MaarshaM (Texas)
Posts: 6
Posts: 6
Posted:
Do any Homeowner Assoications have restrictions regarding husband and wife serving on the Board of Directors?
A service of:
Community123.com
Professional websites for HOAs & condos, since 2004
Professional websites for HOAs & condos, since 2004
🎁 1st year FREE for HOATalk members! →
Related Board Members
Started by MaarshaM • 43 replies • 2301 views
💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.
Create Free Account →
⚡ Takes 30 seconds
Already a member? Log in
LynetteB (Texas)
Posts: 141
Posts: 141
Posted:
In our docs it states that each lot has 1 vote. My husband and I both do a bunch of work in our POA, but we both cannot serve on the board at the same time because that would basically give us two votes, (other than for elections). There is nothing specific in our Bylaws, but it would not be wise in my opinion. We still both do a bunch of work, but only one of us consider serving on the board at a time. The one who is not on the board can always be on a committee! If we ever have that issue raised here again, I am sure it will result in an amendment to our Bylaws spelling out that it is not allowed.
I hope you and your spouse will both do what you can for your community. Most seem to lack enough volunteers.
I hope you and your spouse will both do what you can for your community. Most seem to lack enough volunteers.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Nice post LynetteB,
Good condensation of issue. I may go a little further and suggest a husband wife team on the Board should not be allowed and is probably illegal unless specified and modifiocations made for Board Quorum and Board vote and owner vote. I am sure an exception can be made, but lets get real, an exception is not a rule to follow. Any husband and wife that wants to be on the same Board is also exposing themselves to so strain on the marraige, bad enough, one on the Board one on a committee, and that's the truth. So do one board member, one committee member, and if necessary amend documents to include that. Should not be any reason to as under a one unit, one vote, you can't have a board member with no vote. Again, exceptions occur. Stay away from them. So many folks have a short version of association living. Coleridge, an English Poet and writer said, "For in today, walks tomorrow." You allow exceptions today, other people have to live with them tomorrow.
Good condensation of issue. I may go a little further and suggest a husband wife team on the Board should not be allowed and is probably illegal unless specified and modifiocations made for Board Quorum and Board vote and owner vote. I am sure an exception can be made, but lets get real, an exception is not a rule to follow. Any husband and wife that wants to be on the same Board is also exposing themselves to so strain on the marraige, bad enough, one on the Board one on a committee, and that's the truth. So do one board member, one committee member, and if necessary amend documents to include that. Should not be any reason to as under a one unit, one vote, you can't have a board member with no vote. Again, exceptions occur. Stay away from them. So many folks have a short version of association living. Coleridge, an English Poet and writer said, "For in today, walks tomorrow." You allow exceptions today, other people have to live with them tomorrow.
KirkW1 (Texas)
Posts: 1,665
Posts: 1,665
Posted:
Ours allow an owner or the spouse of an owner to serve on the Board, but not both at the same time.
SusanW1 (Michigan)
Posts: 5,202
Posts: 5,202
Posted:
It would have to be stated in your governing documents exactly who can be a member of your board. There is nothing in Roberts Rules that forbids relatives from serving. (Many family members run corporations, nowadays)
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Our docs allows for members of the same family.
Our docs also allow for non-residents/owners to be board members.
The board "vote" is entirely different from a vote of the membership for things like amendments, etc.
The types of things the board "votes" on are different than what the membership "votes" on so the issue of 1-lot-1-vote doesn't apply to the board going about its business.
The board members each have one vote for board business (contractor A versus contractor B, etc); but only HOA members can vote on amendments, document changes, or special assessments, etc.
Our docs also allow for non-residents/owners to be board members.
The board "vote" is entirely different from a vote of the membership for things like amendments, etc.
The types of things the board "votes" on are different than what the membership "votes" on so the issue of 1-lot-1-vote doesn't apply to the board going about its business.
The board members each have one vote for board business (contractor A versus contractor B, etc); but only HOA members can vote on amendments, document changes, or special assessments, etc.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Michele,
It's great that your bylaws address this issue. IMO, most do not and that is why many boards have adopted the "1-lot-1-vote" rule even though, as you say, it really does not apply to board votes.
It's great that your bylaws address this issue. IMO, most do not and that is why many boards have adopted the "1-lot-1-vote" rule even though, as you say, it really does not apply to board votes.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Michele and Mary,
Give me your thoughts about documents that say there can be only 65 votes and only owners can serve on Board of directors. To me that is any voting by these owners is one vote, it matters not if it is as a Board member or not. If we have a vote needed to pass an amendum (for instance) and it is (for instance) going to take 43 members for passage, the votes of the BOD are included in this total. If a majority of the Board (3 members for instance) out of five, those three votes count the same as for amendments, 1 vote each. So, if you want to say that BOD vote is different than our members votes, it don't really matter and is just added something to the game, in our instance, that has no relevance.
Give me your thoughts about documents that say there can be only 65 votes and only owners can serve on Board of directors. To me that is any voting by these owners is one vote, it matters not if it is as a Board member or not. If we have a vote needed to pass an amendum (for instance) and it is (for instance) going to take 43 members for passage, the votes of the BOD are included in this total. If a majority of the Board (3 members for instance) out of five, those three votes count the same as for amendments, 1 vote each. So, if you want to say that BOD vote is different than our members votes, it don't really matter and is just added something to the game, in our instance, that has no relevance.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By RobertR1 on 02/03/2009 5:13 PM
Michele and Mary,
Give me your thoughts about documents that say there can be only 65 votes and only owners can serve on Board of directors. To me that is any voting by these owners is one vote, it matters not if it is as a Board member or not. If we have a vote needed to pass an amendum (for instance) and it is (for instance) going to take 43 members for passage, the votes of the BOD are included in this total. If a majority of the Board (3 members for instance) out of five, those three votes count the same as for amendments, 1 vote each. So, if you want to say that BOD vote is different than our members votes, it don't really matter and is just added something to the game, in our instance, that has no relevance.
Michele and Mary,
Give me your thoughts about documents that say there can be only 65 votes and only owners can serve on Board of directors. To me that is any voting by these owners is one vote, it matters not if it is as a Board member or not. If we have a vote needed to pass an amendum (for instance) and it is (for instance) going to take 43 members for passage, the votes of the BOD are included in this total. If a majority of the Board (3 members for instance) out of five, those three votes count the same as for amendments, 1 vote each. So, if you want to say that BOD vote is different than our members votes, it don't really matter and is just added something to the game, in our instance, that has no relevance.
But, Robert, the board members don't get 2 votes apiece, ONE vote for being a resident and another vote as a board member.
When they are voting on AMENDMENTS and ELECTIONS, etc., then they are voting as residents, their "vote" doesn't carry any more weight than any other member.
AND, since only lot holders (members) can vote on issues like amendments, etc., then only ONE member of the family can vote.
But in the course of doing their board business, for voting on motions, voting for contracts, etc., each board member gets a vote, regardless of their status as a homeowner/HOA member. In your scenario, they just happen to all also be HOA members.
In other words, HOMEOWNER'S don't typically vote on board business. They are two different types of business and voting requirements.
The original poster is somewhat confusing the issue of LOT VOTES with BOARD MEMBER votes.
They are apples and oranges, which is why, if the documents allow for more than one member of the family or non-HOA members to be on the board, their votes aren't restricted by the one-lot-one-vote requirement for the general membership on amendments, special assessments, etc.
In other words, each board member gets a vote, regardless of his/her membership status, whereas on membership votes only one vote per lot is allowed.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
I think I understand that but you keep going back to Board Members not being owners. Not the case here, all board members MUST be owners and are entitled to one vote. Suppose a Husband is Board member and wife is not. In your case, could wife hold vote and husband only hold Board vote? How can he vote on an amendment? She can not vote the vote because all Board members have 1 vote. I think our system is pretty simple, and your system is different and does require what our documents require. But our documents rule our vote, we have to conform.
You can call a Board vote on Board business different if you want, but it does not erase our requirements of 1 vote one owner. The words are there, we would have to amend the documents to change them and I suspect they were put there to avoid Non-owners serving on Boards. But hey, being different is not all bad.
You can call a Board vote on Board business different if you want, but it does not erase our requirements of 1 vote one owner. The words are there, we would have to amend the documents to change them and I suspect they were put there to avoid Non-owners serving on Boards. But hey, being different is not all bad.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
I think we are actually arguing in violent agreement.
But I still think that you're overthinking this.
If you docs allow for members of same family to be on the board, then the 1-lot-1-vote doesn't really apply to BOARD VOTES.
It only applies to MEMBERSHIP votes.
When the time comes to vote on amendments, it's not the BOARD that dictates whether the amendment passes or fails, it's the membership. As such, ONLY 1 VOTE PER LOT IS ALLOWED.
In voting on board business, that requirement is not applicable. It's not membership votes. It's the business of the board of directors.
So it if your docs allow both to be on the board, then there is a presumption that they are equal sitting directors and as such have equal votes AS BOARD MEMBERS, NOT as MEMBERSHIP, since MEMBERSHIP doesn't vote on board business.
But I still think that you're overthinking this.
If you docs allow for members of same family to be on the board, then the 1-lot-1-vote doesn't really apply to BOARD VOTES.
It only applies to MEMBERSHIP votes.
When the time comes to vote on amendments, it's not the BOARD that dictates whether the amendment passes or fails, it's the membership. As such, ONLY 1 VOTE PER LOT IS ALLOWED.
In voting on board business, that requirement is not applicable. It's not membership votes. It's the business of the board of directors.
So it if your docs allow both to be on the board, then there is a presumption that they are equal sitting directors and as such have equal votes AS BOARD MEMBERS, NOT as MEMBERSHIP, since MEMBERSHIP doesn't vote on board business.
BarbaraP3 (Maryland)
Posts: 90
Posts: 90
Posted:
Robert,
I am confused with your statements. Are you saying that a board member (also a lot owner) gets two votes on membership decisions..... amendments, special assessments, etc.?
I think most of us will agree that our documents state owners have one vote per lot, no matter how many people own the lot. One person will cast the vote for all owners of the lot. Our documents do not allow "board" votes on membership decisions. All of our board members MUST be owners in the association, so therefore get to cast one vote as an owner on membership decisions.
We added an amendment to our by-laws several years ago when for the first time in 20 years we had a husband and wife AND a father and daughter submit their letter of intent to run for the BOD which only consists of 5 members! We quickly put together an amendment stating, "NO relatives can serve on the board at the same time. Relatives includes by marriage, blood and in-law relatives."
By allowing relatives on the BOD you are running the risk of Nepotism and the relatives could hinder the board's direction and decisions by always siding with each other.
Better to be safe than sorry......
Barb
I am confused with your statements. Are you saying that a board member (also a lot owner) gets two votes on membership decisions..... amendments, special assessments, etc.?
I think most of us will agree that our documents state owners have one vote per lot, no matter how many people own the lot. One person will cast the vote for all owners of the lot. Our documents do not allow "board" votes on membership decisions. All of our board members MUST be owners in the association, so therefore get to cast one vote as an owner on membership decisions.
We added an amendment to our by-laws several years ago when for the first time in 20 years we had a husband and wife AND a father and daughter submit their letter of intent to run for the BOD which only consists of 5 members! We quickly put together an amendment stating, "NO relatives can serve on the board at the same time. Relatives includes by marriage, blood and in-law relatives."
By allowing relatives on the BOD you are running the risk of Nepotism and the relatives could hinder the board's direction and decisions by always siding with each other.
Better to be safe than sorry......
Barb
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By BarbaraP3 on 02/03/2009 6:55 PM
Robert,
By allowing relatives on the BOD you are running the risk of Nepotism and the relatives could hinder the board's direction and decisions by always siding with each other.
Better to be safe than sorry......
Barb
Robert,
By allowing relatives on the BOD you are running the risk of Nepotism and the relatives could hinder the board's direction and decisions by always siding with each other.
Better to be safe than sorry......
Barb
Sorry. . . .about what, exactly?
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
To all,
If I made a goof somewhere let me try this again.
All below written into documents.
We have 65 units.
We have a total of 65 votes,
We have five member Board.
Only owners can serve on Board.
There can be no more than 65 votes.
Only one vote per unit.
All owners vote on Members Business.
BOD votes on Board business.
(Now to clarify. You insist on calling this Board Business votes. Since only owners can vote, hold office, and there is only one vote per unit, and you can not have more than 65 votes, and the Board has five members, the only votes allowed are by ownners, then these votes are owners votes.
The BOD votes on amendments, same five votes and you call them members votes.
You say in my case then if those same five votes are voted to do Board business, they become Board votes. In your documents, that is true, it my documents the BOD votes and the membership votes are voted by the same people and there is only a total of 65 votes allowed, so, they are members votes.
It makes no difference in my case what you call them and since the documents only speak to 65 votes, any portion of those 65 votes can vote a decision, such as a % requirement. It just works out that way here. Our documents do not mention Board votes nor is there a need to. I understand what you are saying about the Board voting on Board Business, our documents seem to be written that there is no need to distinguish because it is still one vote, one unit, 1 owner. Husband and wife can not serve on Board, one can serve on Board, one on committees.
Now that is interesting and I don't know the answer. Is there a difference between BOD and committee votes? Again I would go back to one vote, one unit, 1 owner, and since the BOD is elected their 1 vote would count as a vote, any other committee votes since committees are not elected would not count as vote.
To add spice to the game, our Board can appoint officers among the owners to serve the Board. They do not have a Board Vote but they do have a member vote. I see no conflict there either.
I really don't disagree with anyone, I'm just saying it works out to be different in my documents.
I'm voted out!
If I made a goof somewhere let me try this again.
All below written into documents.
We have 65 units.
We have a total of 65 votes,
We have five member Board.
Only owners can serve on Board.
There can be no more than 65 votes.
Only one vote per unit.
All owners vote on Members Business.
BOD votes on Board business.
(Now to clarify. You insist on calling this Board Business votes. Since only owners can vote, hold office, and there is only one vote per unit, and you can not have more than 65 votes, and the Board has five members, the only votes allowed are by ownners, then these votes are owners votes.
The BOD votes on amendments, same five votes and you call them members votes.
You say in my case then if those same five votes are voted to do Board business, they become Board votes. In your documents, that is true, it my documents the BOD votes and the membership votes are voted by the same people and there is only a total of 65 votes allowed, so, they are members votes.
It makes no difference in my case what you call them and since the documents only speak to 65 votes, any portion of those 65 votes can vote a decision, such as a % requirement. It just works out that way here. Our documents do not mention Board votes nor is there a need to. I understand what you are saying about the Board voting on Board Business, our documents seem to be written that there is no need to distinguish because it is still one vote, one unit, 1 owner. Husband and wife can not serve on Board, one can serve on Board, one on committees.
Now that is interesting and I don't know the answer. Is there a difference between BOD and committee votes? Again I would go back to one vote, one unit, 1 owner, and since the BOD is elected their 1 vote would count as a vote, any other committee votes since committees are not elected would not count as vote.
To add spice to the game, our Board can appoint officers among the owners to serve the Board. They do not have a Board Vote but they do have a member vote. I see no conflict there either.
I really don't disagree with anyone, I'm just saying it works out to be different in my documents.
I'm voted out!
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Crap..........
I forgot to add, there can be no more than five Board members voting.
I forgot to add, there can be no more than five Board members voting.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Susan,
Robert's rules are just that. Rules to be accepted or rejected by the presiding. IMO. they should be used to maintain decorum and structure, not dictate laws. Your documents, if specific, must be followed. If not specific, they should be amended. Robert's is never incorporated into your documents except to say something to the effect, at the begining of a meeting: All procedural conflicts will be governed by Roberts Rules, or something like that.
Sorry.............just kidding!
Robert's rules are just that. Rules to be accepted or rejected by the presiding. IMO. they should be used to maintain decorum and structure, not dictate laws. Your documents, if specific, must be followed. If not specific, they should be amended. Robert's is never incorporated into your documents except to say something to the effect, at the begining of a meeting: All procedural conflicts will be governed by Roberts Rules, or something like that.
Sorry.............just kidding!
GeorgerwilliamsW (Indiana)
Posts: 975
Posts: 975
Posted:
Robert, you are terribly confused here.
In a membership election, most governing documents specify one vote per unit/lot independent of, and irrespective of, any other voting/membership arrangements followed by the board of directors.
If a husband and wife serve on a board of directors and have two votes on the board, when it comes to a member vote, the unit/lot which they own jointly (in most cases) has only one vote.
If the governing documents do not speak to the issue, then there is no reason that related individual owners (even non-members) cannot serve on the association board and have one vote per individual. The same holds for committees of the board of directors.
Here is some typical Hoosierland language regarding votes of members (not board (!) [emphasis added]:
In a membership election, most governing documents specify one vote per unit/lot independent of, and irrespective of, any other voting/membership arrangements followed by the board of directors.
If a husband and wife serve on a board of directors and have two votes on the board, when it comes to a member vote, the unit/lot which they own jointly (in most cases) has only one vote.
If the governing documents do not speak to the issue, then there is no reason that related individual owners (even non-members) cannot serve on the association board and have one vote per individual. The same holds for committees of the board of directors.
Here is some typical Hoosierland language regarding votes of members (not board (!) [emphasis added]:
- If title to a Lot is held by more than one person, each of such persons shall be a member.
- When more than one person holds title to any Lot, all such persons shall be members. The vote for such Lot shall be exercised as they among themselves determine, but in no event shall more than one vote be cast with respect to any one Lot. “Person”, whether appearing in upper case or lower case form, shall mean an individual, firm, corporation, partnership, association, trust, or other legal entity, or any combination thereof.
BarbaraP3 (Maryland)
Posts: 90
Posts: 90
Posted:
Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability or suitability.
If you have a husband and wife (or other relatives) on the BOD they may always be in alliance with each other, no matter what the discussion or vote is on.
My statement was just a precaution, it is better to be safe than sorry.
If you have a husband and wife (or other relatives) on the BOD they may always be in alliance with each other, no matter what the discussion or vote is on.
My statement was just a precaution, it is better to be safe than sorry.
BarbaraP3 (Maryland)
Posts: 90
Posts: 90
Posted:
Robert's quote....
The BOD votes on amendments, same five votes and you call them members votes.
You say in my case then if those same five votes are voted to do Board business, they become Board votes. In your documents, that is true, it my documents the BOD votes and the membership votes are voted by the same people and there is only a total of 65 votes allowed, so, they are members votes.
Thanks for the clarificataion.
In essence a BOD member's other owner (spouse) may cast the amendment vote, so therefore it is not a board vote.
The BOD votes on amendments, same five votes and you call them members votes.
You say in my case then if those same five votes are voted to do Board business, they become Board votes. In your documents, that is true, it my documents the BOD votes and the membership votes are voted by the same people and there is only a total of 65 votes allowed, so, they are members votes.
Thanks for the clarificataion.
In essence a BOD member's other owner (spouse) may cast the amendment vote, so therefore it is not a board vote.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By BarbaraP3 on 02/04/2009 4:13 AM
Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability or suitability.
If you have a husband and wife (or other relatives) on the BOD they may always be in alliance with each other, no matter what the discussion or vote is on.
My statement was just a precaution, it is better to be safe than sorry.
Nepotism is the showing of favoritism toward relatives based upon that relationship, rather than on an objective evaluation of ability or suitability.
If you have a husband and wife (or other relatives) on the BOD they may always be in alliance with each other, no matter what the discussion or vote is on.
My statement was just a precaution, it is better to be safe than sorry.
I still don't see a real problem here.
I see a perception of one.
There is nothing inherently wrong with husband and wife both serving on a board.
There may be an "appearance" of something wrong, but it's not necessarily something to be fearful of, in my opinion.
I know for a fact that some neighbors and friends will have closer "alliances" on boards than husbands and wives will.
The type of business conducted by the board rarely is done to the "benefit" of one household over another.
So I still don't see any inherent problems with so-called "nepotism" on the board.
My point is that the blanket statement that it's "bad" simply isn't fair and doesn't necessarily apply.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By RobertR1 on 02/04/2009 2:22 AM
Susan,
Robert's rules are just that. Rules to be accepted or rejected by the presiding. IMO. they should be used to maintain decorum and structure, not dictate laws. Your documents, if specific, must be followed. If not specific, they should be amended. Robert's is never incorporated into your documents except to say something to the effect, at the begining of a meeting: All procedural conflicts will be governed by Roberts Rules, or something like that.
Sorry.............just kidding!
Susan,
Robert's rules are just that. Rules to be accepted or rejected by the presiding. IMO. they should be used to maintain decorum and structure, not dictate laws. Your documents, if specific, must be followed. If not specific, they should be amended. Robert's is never incorporated into your documents except to say something to the effect, at the begining of a meeting: All procedural conflicts will be governed by Roberts Rules, or something like that.
Sorry.............just kidding!
Robert, your documents ARE being followed when the membership votes 1-lot-1-vote.
But are you trying to tell me that 65 people must vote on all the issues that come before the board on a day-to-day basis?
Of course not. The function of the board, and their votes, do not qualify as membership business requiring membership votes.
It's not that *I'm* calling it something different, it *IS* different.
They are two different votes/functions.
The board votes to select a vendor. EACH BOARD MEMBER VOTES 1 VOTE.
NO RESIDENTS' VOTE ARE USED.
So the 65 votes is moot. Only 5 DIRECTOR votes are required, and each board member has an equal vote, regardless of his or her lot ownership status. That does not conflict with your documents, since the board is simply conducting the business for which the individuals were elected.
When a individual board member votes on a CC&R amendment, then he or she is NOT voting with his/her Board of Directors Hat on. At that point, if one of the board members is a co-owner of a lot, then only ONE of the board members owning that lot can vote, because NOW is when the 1-lot-1-vote requirement kicks in: it's a membership vote.
You are conflating the two votes and functions.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Barbara,
Thanks for for input.
To all. I have no desire to argue what I read in my documents. You can call them what you want and I have no problem labling them Votes for Boards business if that is what you want. To me you are nit-picking what my documents say and are calling me confused because I can read or you say I don't understand.
Get down off your soap box George, I agree I am "badly confused" or something like that, have been all my life and hope to remain that way. Otherwise, I would have no desire to get better. Unlike some people I have run across in my life that have already reached that level of perfection that seems to allude everyone else in the world, I perfer to remain stupid, so let me to my misery and putrify in my cesspool of degradation.
I will try to be less confusing in the future. Looking back on this thread it seems a classic exaqmple of the old whispering game we played as kids. Some, may not have played this and some may have just jumped from baby to supreme being. But you line up a bunch of kids and the one at the end whispers something to the next one and down the line you go. At the end the last soul stands up and repeats what they had whispered to them. It is never what it starts out to be.
George, if you can give me your e-mail address, I will be glad to send you my posts so you can critique them, edit, change anything you want and make any conclusion you want. But wait, I don't have to do that, you do that here on this Board.
Thanks for for input.
To all. I have no desire to argue what I read in my documents. You can call them what you want and I have no problem labling them Votes for Boards business if that is what you want. To me you are nit-picking what my documents say and are calling me confused because I can read or you say I don't understand.
Get down off your soap box George, I agree I am "badly confused" or something like that, have been all my life and hope to remain that way. Otherwise, I would have no desire to get better. Unlike some people I have run across in my life that have already reached that level of perfection that seems to allude everyone else in the world, I perfer to remain stupid, so let me to my misery and putrify in my cesspool of degradation.
I will try to be less confusing in the future. Looking back on this thread it seems a classic exaqmple of the old whispering game we played as kids. Some, may not have played this and some may have just jumped from baby to supreme being. But you line up a bunch of kids and the one at the end whispers something to the next one and down the line you go. At the end the last soul stands up and repeats what they had whispered to them. It is never what it starts out to be.
George, if you can give me your e-mail address, I will be glad to send you my posts so you can critique them, edit, change anything you want and make any conclusion you want. But wait, I don't have to do that, you do that here on this Board.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By RobertR1 on 02/03/2009 5:13 PM
Michele and Mary,
Give me your thoughts about documents that say there can be only 65 votes and only owners can serve on Board of directors. To me that is any voting by these owners is one vote, it matters not if it is as a Board member or not. If we have a vote needed to pass an amendum (for instance) and it is (for instance) going to take 43 members for passage, the votes of the BOD are included in this total. If a majority of the Board (3 members for instance) out of five, those three votes count the same as for amendments, 1 vote each. So, if you want to say that BOD vote is different than our members votes, it don't really matter and is just added something to the game, in our instance, that has no relevance.
Michele and Mary,
Give me your thoughts about documents that say there can be only 65 votes and only owners can serve on Board of directors. To me that is any voting by these owners is one vote, it matters not if it is as a Board member or not. If we have a vote needed to pass an amendum (for instance) and it is (for instance) going to take 43 members for passage, the votes of the BOD are included in this total. If a majority of the Board (3 members for instance) out of five, those three votes count the same as for amendments, 1 vote each. So, if you want to say that BOD vote is different than our members votes, it don't really matter and is just added something to the game, in our instance, that has no relevance.
Robert,
When the membership is voting on an issue, the board, as a whole, does not vote. However, each board member is entitled to vote as a member of the assn. If there are two board members from the same unit, then only one can vote on an issue which is to be decided by the membership. It must always be remembered that BOD matters are different than membership matters and one has nothing to do with the other. That is why Michele says (and I agree) the "1 vote 1 lot" justification doesn't apply. The reason it doesn't apply is because it's normally written in the CCRs that each lot only gets one vote which means votes cast by the membership -- not the BOD. I won't say there are none, but I do believe very few bylaws state whether or not more than one member of a unit may serve on the BOD at the same time.
As far as a board vote not being any different that a member vote and having no relevance, I disagree. A BOD vote gives you a picture of the thinking of the board (from 3 to perhaps as many as 10 members of the assn). On the other hand, a vote of the membership gives a picture of the thinking of the members, which may be far different than that of the board. The board votes on all issues concerning the operation of the HOA, while the members only vote on the election of directors, perhaps to ratify the budget and approve a special assessment. All of these actions are relevant, in their own sense, and required for the proper operation of the HOA.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Michele,
I never said anything of the sort that 65 members have to vote on all votes. If you look you will see I said that the documents allow for any number of vote to make decisions, such as votes by the Board.
My documents do not require all 65 votes be used, such as a majority on a board vote (5 members...remember). We all have several requiorements for % of vote by the members present and % of votes by the total owners, and % of votes by the members using proxys.
Your statement that starts: So the 65 votes moot. It is not moot, the directors have to be members that carry the association vote, they do not lose it because they are directors. You insist in calling this a Board vote (different than owners vote) I say do it, and if my Board wants to do that I don't care. But by doing that, you do not take away the vote of one unit 1 vote, it remains, it is how you got on the Board, you could not get on the board if you didn't carry that vote, our document says so. You don't serve two masters with your vote. Whether you vote with the membership or with the Board, your vote counts one and we would hope your vote would be for the best interests of the association in both cases.
That also addresses you next paragraph. Again, in my situation the way the documents are written, and to be clear: we have co-owners of individual units. Those co-owners select, how ever they want, for one peorson to carry the vote. We have no provisions for more that 65 individual votes.
I am not confusing the two votes, I am saying in my case they are one in the same, call them what you want.
That is also funny
about the BOD taking their hat off to make a membership vote. I think I will motion we buy the Board little Sea Captain Board hats with braid on them to vote Board matters and little enlisted sailor hats to put on when they vote membership matters.
Yikes, I'd better leave town!!!!!!!!!!!!!Incidently, I don't live where I said, I just moved to Bora Bora.
I never said anything of the sort that 65 members have to vote on all votes. If you look you will see I said that the documents allow for any number of vote to make decisions, such as votes by the Board.
My documents do not require all 65 votes be used, such as a majority on a board vote (5 members...remember). We all have several requiorements for % of vote by the members present and % of votes by the total owners, and % of votes by the members using proxys.
Your statement that starts: So the 65 votes moot. It is not moot, the directors have to be members that carry the association vote, they do not lose it because they are directors. You insist in calling this a Board vote (different than owners vote) I say do it, and if my Board wants to do that I don't care. But by doing that, you do not take away the vote of one unit 1 vote, it remains, it is how you got on the Board, you could not get on the board if you didn't carry that vote, our document says so. You don't serve two masters with your vote. Whether you vote with the membership or with the Board, your vote counts one and we would hope your vote would be for the best interests of the association in both cases.
That also addresses you next paragraph. Again, in my situation the way the documents are written, and to be clear: we have co-owners of individual units. Those co-owners select, how ever they want, for one peorson to carry the vote. We have no provisions for more that 65 individual votes.
I am not confusing the two votes, I am saying in my case they are one in the same, call them what you want.
That is also funny
about the BOD taking their hat off to make a membership vote. I think I will motion we buy the Board little Sea Captain Board hats with braid on them to vote Board matters and little enlisted sailor hats to put on when they vote membership matters. Yikes, I'd better leave town!!!!!!!!!!!!!Incidently, I don't live where I said, I just moved to Bora Bora.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By RobertR1 on 02/03/2009 8:45 PM
To all,
If I made a goof somewhere let me try this again.
All below written into documents.
We have 65 units.
We have a total of 65 votes,
We have five member Board.
Only owners can serve on Board.
There can be no more than 65 votes.
Only one vote per unit.
All owners vote on Members Business.
BOD votes on Board business.
(Now to clarify. You insist on calling this Board Business votes. Since only owners can vote, hold office, and there is only one vote per unit, and you can not have more than 65 votes, and the Board has five members, the only votes allowed are by ownners, then these votes are owners votes.
The BOD votes on amendments, same five votes and you call them members votes.
You say in my case then if those same five votes are voted to do Board business, they become Board votes. In your documents, that is true, it my documents the BOD votes and the membership votes are voted by the same people and there is only a total of 65 votes allowed, so, they are members votes.
It makes no difference in my case what you call them and since the documents only speak to 65 votes, any portion of those 65 votes can vote a decision, such as a % requirement. It just works out that way here. Our documents do not mention Board votes nor is there a need to. I understand what you are saying about the Board voting on Board Business, our documents seem to be written that there is no need to distinguish because it is still one vote, one unit, 1 owner. Husband and wife can not serve on Board, one can serve on Board, one on committees.
Now that is interesting and I don't know the answer. Is there a difference between BOD and committee votes? Again I would go back to one vote, one unit, 1 owner, and since the BOD is elected their 1 vote would count as a vote, any other committee votes since committees are not elected would not count as vote.
To add spice to the game, our Board can appoint officers among the owners to serve the Board. They do not have a Board Vote but they do have a member vote. I see no conflict there either.
I really don't disagree with anyone, I'm just saying it works out to be different in my documents.
I'm voted out!
To all,
If I made a goof somewhere let me try this again.
All below written into documents.
We have 65 units.
We have a total of 65 votes,
We have five member Board.
Only owners can serve on Board.
There can be no more than 65 votes.
Only one vote per unit.
All owners vote on Members Business.
BOD votes on Board business.
(Now to clarify. You insist on calling this Board Business votes. Since only owners can vote, hold office, and there is only one vote per unit, and you can not have more than 65 votes, and the Board has five members, the only votes allowed are by ownners, then these votes are owners votes.
The BOD votes on amendments, same five votes and you call them members votes.
You say in my case then if those same five votes are voted to do Board business, they become Board votes. In your documents, that is true, it my documents the BOD votes and the membership votes are voted by the same people and there is only a total of 65 votes allowed, so, they are members votes.
It makes no difference in my case what you call them and since the documents only speak to 65 votes, any portion of those 65 votes can vote a decision, such as a % requirement. It just works out that way here. Our documents do not mention Board votes nor is there a need to. I understand what you are saying about the Board voting on Board Business, our documents seem to be written that there is no need to distinguish because it is still one vote, one unit, 1 owner. Husband and wife can not serve on Board, one can serve on Board, one on committees.
Now that is interesting and I don't know the answer. Is there a difference between BOD and committee votes? Again I would go back to one vote, one unit, 1 owner, and since the BOD is elected their 1 vote would count as a vote, any other committee votes since committees are not elected would not count as vote.
To add spice to the game, our Board can appoint officers among the owners to serve the Board. They do not have a Board Vote but they do have a member vote. I see no conflict there either.
I really don't disagree with anyone, I'm just saying it works out to be different in my documents.
I'm voted out!
My Dear (badly confused, but likes it that way! LOL) Robert,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the point you're trying to get across is that, because your docs state a board member must be a member of the assn, it doesn't matter if they are voting as a director (on board issues) or as a member (on member issues) they are still casting one vote on every decision being made by the assn. That's true! However, a board member's vote as a member should not be confused with a board member's vote as a director. The issues being voted upon are not the same. The board has authority to vote for matters that the members do not have the authority to vote for and vice versa. The fact that a board member is also a member doesn't negate this or make it any different. This, I believe, may be where the confusion comes in. BTW, when you refer to the documents stating "only 65 votes can vote a decision" this is in reference to decisions made by the membership and a verification that each lot only gets one vote since you state there are 65 lots in your assn. The docs are talking about member votes, not BOD votes. You also question committee votes. Any decisions made in a committee are voted on by the committee members, whether they are members of the assn or not. The board doesn't enter into it, nor does the membership as a whole. The "leadership" of each entity votes on the issue before them, i.e., members of a committee vote on committee matters; members of the BOD vote on board matters; and members of the assn vote on membership matters. The fact that a member may also be a committee member and/or a board member doesn't matter. In each capacity they are only casting one vote.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Robert,
You said: "That is also funny about the BOD taking their hat off to make a membership vote. I think I will motion we buy the Board little Sea Captain Board hats with braid on them to vote Board matters and little enlisted sailor hats to put on when they vote membership matters.
Yikes, I'd better leave town!!!!!!!!!!!!!Incidently, I don't live where I said, I just moved to Bora Bora."
Robert you are toooo funny! I'm reading this thread while having my morning tea and you almost made me choke twice. First in reading your response to George (that was classic!! LOL) and now this. You are a character and we all love ya for it. Every internet site needs some levity at times and you've got the job of bringing it to ours. :-)
You said: "That is also funny about the BOD taking their hat off to make a membership vote. I think I will motion we buy the Board little Sea Captain Board hats with braid on them to vote Board matters and little enlisted sailor hats to put on when they vote membership matters.
Yikes, I'd better leave town!!!!!!!!!!!!!Incidently, I don't live where I said, I just moved to Bora Bora."
Robert you are toooo funny! I'm reading this thread while having my morning tea and you almost made me choke twice. First in reading your response to George (that was classic!! LOL) and now this. You are a character and we all love ya for it. Every internet site needs some levity at times and you've got the job of bringing it to ours. :-)
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Barbara,
Thanks for you interest.
If your documents allow for (other owners)it will be different than mine. Husband and wife or whatever don't have individual votes. We have 65 vote, a total of only 65 votes is all that is allowed.
Many an argument has been started around here about who gets to cast vote and really the BOD don't care who casts votes, that is not their function, their function is to only allow 1 vote for each unit.
We had an interesting little deal here recently. The Board put out a survey, they wanted to induce members to answer it. They came up with (To me...a good idea) and wanted to give a "door prize". Sound simple. But who do you drop in the hat, certainly not the name of the vote holder, because we have co-owners in some units. So plain old simple what ever unit shows the vote, put that # in the hat.
Thanks for you interest.
If your documents allow for (other owners)it will be different than mine. Husband and wife or whatever don't have individual votes. We have 65 vote, a total of only 65 votes is all that is allowed.
Many an argument has been started around here about who gets to cast vote and really the BOD don't care who casts votes, that is not their function, their function is to only allow 1 vote for each unit.
We had an interesting little deal here recently. The Board put out a survey, they wanted to induce members to answer it. They came up with (To me...a good idea) and wanted to give a "door prize". Sound simple. But who do you drop in the hat, certainly not the name of the vote holder, because we have co-owners in some units. So plain old simple what ever unit shows the vote, put that # in the hat.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Robert, you are cracking me up, too!
I still think we are arguing in violent agreement on the exact same point!
LOL
I still think we are arguing in violent agreement on the exact same point!
LOL
BarbaraP3 (Maryland)
Posts: 90
Posts: 90
Posted:
Our documents only allow one vote per lot.
If husband is BOD and co-owner of lot with wife, wife can vote for the "lot" and the husband, BOD, does not get to vote on membership issues!
One of our previous boards wanted each lot to register the "official vote caster"....it never flew. "Door prizes" sound like a good inducement to get members out to vote. And yes, drop the lot number in the hat.
Also, when does the ship leave for Bora Bora? Can I hitch hike?
We have 8 inches of snow here in the Phila area!
If husband is BOD and co-owner of lot with wife, wife can vote for the "lot" and the husband, BOD, does not get to vote on membership issues!
One of our previous boards wanted each lot to register the "official vote caster"....it never flew. "Door prizes" sound like a good inducement to get members out to vote. And yes, drop the lot number in the hat.
Also, when does the ship leave for Bora Bora? Can I hitch hike?
We have 8 inches of snow here in the Phila area!
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
From Bora Bora,
Don't be nice to me and get me started again.
I just wish for my Board that when ever they make a vote on Board business or association business they make this vote for the good of the organization.
You guys are all ok, and I love ya.
Oh: Is "violent agreement" the same thing as "violent lovemaking"?
If if is I am still waiting to waiting to lite up and blow smoke rings."
Don't be nice to me and get me started again.
I just wish for my Board that when ever they make a vote on Board business or association business they make this vote for the good of the organization.
You guys are all ok, and I love ya.
Oh: Is "violent agreement" the same thing as "violent lovemaking"?
If if is I am still waiting to waiting to lite up and blow smoke rings."
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Barbara,
Since you have all that snow, I will send my private jet to pick you up at Philly airport and transport you here. But wait, you have too much snow.
Since you have all that snow, I will send my private jet to pick you up at Philly airport and transport you here. But wait, you have too much snow.
MaarshaM (Texas)
Posts: 6
Posts: 6
Posted:
Thanks to all of you for your input, but enough already. I got the message...
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Maarsh
I am to blame for sort of High jacking your thread. Thus the other stuff got in the way. If you have any further questions, please post them as maybe you have the impression we talk too much and allow other stuff to creep in. In our defense we do have a lot of threads going and a lot of different stuff to handle. Hope we helped.
I am to blame for sort of High jacking your thread. Thus the other stuff got in the way. If you have any further questions, please post them as maybe you have the impression we talk too much and allow other stuff to creep in. In our defense we do have a lot of threads going and a lot of different stuff to handle. Hope we helped.
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posts: 5,671
Posted:
Maarsha,
No wonder you got a little bewildered. After reading your original post, it went quickly to how many votes per lot and so on. The only answer that I can give you is that it will be spelled out in your Bylaw or perhaps the Article of Inc. or Charter as some States call them.If not, perhaps your State laws on HOAs.
I am firmly against any 2 immediate family members being on a Board at the same time. The reason? Boards sometimes have to vote on issues that may be favoring perhaps some of the members and not others. This gives them 2 votes which is an advantage against any opposing votes. It might be difficult for a wife member to vote against her husband director or vice versa. And if I think hard, I could come up with others but you get my idea. Some will say that they can think for themselves and will vote the way that they want, even if it is against a spouse. I would and that is why me and my Husband do not serve on any board at the same time.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DonnaS on 02/04/2009 11:54 AM
Maarsha,
No wonder you got a little bewildered. After reading your original post, it went quickly to how many votes per lot and so on. The only answer that I can give you is that it will be spelled out in your Bylaw or perhaps the Article of Inc. or Charter as some States call them.If not, perhaps your State laws on HOAs.
I am firmly against any 2 immediate family members being on a Board at the same time. The reason? Boards sometimes have to vote on issues that may be favoring perhaps some of the members and not others. This gives them 2 votes which is an advantage against any opposing votes. It might be difficult for a wife member to vote against her husband director or vice versa. And if I think hard, I could come up with others but you get my idea. Some will say that they can think for themselves and will vote the way that they want, even if it is against a spouse. I would and that is why me and my Husband do not serve on any board at the same time.
Maarsha,
No wonder you got a little bewildered. After reading your original post, it went quickly to how many votes per lot and so on. The only answer that I can give you is that it will be spelled out in your Bylaw or perhaps the Article of Inc. or Charter as some States call them.If not, perhaps your State laws on HOAs.
I am firmly against any 2 immediate family members being on a Board at the same time. The reason? Boards sometimes have to vote on issues that may be favoring perhaps some of the members and not others. This gives them 2 votes which is an advantage against any opposing votes. It might be difficult for a wife member to vote against her husband director or vice versa. And if I think hard, I could come up with others but you get my idea. Some will say that they can think for themselves and will vote the way that they want, even if it is against a spouse. I would and that is why me and my Husband do not serve on any board at the same time.
I just don't agree with that philosophy.
I've seen worse voting blocks with affiliated neighbors rather than alleged husband/wife "teams."
If both are on the board, most likely both are very strong individuals and not necessarily extensions of each other.
I'm not sure I even understand what it means that some issues may be favoring some members and not others that the board will need to vote on.
I have a feeling people are trying to articulate some sort of conflict of interest, but I'm just not grasping any scenarios where that would apply, that wouldn't also apply to 2 or 3 or more board members being in "cahoots" with each other as a voting block anyway.
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posts: 5,671
Posted:
Michelle,
Oh I absolutely agree that there can be voting blocks by non related Board members as well as spouses and that happens everyday. The favoring of members issues can be simple things like voting for landscaping or new flower beds where some could see and others not, intalling a fountain when some don't want it and others do. Kind of a stretch of the imagination but I still believe that there should be a wide variety of input from Board members and spouses sometimes cannot be seperated at the hip. Key word here is "SOMETIMES"
EdieL (Virginia)
Posts: 86
Posts: 86
Posted:
OK I am still confused. Documents relating to votes.
Votes are per lot/unit, regardless of number of owners of
each lot/unit. Our Docs state 2 votes per lot on members votes.
The votes of members don't have anything to do with BOD votes.
Ours, 7 BOD needs majority of BOD to vote on a BOD action.
Also ours state every legal owner (on the deed) is a member of the Assoc.
Therefore they could all sit on the BOD but when it comes to member/lot
votes each lot has 2 votes regardless of # of ownership members for that lot.
Edie
Votes are per lot/unit, regardless of number of owners of
each lot/unit. Our Docs state 2 votes per lot on members votes.
The votes of members don't have anything to do with BOD votes.
Ours, 7 BOD needs majority of BOD to vote on a BOD action.
Also ours state every legal owner (on the deed) is a member of the Assoc.
Therefore they could all sit on the BOD but when it comes to member/lot
votes each lot has 2 votes regardless of # of ownership members for that lot.
Edie
DonnaS (Tennessee)
Posts: 5,671
Posts: 5,671
Posted:
EdieL,
You are not confused. You stated it clearly.
1 Vote per Board member.
2 votes per lot.
Board votes and member votes ARE NOT RELATED other than a Board member is also a lot member.(owner)
DwightT (Idaho)
Posts: 664
Posts: 664
Posted:
I agree with Michelle on this. If my wife was on the Board with me, I can guarantee that she would vote her own mind and not just follow my lead. On the other hand, if I don't want to wind up sleeping on the couch, I might be inclined to vote her way. But then again, with her snoring, I'm sleeping out there a lot more these days anyway...
While I will agree that it is better to have Board members be unrelated, I don't think it should be flat-out banned either. It's probably not as big an issue for the larger Associations, but we've seen posts here lately about some HOAs having problems getting enough people interested in being on the Board. Sometimes if both husband and wife are willing and able to serve, that at least means that there will be two warm bodies at the Board meetings.
While I will agree that it is better to have Board members be unrelated, I don't think it should be flat-out banned either. It's probably not as big an issue for the larger Associations, but we've seen posts here lately about some HOAs having problems getting enough people interested in being on the Board. Sometimes if both husband and wife are willing and able to serve, that at least means that there will be two warm bodies at the Board meetings.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DwightT on 02/04/2009 12:54 PM
I agree with Michelle on this. If my wife was on the Board with me, I can guarantee that she would vote her own mind and not just follow my lead. On the other hand, if I don't want to wind up sleeping on the couch, I might be inclined to vote her way. But then again, with her snoring, I'm sleeping out there a lot more these days anyway...
While I will agree that it is better to have Board members be unrelated, I don't think it should be flat-out banned either. It's probably not as big an issue for the larger Associations, but we've seen posts here lately about some HOAs having problems getting enough people interested in being on the Board. Sometimes if both husband and wife are willing and able to serve, that at least means that there will be two warm bodies at the Board meetings.
I agree with Michelle on this. If my wife was on the Board with me, I can guarantee that she would vote her own mind and not just follow my lead. On the other hand, if I don't want to wind up sleeping on the couch, I might be inclined to vote her way. But then again, with her snoring, I'm sleeping out there a lot more these days anyway...
While I will agree that it is better to have Board members be unrelated, I don't think it should be flat-out banned either. It's probably not as big an issue for the larger Associations, but we've seen posts here lately about some HOAs having problems getting enough people interested in being on the Board. Sometimes if both husband and wife are willing and able to serve, that at least means that there will be two warm bodies at the Board meetings.
. . . quite agree. . .
Also, please encourage your wife to enter a sleep study. Her snoring may indicate a serious problem (such as sleep apnea) which can lead to other health issues.
Then again, you may actually enjoy the couch!
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Man,
I am on a roll, three opinions in a row I agree with. I hasten to add there may be little quirks in each association and the documents don't always cover everything.
But Dwight, have you been taken your medication?
I am on a roll, three opinions in a row I agree with. I hasten to add there may be little quirks in each association and the documents don't always cover everything.
But Dwight, have you been taken your medication?
EllenS1 (Florida)
Posts: 1,148
Posts: 1,148
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MicheleD on 02/04/2009 12:12 PM
Posted By DonnaS on 02/04/2009 11:54 AM
Maarsha,
No wonder you got a little bewildered. After reading your original post, it went quickly to how many votes per lot and so on. The only answer that I can give you is that it will be spelled out in your Bylaw or perhaps the Article of Inc. or Charter as some States call them.If not, perhaps your State laws on HOAs.
I am firmly against any 2 immediate family members being on a Board at the same time. The reason? Boards sometimes have to vote on issues that may be favoring perhaps some of the members and not others. This gives them 2 votes which is an advantage against any opposing votes. It might be difficult for a wife member to vote against her husband director or vice versa. And if I think hard, I could come up with others but you get my idea. Some will say that they can think for themselves and will vote the way that they want, even if it is against a spouse. I would and that is why me and my Husband do not serve on any board at the same time.
Maarsha,
No wonder you got a little bewildered. After reading your original post, it went quickly to how many votes per lot and so on. The only answer that I can give you is that it will be spelled out in your Bylaw or perhaps the Article of Inc. or Charter as some States call them.If not, perhaps your State laws on HOAs.
I am firmly against any 2 immediate family members being on a Board at the same time. The reason? Boards sometimes have to vote on issues that may be favoring perhaps some of the members and not others. This gives them 2 votes which is an advantage against any opposing votes. It might be difficult for a wife member to vote against her husband director or vice versa. And if I think hard, I could come up with others but you get my idea. Some will say that they can think for themselves and will vote the way that they want, even if it is against a spouse. I would and that is why me and my Husband do not serve on any board at the same time.
I just don't agree with that philosophy.
I've seen worse voting blocks with affiliated neighbors rather than alleged husband/wife "teams."
If both are on the board, most likely both are very strong individuals and not necessarily extensions of each other.
I'm not sure I even understand what it means that some issues may be favoring some members and not others that the board will need to vote on.
I have a feeling people are trying to articulate some sort of conflict of interest, but I'm just not grasping any scenarios where that would apply, that wouldn't also apply to 2 or 3 or more board members being in "cahoots" with each other as a voting block anyway.
I must agree with Michele. My daugher and I own separate townhomes in our assn and are both on the board. A neighbor thought that wouldn't be a good idea when she heard of it but she is the usual complainer. I told her if she ran for the board I would gladly step aside since I had no problem enjoying my "golden years". We are lucky to get enough to serve on the board and I can assure you my daughter and I do not always vote the same. At this point we both would like to let others serve on the board but where are they?
EllenS1 (Florida)
Posts: 1,148
Posts: 1,148
Posted:
I meant to say we are lucky IF we get enough to serve on the board. Our annual meeting comes up this month and for a couple of months we have been beating the bushes trying to get others on the board but......you know the rest.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
To all,
I want to defend our habit of wandering a little on our responses. Case in point, this thread. I see two important items that come up all the time being addressed externally here. One is Donnas', explanation of how her Board amemded their documents for their particular situation regarding renters. Whether you agree or not, it is important that this is a individual association and has to be tailored that way. The other excellent statement was Ellen directly pointing out that BOD's should be aware of who is wagging the tail. It is the Board, it is not the the management company and I am sure good M/C do not try to run the association.
That's it.
I want to defend our habit of wandering a little on our responses. Case in point, this thread. I see two important items that come up all the time being addressed externally here. One is Donnas', explanation of how her Board amemded their documents for their particular situation regarding renters. Whether you agree or not, it is important that this is a individual association and has to be tailored that way. The other excellent statement was Ellen directly pointing out that BOD's should be aware of who is wagging the tail. It is the Board, it is not the the management company and I am sure good M/C do not try to run the association.
That's it.
🎯 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