HOA Condominium Committee's

PatriiciaR (Texas)
Posts: 32

Posted:

Does your Condominium HOA have Ad Hoc committees? If so, what are they and what do they do?

We are trying to bring owners together now that some are more intested in what's going on. Well, only becasue the investor bully got them stirred up.

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

What I find a bit amazing the the HOAs I have owned is the same owners won’t serve on the board will serve on a committee to tell you how you should do things.

In my view, committees should make the board’s duties easier and sunset after the committee has fulfilled the mission established by the board.

CathyB7 (Colorado)
Posts: 25

Posted:

We created sub-committees (landscape, clubhouse, social, ARC/DRC) in our small community of 96 units. I created a Charter for Committees and had them approved by the Board. Many HO's are willing to serve on a committee but don't want to be on the board. They really like being part of a decision and have taken a load off the Board. Depending on the committee, they have a budget. It has worked quite well for us.

SheliaH (Indiana)
Posts: 6,964

Posted:

Well, if the bully has shaken people out of their stupor or indifference, hallelujah. You don't say how many units are in your building, but as long as the owner-occupants outnumber the investors, you'll be able to work together for change that benefits everyone. Right now, the bully probably thinks he can get his way because he has money - time to teach him otherwise.

Now, regarding committees, start with considering what community issues have been ignored for years that really need to be addressed sooner than later. You see a lot of conversations on this website about outdated documents, so that could be a great place to begin, because updates don't happen overnight and require careful thought. Another committee could help look for potential contractors and evaluate current ones, a third could do a deep dive into reserves and insurance needs. A social committee can develop activities that foster better relationships between homeowners (i won't get into how to fund it, there are assorted conversations about that already).

Remember committee's ARE NOT the board - your documents stare what the board is responsible for, and most allow for advisory committees to make recommendations on specific issues for the board's consideration. Read yours to see if there's language about committees. The board should charter the committee to do certain things and determine if it will be a standing committee or special committee, which usually disband after it serves its purpose. You may want to have both, but all need specific instructions. Good luck!

If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it. Marcus Aurelius

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Something we learned the hard way: having a committee for the sake of having a committee is a recipe for failure. Instead, you should have a good idea what a committee's function should be. And not just a vague statement, but concrete things you want that committee to accomplish.

The committee should also have a charter that will detail what it should do, how members are appointed, how long they serve, what their reporting duties are, and the like. It should be clear that committee members serve at the pleasure of the board and may be removed with or without cause. It can be helpful to look at committee charters online to get an idea of what you're aiming at.

You should also be prepared to disband a committee if you find that it isn't serving a purpose or if it's being misused by some members as a platform to stir up trouble. This sort of thing is very possible result if you're creating a committee in response to one or more owners' misbehavior.

A well-functioning committee will take some of the workload off the board's plates, allow homeowners to be more engaged in the functioning of the association, and can serve as a valuable training tool for prospective board members. A badly managed committee will create conflict and miscommunication and add to the board's workload.

My community has found it more useful to have an ad hoc officer position on occasion. This came about because of an owner's knowledge and skills that the board did not have. In other words, the opportunity presented itself and the board took advantage of it.

JulieH4
Posts: 75

Posted:

We have 140 townhouse units here. We have 3 committees.

We have a pool committee whose function is to make sure everything stays looking nice and clean around the pool area and let me (the PM) know if something needs more attention that they cannot handle. I then go to the Board or our pool company for further assistance.

We have a landscape committee that walks the property with our landscape company and comes up with suggestions for the neighborhood. Final approval comes from the Board of what will get done though and it depends on our budget.

We have an event committee for neighborhood events like neighborhood night out, bi-monthly coffee/breakfasts, and we had our 50th anniversary party this year. We budget for this as well.

Hope this helps!

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

I am going to disagree a bit with your post. If the board is going to seat a committee, every homeowner who desires to be on the committee should be seated unless the declaration provides for a set number of members.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Every set of bylaws I've ever seen state that committee members serve at the pleasure of the board and may be removed with or without notice. Serving on a committee is not a right, and a committee has no independent authority.

Sadly, there are homeowners who volunteer to serve on a committee for the sole purpose of undermining the board. Why on earth would you help them do so?

Committees exist to spread the workload around. Ineffective or otherwise dysfunctional committees actually make things worse by causing conflict, spreading misinformation, and wasting the board's time. Appointing homeowners who are already doing these things is foolish. And you could make a good argument that it's a breach of one's fiduciary duty to make a decision that the board knows ahead of time will go off the rails. To quote an often-repeated maxim, when someone shows you who they are, believe them.

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 08/04/2025 12:06 PM
Every set of bylaws I've ever seen state that committee members serve at the pleasure of the board and may be removed with or without notice. Serving on a committee is not a right, and a committee has no independent authority.

Sadly, there are homeowners who volunteer to serve on a committee for the sole purpose of undermining the board. Why on earth would you help them do so?

Committees exist to spread the workload around. Ineffective or otherwise dysfunctional committees actually make things worse by causing conflict, spreading misinformation, and wasting the board's time. Appointing homeowners who are already doing these things is foolish. And you could make a good argument that it's a breach of one's fiduciary duty to make a decision that the board knows ahead of time will go off the rails. To quote an often-repeated maxim, when someone shows you who they are, believe them.

I am not big on committees, but if you are going to seat them, take all that volunteer. The reasons I believe in seating everyone is selecting people who tend to agree with the board is not very productive. The problem with the bomb throwers is they believe everyone is unhappy, everyone agrees with their point of view and wants to throw bombs. Seating them on committees of normal people requires them to interact and discover they aren’t the majority and other people can and do have very different points of view.

Surprisingly when a board does this, the recommendations are usually tweaks of existing policy and the bomb throwers are now without a forum to claim discrimination.

ElleN (Idaho)
Posts: 1,334

Posted:

A board violates its fiduciary duty by requiring only that volunteers for committees have a pulse.

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By ElleN on 08/04/2025 4:18 PM
A board violates its fiduciary duty by requiring only that volunteers for committees have a pulse.

There you go, discriminating against people in a coma.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By DeanJ on 08/04/2025 3:08 PM
... snip ....

I am not big on committees, but if you are going to seat them, take all that volunteer. The reasons I believe in seating everyone is selecting people who tend to agree with the board is not very productive. The problem with the bomb throwers is they believe everyone is unhappy, everyone agrees with their point of view and wants to throw bombs. Seating them on committees of normal people requires them to interact and discover they aren’t the majority and other people can and do have very different points of view.

Surprisingly when a board does this, the recommendations are usually tweaks of existing policy and the bomb throwers are now without a forum to claim discrimination.

What happens in practice is that the bomb throwers usually blow up the committee as everyone else resigns. I've watched it happen. Then you're left with an organized group of bomb throwers who set their sights on scaring off the entire board and anyone else who is thinking about volunteering. Watched that happen, too, a couple years ago - with many of the same people as in the first example. Bomb throwers don't learn. This is because that they aren't in it to improve the community, regardless of what they claim. They're in it for the emotional charge they get out of conflict. They don't want a committee to function well - they want it to go off the rails.

The only way a committee with troublemakers on it works at all is if the group has enough savvy and strong-willed people who understand the troublemakers' dysfunctional dynamic and who take steps to counteract it. Most people don't have the skills unless they've encountered it before and have the scars to show for it. (One of my fellow board members jokes about having PTSD from dealing with folks who blew up our board in 2023, but she's not really joking.)

As for discrimination, here's a secret about appointees: those doing the appointing are allowed to discriminate. A competent board wants to choose people who they think will do a good job and *who will work effectively with others*. Any accusation of discrimination will go nowhere because no one has a right to serve on a committee and because the board can appoint whomever they choose. (One of our vocational dissidents tried that "discrimination" nonsense and was shut down smartly by the association attorney.)

Why in the name of all that's holy would a board deliberately choose people with a track record of not getting along? I can't speak for other board members, but I have too much to do as it is and I refuse to referee fights between grown-ass adults.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

I've been looking at examples of committee charters from other communities. Here is a quote from one charter's Qualifications section:

".... commitment to objectively consider other points of view, work as a team, follow open work processes, strive for consensus decisions but accept majority rule, and utilize effective communication skills."

The rest of that section listed additional skills that a committee member was expected to have.

In other words, committees don't exist to placate the disgruntled, and boards are under no obligation to take all comers. Committee members need to work and play nicely with others and to actually accomplish something - otherwise the committee serves no purpose.

(That quote is useful for board members to keep in mind as well.)

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 08/05/2025 5:20 AM

Posted By DeanJ on 08/04/2025 3:08 PM
... snip ....

I am not big on committees, but if you are going to seat them, take all that volunteer. The reasons I believe in seating everyone is selecting people who tend to agree with the board is not very productive. The problem with the bomb throwers is they believe everyone is unhappy, everyone agrees with their point of view and wants to throw bombs. Seating them on committees of normal people requires them to interact and discover they aren’t the majority and other people can and do have very different points of view.

Surprisingly when a board does this, the recommendations are usually tweaks of existing policy and the bomb throwers are now without a forum to claim discrimination.

What happens in practice is that the bomb throwers usually blow up the committee as everyone else resigns. I've watched it happen. Then you're left with an organized group of bomb throwers who set their sights on scaring off the entire board and anyone else who is thinking about volunteering. Watched that happen, too, a couple years ago - with many of the same people as in the first example. Bomb throwers don't learn. This is because that they aren't in it to improve the community, regardless of what they claim. They're in it for the emotional charge they get out of conflict. They don't want a committee to function well - they want it to go off the rails.

The only way a committee with troublemakers on it works at all is if the group has enough savvy and strong-willed people who understand the troublemakers' dysfunctional dynamic and who take steps to counteract it. Most people don't have the skills unless they've encountered it before and have the scars to show for it. (One of my fellow board members jokes about having PTSD from dealing with folks who blew up our board in 2023, but she's not really joking.)

As for discrimination, here's a secret about appointees: those doing the appointing are allowed to discriminate. A competent board wants to choose people who they think will do a good job and *who will work effectively with others*. Any accusation of discrimination will go nowhere because no one has a right to serve on a committee and because the board can appoint whomever they choose. (One of our vocational dissidents tried that "discrimination" nonsense and was shut down smartly by the association attorney.)

Why in the name of all that's holy would a board deliberately choose people with a track record of not getting along? I can't speak for other board members, but I have too much to do as it is and I refuse to referee fights between grown-ass adults.

Why would they? Because you live in a community with both nuts and normal people. The board’s job is not segregating the nuts for the normal. Doing so just gives the nuts a I am a victim shirt to wear. You want them wearing a I am a nut shirt and for them to be properly identified by the rest of the community.

We just went through this a year ago when the nuts were upset over some rules being adopted. Fortunately the nuts are in the minority, but if your committees are populated by too many nuts, I can see where your experience may have been different.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

I think that people can have different opinions about this depending on whether they live in a single-family home HOA or in a condominium of attached homes.

If the former, who the heck cares what a gardening committee does about the landscaping at the community entrance? Your roof isn't going leak or your plumbing back up or any of the other misadventures that can happen in attached housing because the board is distracted by out-of-control volunteers. Committee degenerates into all-out war over petunias? I'd probably grab some popcorn and enjoy the show.

Condominiums have a much higher percentage of common elements, which means incompetent governance has a greater impact on owners. And committees often have more ability to get all up in condo owners' business, because everything these owners do impacts the common element in some fashion (and vice versa).

In short, in condominiums nincompoopery matters more, so tolerance is often lower.