TERMINATE PMC!!!

Started by KathleenR2 • 54 replies • 3451 views

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

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

KathleenR2 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

Hello everyone!
Can the homeowners/HOA get a petition going to terminate the current PMC. They are rude, lie and are "nickle and diming" us to death or does this have to go through the BOD first. If this does not have to go through the board first, what percentage is required for this to happen? We have a 90 unit complex.

I have always received great responses whenever I visit this HOATalk, so thank you so much to all of you who are more experienced and knowledgeable!

Kathy
Ontario, CA

SteveM9 (Massachusetts)
Posts: 3,699

Posted:

whats a PMC?

KathleenR2 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

PMC = PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY

KathleenR2 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

PMC = PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY

SteveM9 (Massachusetts)
Posts: 3,699

Posted:

Thanks. So many acronyms in the world, sometimes its hard to figure out what the heck people are talking about.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Kathleen,

The PMC's contract is with the BOD (acting for the assn), not the members; so I would think the BOD would have to terminate. Also there are contract provisions regarding termination that must be followed and the members are most likely not aware of what they are. You and your friends should take this issue to the BOD for resolution.

JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967

Posted:

What Mary said.

JonD1
Posts: 2,350

Posted:

Throwing someone out is actually the easy part. IF you can do it within the conditions of the contract signed by the PMC and BOD.

I would wonder how the current BOD feels on this issue as THEY are the ones who interact with the PMC most often.

I work back from the other direction, when you terminate them WHO will replace them??? Anyone have any idea?

I would have an answer to that question before I pushed to remove a PMC.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Jon,
I believe the OP feels there is justification to remove the P/M, how can it be done? Mary is right the BOD hired the P/M but lots of times this is not entirely true. The PM could be a hold over from the last board and in many instances, I would imagine, from Boards many years in the past. In our days of absentee ownership, there is great Resistance to even consider firing the PM. The adage; the devil you got may be better than the devil you get is a cope out and a sign of poor management. Jon emphasis on replacement is misdirected. That should never weigh on a decision of an employee performance. Should you know or advertise for the position, absolutely, should you let the fact you don't know who will replace the PM, therefore, don't consider firing them, of course not. I have experienced this first hand, more that a couple times, as you all will if you let the tail wag the dog. That is what happens when you don't watch the store over the years.

P/M are not different than any of us, you give us enough rope and we will, over time, demand that our way is the right way.

So, maybe we can give the OP some advice if we know more about her reasons for this specific interest.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Robert,

Whether the PM was hired by the current board or not, it's still a matter for the board -- not the members. Whatever the reason is that has caused some members to want the PM removed should be reported to the BOD. But, in IMO, the members cannot "do the deed". I doubt you would find it written anywhere in the gov docs that the members have the authority to cancel a contract or fire an employee. These are BOD functions.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Mary,
When and if a P/M is fired , hired, or directed, THAT is a Board matter, never said it wasn't.

It is equally the Boards function to be aware of the owners concerns. I would bet my bottom dollar there is a problem with the PM by more than one owner. You jump on your Board podium and start defending the board. No one has questioned the Boards authority and that is not the issue, I bet I am right.

The issue is probably the Board is absentee and don't want to face the fact they may have to perform an administrative function they have no stomach for. It would mean they may have to get deeply involved in making a change.

You took exception (unwarranted) that I proclaimed that somehow this was a not a Board responsibility. I said it was a responsibility and if a change is needed they have to make it. And there-in is my point. It is the Boards job to hire and fire the PM, it is also their responsibility to be accountable for good performance and also to respond to owners concern. When an owner shows concern about mismanagement of the association and brings this subject to the Board, the answer is not for the Board to jump up and say, 'we have the right to hire and fire employees." Where is resolution to the concern in that statement.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Kathleen,
Your question of whether the owners can get a petition up to fire the P/M.

As far as I can see the answer is yes. Will it work and the manager gets fired? Who knows? But there are better more effective ways to handle the matter. I think we can accurately state the Board is the entity responsible for all employees, so they have to do the deed.

But, from your post, and reading a lot into it by assuming there are other owners concerned, I would suggest the following.

The group should compose a joint letter to the Board and request a private hearing before the Board without the presence of the M/C. State your reason as wanting to express concerns over an employee's conduct. Specifically state you want a closed hearing in the presence of owners only.

No reason they should not grant your request. Pick a spokesman, and define specific acts over a period of time. If you all consider the actions do warrant firing, state it so. Then ask for the Board to respond to your concerns.

Record the meeting and hopefully, you all can talk this through.

If your group is not satisfied and have the resolve, build more support and call a special meeting to replace the Board. First find out what all that means.

Maybe the M/C could send another manager, not everyone works with everyone. That action is again a Board responsibility and your group has to convince the Board the problem exists and is serious.

Keep your contact with the manager to good morning and no conversation about association matters. If necessary ask the Board to assign a Board member to your group to discuss ongoing problems.

I believe in the scheme of things, a group of owners concerned about the association is in no way usurping the Boards authority. Addressing a group of owners concerns is probably the single most important function the Board can perform. It far outweighs the importance of who hired the personnel.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Robert,

First of all, I am not a board member and I was not defending the board.

Secondly I may have misread you. When you stated perhaps the current board did not hire the PM, I mistook that to mean you were saying they are not resp. for firing him.

I think you may have hit the nail on the head in saying this is probably an absentee board. The OP stated the PM "is rude, lies and is nickle and diming us to death". Of course any complaints with the PM should go to the board before a member petition is circulated to get rid of the PM. I was under the impression the OP was asking about petitioning the board to fire the PM not petitioning the board because of mismanagement. To just ask (or demand) that the PM be fired w/o knowing the whole story is not proper either and that is why I stated it's a board matter.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Mary,
And I agree completely and now I will be able to go out in this Arizona heat here in SC. They say it is not the heat but the humidity.............bull.

However, I don't have any "howevers" so my world is back to the usually wobbly turning. "Wobbly", I wonder if that is a word.
I will see what spell check says, and not tell anyone.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Robert,

And here they say "it's a dry heat" and to that I say bull****!! I grew up in humid PA but we never talked about the humidity. We just lived with it and we had no a/c. I've lived in Baton Rouge where the humidity is probably like yours in SC; don't know if the temps are the same or not. But I do know it was awfully uncomfortable in the summer! Humidity and heat is a bad combination. Here it's more than "awfully uncomfortable" in the summer!

I think it's "wobbley" -- tottering, unsteady. Does that describe you, Robert? When I was younger, that may have described me after a few drinks, but now that I'm older, I really don't need the drinks! LOL

JonD1
Posts: 2,350

Posted:

Robert:

You have a habit of filling in the blanks with YOUR own facts that somehow support YOUR viewpoint.

We don't know anything about the Board or the MC from the OP. Just YOUR guess.

Who hired the MC nor how long they have served the property.

I would guess the Board was in fact elected for some reason. By the owners.

Now you have set a course to have the homeowners force the MC to be fired. And then you even go so far as to suggest if unsuccessful the homeowners should move to remove the Board.

I actually serve on a Board and in my opinion Kathy's claims that the MC lies, is rude and "is nickle and diming us to death" does not warrant the MC's termination. Just perhaps we would need more facts ( not speculation) before we can make an informed decision.

Every property has a group of people who always believe they have all the answers, when in fact they know very little. If we changed MC companies each time an owner complained because the response they recieved was not up to their standards we would have no companies left to hire.

IMO the owners should have NO role in the hiring and firing of an MC. They have no idea what is required or needed for them to do a satisfactory job. That is why there is a Board in position to make such decisions.

As to my comments about knowing beforehand who might replace the terminated MC that comes from actually dealing with several situations while SERVING on the Board. Your suggestion this should play no role in the thought process suggests you haven't seen the results of lacking a complete plan can have.

And finally Robert my job as Board President is not to listen endlessly to each demand, request and suggestion from the owners. If you served on a Board you would understand in some cases no matter what you do it will never satsify those who wish to play a role, just a limited role in which they can sit on the sidelines allowing others to do all the work while they sit by and throw out suggestions and demands as to how things SHOULD be done. I have more important things to do.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Jon,

Although I respect Robert and his opinions and can understand where he is coming from, I agree with everything you've said. This is definitely not a matter for the members to deal with, although I would find nothing wrong when them informing the board of their complaints. But what should be done about it is a matter for the board to determine.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

To Mary and Jon, I never said I was giving an informed opinion. Nothing I said is in opposition with associations documents.

I stated loudly and clearly it was a board responsibility, I pointed out that the group should go before the Board to discuss their concerns.

You two are not saying this is not proper are you. Mary. I based my remarks on my assumption this was an absentee BOD, you agreed it may be.

Well, you can't agree it may be and support all that Jon has concluded.

Jon, you stated I am making unioformed decisions. Do me a favor and point out one of us that doesn't do that. Did I go out of bounds in my assumptions, maybe we will see but there is nothing I said that is not a direct reference to the documents of most assosication and a recall is proper at times.

I imagine you do a good job Jon, but like all of us you are not perfect, board or otherwise. You statement that the Board should consider who they are going to get is somewhere prime for reason to replace the mamager is suspect. If he is stealing funds, do you say, go head while I see who I can get for your replacement. Your assumption that no one knows a Board members job is suspect at best. You have to admit, from your knowledge and experience, not all board members are good board members. If you are convinced of the premise, then how can you conclude you know a members position when you sit on the Board. Have you ever been a member that disagreed with the Board and you weren't on the Board. How did you handle it Jon? What would your response be if you were a member of a group that took a problem to the Board and the President said, I have not been elected to solve the concerns of this group, I have better things to do.

Do I think that is a scientific report, nope, just my uninformed opinion, and I don't think all board members are bad either.

JonD1
Posts: 2,350

Posted:

MaryA:

Robert and I have two different perspectives on these issues. I am looking from the inside out and Robert is looking from the outside in. No right or wrong just a different view.

After years serving our Board you get to know who you are dealing with. When you get letters or calls each day or week from the same folks who only seem to have complaints like the boy that cried wolf you begin to tune them out or at least I do.

To many owners make snap judgments REPLACE them! RECALL the entire Board!
Terminate the MC!and magically all will be fixed. Hardly.

We have terminated 2 MCs so is there a time when that is called for YES. Should the members decide who will manage the property NO.

RUDENESS can be a two way street. My instructions to those working in our MC's office if the caller fails to give you the courtesy of acting a decent manner then hang up the phone. You get what you give.

JonD1
Posts: 2,350

Posted:

Robert:

Here you go again, now we are to consider some situation when the manager is stealing funds...... Guess that supports YOUR view. OK I agree the Board should terminate anyone guilty of a felony against the property...........

My point was simply that many people think firing, terminating, replacing people solves the problem. In and of itself it DOES NOT!

It is a shortsighted approach which leaves lots of work left for those in charge and nothing to be done for those who demanded the action.

"Your assumption that no one knows a Board members job is suspect at best."

Robert have you served on a Board? That requires a YES or NO response. Not you were "active" in your community.

I would never assume to understand the responsibilities which fall on any Board due to the different types of home ownership, HOA, condo etc, the location of the property, the age, the participation of the Board members, each property has different challenges which need to be addressed.

Each would require a different level of effort.

Claiming you do understand what is required is at best suspect if you are not directly involved. I would never feel comfortable making such an assumption.

Actually Robert when faced with your scenario I worked to join the Board then spent the next 14 years working to remove the Board members not acting in the best interest of our property. That included the Pres, VP and Treasurer. And 2 MCs.

We now oversee a property with an annual budget of more than $300,000 with a market value of more than $20 MILLION. Whether you understand it or not THAT takes a lot of effort, protecting the lives and investments of the more than 100 owners. That's my view from the inside.

Our assets were increased more than 5 times, in addition we spent nearly $300,000 on improvments, and the value of our property was increased 40-50% and believe me that took some effort. Most of which is lost on the members who would rather not bother to consider what positive has been done. Better to find fault. And easier.

So while I would like to chit chat with the owners, who don't bother to make any effort, about what they view as that which needs to be done I DO have more important things to do.

It is always easier to make demands and suggestions from the cheap seats..............

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Jon,
You got that right, here we go......... again.

Let's get this out of the way again.........No I am not now a Board Member and if there is anyone that knows I don't belong on the Board it is me. I have been over this time after time on this site. Seems to be a recurring problem and dug up like an old shoe buried in the back yard.
You get on here and lambaste me for responding to a question on a post and because you think I am out in left field, you get out there with me and label me the same way. You make assumptions about what kind of a person you think the OP is.......a carper.

Has it ever occurred to you that not everyone should be on a BOD. Certainly the BOD in numbers is smaller than the number of owners. For you to proclaim only the Board knows what they are talking about is belittling the folks that elected you. Do I support the Board, when I can I am very strong in my support. Can I appreciate their job, more than you will every believe. Do I appreciate how owners have personal agendas and see nothing except personal satisfaction. For twenty years I have listened to them bitch, do you honestly think the Board is the only people these kind of people complain to?
Can you imagine owners outside the board defending the Board.....it happens all the time. Would I want you for a Board member of my association, I really would as I would Mary. Both of you would be far better than many I have seen over the years.

The sad and wrong part of this is, after 37 years of community living I am just to the edge of walking away from it all. My twenty years of corporate memory at my association will be lost, my 15 years of working for the regime will be lost and my stepping back will make no difference at all, what's lost is gone. There are personal reasons I refuse to be on the Board also..........really none of your business and if you want to condemn me for that........have at it.......who really cares. My reason......plain and simple.........I have lost my spark....I no longer want to tilt at the windmills.

I also see no end to this conversation so I will be pleased to concede the floor and that will be the end of this conversation for me.

GraceH (Virginia)
Posts: 224

Posted:

Kathleen,

Yes, you can petition for the PM's termination, however, you will need to present that to the board for them to make the final decision.

I am in the same boat. I have started a petition to seek termination of our PM and was sent an email from her explaining that "The Board" has requested a copy of my petition with the signatures that I have obtained. I contacted the Sec. from both Boards, neither one had any knowledge of this request. There for strengthening my claim of the PM using her position to intimidate the Homeowners. I sent a blank copy explaining that I refuse to give the signatures as I feel that the PM will use that list to intimidate those who had signed and to put fear into those who have not.

The percentage you need, varies from Association to Association, you will need to refer to you documents for that answer.

Hope that helps, good luck!

KathleenR2 (California)
Posts: 8

Posted:

Hello everyone...I truly appreciate all of your responses. Just to clarify a few things, I am a Board Member my self and along with three other board members (we are a board of 7) want to terminate this company, but now more than half of the homeowners are demanding it.

The lying is the most crucial. The PMC lied about getting permits like one for the pool to comply with the Viginia Gramme Act and because there was not permit, there was no inspection, and we now have to have the pool drained again! This is just one of many costly mistakes this PMC and one board member has caused us. Yes, this ONE board member believes he is the Board; however, no one on the board will stand up to him but me and more than half of the complex is willing to back me up on this. Hope this clarifies things! Thanks again!!!

RogerB (Colorado)
Posts: 5,067

Posted:

Kathleen, with a majority of the Board votes (4 out of 7) a vote will passs to terminate the management ageement. Sound like it is overdue. To changing management companies you will need to:
1) have a motion passed by the Board;
2) comply with the management agreement; and
3) get new management before terminating the current company.

JonD1
Posts: 2,350

Posted:

I would suggest perhaps you take Roger's steps in the opposite order.

1) find someone to replace the current company ( let them begin preparing and letting you know what they will need exactly)
2) check into the contract with the PM to make sure you follow the requirements for termination to the letter
3) pass a motion to do so

I would also suggest you collect copies of all records, documents,
passwords, bank account numbers, keys, contracts, etc or anything else in possession of the current PM BEFORE you announce their termination.

You SHOULD have those already but many Boards allow the PM to control these which I find problematic. Beleive it or not when you terminate a PM in some cases their desire to cooperate and turn over what belongs to your property ceases.

EverettC (Maryland)
Posts: 90

Posted:

Kathleen,

Terminating the management agreement has legal implications - if the termination is challenged and found to be wrongful, the association can be held liable for damagaes arising from breach of contract. In addition, it sounbds like the association may have a claim for damages against the PMC for the cosdt of darinign the pool and the other "costly mistakes" you mentioned. I suggest that the board talk to the association's lawyer. S/he should be able to advise whether there is good cause to terminate. Otherwise, I agree with Jon that you should:

1. make sure someone else is available to replace the current PMC (that does not mean entering into a contract with the new company yet, just make sure someone acceptable is available for an acceptable price).

2. follow the termination provision of the existing contract (as an aside, if the contract is up for renewal "soon", it may be better to not renew the contract than to terminate it for cause, but you will have to decide how long is too long to live with the current PMC).

3. the BOD should pass a motion terminating (or deciding not to renew) the existing PMC.

Whether a majority of the homeowners are demanding the termination of the PMC or not, it is the BOD's job to "do the deed".

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Does any of the below make sense?

Merriam-Webster says: Petition
: an earnest request : ENTREATY; esp : a formal written request made to an authority

Wasn't Kathleen's request to ask if it was proper to petition the Board to have the P/M fired. We seemed to have jumped the question and ended up with it is the Boards responsibility to fire and hire employees. Certainly by now if someone had doubts about who does the hiring and firing it should be clear. I didn't see any objection to this conclusion as it is proper according to the documents and statutes and it has reason. The post has turned into why is is the proper procedure for the Board to do the deed of hiring and firing employees. Why is the Board endowed with knowledge that could bear on the question of firing the management.
Why the members should realize that there may be contractual obligations that only they are privy to that can bear on their decision. Then it goes to what the Board should do if they decide to fire an employee. I have learned some from these conversations and really have little if any contra opinion about the hierarchy and where the power lies in regard to hired personnel.

What remains seems to be to answer the question: Is it proper to petition the Board to effect change?

EverettC (Maryland)
Posts: 90

Posted:

Of course it is proper for homeowners to present their grievances, by petition or otherwise. Isn't it always proper for members to present grievances?

But, what is to be gained here by a petition to the Board? Kathleen has indicated that she has knowledge of "costly mistakes", and that she is a board member and has the support of 3 other directors.

In addition, petitioning the board may give the PMC advance notice of what is contemplated and an ability to prevent the action from being taken.

Also, public accusations of "lying" may result in the PMC filing suit for libel and slander so she should be careful of what is said orally and what is written in the petition should she go that route.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Everett,
Points well taken. Of course they also raise some other issues other than the question as originally posed.
I am hung up on assuming Kathleen is part of the petition? If she is , just about all bets are off for me.

You suggest that it is proper to petition the board but not in this case and list a couple of reasons. Certainly your reasons are valid concerns and have to be considered, but I have a little trouble with a PMC not being aware of discontent in a 90 unit association.

Also, as long as the Board is not making accusations in their official capacity I would believe you would have to go real public (Homeowners)and make some written charges for slander to be established. But you are absolutely right, nothing is to be gained by publicly exposing all the dirty laundry.
Which brings up another matter. If Homeowners can petition the Board and it seems plausible that these charges or concerns will result in conflict if made in front of the PM at a Board Meeting, should the Board provide a forum that is devoid of non-homeowners?

If so, what forum, (if we are expecting half the homeowners to present their grievances about an employee) does the Board establish. I understand I probably am exaggerating the numbers here, and I want to point out that this hiring and firing includes all employees, not just the manager. I would imagine that if (for instance) a security guard is being considered for dismissal, the PM would be included in the discussion with the board about the action, although , unless specified in their contract, the PM does not hire and fire security guards.

This kind of stuff should go on another thread and if anyone desires I will start another one.

EverettC (Maryland)
Posts: 90

Posted:

Robert:

You said, "You suggest that it is proper to petition the board but not in this case..." I wasn't suggesting that it is not proper here for Kathleen or other homeowners to petition the board; I was suggesting that, for tactical reasons, it doesn't make sense to me for them to do so.

You also suggested here and in an earlier post that the PMC is an employee. While they perform similar functions, isn't the PMC a contractor, not an employee? And isn't it proper to discuss concerns with a contractor in a public forum (open board meeting or annual meeting)?

Even if it is proper for Kathleen or other homeowners to petition the Board, I still think that, for tactical reasons, a petition to the board is not the way to go.

Also, you said "...written charges for slander to be established." Slander by definition occurs orally; if it is written or broadcast, it is libel. Either way, using negative words like "lying" can lead to a lawsuit brought by the PMC and muddle the issue of terminating the contract with the PMC. (Better to use words that describe the actions taken or not taken: failed to obtain the pool certificate ... advised the Board that the poll certifcate had been obtained when in fact it had not been obtained, etc.)

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

While I do agree the members have the right to submit a petition to the board, I think they should first do their homework. Do they have proof of the allegations they make? In AZ there is state law outlining the procedure to submit a petition for the purpose of recalling board members. The law states the BOD has a certain number of days in which to schedule a recall election after receipt of the petition. So, depending upon what the state laws are or what is proscribed in the gov docs, this peition could lead to a vote to terminate the PM contract or employment. IMO, this should be a decision of the board not the members. The BOD has the day-to-day contact with the PM and only the BOD knows if he/she is doing his/her job properly. The members only know what they hear or have witnessed personally which in most cases is very little. IMO, the proper procedure would be that the members contact the BOD and let them know what their grievance(s) are with the PM. If the BOD feels those grievances hold merit they can take steps to resolve them which may or may not mean termination. A premature termination of a contract could prove very costly for the assn. This is not a matter for the members to decide or act upon. This is why a BOD is elected to run the business of the assn.

Everett,

The PM could be a contractor or an employee. Some PM's are independent contractors and can be hired as a contractor or an employee to work directly for the HOA. I think most of us are familiar with PM's being employees of a mgmt co that is hired as a contractor to the HOA.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Everett,
WOW, I really appreciate your reply. I could not agree more with your reasoning. I use the term employee simply because the Manager or M/C or contractor or employee is hired by the Board, has to be responsive to the Board and should take direction from the Board and should not act unilaterally.
There is to be some misunderstanding here at times and the Board feels their power is being usurped because owners display too much interest in how the PM.s are controlled. At least I think that is what it is.

To get back to your statement about it being proper to discuss elements of the Managers duties in an open forum. I know there will be some resistance to this from some Board members. It is a sticky question and although I say, keep it all open, I don't think a Board meeting should be turned into personal or job description differences between an owner and the manager, nothing to be gained there. So I guess that leaves those questions up to Board action, and without doubt they should be responsive to the owners in all circumstances.

Give me a comment about whether there should be an owners only forum for the Board and concerned owners to discuss employee/contractor/employee actions.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Everett,

You asked: "And isn't it proper to discuss concerns with a contractor in a public forum (open board meeting or annual meeting)?" Copied below is the section of the CA Davis-Stirling Act which governs HOAs, dealing with the open meeting act. You will note that discussion of personnel matters is cause for an executive session. As I stated earlier, IMO, if the members have a grievance with the PM they should inform the BOD who, in turn, should take care of the matter.

Civil Code §1363.05. Open Meeting Act

(a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Common Interest Development Open Meeting Act.

(b) Any member of the association may attend meetings of the board of directors of the association, except when the board adjourns to executive session to consider litigation, matters relating to the formation of contracts with third parties, member discipline, personnel matters, or to meet with a member, upon the member's request, regarding the member's payment of assessments, as specified in Section 1367 or 1367.1. The board of directors of the association shall meet in executive session, if requested by a member who may be subject to a fine, penalty, or other form of discipline, and the member shall be entitled to attend the executive session.

EverettC (Maryland)
Posts: 90

Posted:

Mary, As you note Davis-Stirling appplies to personnel matters. This is a contract matter not a personnel matter. Kathleen referred to the Property Management Company, not Property Manager, and so far as I am aware, companies are not employees/personnel.

Arguably, the D-S reference to formation of contracts also includes termination of contracts, but don't the members still have the right to present complaints about the PMC to the Board? The Board discussion could then be in ES if the Board chose.

Nonetheless, I agree with your approach if a member wishes to present the grievance.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Everett,

The Davis-Stirling Act does not state whether "personnel" only means employees of the assn; it could be construed to also mean contractors. However, the open meeting act also gives cause for an ES to discuss ". . .matters relating to the formation of contracts with third-parties. So there you have it. This matter should be discussed in ES with no assn members present.

Yes, the members should have the right to present any complaints they so choose to the board. Those complaints could be in the form of a petition; however, as I stated earlier, if a petition is used the members should know exactly what state law and/or their gov docs state about petitions. In AZ if a petition is presented to recall the BOD, the BOD MUST schedule a meeting to vote for a recall w/i so many days of receiving the petition. The members' grievances regarding the PM may NOT warrant a termination of his/her contract or employment. That's why I think the best course of action is to inform the BOD of their grievances and ask them to check everything out. Their grievances may be unfounded and totally based upon hearsay.

GraceH (Virginia)
Posts: 224

Posted:

Each and everyone of you have raised some wonderful points.

IMHO, I believe that the petition should be presented to the board only to show the BOD just how many Homeowners want the PM terminated. The petition as you said, is not for the Homeowners to make a decision, but for the BOD to hear what the people they are representing want.

Robert, the only question I have with your post is, What if the PM is an owner and others fear repercussion for voicing their views. Is there another way to meet without the PM?

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

Grace,
If you think the problem through, those very owners that fear the PM are going to fear any PM. Hopefully you have enough organization they will do their job. Also if this PM is going to retaliate against fearful owner what better way to stop this than bring it into an open forum. The PM knows who is for and who is against him/her, it is not news. What is news in a meeting of the owners objecting to unfair and dictatorial management is a clear sign to the Board and the PM, they better get their act together. If your group goes before the Board and impresses on them two things, then, they have to change.
#1 You all are not going away until changes are made.
#2 You all have legitimate and correctable concerns that could involve a threat to them personally, any of them.

This PM might intimidate an individual, that will not work when trying to intimidate a group. Time is way past to get all this out in a open forum. If none of this works, demand from the Board that this person be excluded from your meeting. You are presenting a petition to the Board by a group, so set conditions for the meeting, it is not an owners meeting unless you set those conditions.

Your organizational structure is suspect, they know that.

GraceH (Virginia)
Posts: 224

Posted:

The words of wisdom, that I look forward to.

Thank you Robert.

MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043

Posted:

Grace,

If the PM is also a member, IMO, he/she cannot be excluded from a members meeting. It may be a little uncomfortable to have him/her present but that's the price to pay for hiring a member to be the PM. On the other hand, if the PM is not a member there is no reason why he/she cannot be excluded from a members meeting or even a board meeting. Even if the mgmt contract calls for the PM to be present at all meetings of the assn, that does not mean the BOD cannot ask the PM to not be present at a particular meeting.

GraceH (Virginia)
Posts: 224

Posted:

Thank you Mary.
I did not think the PM could be excluded from a meeting of the members being that she owns a unit.

Robert,
In rereading, I don't think that the owners would fear another PM. The present PM seams to pick and choose when accountability is convenient if you know what I mean. If violations were uniform, everyone would not need to wonder or fear if they are okay today, will tomorrow be different.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

#1 Mary and Grace.
This petition is not a petition of the Homeowners, it is a petition for named owners to meet with the Board.

#2 Grace,
Don't agree. Fear is based a lot on motivation or in this case personal agenda. If you are trying and depending on rentals to make your mortgage, your motivation to make the nut will cause you to fear anyone that may disrupt your personal plans. Today is already tomorrow and it will be no different if the motivation is there.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

For Grace and Mary,
I will be out of the country for a few days, and out of touch. My Board is sending me to Argentina to do some research on community living among the Pampas Grass Homeowners Association. Ride'em Cowboy!!!!!

JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967

Posted:

Robert,

Try "gaucho." I know this because my fave eatery in Aruba (which serves wonderful beef from Argentina) is called "El Gaucho" and decorated with appropriate artifacts.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

John,
What artifact did our esteemed Governor, "El Gaucho" put up on the wall when he recently left there to get back to tending Association duties. Don't tell me the answer is finally resolved and we now know where the "Beef" is?

JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967

Posted:

Robert,

Maybe where the beef "was"? I'm still waiting to see pix of Maria. I have to guess that as, if my understanding is correct that Missus Sanford is a recipient of much moolah from the Skill Tools(?) fortune, Maria must be a pretty hot chili (if you follow my meaning).

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

John,
No, I meant where is beef is?

I tell you it is a tough place to be when you lose support of both parties, and the Dems wants a Rep to stay in the Governors chair so they can use him like the guy at the Carnival sitting in the Dunking Chair.

Wonder what would happen if Maria turns out to look like Elenor Roosvelt?

GraceH (Virginia)
Posts: 224

Posted:

Robert,
I am a little confused. I thought that the Pampas Grass Association was here in Virginia. Oh that's right, we have the Pampas Grass Condo Association here.

JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967

Posted:

Speaking of Eleanor Roosevelt, many of you will be excited to learn that the song "Mrs. Robinson" by Paul Simon was originally about (and titled) re: the former first lady, but at the suggestion of director Mike Nichols, was changed and enhanced in order to be used in "The Graduate"'s soundtrack. Which has nothing to do with my search for the meaning of "Funky Cold Medina", a song of the same title by Tone-Loc contained in his album "Booty Jams" (1989). Urbandictionary.com offers 5 possibilities.

RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164

Posted:

John,
Will wonders never cease!

I am curious as to what Booty Jams are? Do you mean I can go look and make a choice among five elections? I think I am getting out of my element.

JohnK3 (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 967

Posted:

Robert,

The 5 defs referred to are re: FCMs, not BJs. Although, speaking of wonders never ceasing, one of the defs does refer to BJs of another sort (if you catch my drifting).

🎯 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