perplexed by Board

As some may know I have a lawsuit currently with our POA. We go back to court in fall, by then the Board has to have a plan to get us up to state law, since the Board only feels that they have to follow the By-laws (or at least the ones they want to follow)and are not required to follow the state laws so the court may or may not approve the plan. The down time is great because the majority of our membership has no clue as to what the BOD has been up to and the thousand have been spent. What is perplexing is they just don't seem to get it. State laws always trumps your by-laws. Also the Board can not pass any resolution that conflicts with the by-laws. You can't "pick-n-choose" what laws you want to abide by. But they do!! If this doesn't beat all, I've learned that when the Treasurer quit she gave over all our records to who "she' wanted to be her replacement. That person then took all our records. And to top that off the out going Treasurer then got appointed as a Director for one of the subdivisions. The person with our records has not been elected or appointed to the BOD, isn't bonded as Treasurer, since she isn't officially on the BOD. Thank goodness the judge has not ruled out receivership. Yes, I know a receive can be expensive but the Association Attorney isn't either, and he doesn't seem to have the best interest of the association in mind only his fee. Much rather have a receiver in place to help fix the problems then an attorney whose kid where putting thru college.

Your advise sound good on paper. But our BOD has already striped the voting rights and as far as working on the problem internally, (try that got the tee shirt). Our BOD refuses to follow state laws, deed restriction and by=laws. That's why I'm glad the court has stepped in and "NOW" finally the members are learning the facts that they should have learned along to ago. True receivership is harsh but if this place can't be fix then dissolution maybe the answer. Which ever way it goes, don't you think the members should have a say? After all as you say "we are paying for it".

Does the Board know the State Law? A few years ago the Board at that time voted to permanently lower the move in age to 50. A Board cannot lower the age to 50 in a senior community. It wasn't because they did not want to follow the law, it was becuse they did not know the law.