HOA board doesn't care about the concerns of homeowners

Started by PaulL12 • 30 replies • 734 views

💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

I live in an HOA and when it comes to showing concern for the welfare and interests of the homeowners, the other board members are not operating in good faith. They clearly make decisions not based on what is in the best interests of the homeowners, but based on what will cost them the least amount of their time.
These people are nice and friendly outside of their role on the board, the type of people you would seemingly want as neighbors. But as board members, they are grossly ineffective.

- They have no interest in proactively reaching out to homeowners to find out what is of concern to the homeowners.
- They issue empty threats in an effort to get homeowners to participate in meetings or elections
- They endorse security practices which cause damage to the property of homeowners, and then claim that such practices don't cause damage - even if provided evidence.
- When asked questions about blatant inconsistencies in rules, they say there are no inconsistencies - even when provided evidence of the inconsistencies.
- When asked about blatant ambiguities in rules, they say there are no ambiguities - even when provided evidence of the ambiguities.
- They are very slow to respond to simple requests or queries. When questioned about it, they claim they did respond, but can't provide evidence they responded.
- They will not meet offline with a concerned homeowner.
- They endorse improper use of funds by having our security company focus on issues which are not of concern to the bulk of homeowners
- They get noticeably upset if a homeowner attempts to reach out to other homeowners to spread word of an issue which would require board involvement.

As much of this was as obvious to me well over a year ago as it is now, I have since joined the board - with the idea that I could help make things better for homeowners. But the board resists any efforts I make to make things better for homeowners. I now have an even closer look at how ineffective and disinterested they are.

I anyone would like further details or specifics, I would be happy to provide them.

Thanks!

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Welcome to the Forum, Paul. What size is your HOA? Detached homes? Condos? How many are on the Board? Do you have a property manager?

Have your read your CC&Rs, Bylaws, and Rules & Regs? Can you be a little more specific about which of these the Board is violating? Clear examples might help. Or is it CA Civil Code they're violating?

I don't see a question--do you have any? Perhaps what you believe is bad conduct might not be. Do you, for instance, see anything in your governing documents that say the Board must "show concern for the welfare and interests of the homeowners?"

JohnT38 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,631

Posted:

"- They have no interest in proactively reaching out to homeowners to find out what is of concern to the homeowners.
- They issue empty threats in an effort to get homeowners to participate in meetings or elections"

These two statements seem to conflict with each other. It sounds like you are saying no one will attend meetings or elections but at the same time they feel the board isn't responsive.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

Hi Paul,

I am gonna take a stab at some of your concerns ... couldn't tell if this is your first time on a board, what your educational background is, or whether you are fully knowledgable of California's very well thought out HOA/COA statutes.

HOA Board members are not there to show concern for the welfare and interests of the homeowners, but to represent them as the decision making apparatus - I'm not sure what "operating in good faith" would mean in this context.

Do you have a baseline for HOA Boards being "grossly ineffective?"

Most board rarely believe they are there to reach out to homeowners - but, rather, to be available to provide a means to address those things brought to their attention by homeowners.

I don't know what kind of threat could be issued relating to participation in meetings or elections?

Gotta help me on what is a security practice which causes damage?

When you say rules, do you mean Rules and Regulations or Bylaws or CCRs or statute?

What ambiguities? Perhaps they simply disagree, or have more background on that topic? Need more detail.

Speed in HOAs is usually measured by the number of Board meetings.

Board members do not have to meet with concerned homeowners - this is usually what board meetings are for.

Perhaps they are focusing on exactly the correct security issues, but just disagree with your assessment, or other owners' assessments?

Yep - I need lots more info and specific instances with details - can't figure it out otherwise.

MelissaP1 (Alabama)
Posts: 13,836

Posted:

Board members are homeowners unless your developer control. Not everything has to be cared for per your standards. It's a group thing.

Former HOA President

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Note: PaulL12 is currently on this Board.

Quote:

I am looking for proof of this. Generally proving such a assertion in court is quite difficult.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM
but based on what will cost them the least amount of their time.

I cannot blame them. Now that you are on the board, you are going to be stuck often with doing what the board majority wants to do. It is a high price for anyone who does not want to be a politician. Politicians are used to majorities calling the shots.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM
- They have no interest in proactively reaching out to homeowners to find out what is of concern to the homeowners.

Please quote what your governing documents say about the Board's duty to 'proactively reach out to homeowners to find out their concerns.'

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM
- They issue empty threats in an effort to get homeowners to participate in meetings or elections

Such as? I am with JohnT38 and GeorgeS21 on this one.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM

- They endorse security practices which cause damage to the property of homeowners, and then claim that such practices don't cause damage - even if provided evidence.

I suggest starting a separate thread on this and elaborating on what these practices are and how they have caused damage.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM
- When asked questions about blatant inconsistencies in rules, they say there are no inconsistencies - even when provided evidence of the inconsistencies.
- When asked about blatant ambiguities in rules, they say there are no ambiguities - even when provided evidence of the ambiguities.

You are going to have to give specific examples.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM

- They are very slow to respond to simple requests or queries. When questioned about it, they claim they did respond, but can't provide evidence they responded.

They likely meet only once a month, at most. This often explains the slowness.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM
- They will not meet offline with a concerned homeowner.

Does the homeowner have a specific complaint? If so, follow the HOA's rules for filing a complaint. Also California statute has details on how the Board is to proceed when a complaint is submitted. See www.davis-stirling.com

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM
- They endorse improper use of funds by having our security company focus on issues which are not of concern to the bulk of homeowners

Most likely this does not violate any law or any part of the governing documents. If I am mistaken, then file a complaint using the HOA's procedure and guidance from the davis-stirling.com site.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM

- They get noticeably upset if a homeowner attempts to reach out to other homeowners to spread word of an issue which would require board involvement.

How do they express this 'upset-edness'?

Mostly I think what you need to do is (1) make sure you are on the correct side of the law and governing documents, with regard to each complaint you have; (2) use California's HOA statute to submit grievances and seek resolution; and (3) possibly seek to gain control of the board at the next election, by campaigning for others who think like you do.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Q:Welcome to the Forum, Paul. What size is your HOA? Detached homes? Condos? How many are on the Board? Do you have a property manager?
A:About 120 units; condominiums with attached garages. 5 people on the board. We have an association manager.

Q: Have your read your CC&Rs, Bylaws, and Rules & Regs? Can you be a little more specific about which of these the Board is violating? Clear examples might help. Or is it CA Civil Code they're violating?
A: Yes I have read all those documents. For example, they are endorsing the security company placing paper based difficult to remove stickers (that in many cases cause damage to the vehicles when removed) on vehicles. They provide warnings of towing, but no warnings of such defacement of property to a vehicle.

Q: I don't see a question--do you have any? Perhaps what you believe is bad conduct might not be. Do you, for instance, see anything in your governing documents that say the Board must "show concern for the welfare and interests of the homeowners?"
A: No I don't see that language. But if the homeowners knew that the board was not showing concern for the welfare and interest of the homeowners, they would want that board removed.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

I can understand why one could see those contradicting each other, but the board is passive - meaning they don't care about going out there and finding out what the homeowners want. Their attitude is homeowners are entitled to attend homeowners meetings and speak out. The homeowners I've spoken to who have gone to homeowners meetings feel as if the board doesn't want to hear what they have to say.

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Thanks for some clarifications, Paul does your property mgr. have an office onsite?

This specifically has become very interesting to me because I'm beginning to think that many HOA owners and board members do not know what their Board's obligations are. What do your CC&Rs say about your Board's responsibilities & obligations? (Beyond routine maintenance & utilities)

Parking stickers are a nuisance but they're required to park in our underground garage of our condo building too. Wait, do you mean warnings the car might be towed stickers? Do you mean they're adhered on the car's body? Did the board vote on whatever they are?

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

I am gonna take a stab at some of your concerns ... couldn't tell if this is your first time on a board, what your educational background is, or whether you are fully knowledgable of California's very well thought out HOA/COA statutes.

Somewhat knowledgeable.

HOA Board members are not there to show concern for the welfare and interests of the homeowners, but to represent them as the decision making apparatus - I'm not sure what "operating in good faith" would mean in this context.

We don't really know that unless we ask the homeowners.

Do you have a baseline for HOA Boards being "grossly ineffective?"

Not adequately addressing concerns of homeowners. A good example is there were some inconsistencies in some rules. A homeowner pointed this out and explained why it was an inconsistency. Instead of making an effort to fix it, they insisted the homeowner was wrong and did nothing.

Most board rarely believe they are there to reach out to homeowners - but, rather, to be available to provide a means to address those things brought to their attention by homeowners.

The board encourages homeowners to come to meetings if they wish to have concerns heard. The association manager encourages homeowners to contact him/her if they have concerns (and those get forwarded to the board). But any time a homeowner has a good idea or points out some sort of problem, the board would rather not address it.

I don't know what kind of threat could be issued relating to participation in meetings or elections?

They threatened to impose a $50 fee on anyone who didn't vote in an election if they did not reach a quorum.

Gotta help me on what is a security practice which causes damage?

Placement of paper based stickers on violating parking vehicles - stickers which often can't be removed without causing damage - without providing any kind of warning.

When you say rules, do you mean Rules and Regulations or Bylaws or CCRs or statute?

Rules and regulations

What ambiguities? Perhaps they simply disagree, or have more background on that topic? Need more detail.

Example: "these spaces are designated for visitor parking only" while also saying "resident vehicles may use these spaces"

Speed in HOAs is usually measured by the number of Board meetings.

Now that I am on the board, I can see that homeowner concerns can and should be responded to within 3-5 days maximum.

Board members do not have to meet with concerned homeowners - this is usually what board meetings are for.

Agreed. But showing such a disinterest reflects poorly on their concern for the welfare of the homeowners.

Perhaps they are focusing on exactly the correct security issues, but just disagree with your assessment, or other owners' assessments?

I disagree. They have been shown numerous inconsistencies and lack of clarity, but will not address any of it when asked, responding to saying they're right and the homeowner(s) are wrong.

Yep - I need lots more info and specific instances with details - can't figure it out otherwise.

Another example is the outdoor spots are marked 'visitors only', but they do permit residents to park there. And the rules don't state if they are referring to the vehicle or the driver when they say 'visitor' or 'resident'.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

Thanks, Paul.

You didn’t answer wrt this being your first COA rodeo?

I can see your perspective in trying to be helpful ... but, some of what you express is outside the norms of what HOA/COA/POA boards are responsible to do - ie Boards are supposed to be less parental than what you might be thinking.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

You didn’t answer wrt this being your first COA rodeo?

I can see your perspective in trying to be helpful ... but, some of what you express is outside the norms of what HOA/COA/POA boards are responsible to do - ie Boards are supposed to be less parental than what you might be thinking.

I think you may be on to a good point. Then what would be the best way to get the body of homeowners to speak up so that certain rules - which are written poorly and thus target problems that are non-existent and waste resources - can get amended?

It seems to me that the board doesn't care about doing what the body of homeowners values. E.g. if the board decides to close the pool at 10PM, but the body of homeowners wants it to be 11:00 PM, the board is more inclined to not change it than change it.

Now let's say one homeowner comes forward and says at a homeowners meeting, "I have heard from many other homeowners that they would prefer that the pool close at 11 instead of 10; what can you do about that?", and the board simply says "the rules say it is 10, so it is staying at 10". Somewhat of a red herring and a clear indication that the board is not the people a concerned homeowner should discuss these things with. But who should the homeowner discuss these things with? What should the homeowner do to go to bat for other homeowners who want the pool to stay open until 11?

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

Good example.

The board might be expected to offer an explanation - it could be as simple as, “we hear you, but believe the pool hours are a good balance between recreation time, and the noise interests of owners living close.” Or, “our insurance provides coverage up to 10 pm, and we don’t want to change it.”. Or, even, “we’ve been through this before and believe 10 pm is the correct time.”

The board, is just a group of elected volunteers trying to manage the business interests of a community.

The owners can recall these directors, and replace them with other volunteers. Or, other volunteers may run for the board seats. Or, you can try and change the behavior of the board.

What usually happens is that those complaining are unwilling to spend their time as directors.

JohnT38 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,631

Posted:

"Now let's say one homeowner comes forward and says at a homeowners meeting, "I have heard from many other homeowners that they would prefer that the pool close at 11 instead of 10; what can you do about that?", and the board simply says "the rules say it is 10, so it is staying at 10". Somewhat of a red herring and a clear indication that the board is not the people a concerned homeowner should discuss these things with. But who should the homeowner discuss these things with? What should the homeowner do to go to bat for other homeowners who want the pool to stay open until 11?"

I've now been on the board for 2 1/2 years and based on my experience this thought is simply false. I can't tell you how many times I have been approached by an owner and told, "I have heard from many other homeowners that would prefer..." In most cases the statement was false and the owner was just trying to push his or her agenda. In addition, this example and some of the other given don't take into account that serving on the board is a volunteer position and you can't expect the board members to treat it as a full time job. In your example, the owner should start a position and/or get other owners to come to a board meeting and express their concern. It is not up to me to go out and investigate every owner claim that is presented. As it stands, I would estimate that I put in between 10-15 hours per week on board business. I have a max amount of time that that I'm willing to donate and after that I shut it down unless it's an emergency. Burn out is a real danger for board members and we each have our own thresh hold on when this becomes a problem.

Although we go out of our way to be open and communicate with our residents, they have JUST AS MUCH responsibility to do the same. If they don't want to attend meetings or participate in votes I have zero sympathy for them when they come after the fact and bitch about something.

My recommendation to you is start concentrating on educating your owners about the importance of attending meetings, voting and providing meaningful, respectful feedback. We did this and over time we have steadily improved and now have the trust of the community.

ChrisE8
Posts: 454

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 12:22 PM
I live in an HOA and when it comes to showing concern for the welfare and interests of the homeowners, the other board members are not operating in good faith. They clearly make decisions not based on what is in the best interests of the homeowners, but based on what will cost them the least amount of their time.
These people are nice and friendly outside of their role on the board, the type of people you would seemingly want as neighbors. But as board members, they are grossly ineffective.

- They have no interest in proactively reaching out to homeowners to find out what is of concern to the homeowners.
- They issue empty threats in an effort to get homeowners to participate in meetings or elections
- They endorse security practices which cause damage to the property of homeowners, and then claim that such practices don't cause damage - even if provided evidence.
- When asked questions about blatant inconsistencies in rules, they say there are no inconsistencies - even when provided evidence of the inconsistencies.
- When asked about blatant ambiguities in rules, they say there are no ambiguities - even when provided evidence of the ambiguities.
- They are very slow to respond to simple requests or queries. When questioned about it, they claim they did respond, but can't provide evidence they responded.
- They will not meet offline with a concerned homeowner.
- They endorse improper use of funds by having our security company focus on issues which are not of concern to the bulk of homeowners
- They get noticeably upset if a homeowner attempts to reach out to other homeowners to spread word of an issue which would require board involvement.

As much of this was as obvious to me well over a year ago as it is now, I have since joined the board - with the idea that I could help make things better for homeowners. But the board resists any efforts I make to make things better for homeowners. I now have an even closer look at how ineffective and disinterested they are.

I anyone would like further details or specifics, I would be happy to provide them.

Thanks!

Then replace the board. I'm not seeing anything clearly illegal here.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/06/2020 6:13 PM
They threatened to impose a $50 fee on anyone who didn't vote in an election if they did not reach a quorum.

I think this is certainly a symptom of a Board that does not follow the governing documents or state law. In fact I would say this Board's threat is a violation of the governing docs and state law. I think this threat is also a sign of low intelligence in general.

Even City staff tasked with enforcing municipal ordinances tell members of the public that the City has found using a carrot, rather than a stick, to be more effective in gaining compliance on many issues.

Some HOA boards have offered a small discount on one month's assessment for people who agree to vote. This may or may not be lawful under the governing documents. But importantly, I think such an approach is far less likely to yield hostility from the membership.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

Certainly concur with Augustin on this point - 5% discount built into the dues over a year or two would become transparent to the budget needs - and , shift the decision to owners. I like it!

MelissaP1 (Alabama)
Posts: 13,836

Posted:

Sorry but I am needing more details on this 50 dollar FEE "threat" for not voting. Something doesn't pass the smell test here. Usually a quorum is needed within the board not all membership. So I don't get this.

Former HOA President

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 11/07/2020 7:35 AM
... snip ...

Some HOA boards have offered a small discount on one month's assessment for people who agree to vote. This may or may not be lawful under the governing documents. But importantly, I think such an approach is far less likely to yield hostility from the membership.

The OP said that he's in condos. Condo assessments are generally defined in the CC&Rs and based on things like percentage of ownership. Unless the CC&Rs give the board the right to change these percentages, it has no legal authority to do so. It requires an amendment to the CC&Rs that must be approved by the membership (often a super-majority). So offering discounts on assessments is asking for a legal challenge.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 11/07/2020 8:11 AM

I agree. I personally object to such incentives for the reasons CathyA3 gives. However, I have seen Boards do it. I have not read of a report of anyone complaining.

What cracks me up is that those Owners who praise, for example, a $25 discount from their monthly assessment if they cast a vote. These owners think they are getting a good deal. The twenty-five bucks is like a coupon for a couple of alcoholic beverages at their favorite restaurant. But if all Owners (or nearly all Owners) vote and so get the discount, then it's a wash: All Owners get to pay back their $25 in the coming years on account of expenses not changing.

But the average Owner is clueless about HOA budgets. Math and financial illiteracy rule the day. Reserve funds? Who needs 'em. All they see is $300,000 sitting in the bank idle while incredibly (to them) their assessments are rising again (and some of their condo neighbors' roofs are slowly but surely failing).

Aside: I do not think it's any different for condos vs. non-condo HOAs, regarding assessments.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

The following are general observations about condo associations and business of boards.

* The vast majority of condo owners do not understand the nature of what they've bought. This means that their opinions on many things will be uninformed.

* Unfortunately, it also means that newbie board members also don't understand what they're doing. There is quite a learning curve.

* The board is elected to run a non-profit corporation, which means their primary focus will be on money and legalities. The board's responsibilities and conduct are limited by the association's governing docs as well as state and federal laws. A number of associations have social committees or some such to hold neighborhood events, but unless these are required by the governing documents, they're outside of the scope of the board's responsibilities. They're a nicety, nothing more.

* It is impossible for the governing documents to cover every contingency. It's possible that some of the language is ambiguous, but this sort of thing should be unusual since the governing docs are written by lawyers based on templates that comply with the state's applicable statutes. More likely the "ambiguity" comes from the fact that the CC&Rs are written in legalese, and most people don't know how to read legalese. If certain potions of the CC&Rs contradict each other, then the CC&Rs need to be amended. This is a legal process and not something the board does on the fly.

* Nothing happens as quickly as one likes in condo associations. That's because the board must hold properly noticed meetings to conduct all association business (there may be some well-defined exceptions for emergencies). This means that meeting with "concerned homeowners" offline is a no-go. All homeowners should be encouraged to put their concerns in writing and to submit them to the entire board for possible discussion in a future agenda. If these concerns deal with things that are typically handled by the property manager, then they should get more prompt attention, with response time dependent on the nature of the issue. Anything that requires board discussion will have to wait until future board meetings. That is the nature of condo associations.

* Finally, the board is not obligated to entertain every homeowner's concerns. (See first point above.) The board is obligated to act in the best interest of the association as a whole, which means that individual owners will no doubt find something that's not to their liking. Again, that's the nature of condo ownership. It doesn't mean that the board isn't doing their job properly.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 11/07/2020 8:52 AM
The following are general observations about condo associations and business of boards.

* The vast majority of condo owners do not understand the nature of what they've bought. This means that their opinions on many things will be uninformed.

* Unfortunately, it also means that newbie board members also don't understand what they're doing. There is quite a learning curve.

* The board is elected to run a non-profit corporation, which means their primary focus will be on money and legalities. The board's responsibilities and conduct are limited by the association's governing docs as well as state and federal laws. A number of associations have social committees or some such to hold neighborhood events, but unless these are required by the governing documents, they're outside of the scope of the board's responsibilities. They're a nicety, nothing more.

* It is impossible for the governing documents to cover every contingency. It's possible that some of the language is ambiguous, but this sort of thing should be unusual since the governing docs are written by lawyers based on templates that comply with the state's applicable statutes. More likely the "ambiguity" comes from the fact that the CC&Rs are written in legalese, and most people don't know how to read legalese. If certain potions of the CC&Rs contradict each other, then the CC&Rs need to be amended. This is a legal process and not something the board does on the fly.

* Nothing happens as quickly as one likes in condo associations. That's because the board must hold properly noticed meetings to conduct all association business (there may be some well-defined exceptions for emergencies). This means that meeting with "concerned homeowners" offline is a no-go. All homeowners should be encouraged to put their concerns in writing and to submit them to the entire board for possible discussion in a future agenda. If these concerns deal with things that are typically handled by the property manager, then they should get more prompt attention, with response time dependent on the nature of the issue. Anything that requires board discussion will have to wait until future board meetings. That is the nature of condo associations.

* Finally, the board is not obligated to entertain every homeowner's concerns. (See first point above.) The board is obligated to act in the best interest of the association as a whole, which means that individual owners will no doubt find something that's not to their liking. Again, that's the nature of condo ownership. It doesn't mean that the board isn't doing their job properly.

Well said

ChrisE8
Posts: 454

Posted:

PaulL12, on any board, even a high-profile company's board, with skilled management and skilled experts to support the board (such as top-flight lawyers), there are personality clashes, grudges, vendettas and the ability to focus only on some things, but not everything that every owner (stockholder) wants.

In a homeowners' association, while of course the situation is different than a Fortune 500 company's board, you still have human beings dealing with rules set forth in legal documents. Unfortunately, depending on the homeowners' association, the level of professionalism can be far lower, leading to fewer constraints on personality clashes, grudges and vendettas, and even less time to devote to proper governance.

I think that you're asking too much. No board is perfect. But any board is not going to satisfy at least someone. And in a board that may be made of people who don't have work experience serving on boards of directors, or familiarity with legal documents, and supporting advisors who may not be the best, I think that all one can hope for is that the association will be decently managed and the legal rules will largely be followed. But in a lot of associations, you don't even get that.

So as long as there isn't gross mismanagement or illegality, I think I'd drop the complaints. Change the board if it bothers you that much.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Paul seems to want haste over quality. He sounds like a Ready, Fire, Aim type of guy.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

I’m gonna give Paul the benefit of the doubt ... he sounds well intentioned.

Paul, did you ever tell us if this is your first time as a director?

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

* Finally, the board is not obligated to entertain every homeowner's concerns. (See first point above.) The board is obligated to act in the best interest of the association as a whole, which means that individual owners will no doubt find something that's not to their liking. Again, that's the nature of condo ownership. It doesn't mean that the board isn't doing their job properly.

When a board is not acting in the best interests of the association as a whole, what recourse do the homeowners have? Especially if the bulk of homeowners are content with things as they are and aren't interested in doing anything about it.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

Paul,

Will you be answering my question?

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

I’m gonna give Paul the benefit of the doubt ... he sounds well intentioned.

Paul, did you ever tell us if this is your first time as a director?

No, not my first time. I was on this same board about four years ago, but had to resign due to work obligations. I have also served on the board of directors of a couple non-profit groups.

ChrisE8
Posts: 454

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/10/2020 3:45 PM

Three options:

1. Deal with it.
2. Move.
3. File a lawsuit.

Some things are not worth worrying about so if you otherwise like where you live, I'd pick 1.

BarbaraT1 (Texas)
Posts: 821

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 11/10/2020 3:45 PM

They can remove the board members. The process for doing that is in your governing documents.

But if the bulk of homeowners are content with things as they are and aren't interested in doing anything about it, then you must either accept that you are in the minority and will not get your way, or you can try to change your neighbors' minds. Or you can move to a neighborhood with a board that better represents your desires.

I sympathize. I'm a Democrat in Texas. I don't think my governor or senators are acting in the best interests of my state. But the bulk of registered voters are content with things as they are and aren't interested in doing anything about it. It's frustrating! But change doesn't happen overnight, and realistically it may never happen.

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

✓ Ask follow-up questions
✓ Share your experience
✓ Get expert advice
✓ Access 350,000 discussions

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here