HOA refusal to answer member's written questions

As a member of a Florida HOA, I submitted "written" questions to my board. My question is:

Can an HOA board or one of its officers decide to refuse to answer a member's "written" request for answers to several questions?

Is there anything stated in the Florida Statutes/laws that gives an individual the right to expect answers when submitted in writing to an HOA board -- or is there anything that denies that right/expectation to me? I can't find anything in FS 720. Is it somewhere else? I would love to quote it to them.

I am being told to eliminate some of my questions and then, and only then, will they answer to whatever is left (yes, there were several and they pertained to the year-end financials, but that should not matter). I am also told that I will not have any more than 1/2 hour to meet with the board's officer and receive answers to whatever questions are left. After 1/2 hour they will refuse to continue, even at a later date.

I am planning to respond (again in writing) with:
"No I will not eliminate any questions and I expect to receive answers by a reasonable date. I also expect reasonable time in a meeting (or meetings) to review and have answers to my questions. It is my hope that most questions will be answered at one time. Further, I expect common courtesy in the event that subsequent questions may arise (due to the explanations given) and those questions receive answers either at the meeting or in a timely manner."

Brenda,

I agree with Donna - you are lucky they agree to give you 30 minutes. All you can do is to request official records, that's all.

What you wrote shows that you completely underestimate your situation. Demanding a courtesy from the board is a disastrous strategy. Do anything and everything to keep the relationship with your board members, the management and - I can't stress it enough - with the HOA attorney as good as possible. These people do not represent you, can make your life miserable. Homeowners together may have some power, but as an individual homeowner you are totally powerless.

Sorry if this comes as a surprise for you - the reality is more complex than you think. Do your research first, don't rush with accusations.

There are a lot of people on this forum who would be interested in helping you. Ask here first.

Hi Brenda,

Any questions should be asked in a Board meeting during Open Forum, or request a copy of whatever documents you want to see. They should not need to schedule a special meeting for one homeowner to ask questions. The fact that they have agreed to be grilled by you for 30 minutes is amazing.

If the Board has already gone over some of the topics you are asking about in a prior meeting, then I don't know why they would want to go over it yet again(there are so many other things a volunteer could be spending their time doing).

It would be helpful to post what kinds of questions you are asking, especially if the Board wants you to eliminate some of them. The Board certainly does not have to provide answers to a laundry list of questions. They do however need to allow you a copy of documents, but you need to know what you want to see.

I think you should civily bring up the items you feel you need more information on at the next meeting and go from there. Let them know why you have concerns and find out if any other homeowners feel the same way.

And most importantly, try to work WITH the Board rather than against them. Don't get personal for gods sake, keep it business like or else nobody will even want to talk with you, let alone help you with anything.

Wow and I can't say wow enough, I am really surprised. I would not have expected that I do not have the right to receive answers to my questions. Then does that mean a board can do anything they want and my only recourses are what is in the statute, all the legal, upsetting to the community stuff?

I certainly do not want to recall the board; I don't want to have a special meeting; I really didn't want to state my question in the open as I didn't want to have anyone else misinterpret the question or answer (I've seen that happen). I thought if I got my questions answered, I would then know what my concerns really are. I will admit I have an agenda, but it is not to discredit any one person. I really do believe that the board has made a couple of decisions that are questionable with our financials. And there are truely some items on the balance sheet and income/expense statement that do not seem true to form. I need answers to know if my concerns are real. I was not going public with anything until I received some answers. Answers might have eliminated many of my concerns.

I need to settle down, I was not expecting those responses. Thanks, I'll think this through some more and soften my response. Would you like one on my concerns. This to me is an important one and has the potential for serious financial shortage during the first part of the year, not to mention poor budgeting. I have more and would be glad to share. Let me know.

The board met all their obligations of funding the budgeted amount for reserves for 2009, no problem. In the HOA, they had an extra $5,000 and they transferred it to the reserve account - over-&-above what was in the budget. Sounds fine on the surface, the more in reserves is better. Anyone looking at the balance sheet sees $24,000 in the bank (checking account)...looks fine. Now, taking into consideration the accounts payables and the prepaid maintenance obligations that are listed on the balance sheet, that left the operating account (they reduced the cash) to a negative ($405). Now if the receivables are collected and soon, that would help the cash flow...but let us assume the worst case scenario, the receivables will not be collected. Someone or the board made this decision to reduce the cash by $5,000...it was not necessary to reduce it that low. I am questioning why.

Now, it can be said that the prepaids will pay the bills...but not if there is a big bill like insurance down payment and not if we have deliquent payments (we pay on a quarterly basis). It has been my experience that associations take a few months to even out with their budget. They can just barely pay all the bills the first couple of months and then it gets better as more is collected and by mid-year they can start doing the any extras that they budgeted for.

This 5,000 that was transferred is extra money not spent during the year. We had extra even with the bad economy, with houses in foreclosure, and bad debt expense which was covered by the members. They then keep stating to us at just about every meeting that times are hard; we have bad debt expense; we can't do repairs because there is no money. And believe me repairs are not being done. In my opinion...If they have this extra money, they are not budgeting properly or they need to make the needed repairs.

Brenda, You don't seem like a bad sort and there is reason behind some of your questions.

But honestly, don't you think this 5k that you are spun up about is over the top.

From what you are telling us it sounds like the Board is operating and making decisions. Believe me, at the minimum, that is a step in the right direction. The decision to stick it in the reserve account may turn out to be the wrong move, but nothing will be lost. It certainly is a far leap to assume the assessments are too high just from the fact the board found they had an excess 5K, and to compound that, jump to this means there are repairs that have to be done. Go to the Board, offer your help. It IS just as much your association as theirs.

I remember our Board elections in November 2008. We had two new directors elected. Back in 2006, there were three new faces elected. Once the new Directors took office things around here seemed to take a dramatic turn. Things that didn't need to be fixed or repaired were done at great expense to the reserves, which are almost depleted and new projects for which we have very little funding are being planned. The condition of the community is being blamed on the previous board, prior to 2006.

Here is the problem. Most of the meetings are conducted behind closed doors, there is no reports available to the membership about what is being done, Director's personal agenda is getting in the way of what's fiscally best for the community and no financial records are available for the membership to view. A few of the community have voiced their opinion and offered solutions to our problems, but we are viewed as whiners and told to step aside.

I am sick and tired of people saying that this is just a volunteer position without compensation. Well, no one put a gun to your head and made you volunteer. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. If you can't get any one to volunteer, then dissolve the HOA, there way too many out there.

Carol,

That is correct. Brenda will have to meet with 1 Board member--preferably the Treasurer and if there is a P.M., they should also be in attendance. Brenda does have the right to inspect records but that requirement does not say that anyone needs to be present other than an office employee.

Brenda does have some legitimacy to her concerns but I think that the approach was not done in her best interest. As a former Treasurer, she might have the microscope on full range but I feel that she would do better by working within the team, not outside of it. Maybe the Board is just not doing the financials correctly. Who knows as we certainly do not have that insight.

BrendaS4
Following are your questions and my comments:

Can an HOA board or one of its officers decide to refuse to answer a member's "written" request for answers to several questions?
YES. HOWEVER, A BOARD USUALLY WILL ANSWER A REASONABLE QUESTION OR TWO.

I am being told to eliminate some of my questions and then, and only then, will they answer to whatever is left (yes, there were several and they pertained to the year-end financials, but that should not matter). I am also told that I will not have any more than 1/2 hour to meet with the board's officer and receive answers to whatever questions are left. After 1/2 hour they will refuse to continue, even at a later date. THANK THE BOARD. THEY ARE BEING CONSIDERATE. WITHIN 1/2 HOUR YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET ANSWERS TO THE KEY QUESTION OR TWO.

I am planning to respond (again in writing) with:
"No I will not eliminate any questions and I expect to receive answers by a reasonable date. I also expect reasonable time in a meeting (or meetings) to review and have answers to my questions. It is my hope that most questions will be answered at one time. Further, I expect common courtesy in the event that subsequent questions may arise (due to the explanations given) and those questions receive answers either at the meeting or in a timely manner."
I THINK YOUR EXPECTATIONS ARE TOTALLY UNREALISTIC.

IF YOU BELIEVE THERE ARE SERIOUS PROBLEMS WITH THE FINANCIAL REPORTS, AND YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT SUPPORT FROM OTHER MEMBERS, CAUSE AN AUDIT TO BE DONE.

Brenda,

I agree with Roger.

IMO, you are being much too harsh on the board. Have you thought that perhaps you don't have all the financial info that the board has? For instance, if a large ins downpayment was required soon I'm sure they would have left enough in the operating account to pay it. You are trying to second-guess the board's actions based on a bunch of suppositions. I suggest you "cool it". If you spot something in the financial statements that doesn't look right, then you can ask a question. Hitting the board with a long list of questions just makes you out to be a trouble-maker.

Daniel,
I find your explanation much to concerned with who has rhe power. I like to believe the owners, and the Board are one of the same. I know our documents make no distinction between owner and Board member, both has equal responsibility and both share equal blame or burden or whatever. I am not slicing the Board off the ownership any more than I am slicing the ownership off the board. I just firmly believe we all serve the same master and if the ownership is doing something that threatens the HOA then the board must protect the association, not the Board. If the Board is doing something to threaten the association it is clearly the reswponsibility of the ownership to protect the association and the powers are granted to each equally. Probblems arise when individuals adopt personal agendas as their holy grail.
The is no reason the Board can't be open, and Lord knows there are many that are not. The Board is not bestowed with spoecial powers, not because they are board members anyway.

As to compelling the Board to answer questions from an owner. Who should the board answer to if not the owners. Ganted, the OP is out of line but you will notice there seems to be a tempering of her position and rightfully so, they should work it out. Her concerns could be accurate and if the Board holds a closed mind that it is not the boards responsibility to consider the voice of the owners, I think the Board is misguided. Sure these issues could be worked out with little effort and i bet it would work out that the homeowner would walk away from the encounter feeling good about the association. In the long run, reason will prevail it given the chance. Just keep your eye on the prize (the betterment of the association) and if you can make that conviction then you are obligated to try and make change.

I agree with Michael 120%.

Our legal system has not figured out a way to address concerns of a minority group in a corporation or in an HOA.

Elections address majorities. If a majority wants a recall, there's a recall. If a majority prefers one Board over another (even a Board with a certain style over another with a certain style), they can elect the Board that they prefer. Majorities get their rights enforced.

The system also seems to recognize that corporations and HOAs need to have a significant amount of latitude and independence to effectively run. There are relatively few restrictions placed on a Board if it is duly elected and, to unseat a Board, the process is pretty onerous. Allowing a Board to appoint its own members between elections places effectiveness above fairness. The system really wants Board to be operational, even at the expense of fairness. I'm not saying that's right; that just seems to be the motivation in how these things are constructed.

But, for a minority group (or a minority group that claims that they represent a majority group but cannot get the majority group to act), there are only a few limited rights (such as the right demand documents, the right to speak at meetings and so on) that they can use to control the Board. It really isn't fair but they haven't figured out a way to give minorities lots of control without making the Board ineffective and the HOA poorly managed.

Ok, so, if the minority group (or the one Homeowner making an issue) agree, there's no issue, right? It only matters when somebody disagrees with the Board.

Some individuals will say that the Board is illegal or evil or that they aren't working in the interests of the HOA or doesn't represent the majority. But how is anybody to know if that's just their opinion or is really the truth? In the absence of a lawsuit or a recall or a regular election, it is just "he said, she said". It's not enough to have so-called proof; there's got to be a forum to present it in and some sort of judge to rule upon it.

I certainly would encourage Boards to try to work out issues with unhappy groups inside the HOA. I would encourage Boards to try to improve fairness.

Michael and all,
It makes no difference if you find my position as too idealistic. It is what is is, and we operate everyday in an idealistic world. It would be chaos otherwise. It is the only glue that keeps things together. Someone said I neglected to mention "evil". I don't deny evil, I just don't think it has a place in the government of the association. Does it occur....of course........but so does dumb, and selfish and misguided and stubborn and pigheaded, etc, etc. Again that is not how to run an association.
To suggest that there is no way, given the restrictions and organization requirements placed on an HOA by the documents, commands that the association can't be managed; is to ignore that thousands of these HOA's operate all over the world in a well organized manner and get the job done. "Idealism" is a player.........like it or not.
Having said all that and not wanting to give the wrong impression, let me say, as has been said many times by many people on this site: The diffused, uneven, self-serving, confusing, at time unrealistic, stupid, misguided laws that all the HOA's operate under is a mess. Pure and simple. The ones that have passed through this site that give the subject consideration, have all voiced opinions that major reconstruction of the way an HOA operates needs to be done. None....me included, can offer any sure fire way to get the train on the track. Different state requirements are major roadblocks to total re-organizations, so what is left is to change your association little by little until it is a better place to live. Idealism helps do this........IMHO.

RToger,
Not what I said. I said I like to believe the the owners and the board are one of the same. Our documents make no distinction between the board and the members. How can they. One day you're a board member, the next day you could not be a board member. The board has the burden of managing the association, that board is fluid and changes, the membership is constant, and the board pool is made of of equal members.
The governing documents assign the power to the Board members tasked with the responsibility as voted on by the members. They do not assign anything to individuals.

Probably semantics.

Robert,
Semantics? Maybe. Am I being persnickety? To the lay person - probably. But technically I don't think so. I am careful not to generalize or be theoretical. To clarify, Owners own property and in manditory HOAs they are members while in a voluntary association they may chose whether or not to be members. Contrastingly, Board members may or may not be required to be members of a manditory or a voluntary HOA depending on the CC&Rs. Thus, all of the indivuals involved are not necessarily owners nor necessarily association members.

Roger,
I haven't heard the word persnickety for a long time, glad to see it is still around.
Again, I am not negating the Board's power (or should we say correctly, the Board's restrictions)

I think I will drop my part of this conversation, things are becoming to encompassing when we start to bring in non-members serving on the Board, too many worms for me.