Need advice, meeting coming up

Hi. I am on the board of condominium association in Texas. I disagree with how the current board is allowing the president to control the day to day decisions of the community. We have an incompetent property manager and the president continues to make excuses for the manager.

My question is, is there a way I can insist on getting a legal opinion from the associations attorney. The president and a few of his supporters are blocking my attempts to have the board ask the association attorney for his opinion. They dismiss my objections to actions of the president.

The president does not run the show!.. Why can't these people get this in their thick heads. I'm sick and tired of the president not answering questions. No information is avaiable unless he gives it to us.

When I object to actions by the president. It's not that i'm disagreeing with what he chose. I'm disagreeing that he didn't get a board vote or input!

Laska, it's hard to understand what is really going on and what you are ultimately hoping to achieve. In your post you raise issues withe president, the property manager and the other board members. While it's entirely possible that you have some real problems with the organization it also possible the problem could be with your expectations and based on what you wrote I have no idea which one it is. For example:

1.) "My question is, is there a way I can insist on getting a legal opinion from the associations attorney."

You state that the president and his 'supporters' are blocking you. Did you make a motion to get the legal opinion? If you did and you lost the vote then you were NOT blocked. You were outvoted and the consensus was that your request did not merit spending money on legal council.

2.) "When I object to actions by the president. It's not that i'm disagreeing with what he chose. I'm disagreeing that he didn't get a board vote or input!"

There's no information provided by you that a board vote was needed. Can you provide an example?

3.)"The president does not run the show!.. Why can't these people get this in their thick heads. I'm sick and tired of the president not answering questions. No information is avaiable unless he gives it to us."

There is really only two reasons I can think of for this problem. The first is the president is a control freak and the other board members either don't care or they are intimidated by the president. The second is that there is a personality conflict between you and the board and they are now ignoring you. I have someone on our board who is very difficult to work with and if she is not kept in line by the rest of us our meetings will drag on forever and no decisions will get made. She has now irritated the rest of the board and as a result she's lost any effectiveness she may have had. I'm not saying this is the case with you but your post is high on emotions and low on facts.

I agree with JohnT . . . your post does not provide enough factual info to be able to help you out and provide opinions.

Regarding you one question . . . "is there a way I can insist on getting a legal opinion from the associations attorney" . . . the way to do this as a Board Member is to get the topic of discussion on your agenda, discuss and present your case at the meeting as to why a legal opinion is needed, and request the Board vote on your recommendation. If vote is in your favor, then a legal opinion should be sought. If not in your favor, then you either haven't sufficiently substantiated the need to seek the legal opinion or others on the Board simply seek to disagree with whatever you present.

Why can't you understand that these directors have heard your point of view and have decided they prefer the President making unilateral decisions? It takes less of their precious time. It keeps the HOA running. There is less conflict overall at board meetings. Isn't this rational decision-making on their part?

Else I agree with JohnT38, ND and George that it appears you have been outvoted. If you cannot accept a board majority's decision, then it is your conduct that is on the cusp of being unlawful. You should vote, lose the vote on some occasions, and move on. If you think a board action is unlawful, you have the option of hiring an attorney, spending a fortune, and waiting at least a year for the outcome (which may not go in your favor).

I imagine you're going mad because people 'are not following the rules.' You can let the inner conflict consume you. Or you can realize that people actually do see things differently from yourself. There is no changing their minds no way, no how. History and contemporary government at the national, state, and municipal levels show this time and again.

Unless there is a prior agreement with the lawyer for free consultations he has no business calling the lawyer if there is going to be a charge. It's not HIS money. In addition, fair or not, once he does this he will do nothing but piss the rest of the board off which will end up making him less effective as a board member.

As Jared noted - there are many ways to address your community's political management structure.

On the board via voting on motions to act - small stuff to special meetings for specific issues.

Via owner special meetings for specific issues or to recall.

All via the community's governing docs and state statute.

Complaining does little - organizing, on the board or as a property owner - is required to move forward.

Melissa,

That is the best explanation of this HOA board challenge I think I've read on this forum.

AugustineD I personally went through this process last June. I got the necessary signatures to call the very first special meeting in our HOA's history. It was so unique the HOA attorney became involved and even attended the meeting despite the protests of the board members and homeowners. I brought up four items to vote on the the attorney not only signed off on the process but advocated for it. In the end my idiot neighbors decided to NOT trim trees for hurricane season, NOT address a significant rodent infestation in all buildings, NOT replace known inaccurate electrical submeters (I'm going to court on this particular point on January 21st btw), and NOT clean the mold and mildew off the white siding. Basically my uneducated moronic neighbors didn't want to do any normal maintenance. The funny thing was several approached me later complaining about the rodents they just voted not to remediate. Truly stupid people.

In the end common sense and prudent property management lost however the process is real. In our HOA the majority can overturn board votes.

JaredC, thank you for sharing this account. As you seem to indicate, it is interesting on a few levels. To me it raises some serious liability issues. E.g. does the HOA manager now take direction from the members (not to trim trees for hurricane season etc.) or the Board. From what you wrote, it appears the HOA attorney weighed in and opined that the manager must take direction from the membership, on account of a properly called Special Meeting. Should the board actually vote to approve the membership's direction? If it votes yes (and so counter to the board's own wishes on the point), the manager must take instruction from the membership on this issue, then I think the Board is jeopardizing its indemnification. If the Board votes no the manager will not take direction from the membership on this issue, then the manager is in an unfair quandary. From whom does the manager take direction? Who is responsible for hiring him or her? And so on. Unless the Texas Property Code validates your HOA attorney's position, I think this was a stupendously stupid opinion by him.

By the way, what was the board's actual position on each of these issues?

And then people wonder why there's so much chaos and disorder in their HOAs!

AugustineD regarding the electrical meter issue the reason the board hasn't replaced them is BECAUSE I am for replacing them. Our board is unethical, immoral, and unreasonable. While this is the truth it is NOT a legal argument. The legal argument is much different.

1) I am acting as my own attorney.
2) I filed the formal complaint in April 2019 and trial is set before an SOAH ALJ (State office of Administrative Hearings, Administrative Law Judge) for January 21, 2020.
3) The case was brought before the PUC (Public Utility Commission) and they are acting as an interested third party. My case will create state-wide precedent.

This thread cannot do this case justice but if anyone wants to go take a look and dive in the the details then knock yourself out. It's all public record. interchange.puc.texas.gov control #49429.

Regardless, and back to the special meeting issue, our board was deadlocked because of one bad board member and therefore never actually voted on any of the topics before the special meeting. The fact that a majority of homeowners voted AGAINST replacing known inaccurate meters absolutely does bring up a legal quandry. Board members have a fiduciary responsibility to the HOA but can that be trumped by a majority vote of homeowners? Why didn't the board vote to replace the meters during the year and a half prior to the special meeting? Is that not a breach of fiduciary responsibility?

They are interesting questions.

JaredC, I read quickly a number of the documents. In the filings with PUC, did the HOA refer to the members' vote? Otherwise, among other things, I see the HOA (through its attorney) is claiming you lack legal standing; that the HOA is not subject to certain laws; and so on. The board appears to prefer to spend a fortune on its attorney, defeating you on technicalities (granted legitimate ones), rather than fix the problem. About how much would it cost to replace the sub-meters in question? Your efforts impress me.

(I am trying not to hijack the thread too much.)

JaredC, how kewl that the PUC staff attorneys are arguing the jurisdiction claims (in your favor). I do not have command of all that's been argued at this point, but this seems like one amazingly good sign.

I agree it is a complete breach of fiduciary duty on a few levels. Still, I do not see any judge making any director personally liable on this one. Doing so is too much of a deterrent to members stepping up to be on the board. The only times I have seen a judge make a director personally liable is in criminal cases. I think this is too far a stretch from criminal activity.

From afar but still as a neighbor of sorts, way to go!

I am convinced you believe the latter. But the law does not.

Melissa, under corporate law, a board majority makes all decisions except possibly the lesser ones delegated to the Treasurer, the Secretary, the President or the manager.

George, reports here of Board Presidents making decisions on big ticket matters, without a board vote, seem frequent enough. I do not think this is a 'fine point.'

sorry I am just now responding. I had a family emergency and just got back home.

First, I was not wanting a legal opinion for my own issues. I wanted a legal clarification on the validity of actions that the president had taken without following the board adopted rules of order.

Second, I haven't been outvoted. I actually have made a lot of progress. I got the majority of the board to vote with me in the last meeting on a motion to interview new potential candidates for replacing the property manager.
This was huge! Up to this point, most of the board had continued to defer to whatever the president wanted.
.
However, now the president is basically insinuating that if the board decides to replace the property manager, the president won't be involved anymore. In my opinion, this is inappropriate at best.

Melissa. On our property, the hoa employs a full time property manager, 9-5 ,, m-f. The property manager is supposed to manage and facilitate the maintenance of the day to day operations.

If the board president was the person who was responsible for day to day oversight and management of the property,, we woudn't need a property manager.

LaskaS, this is my point: That you appear not to consider the machinations of a herd. You trumpet the facts and expect the cows in the herd to "get it." The herd does not care about the law or facts. Right now, you choose to be frustrated, wasting precious energy. You come here to vent. Venting is fine except for one thing: If venting and being validated for same does not translate to your realizing that one has to deal with the irrational among us in constructive ways, then what's the point of your posting and people responding?

I think I am "absolutely right" on the facts of Trump's attempting to bribe the Ukraine and that Trump got due process in the impeachment proceedings in the House. But nearly every Republican in the Senate says otherwise. What does one do? Concede the fact that Republicans hold the majority of the Senate. Get through the trial in the Senate, dotting i's and crossing t's to the greatest extent possible. If only because Trump, if re-elected, is going to pull this cr-p again and again. One has to stay calm and comply with the legal process. After dotting i's and crossing t's and getting all into the record. one should move on instead of ranting about, say, what idiots you have on your board or deeming the President's suggestion that he will 'no longer be involved' if the property manager goes is "inappropriate."

You seem to fixate on others' ethics (over which you have no power) and not process (over which you have considerable legal power).

More importantly, congratulations on a board majority agreeing to interview the property manager. Why you are decrying the President's threat to no longer be involved if the property manager is replaced does not make sense to me. If the President quits, I'd be thinking, "Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord... "

Between the Board votes, someone, almost always the President of the Board, must continue to represent the Board, which represents the constituents of the HOA. Management companies require direction, attorneys require direction, representation wrt local municipal organizations, requires direction.

The Board, as an entity, usually does not meet frequently enough to make all decisions.

Laska, if you can work towards some more turnover in the Board, great. If you have constructed this as you versus the President, and they are considered valuable, you may just end up being a pita at every interaction. Unless you win.

Democracy.

melissa, with all due respect.. I'm not asking for fair! Life's not fair.

I'm asking for board members to not just look the other way because they can't be bothered. One of the board members who I'm friends with and talk to often. Has told me, Laska, you are right. But noone has time to follow up on all of these things and we would rather let mr.x(president) handle things because he's done a good enough job..
My friend also has advised me that I need to focus on one issue, and one issue only. Otherwise, The other board members tune out. So that's what I've done. I"ve methodically made the case and gotten the support to replace the property manager. However, since everyone is tiptoeing around mr.x(president) The motion that I made and that passed was to set up interviews for possible replacements. I knew the board members whouldn't vote to fire the property manager , it would upset the president.

Anyway, several of you have mentioned real politik, and or alluded to the way actually boards work. I guess I just thought that If I clearly and politely made sure that all the information was on the table. The board members would do the right thing. What I'm finding is, while they agree there are numerous issues with the property manager, that have not gotten better over a year, and he has not shown the basic ability to problem solve, or troubleshoot ,(the times he did take action, he made the wrong decisions. and basically made it up as he was going, instead of refer to the documents).. The president continues to tell the board that the manager is getting better, and the president works well with him.

Finally, after months and months enough owners have complained and relayed interactions that are exactly what I've been saying for 8 months. Anyway. Personally, I am sick of it all. I can't do it by myself. Of the owners that are residents, I have a lot of support. But many non resident owners as well as some new resident owners are apathetic unless it directly affects them.

Im kinda bummed that people don't aim higher. Our property could be so much better, without spending a lot more money. People just don't really care. ugg I'm done.

For what it is worth, and without intending to shoot you down LaskaS, I think what this board member said shows wisdom. Yes, to those of us who believe our HOAs/Condos could be so much better, and who are maybe still a little idealistic and not yet completely cynical (and thus "unwashed"?) it is dismaying to read. But for me, it helps my decision-making going forward. Like what battles to pick. Like whether I want to live in a condo or HOA in the future. Or if so, what are my criteria for buying into one?

I was going to compare what this board member said to the experience of, say, City Councilors and members of legislatures. These (almost always paid) folks all could likely name times they were on the losing side of a battle, with enormous implications and were frustrated. But City Councilors and members of legislatures are fairly easily held accountable. The press, civil servant staff, the occasional citizens' nonprofit lawsuit, government agencies like GAO, and attorneys general offices, fairly transparent election procedures and so on all ensure much greater accountability of their respective governing bodies. While City Councilors and higher may be frustrated, they have much greater assurance that the law is being followed. Homeowners' associations and condos lack this accountability. And it's not just about corporate vs. non-corporate. The courts have said HOAs and condos are quasi-governmental. Yet HOAs/Condos run roughshod over members all the time; break laws all the time; harass members all the time; get their attorneys to write stupid letters with no legal meaning (and only intended to intimidate with legally allowed lies) to members all the time.

I believe Laskas is on the board. Just not sure has a full understanding how things work versus wishful thinking. I find people who assign why OTHER board members act like they do, is what they feel. What you think of me isn't what I think of me, it's most likely what you think of yourself or of me...

So to assign the board members not doing anything or agreeing with the President may just be how they feel they want to do. I find people who are against something do speak up...