? conflict of interest

I am a new member to our BOD. I am trying to bring back the commitees that onced funtioned vey well but have been in active for about 3 or 4 yrs.mabe longer
Since our election there has been an overwelming burst of energy from many of the owners wanting to be on commitees some have been on various commitees in the past and some new.
the bod recently met with one owner that has agreed to be the spokes person for the comitees and to chair a commitee he even had a brief summary of resposibilities for each.
my concern is the finance commitee the person that agreed to chair this comittee her husband was once the chairman of our bod. he also has a relationship with the property manager and in talking with some of the historians they say that the chairman and property manager at one time made some not so good decisions that could have cost the owners a hugh law suite.( they did not apply the common area intrests fairly) and folks with larger units were paying less than those with smaller units.about 30 suits could have been filed. the chair stood to gain because they had the larger unit. both po and chair were aware of this until an audit discovered this and brought it to light. Wondering if this ownrer were on the finance comittee would it give the appearence of a conflict since her husband(ex chair) still has a partnership with the pm (we are also looking at his company with different light) I have no problem separating business from friendship these people were very supportive to me when i was campaining for this spot but was not aware of the relationship with the po.
there is alot of anamosity amongst the various people so i could use your thoughts on this one.
the finance commitee is one that i hope to be able to monitor but would not want to encourage a conflict of interest your thoughts are appreciated.
This site has been very helpful to me thank you all for this valueable information

Lynne,
You are now on the Board. It appears your association has woke up and is becoming active. The President appoints boards or the Board does, whatever you documents say.

I would hope that the Board starts with a clean slate and not repeat the past mistakes, that got you into trouble. And it sound to me as if the Board was part of the past problems, don't let it happen again. The Board controls the committees and if anyone gets out of line, especially a prior offender, don't let it happen. Do not let the tail wag the dog. Your board will be respected, you will get the job done. If you have the interest of the people, and you, by law have the hammer as the board, then the trick is to use your power fair and wisely. The Board needs to control the committees and make decisions forwarded by the committees. The Board can establish rapport with the committees and the members, but run the business of the board and the business of the board is anything that effect the real property and the members.

I am curious about how an auditor revealed that you were not charging fees on an apportionment. Are you aware all fees dues, anything that is billed to the members has to be apportioned.

As always the Boards power is applied by how they understand the business, I would make sure all Board members are comfortable with their jobs..... first things first. Normally, this is all a learning process and you will never learn it all, that's a good thing to keep in mind.
I hope you are not trying to do all this alone. You need good people around you.

Susan, my mind is heading in this direction, too. It sounds to me, and I could be wrong, that it appears that people are just looking for an excuse or opportunity to disallow the spouse of a former board member the opportunity to sit on a committee, or chair one.

If simply being a SPOUSE of a FORMER board member is "conflict of interest," there could well be a point in time that fewer and fewer people will be eligible to sit on any committees if you have any form of board turnover over the years.

Are you saying then as well that if a FORMER board member wants to sit/chair a committee, that he/she would be disallowed under the same "conflict of interest" test?

I'm just trying to figure out where the actual conflict of interest arises. Both are members of the association. Both have a vested interest in the community. But then, so do all the board and committee members.

While the former board member may have a history, are you saying if the history is bad, then you'll only take their dues/assessments, but not allow anyone from that household to work to the betterment of the community any more?

Since the position is a committee position, the board can dismiss the person if there becomes issues with propriety or whatever ills people feel might develop. (Which, I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out what people could possibly think would or could happen.)

In the meantime, as Susan said, this is simply a committee chair. This person should not have direct responsibility for anything that would put any of the funds or assets of the organization at risk.

This is not an easy one. What do your bylaws say about members living in the same Unit being on the board and/or on committees? This has nothing to do with whether or not a particular person is a spouse or a blood relative. Be careful also of discrimination lawsuits. Anything that appears as discrimination, including race, religion, sex, marital status, etc., may leave you vulnerable. Stick to fundamental, generic, and objective criteria.

thanks to all of you for your opinions. your right we the board control the committee's. and this dilemma could also give the appearance of discriminatory given the bad tastes with some of the current bod.i want to work on the positives and after reading your opinions i feel better.
Now if i could get your thoughts on what the duties and responsibilities of the finance committee should be, that would be helpful. I am not doing this alone there are 5 board members but 2 of the officers seem to be apprehensive about this person on that committee, mostly past experiences and attitude. but this person has a finance background and starting fresh is what i hope to accomplish.

committee's recommend in our community to the board and the board makes the decisions. .I guess after the whole partner with husband and po issue came up i did'nt want to fall into any mess. but i personally see no reason why she could not chair this committee. the 2 ? uncomfortable board members (chairperson & tres.)will hopefully set aside the past and keep things moving to start fresh.I have lived here for 2yrs. most of these folks have battled for 20yrs. I would hate to loose all this energy and willingness to volunteer

BruceF, it's my understanding that the spouse who wants to be on/chair the finance committee is not the spouse of a CURRENT board member, but rather of a FORMER board member. So I doubt that any language in the governing documents would prevent such a thing, inasmuch as they would not be on their respective board/committee concurrently.

LynneM:

By the way, a chair or member of any finance committee would be unlikely to get into much mischief.

Here is some wording of a sample statement of finance committee responsibilities:

Finance Committee Duties;
1. Work with the BOD on the annual budget.
2. Review the operations of XXXXXXXXX Association as it compares to the budget, and to the
actual expenditures and income.
3. Reviews could be at six months into the budget year, and or at year’s end.

Annual budget Purposes Duties;
1. Recommendations to the Board regarding what changes to expenditures could be made in order to keep its
operational budget at, or under budget.
2. Recommendations to the Board regarding possible investments when funds are available.
3. Recommendations to the Board regarding changes of accounting, and financial practices that may be required
to better control our funds, and operation of the XXXXXXXX Association.

Robert,
Bylaws may differ from HOA to HOA, depending on the juristiction. In our bylaws there is no distinction between the votes for members of the board and the votes on any other issues that a Unit Owner may make. The allocation of votes to Units is not specified in the bylaws, but instead is specified in the Declaration (CCRs) which, as it turns out, reads identically to the statute, and is the same in six other states (South Carolina is not one of them). It is based on the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act which was drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Connecticut makes no distinction between a Condominium, a Planned Unit Development, or a Cooperative, and the ststute applies to all such developments created after January 1, 1984. Any previous laws pertaining individually to the preceding entities have been superceded by the CCIOA.