Who can attend executive sessions?

The Board decides who may or may not attend executive session. I'd say that the Board may want her involved in contracts in formation (the Board might ask her: can we afford them?). As a non-board member, however, it seems to me, she has no right to be privy to personnel matters or owner disciplinary matters, potential litigation, owner payment plans. She has no vote either or any matter.

Are you on the Board?

On our Board, non-voting officers attend executive session.

Denise,
First, I usually always agree with John C on most topics. I have a different opinion on this one. As a past board member this person already knows many of the Confidential information in your HOA. She probably still has emails from her board days, and I see no harm in her hearing about collection issues or other Executive session items. In fact, she may be able to give valuable insight into some of the past contracts if she were able to be in the meeting. Obviously, the board would vote on any matters alone.

I kind of think of most ex-board members as allies who have fought in the same wars and understand the good and the bad of HOAs.

Weren't you a "special" advisor officer who attended executive sessions AFTER you left as a Board member?

I think that the decision will depend on what is being covered in the executive session, so no hard and fast rule. If the issue is something that the treasurer may have input into, then maybe yes. But otherwise, I'm not sure it's justified, especially if the treasurer is no longer a homeowner. Confidentiality is important in these sessions, the treasurer doesn't count toward quorum, so why are they needed?

I'm trying to think of an instance where the treasurer would have important information that the board doesn't also have, or where the decision related to this important information would have to be made immediately or wouldn't need to be moved into open session. So far I'm not coming up with anything. ????

As you have indicated elsewhere, your HOA is governed by the Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act. The latter requires board meetings to be open to owners except where any of the following will be discussed:

"(1) personnel matters;

(2) pending or potential litigation, arbitration or other potentially adversarial proceedings, between unit owners, between the board or association and unit owners, or other matters in which any unit owner may have an adversarial interest, if the board determines that closing the meeting is necessary to discuss strategy or to otherwise protect the position of the board or association or the privacy of a unit owner or occupant of a unit; or

(3) criminal activity arising within the common interest community if the board determines that closing the meeting is necessary to protect the privacy of the victim or that opening the meeting would jeopardize investigation of the activity."

If the board closes a board meeting to discuss any of the above, then the treasurer should be permitted to attend only to the extent the treasurer has information to share or the board has questions for the treasurer.

By far for the greater part if this board is in executive sessions and discussing budgeting or how to spend money, and so the treasurer should be present, of course the meeting should be open to all owners.

Legal concerns concerning privacy are too large. Per statute and the covenants, the board, not the officers, have the final say on how the HOA operates.

Wanting to recognize the Treasurer as one of the "adults" on account of say past board service, and so "deserving" of special privileges, is also no basis for allowing attendance.

If this HOA wants to play loosey-goosey on this one, whatever. But I disagree about the treasurer being in attendance at every executive session simply because she is the treasurer.

With additional insights, I'm back to my original stance. She should attend ES when a knowledgeable treasurer's expertise & opinion is needed. I mentioned contracts in formation earlier. Others have mentioned other examples, e.g., many aspects of delinquencies and collections. Perhaps discussions of raises for vendors' individual onsite staffers, if any & how they fit the proposed budget.

But not attorney/board meetings, hearings with owners for violations of the rules, size of fines for those, evaluations of work performances of staff & the PM, if any. It's just none of her business especially since she's a non-owner.

Btw, I'm sensing there might be something else going on here between Denise & the board re: this topic.

I thought Max said he'd quit obsessing about me. Must be mistaken. Since the topic is non-directors officers, here's how our Board handled one case. I didn't seek reelection at the end of '21 but had been the main shepherd of our proposed restated CC&Rs. I'd also been secretary. The MC would soon send out ballots & our HOA attorney & I'd worked on a cover letter. The prez & I worked on a push in our newsletter. So there was still campaigning to do, ideas needed to get out the vote, advice to the Board on reaching absentee owners.

Our Bylaws permit the Board to appoint any officers they feel are needed. They appointed me as Assistant Secretary until such time as the ballots were tabulated, which turned out to be about 5 months later. I never attended executive session. I did, via the Board president, email with our attorney solely on this topic a couple of times. Even at open meetings, I did not sit at the directors table, but was asked to give a monthly report in the way committee chairs do.