HOA Records

Is communication between the HOA's lawyer and the president of the HOA a part of the HOA's official records when this communication is for the benefit of the association? Should all correspondence between the HOA attorney and the president of the HOA be made available to all of the board of directors or just a report of the findings from the attorney?

When we asked to see a structural analysis report on a problem re-constructed pool, we were turned down by the HOA lawyer as "fishing" for dirt. (His reason.)

The thing is, we were concerned and able to get it through another channel AND, with it, an email from the HOA attorney to the board president, stating he would try to hide the report "as protected work materials" but that if pushed, he would have to produce it. (Guess: the president is the one who added the flawed structural requirements that are making the two new pools fail. Cost guess for that: about 200,000. if it ever gets corrected. More if the entire two pools need to be replaced again.)

Our Board President and HOA attorney used to copy all emails to the Property Manager. Then it got very quiet. (And questionable.)

All communications should be shard with the other Directors, at least. They should also be shared, on writen request, with homeowners who request to see them, UNLESS the conversation falls under attorney-client privilege where litigation is ongoing or pending. In those cases it's even more important to share them with the rest of the board because the board as a whole has the final say on what litigation strategy should be pursued. I wouldn't want one person to be making those decisions on his or her own with the attorney while everyone else on the board was in the dark.

How is anyone to know if something smells fishy if they can't go fishing to find out? Attorney-clien privilege? Off limits. No attorney-client privilege? Share it with everybody or explain what it is you're trying to hide.

The president is reporting the communication, just not sharing the actual emails. No one is trying to hide anything, just wondered if sharing the actual emails was appropriate with board members? I guess if these email communications are considered official records then they could be shared with non-board members upon request.

Do you have a management company?
The HOA's Lawyer is just that . The HOA's lawyer not the President's lawyer only. The Lawyer should share all communications dealing with the HOA's business with all members. The President has to share all communications when dealing with the Lawyer. That is a MUST
It is not the private lawyer for the President. If they are hiding something then they all should be sued for the documents.
It sounds like you have a bigger problem with 2 pool failures and their cover up. Why aren't the pool installers called back to fix the pools? Or where they a fly by night company. Or was it someone the President knew to do the job?
It all smells bad.
Unfortunately it all takes money to get all the documents that they are not turning over. Hiring another lawyer that WILL go after after another lawyer will be hard to find.
BUT there has to be something you can do.
What about your state that governs HOA's. They have rules that the HOA's have to follow. I know where I am you can file a report with the your state.
Faye

FayE, I'm more with Melissa on the sharing of information than I am with your position. I do agree communications between the designated point person on the Board and the attorney should be shared with the entire Board, in Executive Session, until the matter is resolved. At that point, the information, outcome, or whatever, should be shared with the members.

I can cite two reasons (there are undoubtedly more) why information regarding attorney communications should only be discussed by the Board, in ES:

1. If the matter involves another member, sharing the information may violate privacy and could reveal to the other party strategies and tactics being used by the Board and its attorney

2. If the matter involves a 3rd party, let us say a vendor or contractor, sharing the details could have the same result--you never know which member of the association is the cousin of the sister-in-law of the vendor or contractor.

A member of the Board threatened to sue the Board. The executive officers decided contacting the HOA lawyer would be advisable. This was revealed at the next board meeting. This board member who threatened to sue the Board, is that person entitled to see email communication between the President and the HOA attorney.

In our HOA, all records, communications, etc. are supposed to be available during reasonable business hours for any homeowner to review or make (at their own expense) copies of. The only things not allowed are liens, foreclosures, late dues.

At our HOA, we have previously uncovered badly behaving boards and property managers and voted them out/fired them.

But not being given any agenda for what the board is doing with maintenance, being locked out of meetings, not being allowed access to any records, suspected election misbehavior, and other behaviors, many of us are concerned here.

I think that transparency eliminates a lot of concern when it is not trampling on others' rights to privacy. I also agree that the board needs the ability to cook without too many cooks. Town Halls, posting agendas, open meetings, properly run elections, friendliness are also good ideas. Sometimes necessary.

Also, the concerns are about our home values, our flooded basements when things are not maintained properly, our neighbors, and so on. We have a right to know, to expect funds to be used properly, and concerns to be heard.

Roberta

The OP also clarified her post about yet you rant on about demanding transparency. Read the post above (before) yours before you go off ranting about how bad your BOD is. Stick to the issue the OP clarified rather than introduce your grievances (right or wrong) especially when out of context. You have to let go of that bone in your teeth some.

A threat of a lawsuit would not have me going to the HOA lawyer FYI. It's not worth spending the money or time in my opinion. However, many HOA's do this and not uncommon. Can't judge because each HOA is different. Going to the lawyer is most likely for advice not reaction. A move still requiring approval.

This this is another reason I say "Suing your HOA is suing yourself and your neighbors". It applies to internal board members situation too. The liability insurance covers poor decisions of a board member in the process of doing HOA business. So what does the lawsuit involve factors in here.

I say the board member should be excluded from the process for the most part. Court doesn't work like it does on TV. There is a "discovery" period so there are no surprises. It's used for BOTH sides to provide it's best case. So there shouldn't be any "smoking gun" moments.

The board member really needs to just sue and the HOA counter-sue once case is filed in response. A counter-suit can be for about anything. It's cheaper to file and doesn't need a lawyer. I'd make the lawsuit at minimum for the legal expense/advice it took to file the counter-claim. Do not believe a HOA should intentionally sue a member 1st. That is a rare situation that option should ever be considered/used.

So I'd let the board member to know that since they are wanting to sue, that the exchange between lawyer is between the HOA and the lawyer. That the details will be communicated to their lawyer if need be. The board member needs to be excluded in any conversations outside of the lawyers offices when case being discussed.