HOA Board welcomes Renters on Committees

Our HOA board is having a big problem with home owners not only paying dues but participating on committees. They have allowed access to a supposedly closed board to a renter in the neighborhood because they don't have enough property owners to tap. Seems they haven't taken the hint nobody wants the HOA.

So the question is can an HOA allow a non-voting resident to participate in committees that will have an effect on the voting members/property owners?

Most of my research so far says that it wouldn't be legal. Any thoughts?

Well said John.

Our organizing docs clearly allow for committees, but the only committee specifically mentioned is the Architectural Control Committee which must consist of 3 individuals selected by the Board. There are no other restrictions.

I don't think that my board would ever consider selecting a non-owner for the ACC. But, our policy is that any resident can join our Landscape Committee. We have one renter on the Landscape Committee, and we do get complaints that she is "a renter." The complaints do not come from other members of the committee - they come from owners who aren't on any committees.

So for us, the answer to your question would depend on the nature of the committee, the qualifications of the individual renter, and whether the complaining individuals are contributing their share.

Are you willing to cite your research?

Maybe research wasn't the best choice of words. Poking around the net and found several
discussion forums and other sites that excluded non-"members" from participating in HOA committees and other board functions.

Looking back through the By-Laws (which I finally found while looking for something else) it states that our board appointments "members" to committees. A "member" is defined as an owner of a lot within the community. So if the board adheres to the By-Laws as they should a renter would NOT be allowed to be on a committee.

I appreciate the input.

From the by-laws:

Aticle II
Membership, Voting, Majority of CO-Owners ("Owners"), Quorum, Proxies

1. Membership. Except as is otherwise provided in the Declarations, the Articles of Incorporation or in these Bylaws, ownership of one of the Lots described in the Declaration is required in order to qualify for membership in this Association. Any person on becoming an owner of a Lot shall mandatorily and automatically become a member of This Association and be subject to the Bylaws......

Article XII
Committees

1. Designation. The Board of Directors may, but shall not be required to, appoint an executive committee, and it may designated and appoint members to standing committees or special ad hoc committees for any useful or worthwhile purpose to function in an advisory capacity to the Board of Directors. The Board may establish rules for the conduct of these committees and may delegate responsibility to said Committees.

Personally, I agree with Tim's assessment.

However, if you provided us with all of the relevant references to the word "member," I could see someone objecting on the grounds that the phrase "Except as is otherwise provided in the Declaration, Articles of Incorporation, or in these Bylaws" precludes anyone other than an owner from being considered a "member" of anything having to do with the HOA.

I agree with Tim, NpS & JohnC and was trying to get at exactly that issue in my earlier post.

If the board only wants owners to serve on Committees, it's under no obligation to appoint non-owners.

Back to your original point, Sam: What kind of Committee is it? Does it have any money-spedning or or decisin-making authority? Is there something else troubling you with the Board, Sam, other than a renter being on a committee?

> There are a number of committees they don't have enough people on

So maybe you don't NEED all those committees.

You haven't clearly stated what you are worried about. Personally I would definitely not want a renter to have a VOTE on budget or bylaws. Other than that- what does it matter? Remember information tries to be free- even if you did not allow access to a website with board meeting info, etc. it doesn't guarantee others won't get it.

> Seems they haven't taken the hint nobody wants the HOA.

Not logically correct. It could also mean everything is just fine with the owners.

Good point. My take that nobody wants it is because out of 66 homes only 10-15 people show up at meetings (if you count actual votes that would be about 6-7 since its one vote per lot and its always the same few people) and not everybody has paid their dues (at last count only 25 a month or so ago).

There is an open web page that is public. They also produce a newsletter which is public and printed and hand delivered to residents.

I'd agree we don't need those committees. The dues are $100 a year and were supposed to take care of the common area in the front of the development and a common area that has two concrete pads which are located in what is an overflow area for the ponds that the farmers have to the back of the development.

As far as total rent/lease residents haven't a clue. I know of at least 5.

Wow. For a $100 a year, I wouldn't care. I spend much more than that amount for unreimbursed out-of-pocket expenses.