Refusing to deal with particular homeowner

MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 501

Posted:

We have a high maintenance homeowner in our community. I no longer want to deal with him, so I directed our property manager to stop involving me in this particular homeowner's drama. I asked at the Board meeting if anyone else wanted to be the point of contact for our property manager, and none agreed to do so.

Now, the property manager is unhappy with me.

Am I wrong to refuse to deal with a specific homeowner? I'm the most active Board member and spend a ton of time on Board stuff already. I think that, if we as Board want to deal with this homeowner, someone else can step up to handle it.

Is that wrong?

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Can't stand the fire, stay out of the kitchen.

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059

Posted:

Honestly, I do feel that it wasn't proper to not deal with the homeowner until you found someone else who would. If you could not find someone else, you should have continued with the functions of that position.

The key thing is to find out the issue from the other persons perspective vs. dismissing it because it doesn't mesh with your perspective.

For most issues, I would simply say, I understand your concerns and I will bring them to the board. However, it would be best if you could bring the issue to the board at the next meeting so nothing is inadvertently overlooked. Keep in mind that I am but one vote and a majority of the board would have to vote on a plan of action.

This typically put the homeowner at ease. Additionally, more often then not, the owner wouldn't show to the meeting and all that was required was a written response after the meeting which the secretary handled.

ND (PA)
Posts: 792

Posted:

My thoughts would vary depending on what the "drama" is specifically that you're referring to.

But generally I see this as an issue that you have created for yourself. You are CEO; you control the meetings; you make the agendas; you are responsible for decisions; nothing happens without first going through you; etc.; etc.

Now things come to you for review/decision and you don't want to be involved.

There should be things that MC is responsible for that do not need to involve you. They should be empowered to make those decisions and respond to homeowners without needing to run through you. But other things may need Board involvement. If nobody else will step up, you need to either get them to step up or deal with things yourself.

MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 501

Posted:

The particular issue is that the homeowner, who has a criminal recording of violating restraint orders. A few years back a SWAT team conducted a search of his home finding that he owned multiple firearms in violation of a court order. This homeowner went on a expletive filled racist rant because he received a compliance letter. We have had one legal firm that has declined to take the account for foreclosure proceedings because of his volatile and unpredictable nature.

I'm pretty bold, as you know, but I have a wife and children who live in the neighborhood and not too far away from the home. I'm not interested in upsetting this homeowner, out of concerns for the safety of my children, my spouse, and me.

SteveH35 (Washington)
Posts: 339

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By MichaelT21 on 06/09/2022 8:13 AM
We have a high maintenance homeowner in our community. I no longer want to deal with him, so I directed our property manager to stop involving me in this particular homeowner's drama. I asked at the Board meeting if anyone else wanted to be the point of contact for our property manager, and none agreed to do so.

Now, the property manager is unhappy with me.

Am I wrong to refuse to deal with a specific homeowner? I'm the most active Board member and spend a ton of time on Board stuff already. I think that, if we as Board want to deal with this homeowner, someone else can step up to handle it.

Is that wrong?

There are so many wrongs here... Given that any given CIC uses a management company (which you've said is the case for your CIC), you should have a communication policy in place. That policy would require that individual Board members communicate with the management and during Board meetings and *NEVER* directly with homeowners related to business of the association.

We've already discussed the fact that, contrary to what ND writes, that you are *NOT* the CEO (even if your Bylaws incorrectly use this misleading terminology). All volunteer directors are in fact equals (especially true in Washington State) when it comes to governance. The Board President is no more appropriate to engage with homeowners than any other Board volunteer. Your management company and other third party compensated individuals are ALWAYS the right folks.

Regards,
Steve

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

OK, this is more than the typical "difficult homeowner" problem, and even beyond a typical "ex-felon in the community" problem since restraining orders (multiple!) imply the potential for violence. It will depend on how dangerous you think this person is, and it sounds like he has the potential for being mighty dangerous.

Our attorneys have said that no board member is obligated to put themselves or their families at risk for doing their jobs. And I'm sure that the HOA's insurer would also be happy not to have to settle the claims that would result from a board member getting shot.

So I agree with keeping this person at arm's length.

A property manager is more able to deal with this person safely since they probably don't live in the community. If you have an off-site, full service manager, it's entirely appropriate to allow the manager to act as a buffer for routine stuff ** unless the PM is also a target for this person's ire **. FWIW, our PM acts as a buffer for all routine stuff all the time, it's part of the service we pay them for.

If there is a chance that the person would disrupt a board meeting, having an off-duty cop present would not be unreasonable (also advice from our attorney). In your shoes I'd prefer to move the meetings on-line if that's doable. If this guy shows up with a gun, many people can be hurt - the board has an obligation to consider the safety of all homeowners when making decisions. And if you think that's unreasonable, ask yourself if the board is going to be having full and frank discussions followed by a thoughtful vote if they're worrying about the guy in the audience blowing up over something that someone has said.

I also recommend consulting with the HOA's attorney and insurer just to make sure you're on solid ground here, but as I said this is an extraordinary situation and is more than dealing with the neighborhood bully. Board members generally aren't trained in de-escalating potentially violent situations, so this is above your pay grade.

MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 501

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By SteveH35 on 06/09/2022 11:29 AM

Posted By MichaelT21 on 06/09/2022 8:13 AM
We have a high maintenance homeowner in our community. I no longer want to deal with him, so I directed our property manager to stop involving me in this particular homeowner's drama. I asked at the Board meeting if anyone else wanted to be the point of contact for our property manager, and none agreed to do so.

Now, the property manager is unhappy with me.

Am I wrong to refuse to deal with a specific homeowner? I'm the most active Board member and spend a ton of time on Board stuff already. I think that, if we as Board want to deal with this homeowner, someone else can step up to handle it.

Is that wrong?

There are so many wrongs here... Given that any given CIC uses a management company (which you've said is the case for your CIC), you should have a communication policy in place. That policy would require that individual Board members communicate with the management and during Board meetings and *NEVER* directly with homeowners related to business of the association.

We've already discussed the fact that, contrary to what ND writes, that you are *NOT* the CEO (even if your Bylaws incorrectly use this misleading terminology). All volunteer directors are in fact equals (especially true in Washington State) when it comes to governance. The Board President is no more appropriate to engage with homeowners than any other Board volunteer. Your management company and other third party compensated individuals are ALWAYS the right folks.

Regards,
Steve

Steve,

I don't communicate with this homeowner directly. The PM receives the communication and then forwards it to me to read. I don't wish to read explictive filled racist rants, so I am telling the PM that I don't want to be forwarded any more e-mails from this homeowner nor do I wish to provide direction.

ND is correct about me being the CEO. I am the CEO of the organization per our by-laws. It is explicity stated along with the CEO related duties that I carry out. We make decisions at meetings, but the day to day operation of the HOA is run by me.

ND (PA)
Posts: 792

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By MichaelT21 on 06/09/2022 11:35 AM

Posted By SteveH35 on 06/09/2022 11:29 AM

Posted By MichaelT21 on 06/09/2022 8:13 AM
We have a high maintenance homeowner in our community. I no longer want to deal with him, so I directed our property manager to stop involving me in this particular homeowner's drama. I asked at the Board meeting if anyone else wanted to be the point of contact for our property manager, and none agreed to do so.

Now, the property manager is unhappy with me.

Am I wrong to refuse to deal with a specific homeowner? I'm the most active Board member and spend a ton of time on Board stuff already. I think that, if we as Board want to deal with this homeowner, someone else can step up to handle it.

Is that wrong?

There are so many wrongs here... Given that any given CIC uses a management company (which you've said is the case for your CIC), you should have a communication policy in place. That policy would require that individual Board members communicate with the management and during Board meetings and *NEVER* directly with homeowners related to business of the association.

We've already discussed the fact that, contrary to what ND writes, that you are *NOT* the CEO (even if your Bylaws incorrectly use this misleading terminology). All volunteer directors are in fact equals (especially true in Washington State) when it comes to governance. The Board President is no more appropriate to engage with homeowners than any other Board volunteer. Your management company and other third party compensated individuals are ALWAYS the right folks.

Regards,
Steve

Steve,

I don't communicate with this homeowner directly. The PM receives the communication and then forwards it to me to read. I don't wish to read explictive filled racist rants, so I am telling the PM that I don't want to be forwarded any more e-mails from this homeowner nor do I wish to provide direction.

ND is correct about me being the CEO. I am the CEO of the organization per our by-laws. It is explicity stated along with the CEO related duties that I carry out. We make decisions at meetings, but the day to day operation of the HOA is run by me.

Just to clarify . . . I only mentioned the whole CEO thing (sarcastically I should point out) because you, Mike/Henry, mentioned it previously (as a resume-builder I think I remember) and it is something that (in my opinion) improperly guides your actions and decision-making. I totally agree with Steve's assessment that, regardless of what your bylaws say, you are *NOT* the CEO.

SteveH35 (Washington)
Posts: 339

Posted:

Ah my bad ND. I did not catch the sarcasm in the prior post above

Improperly guides decision-making is THE the perfect way to summarize the illusion of a CIC CEO. Any volunteer leader who runs, and I quote, the "day-to-day operation" of their CIC is doing something wrong.

I have invested thousands of volunteer hours, but neither I, nor any other volunteer I know to be reasonable, has ever contemplated taking on daily operations. This is why CICs hire third party vendors.

Regards,
STeve

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Cathy's rec seems wise: "I also recommend consulting with the HOA's attorney and insurer just to make sure you're on solid ground here, but as I said this is an extraordinary situation and is more than dealing with the neighborhood bully."

You need professional advice, Michael. Meanwhile, are you saying that no director will even read this creep's communications? Who are they addressed to? The PM? I would think it's the entire Board's job to have them in their monthly board packet for review and be entered into the meeting minutes as such.

Say, Michael, who DOES write your Board's meeting minutes?

MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 501

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By KerryL1 on 06/09/2022 7:12 PM
Cathy's rec seems wise: "I also recommend consulting with the HOA's attorney and insurer just to make sure you're on solid ground here, but as I said this is an extraordinary situation and is more than dealing with the neighborhood bully."

You need professional advice, Michael. Meanwhile, are you saying that no director will even read this creep's communications? Who are they addressed to? The PM? I would think it's the entire Board's job to have them in their monthly board packet for review and be entered into the meeting minutes as such.

Say, Michael, who DOES write your Board's meeting minutes?

The e-mail was in the packet that was distributed to the whole board. I don't know how many people read it. I do, I know that much.

I also put it in my powerpoint that Max pokes fun of so I forced the whole board to acknowledge it.

Our meeting minutes are done by the board member who holds the office of Secretary.

MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 501

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 06/09/2022 11:35 AM
OK, this is more than the typical "difficult homeowner" problem, and even beyond a typical "ex-felon in the community" problem since restraining orders (multiple!) imply the potential for violence. It will depend on how dangerous you think this person is, and it sounds like he has the potential for being mighty dangerous.

Our attorneys have said that no board member is obligated to put themselves or their families at risk for doing their jobs. And I'm sure that the HOA's insurer would also be happy not to have to settle the claims that would result from a board member getting shot.

So I agree with keeping this person at arm's length.

A property manager is more able to deal with this person safely since they probably don't live in the community. If you have an off-site, full service manager, it's entirely appropriate to allow the manager to act as a buffer for routine stuff ** unless the PM is also a target for this person's ire **. FWIW, our PM acts as a buffer for all routine stuff all the time, it's part of the service we pay them for.

If there is a chance that the person would disrupt a board meeting, having an off-duty cop present would not be unreasonable (also advice from our attorney). In your shoes I'd prefer to move the meetings on-line if that's doable. If this guy shows up with a gun, many people can be hurt - the board has an obligation to consider the safety of all homeowners when making decisions. And if you think that's unreasonable, ask yourself if the board is going to be having full and frank discussions followed by a thoughtful vote if they're worrying about the guy in the audience blowing up over something that someone has said.

I also recommend consulting with the HOA's attorney and insurer just to make sure you're on solid ground here, but as I said this is an extraordinary situation and is more than dealing with the neighborhood bully. Board members generally aren't trained in de-escalating potentially violent situations, so this is above your pay grade.

Thank you.

This is why my plan is to ignore him in the community. As long as we don't hassle him, he leaves us alone. I like that.