« What Happens If Owners Do Not Sign The Ballot Envelopes? | Main | "I don't want to follow the law." What Can Happen? »
March 12, 2007
Acclamation and Appointment for Lack of Candidates/Interest - More On The Subject.
The elections questions never end. I have been communicating with Janet of www.parli.com, (Robert McConnell Productions). There are articles and answers to questions on www.parli.com related to homeowner association election issues and resources and publications you won’t find anywhere else. The following information related to Roberts Rules was provided to me and I highly recommend visiting the site for even more questions and answers.
Now ... we were talking about the kinds of problems that arise over finding enough candidates sufficient to need a ballot, a lack of voting quorum, and qualifications for Board members (all of which are ongoing concerns for homeowner associations). I asked for feedback about how Roberts Rules looks at these issues.
She has a different perspective that I and than managers of associations. She is, however, an owner in a common interest development and has served on her board of directors. Now, here are some important thoughts she shared with me:
On striving for nominees: "The way I read the California law that you sent me, it does not require more people to be nominated than there are positions. Looking at the concept from a Robert's Rules prospective, Robert's does not recommend pitting people against each other, but finding the best people to be nominated for office. In finding the best people, he means those who are current on dues or assessments, and having certain talents or abilities that fit the position. For example, some one who has accounting or bookkeeping experience would certainly be a good fit for the office of Treasurer. Some one who can't balance his own check book would not make a good treasurer. So the important thing is to find people willing to serve who fit the positions.”
On the difficulty of finding candidates: Janet acknowledges that this is difficult in HOA's, and raises some relevant points:
"1. Sometimes the reason people don't want to be considered for positions is because of how things are run.
2. Sometimes people are bypassed because they are considered "troublemakers."
3. It is hard to tell how many of the “apathy” problems are really “prejudice” problems as opposed to a lack of willing participants.
4. In this vein, sometimes boards won't go out of our own circle of influence."
She has some recommendations:
"1. Try sending out a letter that is informational about serving on the board telling what the position is, the term, what are the duties of the position, the hours it takes to fill the position, and that someone will train that person. (Be sure there is follow up on that last one).
2. If after doing that there is still no response and the board or nominating committee has made an earnest and genuine effort to find people, then send a ballot out with blanks for those positions and encourage people to write in a name. IF when the ballots are counted and no one gets elected, then the board deals with it at that time. [In Janet’s state, the law provides that board members stay in the office until someone is elected and qualified. So if no one is elected then that board member or officer stays in the position until the next election. Note, most documents in California say this also.]
3. If a person is elected that does not meet the qualifications of that office (no assessments paid or otherwise as in the bylaws) then they are not considered elected because they haven't qualified.
4. Now about a quorum. When sending the ballots out, members should be instructed that if they are not returned and there is no quorum there will have to be another election. This will end up costing them money! Maybe this will get their attention.
5. By reading the information you sent me, HOAs have to send out a mail ballot even though only one person per office is on it. I (Janet) didn't see any exceptions in the law."
6. On qualifications: "The qualifications should be carried over into the election rules [when there are good standing qualifications in the bylaws] and a date that the assessments must be paid, for example, for the candidate’s name to be put on the ballot, even if that date is 35 days prior to the election. That would give those sending out the ballot time to make changes and print a current ballot."
She asks the question, rightly so: “Why would you allow someone to be nominated and put on a ballot who hadn't paid dues and may not pay them by election day? This is confusing and may end up causing problems in the association. The best policy is to have these kinds of things in writing from the beginning.
Janet and I both recognize some of the problems associations are experiencing, such as:
1. HOAs are set up such that volunteers are expected to know what to do to operate an association, without any training or policy manual to follow;
2. In HOAs, power struggles often abound and this deters people from running, especially if they have served and found out that they have no say in anything because of power- happy overbearing people;
3. Sometimes HOAs are so poorly run it causes great divisions with the association and no one wants to get involved.
It is clear that a basic understanding of the democratic process, parliamentary procedure, and
improved communications and relationships could solve many of the problems going on in associations. Whether this alone will solve the apathy problems is yet to be seen.
I urge you to visit http://www.parli.comand see if there is something there for you.
Posted by Beth Grimm at March 12, 2007 9:58 PM