Too often, hardworking community association Boards find themselves at odds with their homeowners.
Conscientious Board members, who are volunteering their time, talents and energy to better the community, wonder why their efforts are unappreciated and why they are constantly under attack. The tendency is to “circle the wagons,” which only serves to perpetuate and exacerbate the feelings of animosity between board members and the constituents they are trying to serve.
Such an adversarial atmosphere in any community will be the product of the particular circumstances of that community, but there may be certain guidelines that boards can follow to try and avoid such downward spirals. One such guideline is Inclusion.
Condominium, co-op and homeowners association Boards often operate under the impression that they do not need the homeowners’ approval before embarking on major spending or renovation projects.
For the most part, these Boards are correct. While every Board must be cognizant of any limitations on spending set forth in the community’s governing documents, most Boards do have extensive authority to spend money without obtaining homeowner approval, especially when the purpose is to maintain, repair and replace the common elements.
However, just because you can do something does not necessarily mean it is a good idea. Homeowners will usually be interested in knowing what is going on in their community, especially when it involves major expenditures. And they will be interested in hearing about the project before the Board’s decision has been made and the contract has been signed. When homeowners are told about a capital improvement contract after the fact, or if they find out about the project in an indirect manner and not from the Board directly, suspicion and resentment will be high.
There will always be opposition to the Board’s proposed spending, and inevitably, someone in the crowd at an informational meeting will suggest that a vote of the homeowners be taken.
While the audience can be polled to get a sense of the sentiment in the room, the Board should explain that, ultimately, it is the Board’s responsibility to decide on such projects (if that is indeed the case) and that the Board needs to take into account not only the opinions of those homeowners at the meeting, but also those not in attendance. Furthermore, the Board needs to explain that its decision must be based upon the best interests of the community (the Board’s fiduciary duty) and not individual concerns or personal preferences.
Most homeowners will appreciate the Board’s sharing of information and will often agree with the Board’s rationale for embarking on the project at hand.
Some homeowners will almost always be opposed to any spending, but even they should also appreciate the Board’s effort to explain the necessity of the project. And if community opposition to the project is overwhelming, maybe that is a sign that the Board needs to reconsider or “go back to the drawing board.”
Including your community members in the decision-making process, although not always required, will go a long way toward maintaining a relationship of mutual trust and respect between the Board and its homeowners.
