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

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

DarylF (Washington)
Posts: 157
Posted:
So our community recently had our turnover meeting and our property manager failed to follow our bylaws. The bylaws had not been previously distributed so no one had read them prior to the meeting. My wife was elected to the board and she requested to see the bylaws a couple days after the meeting, which is when we found the problem.

Per the bylaws: we should have elected 2 directors with 3 year terms who appoint 3 or 4 officers with 1 year terms (president, VP, secretary, treasurer…).

What we did: elect three officers (President, VP and Sec/Treas) with 1 year terms.

Not even close! We have 3, we should have 5. We should have elected 2, we elected 3.

Also, our CC&Rs state that the officers decide amongst themselves who takes which position, yet our property manager assigned titles when she read the result of the votes?

It is also questionable if we even had a quorum, but I have not verified that.

Where do we go from here? My thought is the results are invalid and the only way to fix it is to do a re-vote. However, if I suggest that I’ll be hated as no one wants to do that all over again. However, if we don’t fix it, the door is wide open for someone to raise a stink the first time they are unhappy about something.

Thoughts? Advice?
JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967
Posted:
Daryl,

Did you elect the two directors? If so, did they (with any add'l directors you have) agree with the PM as to who the (appointed, not elected) officers would be? Do you really need 5 officers, or is P, VP & S/T enough to handle things? Setting aside the quorum issue, if you answer Yes to my 3 Qs, I'd say there's not much to complain about, much less doing things all over again. More details, please.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
couple options:

1) do as you suggest, and do it right, following your by-laws. have another meeting, and revote.
or
2) take the two elected members, and have them ask around for volunteers to serve on the board. Consider those who got votes at teh first meeting. when you have a couple folks willing to serve, simply appoint them to the 'vacant" positions, and move forward. Once you have all 5 board positions filled, the 5 members decide among themselves who is president, vice president, etc.

Lastly, remember that the property manager is an assett to the board: a resource. they work FOR the board, they don't run it or own it. use their knowledge, use their skills, but the board makes the decisions.

JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967
Posted:
Hmmm. Now I'm confused about what the numbers are referring to - directors, officers, or both? More details, please.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
i am with you JOhn, i haven't run across an HOA that elects board members who then appoint other members without vote of the owners.

I simply assume it is a misread of the by-laws, and that they should elect a board from the ownership, and then that board assigns/votes for roles within the board (president, vp, etc.).

JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967
Posted:
Thanx, Brian. I thought maybe the heat was getting to me: Currently 96F and it ain't 2pm yet. Add in our swell PA humidity and...
DarylF (Washington)
Posts: 157
Posted:
Sorry for the confusion, thanks for the response thus far...

We elected three officers to one year terms. President, VP and Sec/Treas.

Per our bylaws, we should have elected two directors to three year terms.

So no directors were elected. My concern is, if we didn't do it right, can't a homeowner with a lawyer invalidate the election the first time they don't like something? What I think or like does not matter. We did not follow our own rules.
DarylF (Washington)
Posts: 157
Posted:
and yes, our bylaws are strange and are not crystal clear on numerous issues. But they are clear that we elect 2 "Directors" at the turnover meeting to 3 year terms and the "Directors" elect the 3 "Offcers" who have 1 year terms. Then all 5 or 6 (the bylaws allows us to combine sec and treas) are board members and have a vote on issues.
JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967
Posted:
Daryl,

So aside from your wife, how many Board directors do you currently have and how many are called for/allowed for in your ByLaws?
DarylF (Washington)
Posts: 157
Posted:
3 total board members existing today.

5 should exist per the current bylaws.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DarylF on 06/09/2008 11:09 AM
Sorry for the confusion, thanks for the response thus far...

We elected three officers to one year terms. President, VP and Sec/Treas.

Per our bylaws, we should have elected two directors to three year terms.

So no directors were elected. My concern is, if we didn't do it right, can't a homeowner with a lawyer invalidate the election the first time they don't like something? What I think or like does not matter. We did not follow our own rules.

technically, you elect directors/board members. you do not elect officers from the general ownership. Officers are chosen by the directors FROM among the directors.

Could a Homeowner sue? Yes. But, as you state, many of them weren't even interested enough to show up to the election meeting, so the chances of them sueing to invalidate the board are slim.

I would suggest you try to move forward, and get 5 folks in place to run the community. If no one complains for a bit, they will lose their chance to invalidate your turnover every month that passes.
JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967
Posted:
Okay. We're making progress. 3 out of 5 ain't bad. Our HOA ByLaws allow for 3, and we've been as small as having only 1.

So, I'll assume you need 2 Directors for decision-making purposes.

Did 2 Directors agree with the PM as to the eventual choice of Officer appointments?

If so, the cake has been baked.

And as Brian noted, input from a good PM need not be ignored.
DarylF (Washington)
Posts: 157
Posted:
we never elected the two directors!!! That is the problem. We just skipped that part. We elected the officers that were suppose to be elected by the directors (directors that do not exist).

I know it's confusing, but I don't know how to type it out any clearer.

Should Have happened:
The community elects 2 Directors that have a 3 year term. The bylaws are clear on this. Just 2, no more no less.
Then, the 2 directors get together and elect 3 or 4 Officers with 1 year terms (the community does not vote on the officers). The board can agree to add more officers, but three is minimum.
Thus our board should be 5 or 6 total members (2 directors + 3 or 4 officers).

Did happen:
We elected the three officers who were suppose to figure out which roll they wanted to take.
After the vote our PM assigned rolls to our officers.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
i have to say, i have never seen an HOA with this election procedure... essentially, the voting members of the HOA, the ones who make all the decisions, aren't elected by the owners.

that seems like the start of an HOA out of control already.
JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967
Posted:
No (2) directors were elected, though your wife was?

You currently have 3 directors, but none exist?

I'll shut up now. Maybe somebody else can sort these issues out.

Good luck!
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DarylF on 06/09/2008 10:19 AM
So our community recently had our turnover meeting and our property manager failed to follow our bylaws. The bylaws had not been previously distributed so no one had read them prior to the meeting. My wife was elected to the board and she requested to see the bylaws a couple days after the meeting, which is when we found the problem.

Per the bylaws: we should have elected 2 directors with 3 year terms who appoint 3 or 4 officers with 1 year terms (president, VP, secretary, treasurer…).

What we did: elect three officers (President, VP and Sec/Treas) with 1 year terms.

Not even close! We have 3, we should have 5. We should have elected 2, we elected 3.

Also, our CC&Rs state that the officers decide amongst themselves who takes which position, yet our property manager assigned titles when she read the result of the votes?

It is also questionable if we even had a quorum, but I have not verified that.

Where do we go from here? My thought is the results are invalid and the only way to fix it is to do a re-vote. However, if I suggest that I’ll be hated as no one wants to do that all over again. However, if we don’t fix it, the door is wide open for someone to raise a stink the first time they are unhappy about something.

Thoughts? Advice?

Daryl,

Would it be too much trouble to ask you to post this article in your bylaws -- word for word? I think the problems everyone is having is the fact that this is so unusual we just cannot believe it. In most assn doc. the members elect all the board members (directors). The board members, in turn, elect or appoint the board members to serve in the officer positions. If there are 5 board members elected and 4 officer positions, the 5th board member is a member-at-large.

I'm thinking the reason the prop. mgr. "ran the show" is because it was the turnover meeting and there were no members already serving on the board. Either she or the developer would be the only people who could hold and run the election/meeting. Since the election was not conducted properly the board could just send an announcement to the members stating the board members elected should have been referred to as directors instead of officers. Also, only 2 should have been elected by the members. In view of the error made, the board has decided to remedy the situation as follows:
(1) The board will decide among themselves which of the 3 elected board members will serve as an officer for 1 year with the remaining 2 serving a 3-year term. (2) The board members will then appoint 2 officers who will each serve a 1-year term.

DarylF (Washington)
Posts: 157
Posted:
It reads pretty much as I typed it. I know it's very stange and doesn't sound right, but i re-read it numerous times and I read documents like this all the time for a living so I'm pretty sure I'm reading it right. I've had others read it and they agree.

It very clearly says at turnover the community elects two directors. Nothing questionable in the wording.

then it talks about the powers of the directors and how to remove them, their term....

Then it goes into the officers and it clearly states the officers are elected by the directors. Again, nothing questionable in the wording.

Then it talks about the duties of the officers and how to remove them, how may of them, their term...

I would not want to follow the bylaws either as it puts a lot of power into just two people's hands, but I don't see how we can ignore the bylaws or change them without having a properly elected board to start?

The bylaws are very questionable in how we re-elect officers when their 1 year term is up, and how to re-elect directors when their 3 year term is up. The bylaws seem to just cover the turnover meeting (lots of "at turnover" quotes). Maybe with the intention of having the board re-write them after turn over???

I'd post them, but I do not think they are public documents.
GlenL (Ohio)
Posts: 5,491
Posted:
Daryl if they are on file at the county recorders office then they are public documents. Even if they aren't on file unless they have some kind of disclaimer you can post them. What I suspect is that there were three BOD members (aka directors) already serving and you were to elect two more at turnover to complete your Board. In most cases there are some provisions to stagger the positions i.e. we have a five member BOD, one year three people are up for election for a two year term - the following year two people are up. This way you always have someone familiar with the BOD procedures available to guide any "newbie's". Then the directors get together and decide what office positions they will hold on the BOD. I'll risk it and post ours here:

ARTICLE II

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Section 2.1. Number and Qualification. The Board of Trustees shall consist of (5) persons, except as otherwise provided, all of whom must he owners and occupiers of a unit. If for five (5) years following filing the Declaration, the Declarant, its successors and assigns, shall not have conveyed seventy-five percent (75%) of the number of units which may, be erected, as stated in the Declaration, no less than three (3) members of the Board shall be designated by it who need not be owners or occupiers of a unit.

Section 2.2. Nomination of Trustees. Nomination for Election to the Board of Trustees shall be made by a Nominating Committee, except for those appointed by Declarant. Nominations may also be made from the floor at the annual meeting. The Nominating Committee shall consist of a Chairman, who need not be a member of the Association but who shall be a member of the Board of Trustees and two or more other members of said committee who shall be members of the Association. The Nominating Committee shall be appointed by the Board of Trustees 120 days prior to each annual meeting of the members, to serve until the close of the annual meeting. The Nominating Committee shall make as many nominations for election to the Board of Trustees as it shall in its discretion determine, but no less than the number of
vacancies that are members or non-members.

Section 2.3. Election of Trustees; Vacancies. The required Trustees shall be elected at each annual meeting of members of the Association. Only persons nominated as candidates shall be eligible for election as and the candidates receiving the greatest number of votes shall be elected. Each member may vote for as many candidates as there are vacancies in the Board of Trustees however caused. The remaining though less than a of the authorized number of may, by the vote of a majority of their number, fill any vacancy for the unexpired term, provided, however, that a vacancy in the position filled by designation of Declarant shall be filled by Declarant.

Section 2.4. Term of Office; Resignations. Trustees terms shall be for two (2) years. Two of the Trustees first terms shall be for only one (1) year so that the terms can be staggered. Each Trustee shall hold office until the next annual meeting of members of the Association in which his term expires or until his successor is elected or until his earlier resignation, or removal from office or death. Any Trustee may resign at any time by oral statement to that effect made at a meeting of the Board of Trustees or in writing to that effect delivered to the Secretary of the Association; such resignation shall take effect immediately or at such other time as they may
specify. Members of the Board of shall serve without compensation.

Section 2.5. Organization Meeting. Immediately after each annual meeting of members of the Association, the newly elected Board of Trustees shall hold an organization meeting for the purpose of electing officers and transacting any other business. Notice of such meeting need not be given. A meeting of the Board of Directors may be held by any method of communication, including electronic or telephonic communication, provided that each member of the Board can hear, participate, and respond to every other member of the Board.

Studies show that 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Glen, I agree with your interpretation of what is going on.

At our turnover, we had 4 directors already on the board (through the developer). At turnover we were to elect 5 more, however, the 4 resigned before the election, so we were able to elect 9 total.

Daryl, I don't do so well with "pretty much" as you typed them.

It would really help if you would post your bylaws that deal with this.

Ours read almost exactly as you say yours do, however, it's also very clear that the OFFICERS are ELECTED by the DIRECTORS, and their pool of potential candidates can ONLY be other officers.

SusanW1 (Michigan)
Posts: 5,202
Posted:
Just to muddy the already muddy waters: Are the bylaws adopted (approved by a motion and vote) yet?

Perhaps this procedure took place because there were no bylaws adopted by the membership yet.

DarylF (Washington)
Posts: 157
Posted:
the bylaws say the 2 elected directors replace the builder board, not add to it.

Here is what our bylaws say:
Number of directors: A board of directors manages the affairs of the association. The board has two directors. Until succeeded by the directors elected by the owners, the directors need not be lot owners.

Then when it gets to the officers:
Term: The officers of this association are elected annually by the board and each holds office for one year or until that officer's successor is elected, unless the officer sooner resigns, or is removed, or otherwise is disqualified to serve.
GlenL (Ohio)
Posts: 5,491
Posted:
Daryl I've read some bad documents over the years but if your's are factually as you have posted them, then I will nominate them as the worst ever. Are you truly saying that you're only ever supposed to elect two (2) directors who will then appoint officers of the Association for ever and ever till the end of time????????? These two Directors who are to be re-elected or replaced every three years; two people to decide from on high who gets to be on the BOD and make the decisions that affect everyone who lives there! I don't think so; either you're just reading selected snippets to try and prove your point that the election was done incorrectly or the first thing the Association should do is redo your By-Laws.

What is typical is that the Declarant has the majority of the seats on the BOD to protect his interests until turnover. Then his appointee's step down and are replaced by homeowners, now the homeowners are in charge. The number of directors is almost always an odd number to prevent tie votes. The directors then choose officers from among themselves to fill the positions of President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer with the remaining director(s) serving as Member at Large.

Studies show that 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions
CaroleJ (Georgia)
Posts: 70
Posted:
The number of directors is almost always an odd number to prevent tie votes. The directors then choose officers from among themselves to fill the positions of President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer with the remaining director(s) serving as Member at Large.

It is exactly as Glen states with this added explanation for where I think the confusion is coming from:

Each director is elected for a 3 year term. Within that 3 year term however, the office that person holds, such as Pres, VP, Secy, Treas, or Member at Large only lasts for one year. At the end of the year, the directors whose terms have not yet expired, as well as the newly elected directors, again agree on the office each director will hold for the next year. So one director in a 3 year term for example, may hold the position of Pres, V-P and Member at Large. This way, one director usually will not hold the same office and burn out as President or become a tyrannical President (or V-P, Secy, Treas, MaL) for all 3 years or even 2 years. The director serves for 3 years, but the office she/he holds changes yearly.
BrianB (California)
Posts: 2,820
Posted:
i will add where another point of confusion may be entering: Under declarant control, perhaps the rule WAS two directors (the owner and developer? President and CFO?), who did "appoint" people (probably from within the company) to be officers.

However, there is a missing section somewhere, that covers the transfer of the HOA from declarant to owners, and in that section, it describes what everyone else is saying: elect a board of directors from the membership, they meet and elect officers from their own ranks, etc..

It sure seems like this is a mish-mish of paragraphs from pre and post turnover sections or something. Or, like it has been suggested, this is one of the worst written docs i recall seeing in a while.

KirkW1 (Texas)
Posts: 1,665
Posted:
I would recommend that the three people who were announced as officers get together and decide who they believe should be the officers. Most likely the titles went based on numbers of votes, but that is not the best way to do things. The board should decide among themselves after discussing it. It is senseless to have a president who would rather not be. And in our board, there are at least two members who would not want to be president.

Once they decide that run as is for the first year. If a member wants to sure, head them off by seeing what they really want. If you end up calling another meeting so be it. But I doubt anyone will bother. A high priority should be to correct the documents to conform more closely to standard set of rules. This will most likely require a push for proxies. Please thank your wife for volunteering. I ran partly because I am willing to go knock on doors explain that we need to change something and would you please sign this form.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DarylF on 06/09/2008 1:18 PM
It reads pretty much as I typed it. I know it's very stange and doesn't sound right, but i re-read it numerous times and I read documents like this all the time for a living so I'm pretty sure I'm reading it right. I've had others read it and they agree.

It very clearly says at turnover the community elects two directors. Nothing questionable in the wording.

then it talks about the powers of the directors and how to remove them, their term....

Then it goes into the officers and it clearly states the officers are elected by the directors. Again, nothing questionable in the wording.

Then it talks about the duties of the officers and how to remove them, how may of them, their term...

I would not want to follow the bylaws either as it puts a lot of power into just two people's hands, but I don't see how we can ignore the bylaws or change them without having a properly elected board to start?

The bylaws are very questionable in how we re-elect officers when their 1 year term is up, and how to re-elect directors when their 3 year term is up. The bylaws seem to just cover the turnover meeting (lots of "at turnover" quotes). Maybe with the intention of having the board re-write them after turn over???

I'd post them, but I do not think they are public documents.

Daryl,

There should be an article in your bylaws which states how many directors are to serve on the board. If it states there are 5 directors, then at the first election after declarant control, 5 directors would be elected by the members. Some assn docs state the directors are to serve staggered terms and goes on to explain how this is accomplished. Other assn elect all the directors each year.

Then there should be another article in your bylaws which outlines the "powers and duties of the BOD". One of the duties is (as quoted from my bylaws): "elect and remove the officers of the assn as hereinaftrer provided and to supervise all officers, agents and employees of this assn and to see that their duties are properly performed." This is the same as you stated above!

I think the problem lies in the fact that you are lumping these articles together when you should only be looking at the article which explains the makeup of the BOD. That article in my bylaws is entitled: "Board of Directors: Selection: Term of Office".

Daryl, we all want to help you! However, you are making it difficult by not posting the exact wording in your bylaws. The only way we can determine the meaning is to read it, word for word. You've come here asking for our help and opinions; but we can't comply if you don't cooperate by giving the the required information. BTW, they ARE public documents. If I lived in your state I could go to the Co. recorder's office and get a copy of them.

🎯 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