ADA & Civil Right Act violations

The Property Owners Association Board of Directors (BoD) may have caused possible violations of ADA, Civil Rights and Fair Housing Amendments Act via new operational procedures for Board of Directors meetings. As a handicap person I need protection against possible violations of my ADA and Civil Rights. Please help.

On September 14, 2011 the Board of Directors (BoD) of the Property Ownwers Association voted and approved new operational procedures.

It is stated in “Item 8. Any person as indicated by a written instrument who is represented at the meeting by another owner or person authorized by power of attorney will be permitted to have such person speak for them.” This means that no person can have a representative speak for them without a POA and maybe that document has to be shown.

Item 8 is all inclusive and has no exemptions for any person who is handicapped, bilingual, etc. one has to have an authorized Power of Attorney (POA) representative to represent them. There is no mention as to who has to pay for a POA document to be drawn up by an attorney or if such has to be presented at a meeting if a person or persons with the POA represents an association member.

Item 8 is listed under the Operational Procedure for the POA Board. 0797-l R2
Property Owners Association
Procedure for Conduct of Meetings

1. This means all handicap people have to have a Power of Attorney (POA) drawn up indicating who can speak for them at the POA BoD meetings. Does this legal instrument have to be shown to prove that the person has such authority to speak?
2. Do all hearing impaired will have to have their sign language person or persons registered as a POA?
3. Do all persons who cannot talk have to have their person registered as a POA?
4. Do all blind persons will have to have their person registered as a POA to read their comments?
5. Do all persons who do not speak English have to have their interpreters registered as a POA?

PLEASE NOTE.
The above was initiated and passed after the following occurred at Board of Directors meeting on July 13, 2011, which may have resulted in possible violations of Federal and State Laws.

My home owners association, may have caused possible violations of ADA, Civil Rights and Fair Housing Amendments Act via new operational procedures for Board of Directors meetings.

I am handicapped and have to walk with a cane and have speech problems do to tubes in my throat during an operation in November 2004. During a Home Owners Association meeting in July 13, 2011, I signed up to talk. I was told to come to the podium and the Vice President knew I had trouble walking and standing. Finally someone in the audience brought the microphone to me. I said I have trouble talking and would like someone to read what I wrote and this was turned down because no one had signed to speak for me.

This was a very humiliating situation, embarrassing and a slam to all handicap persons.

The following action taken that appears to be in retaliation on me because of my request at the July 13, 2011Board meeting.
On September 14, 2011 the Board of Directors (BoD) of Property Association voted and approved new operational procedures.

The Association Bylaws state, 9. Parliamentary rules. Robert’s Rules of Order (latest edition) shall govern the conduct of Association meetings when not in conflict with the Articles of Incorporation of these Bylaws.

I have questions dealing with and I quote, “Item 8. Any person as indicated by a written instrument who is represented at the meeting by another owner or person authorized by power of attorney will be permitted to have such person speak for them.” Item 8 is all inclusive and has no exemptions for any person who is handicapped, bilingual, etc. All have to have an authorized Power of Attorney (POA) representative to represent them and all have to sign in to speak. There is no mention as to who has to pay for a POA document to be drawn up by an attorney or if such has to be presented at a meeting if a person or persons with the POA represents an association member.

1. Can rules such as Item 8 require the handicap that are hearing impaired and require an interrupter to have a Power of Attorney to translate and speak for them?
2. Can rules such as Item 8 require a blind person to have their representative to have POA to read a statement?
3. Can rules such as Item 8 require a non-bilingual person to have a representative to have a POA to translate and speak for them?
4. Do all who what to speak at a Board meeting have to sigh including the POA representative?
5. Is Item 8 a violation of ADA?
6. Is Item 8 a violation ones Civil Rights?
7. Is Item 8 against the Fair Housing Amendments Act?
8. What recourse does one have?

Melissa, unless I missed something, maybe you did? It doesn't seem to me that the writer blew this up at all into a Federal offense.

This BOD response came about from the June meeting where difficulties arose on both sides as to how to handle the making of a statement by the disabled poster. Seems the BOD is trying to make sure a representative of a disabled or other homeowner is duly authorized, but the BOD imposed the POA requirement. The poster thinks this is onerous, and I wouldn't disagree because there are easier ways to ensure a representative/delegation has authority to speak on a members behalf.

Jeff, there are 2 questions that come to mind. What is needed for someone to speak on behalf of another owner when said owner is present, vs when said owner is absent.

A BOD is being responsible and reasonable if they request something in writing when an owner isn't present, but the guy was turned down when he was there!

You want to make sure any written authorization isn't forged etc so a POA may help to accomplish that, albeit there will be costs.

When the disabled person is present, do you honestly think a written authorization is the least onerous way of accomplishing any concerns the BOD may have that the representative may not be authorized to speak for the disabled person? I don't think so.

Ron:

My first reaction when I read your post was embarrassment for the association. Really? Wow! I can understand the power of attorney when you are gone, the reason for a power of attorney is to help manage your affairs in your absence. However, not being allowed to have someone speak for you when you requested and were present is a bunch of BS...

While ADA may not apply, I would argue that a board of directors meeting if required to be open by state statutes would be required to follow applicable ADA laws in terms of providing reasonable accomodations. Even if that isn't correct for any board to do that would be in my opinion reprehensible.

If I were in your shoes I would send the board a certified letter asking to provide you those reasonable accomodations, if they decline I would consult an ADA lawyer for advice. I think the ruling while intentions I think were ok has some serious flaws in it.

We also need to recognize the intent of this rule. It's intent is to cover situations where the member is either incompacitated or for a renter to speak on the owner's behalf. Renters typically aren't allowed to attend or have a vote in HOA's meetings. Thus the owner appointing them to speak on their behalf may be required in writing. A member who is incompacitated due to reasons such as health or other issues, can have the person named as their Power of Attorney speak for them if presented the need to do so. We had a few owners who had alzheimer's and family members could represent them. However, it was more in the way of negotiating paying dues not expressing opinions on a subject. Anyone could write a letter into the HOA to have their issue addressed.

This sounds like a case of seeing the forrest for the trees. Your living in the forrest your going to see nothing but trees. Try going out to the pasture once and awhile to change your view of the trees...

I may buy that argument but if you reread his post you will see he was at a meeting, clearly with all his faculties functioning and asked to have someone read something for him and was denied. Either the board has a) adopted a rule intending to deny reasonable accommodations or 2) is misinterpreting their own rule.

It would be doing a dis-service to just disallow the presentation because you observe the person holding 3 or however many pages. I might be holding a 3" binder but that doesn't mean that is what I am planning on reading out loud. Setting a time and listening would be more reasonable.