Open Meeting attendance

In my opinion, whether or not it is a game changer is irrelevant. We usually average 1-2 non board member attendees per monthly meeting. Frankly for me, its not about what percentage shows up, but the fact that 100% are WELCOME to attend should they choose.

For the record, we are 120+ single family site condos.

As you know, Jon, I'm a fan of open meetings of HOA Boards and CA law requires them.

But why does % attendance matter?? Attendance at HOA board meetings, which has been touched on in many posts since I've been following this forum for almost 2 years, in very low--just going from memory--perhaps typically 5-10% of owners. I think we all know that.

But knowing that number only tells us that most HOAs have memberships that are apathetic (a catchall word?) --whether very satisfied or feel hopeless, or have a large number of owners who don't live on the premises (between landlords and 2nd home folks ours is 53%).

But legislation in many or even a majority of states to require open meetings was not done to solve "apathy." It was implemented to protect owners from corrupt and/or self serving boards whose decisions did not protect, maintain & enhance their HOAs.

With open meetings, the membership at least has the opportunity to see and hear the decision-making processes of the board.

Since you're permitted by your state law to have open meetings, Jon, why does your board keep them closed?

Valerie and Melissa said it much better than I did: an important purpose of open meetings is to let owners know that they're welcome to attend and open meetings also demonstrate to the membership our (the Board's) ability to rationally and reasonably discuss and make decisions about the HOA out in the open for all members to see & hear.

Unlike for-profit corporations in general, owners' investments in their homes--HOA or otherwise is (often by far) their largest.

But I forgot to answer your question, Jon, we have 211 condo units in two high-rises and, depending on the topic, 6-12 members attend each month. In the bad old days when we had a secretive, incompetent board, 40 attendees was typical number. And if the remainder who don't attend nowadays "feel" a sense of trust or perhaps read the monthly minutes that're posted on our website, I'm happy about that. I'd call the ability to attend an amenity--some take advantage of it many do not, just like our swimming pool.

I would very gladly keep them open if not required. And, by the way, directors who are on a CA boards with outdated bylaws do not need to spend time & money rewriting them--they just need to comply with the statutes.

But in situations like yours, Jon, is that there is no convenient place for members to attend your board meetings the only reason why you want them closed? In other words, if you had an area in which to meet, would your open up your board meetings?

You asked how many units are in others' condos. How many are in yours? I asked you this on a different thread once before but you did not answer. More recently you volunteered a number of around 100. Is that about right?

Jon

I understand what you are saying/asking. There is part of me that says let us keep them fools/one issue people out and let we professionals/those that care, run the place.

The problem I have is all them fools have an equal ownership place at the table, even those that cannot find the table

Using your logic you say no matter how done, not that many would showup thus what is the harm? The harm is in telling them they cannot.

The property I live on is 130+ units.

John I understand your sentiment but our annual meeting contact with certain owners is more than enough for me.

Same people, same questions, same inability to understand.

The flood lights on building number 5 are brighter than my building. I want them to be the same.

The landscaper doesn't mow the lawn the same way around my building as he does the other buildings.

My building has schrews around it and on the internet is says coyote urine if sprayed around the building will keep them away. In NY where am I supposed to come across coyote urine?

Where does all the money go?

Why do you trim trees?

If you need money to repair that then call the landlord they will have to pay for it.

At the end of each annual meeting we have a Q&A period for owners questions. As President I get to respond. Some questions are rational, simple, and easily answered. For others there is simply no answer that will suffice.

I have better things to do with my time than respond to such nonsense.

With the recent rash of homeowners, not Board members, that have appeared on this site with no understanding of what it entails to manage their own property here where I live I prefer to limit that exposure.

My objective is to accomplish positive things for the property not subject myself, the MC or the other Board members to people who believe the Board should simply do as they say. If we did we would be in a hole.

So now you have 1-2 owners sitting at each meeting and that has changed what? Perception? The appearance of honesty? Aren't Board members supposed to act in the property's best interest and that of the owners? So if the majority of owners don't have a desire to hold open meetings we should do it still because you think it is right.

If I were looking to buy into a property whether or not they had open Board meetings would not be on my list of what I consider important questions. IMO that does little.

This is my first post, so I hope it is okay to add to this discussion.

In our HOA, we have board work sessions between the open board meetings. We accomplish all our planning and major decisions in the work sessions. This is also our time to discuss plans for community improvements, make financial decisions and review the progress of plans in motion. Our work sessions are generally about ten days before the open board meeting, but have been as few as two days prior. The work sessions are only for board members, but we have invited the architectural review committee on occassion

We currently are transitioning from monthly meetings to bi-monthly meetings and eventually to quarterly meetings. The residents are okay with this(well, a couple of them are never happy about ANYTHING) and as we plan to keep updates on the website. Our attendance seems to mirro what I have seen in this forum, very few residents at the open board meetings and it is almost always the same ones each time.

Our HOA has 800 single family homes. The board meets once per month. All meetings are open to the members (Virginia law). There is always an agenda item for "resident comments". The board packet (agenda, prior meeting draft minutes, all documents to be discussed, etc.) is available for examination by residents on the same date it is provided to the board members (usually 5 days before the meeting).

We typically have 30 to 50 members in attendance at the meetings. It tends to be the same folks every month. They are the ones who are interested enough to attend so their views receive significant weight in board decisions.

I don't think it's an issue if the members attend meetings of the Board or not. I think it's an issue of perception. If members know that they can attend it lessons the perception that things are being done in secret.

we have 156 units (townhouse community) and over a year, I suspect we average about 1 homeowner at regular board meetings. It's even worse at our annual meeting - this year, we didn't have ANYONE show up, although we had a quorum due to the number of proxies we received along with the Board members who were there.

Personally, I think the meetings should be open - whether the homeowners take advantage of that is entirely up to them. The minutes are available upon request and we publish summaries of the meetings in our newsletters (sometimes I wonder if they read them!), and most of the Board members have emails, also published in the newsletter, so there are ways people can find out what's going on.

The ones I have an issue with are the people who complain about the board doing this or that, but when you point out this or that was published in the newsletter, along with an explanation, they look at you is if you've sported a third eye and mumble about not getting the newsletter or not seeing it.

The main issue at open meetings is keeping things on schedule, which is why I think you have to announce the behavior standards before the meeting begins, before the resident's forum (which all meetings should have)and after the forum. No yelling, cursing, get to the point quickly during the resident's forum. When we get to the official agenda, you can stay and listen (we encourage this), but turn off your cell phones (or at least set them on vibrate) and we're not taking any comments or questions from the floor while official business is being discussed so we can get through the agenda.

Welcome, Jeffrey!

Jon wrote: "In some states your workshops would not be permitted as all discussions and conversations and Board activity is required to occur only at monthly announced meetings. If a group of Board members happens to be in the same place by accident and they should discuss HOA matters they might be violating the law because this could be seen as a meeting!"

"In some states Board members are not permitted to exchange e-mails, phone calls or have conversations in between Board meetings because that would not be open enough for some. To me that is simply crazy."

I don't know which state Jon is referring to. In CA a QUORUM of directors may not meet accidentally, or via a string of emails/phone calls, etc., to discuss and/or make decisions about HOA business except at announced monthly (quarterly or bi-annual) meetings. But these meetings do NOT have to be solely the regularly scheduled monthly meetings. We may and do call and announce special meetings of the board and occasionally emergency meetings of the board.

The point of open meetings is not to make sure that owners are informed by announcing decisions previously made by the board in "worships" or planning sessions; the point is to give owners the opportunity to see and hear the deliberative process.

We have a highly complex twin tower high rise HOA with lots of contracts and our Board, per our bylaws, delegates many activities to our PM.

But Jon is right, at least re: CA, that a quorum of the Board may not meet behind closed doors to engage in the activities that Jeffrey's board can handle legally in Alabama and which Melissa of Alabama has mentioned many times in the past.

Our of curiosity, Jeffrey, how many units are in you HOA? Detached homes? Many amenities? Property Mgr.?

David, we tend to have the same attendees every month too and our board does listen to their comments at the open forum before and after each board meeting.

Sheila, our protocol for open forum conduct is printed on the back of every monthly agenda that owners pick up as they enter the board meetings.

Valerie, don't mind Jon. Every so often he "goes after a poster.

Here, he keeps insisting that % of attendance matters, but cannot explain why. What is the relationship between the two? Is he hypothesizing something? If so, what the heck is it? A mystery. No one who has replied thinks attendance has anything to do with open meetings, at least not from what I can see.

Jon,Well, just because you made it "simple for" me does not mean that your argument is logical or coherent. In addition, I had nothing to do with creating or passing the Open Meeting act in CA so I'm certainly not patting myself on the back.

My guess is that because CA and FL have so many HOAs --46,000 & 42,500* respectively, that there were enough abusive boards and complaints from HOA members that our elected representatives took action. In states with far fewer HOAs, chances of abuse are smaller.

Did the legislation solve all HOA problems in CA & FL? Of course not! But it was never intended to bolster attendance.

Just by way of comparison, the state with the 3rd most HOAs is TX with only about 18,000. They, too, have an open meeting act of sorts, but I don't know the details.

* See my 5/08/13 post, "Interesting HOA Stats, USA," to see how many HOAs are in each state.

Oh, Tim, that is expensive & takes time. In our HOA, we only hand out the agenda. Everything else involving the open meeting costs the same as if we had closed meetings, e.g., we don't have cookies and coffee available, etc.

Meeting packet =

copy of agenda
copy of draft minutes from last meeting
copy of all reports (treasurers, committees, etc.)
copy of any other handouts used for discussion of an issue.

Carol just HOW does having less than 5% of owners attending control "abusive boards and complaints you GUESS happened? More wishful thinking on the part of the Cal. political leaders. My guess some goody two shoes needed to justify their job for a period.

Carol you really have no say in the matter. Your state requires you to do so and by the same token if they required closed meetings you would do that. So for you their is no choice you simply do as you are told. Good or bad the state tells you what you will do.

So lets not kid ourselves into thinking you have a say regarding this topic.

Carol,

Don't worry - Jon's nasty rhetoric does not phase me one way or the other...

I will state again, I believe most reasonable people would agree that there is value in having the "right" or "option" to attend an HOA meeting. Much the way you and I have the "right" and "option" to vote. Admittedly I don't bother voting in every local election on every little issue, however, I would sure take issue if someone were to try to take away that right.

Sorry but you are not required to "get involved" in order to maintain your RIGHTS and OPTIONS.

That is the logic the Jon is struggling with.

Lol...don't worry Jon. No one can force you to complicate your life with REASON...

I noted in an earlier post on this thread that 40 or so attended our monthly open meetings when we had a secretive & ignorant board. How did we know they were secretive?? Because some of what they "voted" on was obviously decided in advance of the open meetings. When asked about how these board decisions were made at open forums, directors wouldn't explain them.

We owners specifically asked about whether the Board was going to pursue the possibility of construction defects. We, though not yet well informed, knew enough to be concerned about the statutes of limitations clock running out of time. The Board assured us that everything was fine. I distinctly recall one loudly declaring, "there are no construction defects!" Owners asked, "how do you know?" Reply, "we've looked into it." "Why weren't the results of your investigation shared with us owners? Who investigated?" No reply.

That is just one example of their behavior. Having had enough, about a dozen of us formed an informal group and began studying CA's corporations code and civil codes. We also became throughly familiar with our 200 pages of CC&Rs, and 20+ pages of our bylaws. In a few months, we fielded a slate to oust part of the old board at the next election, which we did. A year later we had a majority on the board and immediately interviewed construction defect attorney firms.

If every meetings that old board held had been "private," it would have been much more difficult to figure out that the Board was negligent. The statutes may very well have expired. We eventually collected almost $5 million from the developer, subcontractors or suppliers to repair or replace the defects.

(BTW, upon my election to the board, I immediately requested copies of executive session meeting minutes from that earlier period, and easily confirmed our suspicions. Many open meeting topics were decided upon in those closed meetings.)

Even if only a few homeowners attend the open meetings, if something doesn't ring right or smell right, they can, as we did, start talking with their neighbors, encourage them to come to meetings, etc.

Boards need to be accountable for the decisions they make that can affect (in many cases) owners' life savings. IMO, openness and transparency at meetings with an audience improve the chances for wise decision making.

Jon, I'm baffled why you insist that I and others, like Valerie, pretend that we're speaking for any or all HOA members?? We're just presenting our individual opinions.

While in VA, some HOAs spend more time/$ because they're required to have open meetings. But in CA in my HOA, our Asst. mgr. printing a couple of dozen extra one page agendas with open forum protocol on the flip side takes a few minutes and costs almost nothing. This doesn't him away from "more pressing issues." Our custodians set up the meeting room for the board meetings and it probably takes them an extra 5 minutes to set up some folding chairs for homeowners. Oh, no! Five minutes (usually) a month!!

You write, Jon, that you have "little patience" for us. Why would you or anyone else need such patience?

And why should you care about our states? Why do laws in states that aren't yours upset you so much? Why does it matter to you? It seems that you suffer from a weird form of xenophobia! How "productive" is it for your HOA for its Prez to spend HUGE amounts of time trying (and failing) to attack these other states? this isn't the first time; there have been many other incidents. Are you afraid that NY legislators will "catch" our open meeting cooties??

Additionally, WHY in the world (your last post) do you assert I "kid myself" by thinking I have any "say" or "choice" about CA's HOA Open Meeting Act? Of course I did not, just as I had no say in many other laws in my state. Did I write somewhere that I helped make this law? Or are you saying you have the ability to (mis)read minds??

I did "guess" at the reason for the legislation in CA, FL & elsewhere. I didn't present it as fact, which is much better than fabricating assertions and pretending they are fact as you did with your misrepresentation of directors meeting outside of board meetings in open-meeting states. I corrected you, at least in reference to CA, but you had no comment. If your statement applies to some other state(s) how about naming them???

Carol I am beginning to understand why you might be baffled. Just over a year ago Valerie has no idea what the laws in her own state were regarding open meetings. Now she claims to be the burning bush. Does she even serve on a Board? Has she ever? And if so for how long??? And SHE claims the owners who don't ever attend meetings all still appreciate the fact they can if they ever decided to do so. Just how would she know this? Has she polled those owners? My guess all make believe and wishful thinking to support a viewpoint not supported by the majority of owners.

And you Carol in each post you always hold up your property and state as the guiding light for HOA governance. Yes we all know by now you reside in a complicated HOA consisting of high rise building. And yes by now we know Davis Stirling is the law in your land because the Cal. politicians said so. But other properties and states do exist. And forgive me but I have never turned to Cal. for direction in the area of good government and efficiency.

But the reality is Cal. does not have all the answers and there are in fact states and properties that can survive while doing it differently than YOU.
So we have Valerie the Johnny come lately to the world of HOA Board actions and YOU who resides in a state where you in fact have no choice but to hold open meeting because someone you never met told you that what you will do. So love it or hate it Carol in Cal. you have no other option good or bad.

Patience for those who think their way is the only way. Patience for those who ramble on about how complicated their property is and then "mention" the HOA process they follow resulted in it taking what 3 months for the Board, committee,
owners and whoever else to decide on purchasing an $80 clock for the pool area so those using the pool might know the time! Yes Carol sounds like you folks have the process fine tuned and the rest of us should follow that lead.

And Carol you must really be baffled if you think what you do in Cal. concerns me. I could not care less how much of your $2 MILLION budget is waste. I don't care that you can't make a move without reading DS over and over again till someone in the room can almost understand it. I don't care if every reisdent on your property attends each meeting twice! But we both know the reality is few if any ever show up to hear that 3 month long debate about the $80 clock. Now that had to be ground breaking HOA governance at Cal.'s best! Riveting Board performance.

Carol the bottom line is you have no choice. Whether you were in favor or against open meetings you WILL hold them. So my point having your own opinion in your case means very little. Can you not follow along???? Your views on this topic don't matter because the state decided what's best FOR you. Now you would like everyone else to follow suit. For myself no thanks.

And finally Carol YES you did GUESS or revise facts as to why open meetings were pushed for. All that corruption and out of control Boards so that was your made up theory for why the whole country must have or should have open meetings. Another claim made with absolutely no basis in reality. My guess exactly where you spend most of your day.

And I like your last claim "you corrected me" as if you were the head master at school. Sounds mighty bold for someone not as familiar with laws outside their own state as you have been. California is not the center of the HOA universe. Never was and IMO never will be. Nor is your property the role model for how everyone else should do things. And there is a lot more you don't know than you do know. So before you begin to tell yourself you are capable of correcting anyone else better have your own house and facts in order.

Ooooooooh, can't decide whether to be flattered or creeped out that Jon remembers so much about, or took the time to look up, some of my previous posts.

At any rate, I certainly do not hold up my HOA or state as some kind of guiding light. Your use of the word "always," Jon is certainly false. As I wrote waaaaay earlier on this thread: you like it the way it is in NY and I like it the way it is in CA. Period.

Our Board never reads or alludes to DS (Davis-Stirling; CA legislation about HOAs) at our executive sessions or open board meetings. A copy of it is never with us or our PM. No need.

Since you devotedly scoured my previous posts, you know that I wrote something like the total time the Board spent on the pool clock was perhaps 15 minutes. That decision in my 6-1/2 years of board service was a huge anomaly. It was incredibly rare and had nothing to do with the Open Meeting Act, but, rather, a picky director on our Board of seven.

When I wrote I "guess" the reason for the Open Meeting Act was x, y, or z, I was entirely admitting that I didn't know. I obviously was speculating.

Actually our budget is 2.3 mill. and I'm happy to report that our board uses it wisely and productively. Do directors disagree about some aspects of it? Of course.

BTW, kudos to Valerie for learning so much in the past year!

Jon,

I've been serving as President of my board since inception 8 years ago. Roughly 450 homeowners (give or take the bank-owned properties).
I've always held open meetings. I post the financials and minutes to a community website after every meeting.
I've had plenty of meetings where NO homeowners showed up. I've has a small few where 20 have.

I'm strong enough not to allow the voice of the few speak for the many. If you're curious, why do you have a few open meetings?
The board gains valuable insight when homeowners attend and actually speak. Even the ones that complain. And even the ones that complain about board members.

Instead of "muddling" through the next 31 years, try something new. You might like it.

So Josh other than the fact YOU hold open meetings is there a point?

Other than the fact out of 450 or so owners some months none attend is there some glaring benefit gained by YOUR decision to hold open meetings? Even when no one bothers to attend?

Or is it the valuable insight no one attending provides to you.

And how you see your ability to hold open meetings as proof of how "strong" you are well I would hope you might have more to offer than that. Is that really a test for you?

As a practice I don't waste MY time giving people what they have no need or desire for.
450 people ans sometimes no one shows up. Hmmmmmmmmm.... Is that one of the night's when your strength is put to the test?

So in the end YOU decided to hold open meeting. Sometimes 20 out of 450, sometimes none. And somehow you would like to believe that is something new others might need to try.

I have better and more productive things to do.....

Sometimes I had meeting in my bathing suit in the swimming pool

This is useless without pics.

Naked guy and shrinkage (water was cold)..was that Jon from NY........LOL