Abuse of Board Position

Started by ShelleyP • 10 replies • 1066 views

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

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

ShelleyP (California)
Posts: 1

Posted:

A Board Member of my HOA is being fined for an architectural landscaping issue. She is not allowed in closed session when her item is being discussed. She has been given access to information regarding her item by way of the Board Packet. Should she be given that information that pertains to her case?
Also, she has referred to the Board as "a bunch of Nazis" in e-mail correspondence between her, the other Board Members, and the Management Company. Can this be addressed by the Board in Open Session and can she be censured publicly.

KirkW1 (Texas)
Posts: 1,665

Posted:

There are many here who might encourage you to "censure" this member. But the reality is that the only thing you accomplish is to publicly state your dissatisfaction with the behavior. If you believe that such a thing will change her behavior then go for it. But with the limited amount of information you have provided I would doubt that any good will come of the measure.

I don't know what you do about the person. Obviously they have brought an agenda with them.

SusanW1 (Michigan)
Posts: 5,202

Posted:

I hope that ANY resident who has a violation is allowed to respond to the Board, in closed session, if desired.

When does she get her "day in court" with the Board?

Sounds like she does not agree with the violation.

MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491

Posted:

Susan, it not only sounds like she doesn't agree with the violation, it sounds as though she doesn't agree with the board enforcing violations.

I never understand why people want to try to equate enforcement of violations with Nazi behavior.

If the rule is there, and it's not followed, how is enforcing the rule being "Nazi" like?

Anyway, I'm also confused as to why should wouldn't have received information about the violation anyway, regardless of whether it was in the Board Packet or not.

What is your procedure for notifying people of violations?

Wouldn't she have already received a violation notice and request for compliance?

GeorgerwilliamsW (Indiana)
Posts: 975

Posted:

Unfortunately, in this case, as in so many others the board becomes the judge, jury and executioner. They make the rules, they interpret the rules, they enforce the rules, they adjudicate the rules, and they dole out the punishment. And if you don't like it, they take away your house.

Something is incredibly wrong with this picture.

MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491

Posted:

Well, except, George, those "rules" were what you agreed to when you purchased your home.

And if they were amended after your living there, you were at least aware of the amendment proposal and passage, giving you ample opportunity, if you don't agree with the amendments, to consider other options.

So at least a foundation for what the rules are and how they are enforced was something you acknowledged that you accepted prior to moving in.

So it's not as clandestine as implied.

JohnO6 (Georgia)
Posts: 424

Posted:

Michelle is dead on the money on this one .. .. ..

While it's true "the Board" is conducting the activites George mentions, the homeowners elected the Board, have the opportunity to oust the Board, etc.

And most fundamentally, you contractually agreed to all of this when you purchased your home.

GeorgerwilliamsW (Indiana)
Posts: 975

Posted:

I feel feisty today. To my good friend south of the Ohio, I come back to the notion that (1) we are talking about people's homes here, not a country club membership; and (2) contracts contrary to public policy are not enforceable.

As it now stands these contracts are incredibly one-sided without an effective (quick, not expensive, not lengthy) appeals process. Government by contract can become "Nazi like." Remember, the Nazi Party was elected in Germany. It did not take over in a coup.

(Oh, man, folks, watch the fur fly now . . .)

JohnO6 (Georgia)
Posts: 424

Posted:

George .. George .. George ..

Did someone force you to sign that contract?
Or did you sign it of your own free will?

GeorgerwilliamsW (Indiana)
Posts: 975

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnO6 on 09/16/2008 7:24 AM
Michelle is dead on the money on this one .. .. ..

While it's true "the Board" is conducting the activites George mentions, the homeowners elected the Board, have the opportunity to oust the Board, etc.

And most fundamentally, you contractually agreed to all of this when you purchased your home.

Johm, your position is going to lead to greater state regulation and control over the "covenant contract," such as that we see in Florida and, increasingly, in Arizona. It is all about protection of individual rights.

It has been a fundamental tenet of adjudication that a contract becomes untenable if it is patently one-sided, contrary to public policy, and if it gives away too many fundamental individual rights. (Contract law texts--I know--abound with examples).

The issue here is that we are dealing with people's homes, something rather sacred in public policy in the U.S. Each piece of real estate is unique. Real estate is not easily bought and sold.

What it comes down to, is a balance between individual property rights and the needs of the community.

JohnO6 (Georgia)
Posts: 424

Posted:

Well George - now we begin to agree .. .. ..

If such contracts are overly one-sided, the additional regulation will result - perhaps as well it should?

This can very quickly become a very high level philosophical argument about a governmental authority having to "protect" the masses from those unscrupulous entities who would foist burdensome agreements upon the innocent, unknowing people who get "conned" into the very agreement they sign .. .. ..

In contrast, while I'm also a fan of individual property rights, I'm even more of a fan of holding individuals accountable for their actions, which - by the way - includes reading and understanding legal documents that represent contracts that you enter into BEFORE you execute them.

If the balance of "property rights" isn't to you liking, then you shouldn't sign the contract.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who execute legally binding contracts without first seeking to understand what they're getting themsselves into and THEN crying help.

🎯 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