Board without a president...

You don't need a president, or really any officers. That said, the absence of both a president and a secretary could create a gap if those particular officer roles are enumerated in your governing documents to receive formal notice to the association (but likely backstopped by the presence of a management company).

The longer I've served, the more I've come to appreciate the fatal flaw of volunteer governance which is that having officer roles is more confusing than the absence of them. Having Role X makes most people think the person in that role is the only person responsible for certain elements of governance, yet nothing could be further from the truth.

Sound advice directly above. When you resign, you relinquish....and should for your mental health.

"let the remaining board..."

Yah, I'm not asking so that I can attempt to direct them. I had a board member reply to my query about the agenda for an upcoming meeting with "do we have any agenda set for the meeting without a president to preside?" and while I'm somewhat confident that particular BM was at least half joking, I'm certain one or two are fine with doing whatever they want to the point of ignoring state statutes on down. They've already started throwing precedent to the wind in minor ways such as not publishing meeting minutes and rubber-stamping landscaping changes. Neither of those are illegal and they both will eventually be resolved within the neighborhood so for the moment not making a big deal about them.

I fully intend to let them do their thing until they either screw up enough to anger the overall neighborhood or, more hopefully, they start taking their roles seriously. If they hit somewhere in the middle, well, that would be fine too. To be clear, I'm not going to throw sand in their gears for no good purpose, nor am I going to be a rule pedant but I'm also not going to go the route of just ignoring what's being done in the neighborhood I have a stake in.

"as long as the board is still maintaining the HOA pursuant to the governing documents"

That's really one of my major concerns and only time will tell.

"When you resign, you relinquish"

I'm certain, based on your writings here, you and AugustinD don't mean to say that I should turn away and completely ignore how the board conducts its business. Do you?

I'm not going to micro-manage (or even manage) them as a homeowner but I *am* going to pay attention and remain involved in my neighborhood. Which is something I wish more homeowners would do.

Good advice from everyone.

I spent 10 years on my board, doing a variety of things before I burned out and stepped down. Haven't looked back and still attend the annual meeting and occasionally a regular board meeting to keep up with what's going on. One thing I learned was that there are times when YOU may be in the way of people finally stepping up and growing up - as long as you were there to pick up the pieces, they would continue to do what they were doing.

There's a lot of information out there about running effective meetings and setting up an agenda, among other things, so if these people don't know how to do a simple Google search for that stuff, they probably should rethink why they're there. Until then, keep an eye on things because your investment and quality of life is also at stake, but resist the temptation to look back (you'll feel so much better!) Time will tell who's up to the task and who's not.

My wife and I both served as presidents of our HOA for a total combined of 5 years of the 7 years we lived there. Not boasting, but we accomplished a lot there in a short period of time. I am doing what I do because of my/our experience in an HOA. It only takes a couple of bad apples along with social media to destroy a community. Then when you have corrupt law firms (not just attorneys) and management company supporting the bad apples, it becomes a no win situation.

I'll never live in a HOA again, no matter what. But to see a poster come off and accuse a board member who did quit as sour grapes is bullshit. My health and that of my wife comes before anything in an HOA.

Of course any owner, including an ex-President and director, should feel free to be critical of a board; ask it to comply with the covenants; the law and so on.

However my position remains that if a person knows board work is pretty unbearable; yet refuses to serve; and even knows the board has a hard time getting people to serve as directors; then why make it harder for those people who are serving on the board?

Happy to agree to disagree.

It is exactly what you posted.

MichaelH's approach makes perfect sense to me. He is an owner and has every right to be interested in how his HOA is being governed. If things start going sideways, he has every right to be concerned.

I do agree with others that the officers and ignoring of past practices can be left alone for now. But I also would worry that Board's attitude seems tooooo casual, which can lead to problems whereby the board begins to get sloppy about actual convents or state statute. In my experience serving on 7 boards for two year terms, board get sloppy when the majority are arrogant and think they don't need to bother with covenants and laws. A second way is when the board majority is quite ignorant of the convents and laws.

I didn't seek reelection in late '18 due to an insufferable, abusive board majority and due to 3-months of planned travel abroad during '19. Within 60 days, the new Board voted on a new immense contract including demoing all of our 300 plus balcony surfaces in our 200-unit high rise. It was obvious to me that the contact, which was approved 4-2 in an open session, had not been vetted by our HOA attorney. It required that every balcony surface, had to be replaced even though the majority had no surface issues. The change to balcony surfaces (from ceramic tile to an "alternative traffic coating,"which I called "industrial linoleum") had never been approved in an open meeting, and was a change to a rules & regulations requirement.

This was an example of a Board majority that was both arrogant & ignorant. Two attorneys (from unrelated fields) sat on and ruled this Board. So some other owners & I started our own campaign to overturn this contract and bring our HOA back into compliance with our balcony surface requirements. It took a lot of work and basically campaigning to turn the membership away from the rogue Board. I ran again for the Board in late '19 & won with two others who also were opposed to this stupid wasteful project. Three incumbents who favored the boondoggle were defeated.

The point is that especially in open meeting states, at least some non-director owners need to "pay attention" to avoid what would have been a financial and aesthetic disaster here for my community. They may be a time when action is truly needed and the board simply isn't capable, interested or suffered from m a lack of integrity.

It's not the stepping down that I judge, and you know it.