Conflict of Interest

Yes to the first question and no to the second.

Since this meeting concerned board member discipline, it's only fair that he or she attend yo tell his or her side. After that, tge board member should, leave the room while the others deliberate and vote, then bring the board member back and announce the decision.

If this meeting is a hearing to which the alleged violator is invited, then she can hear the "evidence" against her, etc. The board does vote in this case. She should not be present for the Board's deliberation or vote. This has nothing to do with her being a board member.

If it's NOT a hearing, what the heck is the Board "discussing?" and what are they "voting" on?

In most HOAs nowadays, a board member, if the HOA is self-managed, or a community property manager, corroborates the violation with photos, etc.* At that time it is the assn. that is bringing the alleged violation to the board for its decision. There no longer is any need for the owner who reported the alleged violation to attend the meeting.

The allege violator has every right to hear the "charge(s)" against her. The meeting chair may certainly instruct the alleged violator to be silent when the complainer is speaking, and CAN dismiss her from the room if she doesn't comply. The meeting chair should also permit the "accused" to ask the complainer questions.

It's crucial to follow your governing documents and AZ law to conduct the entire process correctly.

*If a assn. rep cannot verify the violation, on what grounds are you calling this alleged violator to a hearing?

The neighbor of a board member filed a compliance issue against the board member and she was sited and had to comply to CC&R's. All compliance issues are discussed at Executive Mtgs. no residents attend these. They are held just to discuss basically compliance issues and any other financial or legal issues. so after board member was cited she agreed to the decision that was put to her, when the board took action she said that's not what she agreed to and that the neighbor who had the issue was now in agreement with her, so at the next meeting ruling was reversed by a vote of the board, but the board member that had been cited was present for the vote. I maintain that she should not be there for the vote.

Agree she shouldn't have been there for the vote. If it happens again, the meeting chair should simply tell her to leave.

Meanwhile, it sounds very odd that she simply should come to another meeting and "ay" the neighbor is OK now with whatever. Imo, your Board needs clearly written procedure for hearing, fines, etc., that com[ly with AZ statutes & your governing docs. Sounds too loose and too informal to me.