Condominium question

Executives sessions in Condos.
Specific laws or correct procedures defining who can attend an Executive Session. Does the manager had the power of the board to judge an owners conflict. Can he/she attend and participate the session? If the manager is directed to collect information and maybe even act for the Board if necessary, does that, in turn, make him/her a member of the executive arm of the Condominium. If his testimony is rerquired does that make him a member of the executive arm, or would he be treated as another owner that was called before the executive arm, and after testimony, he would be excluded from the remainder of the session/ More to this question than meets the eye.

Lots of opinions please and examples.

First, it would depend on your state concerning applicability of laws on the subject. In Texas open meeting laws simply do not apply to HOAs. I suspect that most states are the same.

Beyond that, the manager is the agent of the board. The manager often acts in the board's stead. But unless elected to the board, the manager is in no way a member of the board. Just the same, I can say that our city council often has the city manager included in executive sessions and they are subject to the open meeting laws.

Now as a board member, I would be inclined to keep the manager in the room throughout the hearing. Partly because the manager should be well versed and have investigated as much as possible. The manager may be called upon for more information or to confirm/repudiate statements made by others.

Part of a managers job is to understand the thoughts and ideas of the board members. The manager should learn the direction of the board and should generally have a good idea of how the board will respond based on past experience. Part of how the manager gets to this place is through being at the meetings (including executive session).

Brian, Kirk and MaryA,

The rest of the story behind this is:

If your manager has no "power", does he have the right to be present during ES? An association is really a governorship by owners. They hold the vote and the Power. Using that as a guideline, I wonder if you can have ES in a closed setting. Certainly the Manager has no standing in a ES. I suppose there could be a case that a hired gun can attend and his voice carry weight, I'm not sure. Even though we are covered in part by corporation laws, we are also given legal standing as an association with each member holding equal vote. Personally as a voting member of my association, I am inclined to think it may not be a problem with the ES, it is a problem with what is taken under ES. Don't I have the right to know if my neighbor is deliquent in his fees to OUR association. I certainly have more invested and more right to know that than the manager. His right to know is dictated by his job, it sure carry no weight. We, our association assigns the manager the job of negoiation to, say, a deliquent owner or a owner that has violated a covennt. He then come back to the Board, and they go into ES to see if they agree what the manager has done. This all don't sound right. It sounds more right if ES was used properly we may not even go there but once a year, if at that.

Also, my observations seen to make me conclude, that there is seldom any decisions announced after a ES. I think I understand, unless a decision is made and a vote taken after the meeting, no one has a clue about what is said. Of course this is just a smart way for the Board to avoid putting themselves under the gun legally. That may also be true, but if the whole thing is not Government behind closed doors with no accountability, I don't know what is. Also, think on this one. Suppose this issue is about a conflict between two owners and in part involve the Real property. Then suppose all this rigamarow goes to ES and no decision is announce. Now you and I know some compromise is reached (decision). Now one or both of the contestants want this in the public domain. The Board can not censor them and place a gag order on them, even if they went to a judge, what could they say. I want a Gag Order on these people to keep them from talking about something that was talked about and no decision was reached.

Crazy to me.

First, I would think that often the manager would be invited into ES. That is the basis for the manger being present. The board certainly has all authority to meet without the manager.

As to the collection thing, our documents specifically state, that this will be done in ES. And no, I don't think the membership at large has a right to know who is affected. I know I don't want to violate any privacy rights of members.

Our management has quite specific guidelines on what they may negotiate with the HOs regarding delinquent accounts. But they always send the final decision to the board. I would imagine partly to protect themselves. This way they can't be accused of mismanagement of our funds.

The only dispute I can see the BOD being involved in is a CC&R dispute. To this end, I would certainly have the manager present as we pay the manager to gather information. And if we need something verified or repudiated that would fall to the manager to look things up. All of us on my BOD have full time jobs and we pay the management company to deal with this stuff.

I would consider the manager not a hired gun, but rather the administrative assistant. We pay them to be available to talk to the owners, check for violations, and research information. And no, we don't always agree with what our manager (or her boss) has to say.