Does your board have attorneys at your annual meetings?

Quick answer is no, we do not have an attorney present at our annual meetings. I know some other associations do, but as board president I see no need for one and that would be a waste of money to have one.

No we do not. Can't imagine the justification for 2 of them??? I wonder if they are about to announce something controversial?

Been on our Board for 9 years and have never had our attorney attend. Nor do I think it is necessary for an Annual Meeting.

Invite your HOA Insurance agent and your Community Police Officer. They don't charge.

Other than possibly overseeing a complicated, challenged election, why? Since the Annual Meeting is a member's meeting, gives the impression that they work for the owner's directly and not the HOA.

Never had an attorney at the Annual Meeting in the last 3 HOA's I was a member of.

Roger

Why does anyone think it is necessary?

Our current Board is four people. One Board member suggested that two attorneys be at the upcoming annual meeting - reason given, in case anyone challenges anything so they attorneys can attest that everything was done right. Another director immediately opined that it was a great idea until the third, the President, discussed how much it would cost. Evidently the one opining it was a great idea thought the attorneys would do it for free or something, because then he said it was not worth the cost.

The director who suggested it normally gets his way with things like this and often does stuff with the rest of the board knowing.

History:

In 2020 when this board director was elected, three of five director quit after the Board's second meeting citing hostility on the Board. This director then recruited and appointed two to replace those three - went from a five person board to a four person board. This director only wanted two replacements for the three vacated position even though more than three members were interested.

Then about six months later another Board director, one of the original five who was still part of that current four, quit also, citing hostility on the Board. The Board operated as three person board for several months then that same director recruited one person to run at the next annual meeting, using rules etc. to keep additional interested members from running - stated candidates had to submit requests to run during a certain time frame etc. and because zoom meeting no one from floor could run (no rule cited for that) - an argument countered, he threw out another one. It then went to a four person board.

This person also transacts POA business, including entering contacts, on his own outside of meetings, and goes after violations, including getting the Board's attorney after violations, without the rest of the Board knowing. In fact the other directors, including the president, learn about this director's activity from members not in board meetings - at least they claim they knew nothing about it before being told.

There is a faction in the subdivision who hate this director. I am not part of them, but have heard them literally say they hate him. I suspect that he is hiring the attorneys as props to intimidate those people at the meeting. $2000 intimidation decoy but that is only my opinion as to the reason.

This is awotta soap. Wery wery soapy.

(sic)

It is one director but he has support from a lot of members who do not take part - will give him their proxies.

I have known of this person for ~30 years, only getting to know him well the last few years. I have recently learned that he was antagonizing boards in-person or via communications for years previous. I got involved with him and others when a new Board approved a very unorthodox fence (different material and 3 feet higher than the fences connected to it, in front of the subdivision.) He was not on the board at the time of that decision.

We had several meetings discussing what to do about the fence that was "weird" looking compared to adjacent fences. Background on that: The member who changed his fence asked at an annual meeting, before constructing the new fence, if he could replace his fence with the much taller and different material fence. He cited road noise claiming his fence would have sound proofing material in it. Several members and some exiting board directors told him unfortunately no, as what he was proposing did not meet guidelines, but the outgoing president, who then became the ACC chairperson, winked at him to say, "we can work something out." That ACC chairperson, and the new board, which was four new directors out of a five person board, gave that person a variance to build the different fence. Then after it was installed, and the subdivision saw it, about half the subdivision was upset. At first about 20 residents, out of 56 lots, showed up at the next board meeting to protest the decision and fence. About 5 of us stayed engaged, including this new director, who was not a director at that time. We had several meetings over the next several months trying to determine if there was anything we could do about the fence.

Our five had several meetings planning what could be done about the fence. During those meetings, this guy would come with one or two "tricks" to we could do to get the board's attention. He would divide the tasks assigning them to people. Many were outlandish so we just politely declined.

One time he proposed doing something very bad in my opinion. One of the five of us, a lady, had recently gone to one of our meeting (we met at each other's houses) 30 minutes earlier than the meeting was planned. She waited for about ten minutes, sitting in her parked car, until she realized she had the start time wrong. She decided to drive back to her house to wait and then come back 20 minutes later. She said as she began to leave, all of a sudden a vehicle with bright lights raced up to her vehicle tailgating her to later pass her and then try to force her off the road. She said it was the same vehicle the neighbor of the person, whose house the meeting was going to be, had. She could not see in it because it was night and she could not get the license plate number.

This person then advised her to go write down the license plate of the neighbor's vehicle and report it to the police saying she wrote it down during the incident. I interrupted saying that was clearly wrong and lying to police could get one in trouble, so that it was overall bad advice. That is who this director is.

Has the annual meeting only an election, Roger? Or are other items on the agenda? Is your item on the agenda? When is the annual meeting?

It's even been advised here to hire an off-duty police officer for meetings when boards fear big disruptions.

Oh.

I've seen this twice. On one occasion there was a faction of pot-stirring homeowners who challenged the validity of everything under the sun; the attorney was there to respond to their accusations. The second occasion was a recall meeting after two board members had pulled some shenanigans with the proxies that required the first meeting to be invalidated. The attorney was there to answer questions as to why there was a second meeting.

BTW... It should be mentioned that these lawyers should state they are not members of the HOA and can be kicked out of the meeting. They have to be invited as guests of the HOA. If they do not say they do not have a right to attend then I would question question them.

I see no need for at meeting. Just write the questions down and consult later.

We had a lawyer at our annual meeting once:

Our community had a huge motion to amend the master deed and bylaws six years ago, and an attorney was present at the meeting.

He introduced himself that he represents the owners as a whole and not the directors or the management company.
Described a little bit of the process of amending, and was open to questions.
Because it was such a complicated change in the governing documents, it was helpful to the owners, me included.

That was the only time we have had a lawyer at a member's meeting.