Termites and Challenges...

Our HOA is responsible for termite management.

Our CCR's reflect this. Months ago ( 6 months ago ) I reported termite infestation. Nothing has been done. Some spot treatments in certain areas and nothing regarding the outside area that I reported.

Fast forward 4 months.. I am on the board, termites is not even an agenda item. I brought this up an the BOD is reluctant to do anything at this point due to costs. I had one board member try to tell me that only "one side" of our building is affected.. our building runs north and south "its the south end only"... sure sure sure. ( try to battle with that one)

Issue at hand? We are responsible for the maintenance. 6 months ago I reported this, nothing really has been done. Bring it up again.. at next meeting month #7 and ask for termite inspection?? and ask for it to go into minutes..

How can one make the 50+ unit building aware of termites and it's issues? It was tented 10 years ago.. and we are infested.

Glen's approach might be effective with homeowners, who'll probably put pressure on the Board. But acting on your own in this way might damage your relationships with other boar members.

So I wouldn't take that step until your know the answers to the following:

Has your HOA been setting funds aside in reserves to pay for this work? How much money is in the termite reserves line item?

Or, are there funds in your operating budget for 2013 for a termite inspection or termite work? How much?

Have you written an actual agenda item request so that the the board has discussed the topic at an open meeting? Did you make a motion and was there a vote? It sounds like you haven't done that yet, so once you learn the answers to the above, and maybe more that other posters can suggest, place it on the agenda and request a report. Your motion and its outcome should, of course, be recorded in the minutes.

The way you try to "fight" one director's opinion is to very nicely ask if he's in the pest control field and if not, suggest that for the board to do its due diligence, a licensed, etc., blah, blah, should inspect the premises and prepare a report for the board.

I cannot agree with Matthew. I believe that going through the Board, and doing it correctly (formal agenda item, vote) is your best approach, Fiona. There is no point is needlessly irritating your fellow directors. Acting on your own may make it so you cannot get anything else accomplished on your Board. And THAT might not be in the best interests of your HOA.

Our Code of Ethics doesn't permit us directors to independently seek opinions, freebies or anything else from vendors. Try to work with your Board first. This matter, while important, is not an emergency, and the cost won't increase much each day.

Matthew, It is not clear to me that Fiona has actually placed the matter in writing on a Board meeting agenda. That's what I'm trying to understand.

The ball is in Fiona's court--a simple reply to the question would be a goo thing.

Carol,

My reading of Fiona’s original post is that she has already attempted to place this matter on the agenda:

“I am on the board, termites is not even an agenda item. I brought this up and the BOD is reluctant to do anything at this point due to costs. I had one board member try to tell me that only "one side" of our building is affected. Our building runs north and south "its the south end only"...

“Issue at hand? We are responsible for the maintenance. 6 months ago I reported this, nothing really has been done. Bring it up again at next meeting month #7 and ask for termite inspection?? and ask for it to go into minutes.”

To me, the board is aware of a termite problem and has chosen to ignore it. Most likely the board has not budgeted for periodic termite inspections let alone remedial treatments. And they have ignored this problem in spite of the fact that there is a history of termite infestations at this property.

I would compare the board’s willful negligence to that of a parent who refuses to seek medical care for a child because the kid has cancer on just one side.

Termites are not in the same category as cockroaches. If not treated, termites will destroy a building from the inside out by eating the wooden structural elements. Even masonry buildings often have wooden floors and wooden roof trusses. When an owner becomes aware of a termite infestation he must act to prevent the total loss of the structure and total loss of his investment.

I do not know whether the laws in Washington require a meeting agenda. We do not all live in the Peoples' Republik of California.

Fiona states that she has brought the subject up in previous meetings and that the "BOD" has decided to take no action. That implies that the board is aware of the problem and has made a conscious decision to ignore it. I fail to see how the situation would be any different if the matter was on an agenda witnessed by the Pope and notarized by the Governor. I doubt that the termites will stop eating the building because the item was not on a formal agenda.

Carol,

You have assumed certain facts not in evidence. Among them is that Fiona’s board is required to have open meetings and an agenda, and that owners actually attend the meetings and/or read the meeting minutes.

More importantly, you have missed the most important fact of all: Fiona’s declaration requires that the association treat for termites. The issue of whether to treat or not is not open for debate. Everyone agreed when they signed on that the association would be responsible. Termite treatment is a ministerial duty for the board; it lacks the discretion to do otherwise.

Even though this building has a past history of termite infestation, the current board seems to be doing no testing for termites and has no plan to remedy the current problem, citing a lack of funds.

The board has the duty to treat the termites and has the duty to raise funds sufficient to do its work. Can you cite any court cases where a condo board was relieved of its contractual duties because it failed to take in enough money to do the work? I know of none.

The reference to California is that so many people, and not just Californians, cite Davis-Sterling that they seem to believe that this is the law of the land. Not only is it not applicable outside of California, it is not even good law inside California. People in California associations are no better off under this body of law than those of, say, Utah where there is little in the way of HOA regulation. You yourself assumed that Washington requires open meetings and rigid adherence to a prepared agenda because that’s the way they do it in the Land of Fruits and Nuts.