them to be silent," "constantly interrupt, bringing up thing that were voted on long ago, and doing anything they can to twist the truth and the agenda to make it look like we are the 'bad guys'." "They are mean spirited and disrespectful of everyone."

The last time I looked I did not find any criminal statutes that prohibit board members from speaking their minds. It is quite possible that the majority of the board are intolerant of any dissent from within their ranks. The idea of using police or security guards to silence the opposition sounds like something right out of the Third World. The very thought that a majority of the board would even consider using the police because they disagree with the minority ought to embarass every red-blooded American. Would you teach your childern that those who do not agree with the majority should be arrested?

I would second some of the advice given above. I would recommend placing "Board Member Conduct" on the agenda for the next meeting and then reviewing Robert's Rules at that time. I would also recommend that at the start of each meeting the president state that California law requires all discussion topics to be placed on the agenda prior to the meeting. If the allegedly disruptive members bring up old issues, the president should immediately respond with a statement that the item cannot be discussed because it is not on the agenda for this meeting and offer to place it on the agenda for the next meeting.

If the statements oppose my position on an issue, then they are chronic disruptions. If they support me, then they offer enthusiastic and welcome encouragement.

I won't necessarily disagree with that...but working with law enforcement in several different states has taught me that they are willing to help in situations you might not think they would. They realize that sometimes the presence of a gun and a badge is enough to change people's minds and in the case of an HOA meeting when you refuse to leave if the board asks you to, you probably will reconsider once the guy/gal with the handcuffs shows up and gives you an ultimatum.

Touche ...

Hi Beth:

You also might try this first:

https://www.davis-stirling.com/MainIndex/RecordingUnrulyMeetings/tabid/2811/Default.aspx

RECORDING UNRULY MEETINGS

QUESTION: Our HOA has some very contentious members at our meetings. Recently, one member rushed another and had to be held back. Our attorney suggested we start video recording the meetings. Some of the contentious members claim it violates the law and we must get permission from every one attending the meeting. Do you have an opinion on this subject?

ANSWER: I agree with your attorney. Recording and especially broadcasting your meetings to the membership will expose hotheads and bullies (both in the audience and on the board), and will go a long way toward establishing civility and decorum. Because board meetings are public forums, the board does not need the permission of attendees to videotape them.

We video tape all our meetings. At the last owner mtg an individual started using mild profanity. A peer owner told them to shut up ... that while everyone may not agree on an item we will treat each other with common decency and respect. It also maybe occurred to them they were put down by a peer on video tape.

Just a thought as it is also allowed in your State.

Our association does have a sheriff officer attend our meetings. It has calmed the irrate homeowners situation. Never had anyone escorted out of the meetings.