Standing Committees must they be part of covenants and by-laws or can they be made in policy without part of governing documents

Your Bylaws make specific reference to three committees (ARC, DRC and Compliance Enforcement). The bylaws are silent about an entertainment committee, library committee and decorating committee. In my opinion the legal maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius applies. This phrase means "when one or more things of a class are expressly mentioned, others of the same class are excluded." You can google on the latin phrase and see other ways to express this. This means the other three committees (entertainment, library and decorating) have no authority under the governing documents; should not be receiving any money from the HOA; and should not be reporting to the board.

If volunteers want to put together a party for the entire community, they do so within the usual rules of the HOA. E.g. suppose this HOA has a clubhouse. These volunteers may reserve the clubhouse and throw a party to the extent the rules allow anyone to reserve the clubhouse.

On the other hand, boards are known for creating social committees and the like, often with no authority in the governing documents. I oppose such committees, due to what the bylaws and covenants typically say. This topic comes up here often. Law firms on the net seem to lean against such committees (lacking authority in the governing documents) but are not unanimous. If you want citations to some of these law firm sites, post back.

What a load of crap

Your bylaws may state whether or not the board can create additional committees beyond the ones already named. (My bylaws do allow such a thing.)

If yours don't, and state law doesn't address it, then I agree that these additional committees are probably an issue. A policy needs to have some foundation in your governing documents - it can't be used to do an end run around the governing documents or to grant the board additional powers beyond what are already spelled out. If these committees are important, then consider amending your bylaws - but keep in mind that you don't want to tie the hands of future boards who may or may not see the need for them.

You may be thinking of Ad Hoc committees. They're usually used to meet a particular need at a particular time, and are formed and disbanded as needed. A nominating committee is an example. But that may not describe what you have. It sounds like your additional committees are Optional (which isn't an official designation as far as I know). They're there all the time, similar to the Standing Committees, but they're not required by your bylaws (unlike your Standing Committees).

I hate to recommend legal advice for something that seems like a low-stakes issue, but I think a lot of associations assume they can spend money on stuff like this and their governing documents may not actually allow for it. (We periodically have l-o-n-g discussions around here about using assessment dollars for social events.) If your association's attorney won't charge you an arm and a leg for an opinion, it may be worth getting it - if for no other reason than to silence critics who have the wrong end of the stick.

If the bylaws don’t prohibit committees, the board is free to create whatever committees they want. They are an extension of the board and have no authority to make decisions without board approval.

I would be surprised if your bylaws truly are silent on the issue, but even if they are a committee is nothing more than a mechanism forthe board to fulfill their duties. Association ps have a millions difficult issues - agonizing over stuff like this is silly.

Actually my thoughts ended up here as well. Since these groups are involved in use of the common elements, then need work under the supervision of the board (our committees must have at least one board member on the committee). Not just because of potential Fair Housing issues, but also for liability and other reasons. Homeowners rarely think about these things - these things should be in the back of the board's minds all the time. Will something bad necessarily happen? Of course not. But if something bad does happen, it has the potential to be expensive, so the board would be remiss if they did not anticipate the possibility and proactively address it.

Homeowners often think that the board is a bunch of party poopers who hate for anyone to have fun, not realizing that the board's job is to make sure the fun doesn't cause trouble. And some of the issues are tough. Not too long ago we had a discussion about what happens if some homeowners wanted to use the clubhouse to hold book club discussions devoted to the writings of an author whose beliefs are, let's say, offensive to a chunk of the population. What's the association's potential liability here? This is way above the pay grade of volunteers, and probably of the board as well. Professional advice is needed.

HOA money isn't the only thing a board needs to be concerned about, since any use of HOA facilities is assumed to be approved by the association (even if the board isn't paying any attention).

I agree, especially the this is silly stuff.

Standing Committee
https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/S/Standing-Committees

Mandatory Committee
https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/M/Mandatory-Committees

I believe that statute states that an executive committee must consist of directors, up other committees need not have any directors.

That is the part that discusses Executive Committees. I'm looking further down with regards to advisory committees. I believe the OP's committees would qualify as "advisory" because they simply perform tasks that the board requests of them - they don't make decisions, bind the corporation to actions, etc.

(8) A corporation may create or authorize the creation of one or more advisory committees with any number of persons on the committee being non-directors. An advisory committee:
(a) Is not a committee of the board of directors; and
(b) May not act on behalf of or exercise any of the powers or authority of the board of directors or bind the corporation to any action, but may make recommendations to the board of directors, to the officers, or to the members.

I'd checked the statute too: In Fla., the board may form any committees it wishes. With ElleN, Annette, use the term "advisory committees" to settle the dispute and so future boards don't get hung up on this. Your Board may even want to approve a simple resolution saying that Committees authorized by the board other than the required DRC, ARC, & Compliance Committees shall be termed "advisory committees" or some such wording.

Those in other states may also find their Bylaws don't say much about committees and you might want to take a look your states non-profit corporation codes. As with both CA & FL's codes, make sure you note the difference between a committee of only board directors and a committee that can be comprised of members. The wording can be a little confusing.

I don't know about FL, but in CA, only the board may "enforce" rules. If an ARC member notices a violation of our ARC requirements, they would notify the PM , who'd send the usual "courtesy" letter asking the alleged violator to cure the issues. If not complying, the PM would call the alleged ARC violator to a hearing of the Board, which would decide whether or not and in what way to enforce our documents.

Our ARC does have the power to turn down ARC apps, or request further info, etc. But if it denies an application, the applies can seek approval from the Board.

I think I remember in FL that the Compliance-Enforement Committee is required by state statutes. Even if I remember that part correctly, I don't know if it has the power to enforce the governing docs, or if such enforcement goes to the Board for a decision.

Drat, my lack of clarity again! Any resident may notify the PM of an alleged ARC violation and, after confirming what the resident or ARC member observed, the PM would send a violation letter, etc. Neither the ARC member nor any resident have the power to "enforce."