who may be a board member

What do you Bylaws say?

Exactly, our bylaws specifically state that directors don't have to be members.

this is someone who filled a temporary position from a board member who resigned. Given a somewhat apathetic owner participation.. I'm guessing most owners don't realize this has happened. I guess it will come up at the annual meeting, when she'll need to be voted in by membership, but I doubt this particular board will even mention that the candidate is not an owner of record.

The bylaws are old - written in early 70s when condos were up and coming; very boiler plate generic. not adequately updated which is another issue. I don't like the idea that someone who has no financial stake in the complex can vote on policy.

Yes, I, too, wouldn't like a non-owner on our HA board, but if your bylaws are silent, and they often are since the developer needs a board when still in control and often they are the developer's employees, then non-owners may serve.

If the non-owner runs to be a director, campaign against her on those grounds.

Meantime, encourage your board to update your bylaws.

Reading these replies made me curious. Just wonder if I could qualify to be a member of on HOA board?
I am removing my name from my deed and putting it in my sons name but will continue to live here.
I will still be liable for the mortgage, taxes, insurance, and HOA fees, etc. So the change is in the name on the deed only.

How would an HOA know a name was quitclaimed off the deed if you don't say anything?

We considered a change in our bylaws to allow non-members to serve as directors for exactly some of these reasons. That's a good list, Tim. We perennially have a shortage of people willing to serve on the board and figured this would be a way to allow some of the people, just like those you mentioned, to do so. Some are long-time residents who have demonstrated a committment to the community over a long period of time and would probably be outstanding board members.

The change was seriously considered by the board and many homeowners were disposed to vote in favor of it. At the end of the day (well, 6 months of formal and informal discussion) two arguments prevailed: (1) The homeowners of record (on the deed) should really hold all the cards, and (2) the law of Unintended Consequences would surely rear its ugly head sooner or later.

We have a really hard time getting board volunteers year after year. It's not out of the question - in fact it would have been more likely than not - that within 5 years we could have ended up with a board where the majority of directors were not homeowners.

So not to say it will never happen, but last year it did not. No one was really upset when the board finally squashed the idea, so that says something as well.

Most communities ByLaws are written by the developer who created the HOA. As the developer generally controls the HOA until it is turned over to the members, the ByLaws are written to allow individuals who do not own property in the development to serve as directors. Once the HOA is turned over to member control, the board should seriously consider amending the ByLaws to only allow an individual who is listed on the deed to property in the community to be eligible to be a director.

This would preclude a non property owner from serving on a board which makes decisions that affect all of the property owners financially such as increasing assessments or spending the HOA's money. We amended our ByLaws exactly for that reason because if you don't it is possible that control of the financial affairs of the HOA would be in the hands of someone who neither owns property in the HOA or pays any assessments to the HOA.