Texas Open Meeting - Can a Board allow people, not on the meeting agenda, to talk

I'm sure TX folks will be of help.

Must agenda items be listed and posted x days before a board meeting in TX?

May items NOT on the agenda be discussed by the Board at the open board meeting? (they may not in CA unless urgent)

It's not about your mythical "non-agenda person," but the ITEM of business and what's "legal" about them.

In our HOA, if an owner sends a cogent agenda item, the Board will place it on the next open board meeting agenda, which must be posted 10 days ahead of the open meeting and the agenda submitter may discuss it or ask a director to.

If an owner wants to, instead, they may bring up a topic during open forum. But the board, in CA, may not make a decision about it because ti was not on the posted agenda.

Along with TX law, WHAT do you Bylaws say, Roger?

Shelia & I probably crossed, but I'll repeat & I. agree with what she wrote: "I see no reason why you can't say whatever you want to say during open forum...The board doesn't have to make an immediate decision on whatever's discussed during open forum. In fact it's best to do a little research on the topic ..."

Still, it depends on whether TX would allow the Board to make a decision on the spot based on open forum comments (NOT on the agenda). NOT permitted in CA except when an urgent matter.

I can not find anything in Texas law, but I did find it in the Association's bylaws. A non-director cannot participate in discussions unless the member made a written request. In the context for why I am checking, it makes me feel better to learn it is a rule in the Association.

There are a list of 15 items under Sec. 209.0051 that a board cannot VOTE on unless at an open meeting where proper notice has been given.

Otherwise, there is only a requirement that notice of the "general subject" of the meeting needs to be given. So, the board can discuss anything or allow anyone to speak without it being on an agenda.

Not the current Board, but previous Board or two back had a President that tried to do everything in executive sessions. I cited the law above, the 15 things they could not do in executive session that it was pretty clear they were doing. He agreed that the law stated that, but he said he disagreed with the law so he was not going to follow it - he actually said that in an opening meeting.

First, the above is correct.

Second, what matters is that the Board has the right to prohibit you or any other non-director from speaking during the business portion.

Third, during the business portion of the meeting, you could always politely interrupt and request to add, say, a "point of information." The Board has the right to say no.

Fourth, pick your battles. I

Fifth, if you want change, then getting elected or appointed to the board with a like-minded majority gives you your best chances. Battling over when you get to speak is nickel and dime stuff.

Interesting new law in Texas, Ben.

Also, with Ben, the Board or presider can invite owners to speak during the biz portion of meetings in CA too. Our current Board does that every so often, a previous board did not.

Sicne it's a meeting of the Board, an owner may not call out "point of information." Only a member of the Board(that particular assembly in Robert's Rules) could. None of our boards have allowed Owners to interrupt the Board biz portion of the meeting. When this has rarely appended the owner who interrupts is encouraged to wait til our second open forum.

We counsel our client presidents and board members to state clearly when the meeting is called to order (after the open forum) that those in attendance are encouraged to remain as it is clearly stated in the documents of each client that the meetings are to be open to the owners, even though the state also requires it. We also encourage statements along the lines of "you are the owners of the property, the board wishes to ensure you understand what is taking place, the issues being discussed, etc."

It is made clear to those in attendance they may not participate in the discussions which take place unless invited to do so by the chairperson of the meeting. However, in both client board meetings, and board meetings of the association in which we live, if someone raises a hand they are recognized. Often the person does not understand a point under discussion, and the MC and/or the board will clarify. If the person states they wish to present information, expand on the discussion, etc., we encourage the chair to call a recess and ask the person to meet with the chair and the MC privately before proceeding. Sometimes the point is incorporated into the discussion, other times the chair asks the person to write a summary and send it to the MC for incorporation into the agenda at a future meeting.

I know in large audience scenarios this can lead to problems. Our client board meetings, and those of the HOA in which we reside, have sparse attendance, generally between 2 and 8 persons. It is our opinion, and that of the board members, that a less formal approach in a small group environment is respectful and can shut down complaints and bad feelings before they become a problem.

We have one client which has such deep seated enmity between certain owners and board members that the chairperson cannot deviate from strict Roberts. At times the chair has had to call a recess to counsel with one or more of those present privately that they must remain silent or they will be asked to leave. At the direction of the chair and following suitable warning, I have muted one or more attendees when the meeting takes place via Zoom.

As an academic matter --

Where either the Bylaws require the use of Robert's Rules, or a Board has adopted use of Robert's Rules for Board meetings, and either (1) state law permits owner input during the meeting (and not just at an open forum period before and/or after the meeting) or (2) the board wishes to recognize a non-director and let the non-director speak, the Board technically is supposed to vote to suspend Robert's Rules. See Robert's Rules 22 at http://www.rulesonline.com/rror-04.htm#22 . At least a majority of the board must vote to suspend the rule.

Robert's Rules says non-directors may not participate at board meetings. If a Board is required to use Robert's Rules, then for a non-director to speak to the Board, the Board must vote, by at least a majority and arguably a super-majority of 2/3rds (per Rule 22) to suspend the Robert's Rule on who is allowed to participate.

And so on.