Quote:
Posted By MaxB4 on 08/16/2021 12:51 PM
Let's for arguements sake say I was the management consultant. I have no idea how I was hired and who I meet with initially. But let's say I was informally hired by the board and then had a Zoom meeting. BM1 asks to meet privately and the consultant has an understanding that the board does not have any issue.
I meet with BM1 at their residence for two hours. BM1 brought out his legal pad filled with his topics he would like to have taken into consideration. Consultation either write each item down or takes a picture of the legal pad with note. He leaves the meeting tell BM1 he will type up his notes and present to the Board.
I can't stop, nor would I want to impose a gag order on the community speaking with a vendor. It is my practice that each vendors is told that issues or concerns must be decided by the Board. If a owner makes a demand to re=paint their house, I was a vendor would kindly say, I'll pass the information on through proper channels.
I have no experence in managing self-managed properties, but I have been involved in over 150 HOA's over time. IF, your policy was ever presented to any of these board, it would fall fall on their face.
In the association I lived in, outside of the management company, there were 20 vendors we delat with on a monthly basis. With our board of 5, do we give each 4 and have them follow your guidelines? What if they do nothing, put a gun to their head? What happens when another board comes in?
God bless you try to self manage your complex, but these are volunteers with different skill sets.
Around 2-3 years ago, the now-Prez and I started talking about bringing someone on as a buffer between Board and community members. We kicked around many ideas. Most we rejected. Until we hit on the idea that we needed more policing, but we didn't want the Board to be any more of a boogie-man than it already was.
The search for the right person - someone who had loads of experience, could grow into broader responsibilities, could bring on his own people or recommend others as needed, understood our values, and could adapt to our style of communications with owners - took about a year.
We invited another Board member to form a group of 3 that would advise and train our newly-hired consultant as he worked through dealing with enforcement and initiating and responding to homeowner communications. With a 3 member group that contained 2 Board members and 1 Officer, we were relieved of the additional burden of treating these learning-curve sessions as Board meetings that required minutes every time we worked through an issue.
The rest of the Board always knew what the individual issues were and got to see all communications between consultant and owners. The consultant did all the following up, something that the Board had done inconsistently in the past. All BMs were pleased with the outcome.
As to formalities, at the beginning of the relationship, the Board approved the hourly rate and an opening $10k budget for the Prez to manage and oversee. Later, the Board approved the group's recommendation to flip an issue with one owner from the consultant to the HOA attorney. All smooth and efficient without much blathering on about things like not wanting to spend money with the lawyer. (From the outset, not waffling on going to the attorney was a pre-condition on our moving forward with any attempt to amp up enforcement.)
In a self-managed HOA, it is sometimes difficult for individual BMs to distinguish between what's a Board level decision and what's a management level decision. Some BMs believe that every $100 decision should be discussed at a Board meeting. I don't. It's usually a waste of time that is better spent elsewhere. Too many BMs want to pat themselves on the back for every nickle-dime decision they approve but kick the can down the road on anything substantial. Fact of life.
Some BMs always seem to inappropriately hold firm or waffle on tough decisions after the decisions were made. Today, a BM is on the short end of a 3-1 Board decision about two trees. Tomorrow, that BM wants to revisit and expand on one of the objections that was raised during the discussion before the vote. Or the following week, a BM who was on the 3 side of that vote starts expressing second thoughts. The particular decision was to accept an arborist-recommended treatment plan for 8 or 9 months, and then revisit the condition of those trees after treatment. We have no shortage of people who are oblivious to the havoc created and time wasted when they attempt to pull the plug before a non-permanent Board-approved approach gets an opportunity to be proved or disproved.
As the OP, I did not think that this back story (and there is more) should have been explained. I was looking for feedback on your thoughts as if you were a BM hearing this issue without knowing much more than the original background information I provided.
Should I have told you that the tree decision was one of the issues that the BM wanted to talk with the consultant about? Again, I think not.
Should I have told you that the BM in question was one of three people who saved my life 8 years ago? Again no. I didn't want that fact to sway your thinking. My personal and professional feelings about him are not the same. He and I have always had an understanding that we straight talk with each other. Should I have told you that before? Once again no, for the same reasons.
Re your own system with your 20 vendors, that's not an issue we face. For our most significant vendors, we sign 3-year contracts where our docs allow it, so that we can comfortably solicit and vett dozens of bids rather than some mandatory 3-bidder system that is easy to satisfy and just as easy to make ineffective.
You are right about the limitations of skill sets within a community. And every move I make is directed toward making life easier for the next Board so that they don't have to inherit the garbage I did. I believe that it's important for any Board to pay attention to values and tone. Too many want to go around pissing on campfires all day, without distinguishing between having a forest fire, a high wind, or some hard-and-fast rule.
I remember when Tim talked about some of the innovations he instituted in his community, and how he understood that some of them would disintegrate after his departure from the Board. I liked what he said. I understood that the likely demise of some activities would factor into Tim's personal decision when or if to step down. I don't think I am any different in that regard.
Thanks.
Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.