BoD blocking speaking of non-members?

So question about this. I'm dealing with a cantankerous HOA board that is trying to string me up for some issues, and I'm trying to get some sort of hearing or official board meeting conversation to discuss the issue. However, the BoD is claiming it is against the CCR's to allow non-members to speak. One would think that if they are discussing potential legal action, they might want to allow an industry expert to come talk about the issue, right? I can't find a single reference in our docs about banning non-members from speaking at meetings. Can anyone give any insight into this?

In another thread you indicated the Bylaws require that Robert's Rules be used for meetings of the membership. I do not know if your Bylaws also require the use of Robert's Rules for Board meetings. Robert's Rules applies to the "deliberative assembly." This deliberative assembly consists solely of the directors on the board. No one else may make motions, second motions, or vote on motions. There is no requirement for the President to recognize any person who is is not on the board and offer the person a chance to speak. See also Rule 73 at http://www.rulesonline.com/rror-13.htm

If this is about the bee hives, and you want the city official to attend, write him up a statement of what you think he would say, and see if he will agree to sign it. Then present this as evidence that your bee hives are not a nuisance under city code; that per the CC&R's express reference to City Code on the subject of nuisances, your hives therefore are not a nuisance; and therefore, you have not violated the covenants.

yes, Roberts Rules. If that's the case, then that makes sense. I just couldn't find anything else specifically in the CCR's about it.

so I'm reading and agree that non-members do not have a privalege or right to speak, but it seems there's mechanism to 'invite' and 'allow' a non-member to speak.

Does Open Meetings laws apply to HOA or only to gov't?

------------------
By a majority vote, however, the body may permit/invite non-members to attend, and even to address the body during the meeting, but not during deliberations.

Allowing non-members to participate in actual debate would require a suspension of the rules, which requires a 2/3 vote.

--------------
Nonmembers, on the other hand—or a particular nonmember or group of nonmembers—can be excluded at any time from part or all of a meeting of a society, or from all of its meetings. Such exclusion can be effected by a ruling of the chair in cases of disorder, or by the adoption of a rule on the subject, or by an appropriate motion as the need arises—a motion of the latter nature being a question of privilege [page 645] (19). A motion to exclude all nonmembers (except absolutely necessary staff, if any) is often referred to as a motion to "go into executive session" (see 9). " RONR (11th ed.), pp. 644-45.

-------------------
The issue is decided by a majority vote... that is, the vote of a majority of the members present and voting. If 50 people are present and 20 vote yes, 15 vote no 15 abstain, that is a majority vote even though it is less than a majority of the members present.

Always or almost always only to federal, state, county or city government. I think there may be a state or two that is an exception.

No where near good enough; totally lacking in authority. In fact I see a number of sites that confirm the above, or statements like the above, are not actually in Robert's Rules.

Find the actual Robert's Rule that says what you claim, and from the latest edition. They are numbered. I do not think such a Rule exists in Robert's Rules.