Common Areas

Considering your board's apparent history of cronyism, I am not surprised.

If you don't believe that the courts are an effective solution for you on elections, then the courts definitely won't be the way to go on preferential treatment. With election claims, the burden to put forward a viable allegation rests with the plaintiff but the burden of proof is on the defendant. But with preferential treatment claims, both the burden of a viable allegation and the burden of proof are on the plaintiff. Way more costly and time consuming.

Sad to say, your board has made you an outcast. Don't think there's much you can do without getting changes to the composition of the board. May need to organize a campaign to get someone else elected. Could take years.

Know that's not what you want to hear - but the bad blood between you and your board only gets worse.

They're saying that they don't have the money for yours. Doubt that you're going to find a silver bullet about that in your recordings.

At best, what you have is evidence - not proof. At worst, there will be stuff in the recordings that they'll try to use against you. Get ready for a pissing contest.

Just calling it the way I see it. No slam-dunk here.

Cf,

For 99% of the issues members have with their Boards, the options are the same:

1) Live with it
2) Complain about it
3) Gather support and replace the existing board (requires others who are willing to run)
4) Consult with an attorney to see what legal options there are (civil suit, receivership)
5) Move
6) For those States that have an ombudsman (like VA) contact them to see if they can assist
(note: in VA, the ombudsman will only consider addressing violations of VA statutes).

As you can see options 1,2 and 5 do not correct the problem.

Options 4 and 6 may not actually correct the problem (as those on the Board will likely still be on the Board) but may provide some addressing of specific issues. However, these options may become expensive.

Option 3 is the only one that will address the actual problem (the makeup of the Board itself). Unfortunately, this is the one option many (not you, but many) simply don't want to take the time, expend the energy or expend the funds to accomplish. Option 3 may take time before results are obtained (it took me over 3 years). However, it is the one that will actually address the problem.

Tim, you already know our election is fixed, and even if I were to get on the board my one vote wouldn't go far when the other board members have an axe to grind against a homeowner.

Just looking for situations that may be similar and possible solutions. A homeowner should not have to decide between moving, and being treated like every other homeowner. I continue to believe a board's fiduciary duty can be called into question in cases where one homeowner is clearly being treated differently than all others.

You mentioned that boards control committees, which I know. But our board openly invites every other member to join a committee...and kicked me off with false charges. That doesn't seem reasonable. They treat me differently than everyone else.

Thanks for the reply all the same, and thank you for your insight as well Geno.

CF,

As for your specific issue, you can simply try peer pressure. Bring the issue up at every meeting of the Board. Encourage others to do the same (otherwise it simply looks like you are the only one complaining). Bring up drainage problems at the annual meeting. Volunteer to serve or head on a storm water management committee to identify and seek solutions to the drainage issues to be presented to the Board.

You could also contact your County Storm Water division and see if they would look at the issue for you (having the County say it needs fixed may have more weight then you saying it needs fixed). Additionally, if this fails to work, you are creating a paper trail if you ever have to seek a court order to recover actual damages.

In Fairfax County, upon our (Association) request, the Country actually sent an individual to identify the problem areas, prioritize them and make suggestions. They also pointed out where some of the issues were County responsibility and some were other property owner responsibility.

Drainage issues, if caught early are inexpensive to address. If the problem has been occurring for several years, it's much more expensive to address. Although we looked at addressing drainage issues for several years, it wasn't until last year that we were able to actually do it (as funds were made available through savings obtained in contract negotiations on our trash/recycling contract).

I understand all of that. You keep asking for solutions and I provided the options. Which option fits your specific situation is your call.

You may be surprised that once you are on the Board, you may be able to gain support from other Directors. Of course, that support will depend on how your present the issue and how well your actions will overcome any preconceived notions the other Directors may have.

You will likely never change the opinion of the individual you identify as the issue. Personality conflicts are extremely difficult to over come and change. However, if others see that you are trying to do the best for the community, they will see that it's a personality conflict and (hopefully) write the other person off. To this day I still have one previous Board member vote against anything I propose and against me at each election (to they point where they have actually written "NEVER" next to my name on the ballot).


And that belief can be utilized under option 3 or 4.

Looked through some of the decisions made by the VA ombudsman. Two things stood out:
1. Seems like an effective way to get documents produced when HOA's aren't responsive.
2. A lot of individuals and HOAs mix statutory with non-statutory issues = Ombudsman rarely comments on non-statutory issues.

Right. In fact the Ombudsman office will flat out refuse to get involved with issues that are related only to the governing documents.

I think that this is due to the fact that the governing documents are not standardized and are (effectively) contractual agreements between the parties. Contract disputes are resolved between the parties or through the courts.