« Cruisin' in the Past | Main | AARP: Attempt to help doesn't really »
September 5, 2006
Transparency or recall - your choice
Things that happen in community associations used to stay in community associations. That's no longer true. I've been surprised by the internal struggles that have found their way into the local newspapers and TV news reports. Recently its been recalls of board members or entire boards. There has been a common thread running through these stories - the people initiating the recall felt that the board or certain members had been less than forthcoming with information they felt was of critical intrest to the owners. When requests for the information were denied or ignored, the recall petition became the only way these owners felt they could regain some measure of transparency in the association. Whether the board deserved to be recalled often isn't really known, but the lack of information gives rise to suspicions of improper activity, or simply failing to be responsive to the concerns of the owners.
Transparency in board operations usually forestalls this type of extreme event. Transparency requires open board meetings with the ability to ask questions or raise issues during some portion of the meeting. It also requires frequent communications to the owners' about board actions, or issues, with explanations and data to support the board's decisions. The third leg of transparency provides for accesss to association records under minimal restrictions. For some reason, too many boards are taking the opposite tack - meeting in private, or conducting business between official board meetings (sometimes in violation of their state's "Sunshine" or Open Meetings laws), rarely communicating anything more than basic information to the owners, throwing up artificial roadblocks at owner's requests for access to records - basically "circling the wagons" and taking a defensive posture about any criticism or questioning of their actions and decisions. This mindset never results in anything positive.
So, if you want to pick a fight with the people who elected you, a good way is to ignore them. For a variety of reasons, Americans tend to be suspicious of any attempt to be less-then-open, and if a President can be forced to resign, a board is easy pickings. I guess I find it hard to believe that any board can honestly believe that any good would come of trying to keep people in the dark, about items they have a right, and need, to know. If you are on a board that likes to keep things to themselves, it's time to "smack them upside the head" and remind them of whom they owe a duty to.
Posted by joewest at September 5, 2006 3:12 PM