Board Member Campaigning

Sure can, AS LONG as they don't use association resources in doing so.

Nothing in election rules covering this.

Can a current Board member send out an e-mail to homeowners endorsing a specific candidate or candidates? Would that be acceptable?

I'm just wondering how it would appear to have someone endorse three of the four candidates that are running for 3 positions.

The First Amendment protects political speech. It became the First Amendment because there is no other right more fundamental in America than free speech. Why on God's Earth would you think that there is some body of law to prohibit one person from endorsing another's candidacy?

Are they using an association email account? If so, then no, otherwise I don't see a problem with board members having the full rights of any owner as far as endorsing candidates.

Why do you think it might be wrong, unethical or whatever, Linda? Form their own private account th directors can send out whatever they wish as a campaign email.

I guess one question I might have is: how did the director(s) get Owners' email addresses?

Board members are provided homeowner e-mail addresses and secondary phone numbers. Only homeowner names and primary phone numbers are available to homeowners.

So, because we don't make e-mails available to homeowners, would this be considered using "Association resources" because e-mail addresses are limited to Board members?

Despite "smear" campaigns happening on a national level, when campaigning for an Association Board position, is it acceptable to point out any negatives regarding a person running for office? Or would it be best to focus on the positives of the other members running for office? Basically, the person that is the subject of this issue has only attended 2 Board meetings while living here (3+ years), doesn't serve on committees, etc. and is currently has outstanding fines and Declaration violations. I know this can't be brought up -it won't. We don't have "member in good standing" in our governing docs or anything else to prevent this person from running, so our only way of dealing with this is through campaigning for the other folks that are running.

A person can run their campaign in any manner they choose.

One important point about negative campaigning is that this type of campaign might say just as much about the person campaigning as it does about the person being campaigned against.

I'd say it's a pretty weak campaign if, unprovoked, someone tries to win support for themselves by pointing out the negative aspects of their opponents.

I suggest keeping things positive and upbeat. Point out the strengths of the person you are campaigning for. Since you know some of the weaknesses of the opponent, create strengths for your campaign that counter those weaknesses . . . making them seem like even more significant weaknesses if they happen to come to light. Allow the opponent's claims to stand on their own. When/if you notice outright lies from the opponent, find a way to point out the lies if it's necessary to your campaign.

And remember . . . this is an HOA election. When all is said and done, your are all still neighbors. These are people you may see from time to time or even live next to.

Obvious violations don't need to go through the official process before neighbors can witness things for themselves and use it as fodder in an election campaign.

Say for example "Steve" is running for the Board and frequently parks on the street even though on-street parking is clearly forbidden by HOA rules. If "Jane" is running against "Steve" and chooses to point out this obvious non-compliance to the rest of the homeowners in an effort to show how "Steve" is unfit for serving on the Board, then that's certainly a possibility.

Remind us, Linda, are you on the Board? I think so? Yes

By the way, unless your Bylaws state that directors may have access to owners' email addresses, I believe your Board is not complying with the (CA) Davis-Stirling Act. Directors in our HOA do not have such authority. A main point of the election section of Davis-stirling is to insure that all Owners have equal access to HOA resources. if one of us wants to contact any resident by email, our PM (Prop. mgr.) contacts the resident for permission. But if you don't have a Mgmt. Co., i.e., you're self managed, I assume your board or t secretary or president contacts Owners by email? Yes, this is how it's handled.

I agree - focus on the positive and make sure candidate statements show that other candidates are currently involved in the community in a positive way. Thanks!

Board directors do have access to email addresses. As a director, I ran the HOA's website and sent out the alerts and notices to homeowners. Technically, the law now exists that would allow homeowners to have access to email addresses IF they are kept by the HOA. The case law is WORLDMARK, THE CLUB v. WYNDHAM RESORT DEVELOPMENT CORP.Most people though just ignore the ruling.

The question was raised about disclosing delinquent owners. IF, the issue was not brought up in executive session, nothing privileged was disclosed. Financial reports, which may disclose such delinquencies are reviewed and approved in OPEN session. Noting illegal.

Hell, today, anything is possible. Just recently, a candidate implicated another candidate's father in the assassination of JFK.

Kerry ..I was confused as Davis Stirling said you can use overdue fines and/or assessments when campaigning, but I know this to be private information when discussed in Executive session. Hence, the confusion

* Very interesting read of the rationale. Depends heavily on Cal's Corporations Code s 8330 & 8331. Without it = ? ( A lower court in my jurisdiction ruled this year that owner e-mail addresses are not compulsorily disclosurable to records requesters. )

* “WORLDMARK, THE CLUB v. WYNDHAM RESORT DEVELOPMENT CORP.” issued Aug 23 /25 2009 California Court of Appeals 3 rd District http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20CACO%2020100825002/WORLDMARK,%20THE%20CLUB%20v.%20WYNDHAM%20RESORT%20DEVELOPMENT%20CORP

What a coincidence, Geno. Our new Admin. Asst. to our property mgr. just this mine sent an email to all Owners who've provided them without using the bcc function. What a shock.

I'll check the case that Richard cited, but so far as I know, email addys, like phone #s are kept private per CA Civil Code.

Our board makes all disciplinary decisions in execute session, so no one would be able to use them in campaigns here. We do, by laws, have vote on a lien in open meetings and we use the APN#. I suppose if someone wanted to they could look up the Owner as it's then a matter of public record. But fines, calls to hearings, etc. are not liens and do not have to be voted on in an open meeting

I read the case that you cited above, Richard; the court ruled in favor of the member who wanted all email addresses of member. But it's a time share with 260,000 members. One reason for the court's ruling was that it would be "unreasonable" to expect an "owner" to US mail so many fellow members. As a time share, it was not subject to CA's Davis-Stirling laws, which specifically are for Common Interest Developments (CIDs), which are all CA HOAs whether condos, detached homes, etc.

So, I agree with the CA attorneys at Davis-stirling.com who write: "Recommendation: Because there is no case law on this issue for HOAs, the better position for boards is to protect member privacy by not releasing email addresses." Now, Richard, if you can show me a different CA HOA attorney's opinion that we can release email addresses to any Owner who requests them, I'll be more persuaded that maybe it's OK.

(Please excuse my numerous typos above and my double postings elsewhere!)

R: “HOA’s are also subject to Corporation Code. Timeshares are subject to Corporation Code.
K: True, and….?

R: “The recommendation you cited is from Adrian Adams and him alone. It is not a bunch of CA attorneys who got together and rendered an opinion. Many of his own attorneys don't use the advice he has posted in handling the firms business.
K: My understanding is that A. Adams is not the sole author of everything on the D-S.com website; other attorneys in his firm also write for the site.

R: “I have one of his attorney's coming after me personally.”
K: And…how does that fit this discussion?

R: “For you information, the right to a membership list comes from the Corporation Code. Much of how Boards conduct meetings, whether open, executive, annual or special membership comes from Corporations Code.”
K: I’m fully aware that, for instance, our bylaws come from CA Corporations Codes. The case your cited re: the time share drew from Corps Code. But CA HOAs are ALSO covered by Civil Code, especially that part known as the Davis-Stirling Act. Time shares are not.

R: “I could make a case of obtaining emails in my former HOA. One, the information that was obtained was never told to be confidential. Their was no implied privacy on the information sheet that was asked to be filled out and returned by each homeowner.”
CR: Our information form for new residents does imply that the email addys are for mgmt. office use only.

R: “Each homeowner, annually, is asked if they want to opt out of their name be listed and distributed by a fellow homeowner.”
K: Hard to comprehend. You’re saying that in your former HOA, not one that you manage, there is an email list available for any owner to have? That would be fine, I think, because each owner consents annually to keep their names on—or not.

R: “If, as it is pointed out here, that someone sends an email and cc's everyone, then it is fair game.”
K: I have to say that I will not use the complete list our new admin accidentally sent with all residents for whom the mgmt. office has email addys on it. Just doesn’t feel right to me.

R: “Associations can send association business via email. We would send 3 or 4 notices every month pertaining to association business. There are safeguards and the member can opt out at any time and is told such every year.”
K: As you know Owners must sign a consent form if they wish to receive certain HOA communications via email, e.g., newsletters, proposed rule changes, etc. But, here, only the GM & her asst. have that list. As noted above, I assume that in self-managed HOAs, all or some of the board officers have this list. I do not believe, agreeing with Geno, that all owners should have it

Linda

To your point, no Director should be sending emails to other homeowners campaigning for any one specific person or a slate of candidates. Get someone else to do that for you. IF they have the list, others should have the same availability. IF they used the association hosting service, others should have the same opportunity.

HOA's need to follow the CAN-SPAM Act.

Linda

As I originally posted, directors can campaign for others, as long as association resources are not used. If someone is trying to garner a majority interest on the board that is always a possibility.

Why isn't the candidate sending a letter or flyer to Owners. We've found that to be very effective in our HOA. The only restriction is that HOA $ can't be used to do it

OK, good point, though the "underdog" approach wasn't mention on this thread. What was mentioned, I think, is to keep any written campaigning positive. I, too, have seen a goofy candidate statement sink a candidate. He was so sure he'd be reelected that his only emphasis was "everyone knows me." Not such a positive thing in his case, PLUS he had no achievements at all.

Say, Linda, has your Board considered having a Candidates Night? We do that when there's competition for open board seats.

Kerry - not a specific candidate's night, but candidates may present themselves at the next Board meeting on the 10th. I'm sure this particular candidate will be present, as they announced last night that they will be presenting a letter to the Board asking for a Declaration change (in regards to their violation). *sigh*