organizational meeting after an election

Started by VernonN • 11 replies • 169 views

💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

VernonN (New York)
Posts: 1

Posted:

As the winner of an election I am claiming the meeting held after the election is illegal and violates hoa laws for a condo.

DIRECTLY AFTER THE ELECTION THE SECRETAY CLAIMED SHE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO RUN THE MEETING. SHE THEN ACCEPTED VERBALLY THE RESIGNATION OF A TEMPORARY
BOARD MEMBER. THEN SHE PROCEEDED WITH A VOTE TO REPLACE THE NEWLY CREATED OPENING WITH THE OLD PRESIDENT THAT WAS VOTED OUT.

THE RESULT THE CONDO OWNERS ARE ALL UP IN ARMS THAT THEY VOTED THE PRESIDENT OUT AND THEN FIND HE IS STILL IN POWER.

I AM CLAIMING THE WHOLEING IS ILLEGAL AND THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS SHOULD HAVE BEEN VOTING THE POSITION
OF THE PEOPLE WHO WON THE ELECION. SHE HELD A MEETING AND VOTED WITHOUT A PRESIDENT, OR VICE PRESIDENT.

WHAT IS BEST WAY TO CANCEL WHAT HAPPENED.

SheliaH (Indiana)
Posts: 6,964

Posted:

No need to shout - writing in all caps is shouting and hard on the eyes. I know you're angry and it may be justified,, but you'll need to calm down to think through this to turn things around.

Whe the secretary said she was in charge, did anyone speak up to ask how she came to that conclusion? Do your documents say anything about officer selection? Usually homeowners elect board members and tge board then appoints officers from among themselves. Read yours to see exactly how this was supposed to work.

You also had a "temporary board member" - no such thing. A homeowner can be appointed by the board to serve out the term of someone who stepped down. When the next election happens, the appointee can run for election or step down for someone else to take a shot at the seat. This appointee should have announced his or her intentions before this meeting - right now, it smells like there's a fix somewhere.

How to fix this? You didn't say if this foolishness somehow booted you off the board, but if your neighbors are angry, it's time for you and them to get together and read your documents to see what it says about calling a special homeowners meeting to discuss all this and possibly doing a recall to toss the secretary and any other board member who supported this.

If you succeed, you need others to step upand run for the now vacant positions - you won the earlier election so this shouldn't apply to you. It may be the ensuing sh**storm will be enough to prompt the secretary and "president" to step down, then you may only have two slots to worry about.

Once you get a properly elected board, look at the documents to see what they say about elections, appointments, etc. (as a candidate, you should have already known this before you ran). You may need to establish some protocols to ensure the documents are followed. If tge documents don't address this at all, it may be time to propose amendments for the community's review and approval. This 8snt a do it yourself job - get the association attorney to review tge documents with you so your amendments will stand up in court. Good luck!

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

JackieB4 (California)
Posts: 398

Posted:

Shelia, A bit off topic, but curiosity killed the cat. Our documents ('86-87 & 140 SFHs) need restatement; member apathy with annnual BOD (3) elections creates numerous attempts to make QUORUM. $$$$- I'm interested in thoughts on simply creating a few AMENDMENTS (ie- Election Rules, etc) VS a complete restatement...expensive and highly doubtful of EVER passing membership vote??? Please share thoughts and experiences. Yes, it's a nightmare!

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059

Posted:

Let me see if I understand this.

From your post (and doing an educated guess):
I expect that you are a three person board.
I expect that the Secretary was re-elected.
I expect that you were the only new person elected to the board.

1) You had a meeting after the election to organize the board (vote in new officers).

2) The old president was not re-elected, hence that position was vacant.

3) Prior to electing officers, the Secretary said that they would run the meeting.
Did you object at that time? If not, then you agreed with that person presiding over the meeting and challenging it now is simply not productive.

4) Per your posting, one individual was resigned, creating a vacant seat.

5) Per your posting, a motion was made and the vacant seat was filled with the previous president.

I can only conclude:

A) The resignation was not effective immediately but at a later time (am I correct)?
If the resignation was effective immediately, that individual should not have voted for their replacement.
If the resignation was effective at a later date, that individual had a valid right to vote for their replacement.

B) The board voted to fill the vacancy - I expect that you voted against that individual and the resignation was not immediate allowing that person to vote and the vote was 2 yea and 1 nay.

c) If my expectations were correct, proper procedures were followed and the old board figured out a loophole to keep them going. Scummy but allowed.

My suggestions:
1) don't fight it - doing so will simply alianate you from the rest of the board and your suggestions may be ignored. Instead, disagree with it but move forward and work for the betterment of the Association.

2) Get someone else to volunteer to serve next year along with you - gather support and get them elected to the Board. This way, the two of you would control the board vote next year.

BillD16 (Texas)
Posts: 971

Posted:

Hi Vernon, I can understand how this situation seems suspicious.

It would help to know a few things:

- How many seats are on the Board? 3? 5? Other?

- How many seats were open in this election?

- What exactly happened? If I assume a 3 seat Board, then: a) the President timed out, b) you took his seat, c) the Secretary kept her seat, d) there is a 3rd person (newly elected or not) who resigned at the organizational meeting. If this is the case, when the Secretary called for a vote, who voted? The only way I can conceive of the vote standing is if both you and the Secretary voted together to bring back the President.

- If I assume a 5 seat Board, then a) at least one seat (the President’s) was open, b) you took his seat, c) the Secretary kept her seat, d) there are 3 other people on the Board (newly elected or not), e) one of these 3 people resigned at the organizational meeting, f) so now there are 4 people on the Board: you, Secretary, Mr X, and Mr Y, g) Secretary calls for vote: again, who voted, and how? If Secretary, X, and Y all voted together, then (sorry) the President is back. Otherwise - you’ll need to investigate whatever rules apply for [2 yes, 1 no, 1 abstain], [2 yes, 2 abstain], [2 yes, 1 no, 1 absent], etc.

- If there was a valid vote and the President is back on the Board, remember that he is not automagically the President again. The entire point of the organizational meeting is to assign officer roles. However, If he’s back due to a legitimate 3-to-1 vote, then he can probably be President again. It also implies that you’ll be outgunned 4-to-1 on everything. I’m sorry.

- Do your condo Bylaws / governing documents provide any guidance on how to conduct the organizational meeting after an election?

- What is the size of your membership? Your governing docs may allow a membership petition to remove a Board member. If enough people are upset, this might be possible.

- For what little it may be worth: typically a Board member that is elected by the Board (ie, not the membership) can also be removed by a vote of the Board. Also, such a Board member’s term usually ends at the next election.

My comments are based on my experience with a Texas HOA - Condo laws and rules maybe different where you are.

Bill

HOA Board ex-President
Austin, Texas USA

“You can’t put too much water in a nuclear reactor”

BillD16 (Texas)
Posts: 971

Posted:

TimB wrote:
> A) The resignation was not effective immediately but at a later time (am I correct)?
> If the resignation was effective immediately, that individual should not have voted for their replacement.
> If the resignation was effective at a later date, that individual had a valid right to vote for their replacement.

Really? They can announce a later resignation, but vote on who takes over their spot? That seems *wrong* somehow. I’m not saying *you’re* wrong, Tim. Just: this sounds sketchy to me.

Bill

HOA Board ex-President
Austin, Texas USA

“You can’t put too much water in a nuclear reactor”

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By BillD16 on 09/13/2025 4:45 AM
TimB wrote:
> A) The resignation was not effective immediately but at a later time (am I correct)?
> If the resignation was effective immediately, that individual should not have voted for their replacement.
> If the resignation was effective at a later date, that individual had a valid right to vote for their replacement.

Really? They can announce a later resignation, but vote on who takes over their spot? That seems *wrong* somehow. I’m not saying *you’re* wrong, Tim. Just: this sounds sketchy to me.

Bill

Yep.

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By VernonN on 09/12/2025 8:27 AM

As the winner of an election I am claiming the meeting held after the election is illegal and violates hoa laws for a condo.

DIRECTLY AFTER THE ELECTION THE SECRETAY CLAIMED SHE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO RUN THE MEETING. SHE THEN ACCEPTED VERBALLY THE RESIGNATION OF A TEMPORARY
BOARD MEMBER. THEN SHE PROCEEDED WITH A VOTE TO REPLACE THE NEWLY CREATED OPENING WITH THE OLD PRESIDENT THAT WAS VOTED OUT.

THE RESULT THE CONDO OWNERS ARE ALL UP IN ARMS THAT THEY VOTED THE PRESIDENT OUT AND THEN FIND HE IS STILL IN POWER.

I AM CLAIMING THE WHOLEING IS ILLEGAL AND THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS SHOULD HAVE BEEN VOTING THE POSITION
OF THE PEOPLE WHO WON THE ELECION. SHE HELD A MEETING AND VOTED WITHOUT A PRESIDENT, OR VICE PRESIDENT.

WHAT IS BEST WAY TO CANCEL WHAT HAPPENED.

One word - CHECKMATE.

I agree with Tim. You got out maneuvered in a political process and you cannot cancel a vote of the owners held at this meeting.

TerriS6 (California)
Posts: 3,284

Posted:

I would think if there was a board vacancy, it would have to be noticed and on the agenda before action could be taken by appointing someone else.

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By TerriS6 on 09/14/2025 7:25 AM
I would think if there was a board vacancy, it would have to be noticed and on the agenda before action could be taken by appointing someone else.

In California, yes, in Ohio no. In New York?

DeanJ
Posts: 1,786

Posted:

Terry, what is the agenda says election of board members? Checkmate.

ElleN (Idaho)
Posts: 1,334

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By VernonN on 09/12/2025 8:27 AM

DIRECTLY AFTER THE ELECTION THE SECRETAY CLAIMED SHE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO RUN THE MEETING.

Unless this is in the bylaws, her having this authority is unlikely. A board majority should have overrode her. If a board majority did not, and a vote was taken, then I say the vote stands.

Quote:

Posted By VernonN on 09/12/2025 8:27 AM
SHE THEN ACCEPTED VERBALLY THE RESIGNATION OF A TEMPORARY
BOARD MEMBER.

I have never seen a statutory or bylaw requirement that board resignations must be "accepted" to be effective. Why? Because this is a voluntary position and no one has to stay even one moment longer than they want to (with some fiduciary caveats).

Quote:

Posted By VernonN on 09/12/2025 8:27 AM
THEN SHE PROCEEDED WITH A VOTE TO REPLACE THE NEWLY CREATED OPENING WITH THE OLD PRESIDENT THAT WAS VOTED OUT.

The new board replaced a member of the board of directors with a new director. This is their lawful right.

Quote:

Posted By VernonN on 09/12/2025 8:27 AM

THE RESULT THE CONDO OWNERS ARE ALL UP IN ARMS THAT THEY VOTED THE PRESIDENT OUT AND THEN FIND HE IS STILL IN POWER.

Then the condo owners can check their bylaws and state law for the requirements for recalling or removing a director.

Quote:

Posted By VernonN on 09/12/2025 8:27 AM

I AM CLAIMING THE WHOLEING IS ILLEGAL AND THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS SHOULD HAVE BEEN VOTING THE POSITION
OF THE PEOPLE WHO WON THE ELECION. SHE HELD A MEETING AND VOTED WITHOUT A PRESIDENT, OR VICE PRESIDENT.

Officers (president, VP, treasurer, Secretary) are different from directors. Though it is possible for a person to be both a director and officer at the same time.

You would have to quote your bylaws verbatim, regarding election of directors and officers, for people here to give substantive advice.

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

✓ Ask follow-up questions
✓ Share your experience
✓ Get expert advice
✓ Access 350,000 discussions

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here