New Next Door site includes too many whiners

Hi Kerry,

What you've described is unfortunately pretty common. I wouldn't bother with Next Door. It's an open platform and was not meant to be regulated by boards. People will always use these sites to complain. If they really wanted issues resolved, they would try to work with the board to fix them.

If you're not doing this already, you could try sending out digital newsletters and notices so they get to everyone quickly. But it is hard to engage people who are not interested.

I used to read and sometimes post on the community social media. More residents check there than read the emails I send out each week. I spent a lot of time correcting misinformation from as minor as pool hours to as major as whether the association was in compliance with state law.

The goal was to steer people toward official sources, but the opposite happened. Discussion stayed on social media because they knew I’d respond eventually. The board and I are considering new approaches to social media.

Ben,
Yes you are correct. That is why board members should avoid engaging in my HOA talk on these sites.

Our current PMC uses a great app called S----webs and I find it very interesting when someone takes a jab at the HOA or the board to look up this address and almost every time they have recently received a violation letter or a late notice for non payment. They get on any media they can find and give their version with skewed details and wait for others to join in.

This would not work for something like Nextdoor and hopefully we don't live in a communist country either.

This is a neighborhood app, not a community specific app, like Facebook.

Depends who starts the group on N.D.
I'm a member of one.

Additionally, a social media policy would still be a correct response in my opinion. It could specify that members of the board do or don't respond to issues (or who responds).

I need to copy all of the comments onto a document to compile & organize your (mainly) useful remarks. Thanks so much to those of you who actually want to advise & help. I do want to read Tim's citations.

I'm such a novice about these things. the owner who tarted it states this is a "private member group 'MyHOA' Condo Folks' within the Next-door Web site." The owner signed and called himself "Administrator." I had for a while belonged to a neighborhood one and it was too offensive and ridiculous I quit after a month.

I did look up the owner and as some suspected, he has received courtesy letters about people smoking on his balcony. I see his balcony perfectly well and observer smokers. Some owners suspect that he has an airb&b op going on. He does not attend our monthly-or more often- open meetings.

Our Assn. has no intention of starting any social media account. We do have two websites where the Board could post corrections to "Condo Folks." In some ways, I think it might serve us well to know WHAT false rumors are afoot so we can be clearer in our newsletters and communications to owners on certain topics. Our current Board's relationships with Owners has been very good.

I was especially proud of our Board Tuesday night when we hashed out our '22 budget & on-site Level 1 reserve study for well over an hour with 15 owners attending via Zoom & 15 in person. We opened the discussion up for owner input and the whole time was wonderfully fruitful, respectful, etc. Two directors who disagreed on starting major rehab projects in 1/22 almost simultaneously, gradually came around to the point of view of the rest of us directors. This, of course, directly related to the budget and reserves both.

Thank you again for sincere advice!

This is exactly why I had some social media accounts: to see what was being said so that we could address any rumors or false info in our official publications. I was on social media as an observer only.

My observation is it is usually the renters that are the biggest complainers.

I think you hit on the right answer in your first post. You should join to listen, and make corrections courteously in the monthly Newsletter where appropriate. Some things you can just ignore.

To others suggestion the HOA sponsor one with rules they can control, that still doesn't prevent a member from starting their own free for all social media site. I'm a proponent of one-way communication, with members communications to the board being limited to email or open forum in the meetings.

This advice is from a California law firm, but is general: https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/C/Chat-Rooms

I'm glad some communities have sites that work, but beware, it just takes one or two people to change that. I live in an HOA that had a loose social media offering (email list, open to all neighbors not just residents). It was used very respectfully for years (decades?), but a single voice (a renter) started using the platform to criticize board decisions, and also to spread confusion/misinformation. Initially, some directors responded off the cuff, and often poorly, and it inflamed things. The board (correctly) stopped using it as an information channel and began using official channels in a more disciplined way, and respond mostly by directing people to official resources. Not the "misinformation" wasn't always malcontent - the board had done a poor job of providing clear information in other channels, leaving people to fill in the gaps by guessing.

Your best defense is clear communications and transparency, which you sound like you have covered.

Voter apathy is a widespread problem, many people don't want more engagement and are happy to let the board do their work, and only will engage if they see issues.

I think you hit on the right answer in your first post. You should join to listen, and make corrections courteously in the monthly Newsletter where appropriate. Some things you can just ignore.

To others suggestion the HOA sponsor one with rules they can control, that still doesn't prevent a member from starting their own free for all social media site. I'm a proponent of one-way communication, with members communications to the board being limited to email or open forum in the meetings.

This advice is from a California law firm, but is general: https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/C/Chat-Rooms

I'm glad some communities have sites that work, but beware, it just takes one or two people to change that. I live in an HOA that had a loose social media offering (email list, open to all neighbors not just residents). It was used very respectfully for years (decades?), but a single voice (a renter) started using the platform to criticize board decisions, and also to spread confusion/misinformation. Initially, some directors responded off the cuff, and often poorly, and it inflamed things. The board (correctly) stopped using it as an information channel and began using official channels in a more disciplined way, and respond mostly by directing people to official resources. Not the "misinformation" wasn't always malcontent - the board had done a poor job of providing clear information in other channels, leaving people to fill in the gaps by guessing.

Your best defense is clear communications and transparency, which you sound like you have covered.

Voter apathy is a widespread problem, many people don't want more engagement and are happy to let the board do their work, and only will engage if they see issues.

I think you hit on the right answer in your first post. You should join to listen, and make corrections courteously in the monthly Newsletter where appropriate. Some things you can just ignore.

To others suggestion the HOA sponsor one with rules they can control, that still doesn't prevent a member from starting their own free for all social media site. I'm a proponent of one-way communication, with members communications to the board being limited to email or open forum in the meetings.

This advice is from a California law firm, but is general: https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/C/Chat-Rooms

I'm glad some communities have sites that work, but beware, it just takes one or two people to change that. I live in an HOA that had a loose social media offering (email list, open to all neighbors not just residents). It was used very respectfully for years (decades?), but a single voice (a renter) started using the platform to criticize board decisions, and also to spread confusion/misinformation. Initially, some directors responded off the cuff, and often poorly, and it inflamed things. The board (correctly) stopped using it as an information channel and began using official channels in a more disciplined way, and respond mostly by directing people to official resources. Not the "misinformation" wasn't always malcontent - the board had done a poor job of providing clear information in other channels, leaving people to fill in the gaps by guessing.

Your best defense is clear communications and transparency, which you sound like you have covered.

Voter apathy is a widespread problem, many people don't want more engagement and are happy to let the board do their work, and only will engage if they see issues.

I appreciate your experience and insights, Sarah. My concerns about it are on the back burner for the moment as a lot else is going on in my HOA at the moment (good stuff!!)

I will actually join, but take seriously your & others' advice to not argue, "correct, etc. what's on it.

We have a website for owners only which is informational for Owners only. We have another that all residents can access, which is informational only. So either could be good for "corrections" kid needed be. we wouldn't even refer to the misinformation. We also have a monthly newsletter where certain matters might be responded to within the context of other news.

With all I've leaned on this forum over the years, I don't think our HOA wants a site for interaction between the HOA & owners.

Thanks to everyone for good advice!

I completely feel your pain. We had an uninformed disgruntled member spread mischaracterized and flat out false info via Social Media and flyers that they put on homeowners doors. The Board just used the flyers to create bullet points for the annual meeting to clarify what was being said. I would politely do the same on social media, if whatever is being spread is worth it.