Meeting without Property Manager attending

Most HOAs I know in FL have quarterly Board meetings that PMs attend at no charge but I don't think it's mandatory for PMs to be present. There are inexperienced boards that want the PMs to attend all of their meetings whether monthly or quarterly. Have you checked your contract with PMC ?? Perhaps he/she is just following a clause in your contract.

Alex unless the contract with the PM has some language to the effect of the PM shall attend all meetings then of course you can hold one without them. However since Florida requires you to notice all meetings unless it is an emergency; do not expect it will be a secret from the PM.

Alex,

I see nothing wrong with the PM attending all the meetings -- even the annual or other member meetings. The PM is usually the person who is doing the bulk of the work and knows exactly what is going on in the assn. I think it all boils down to whether or not the majority of the members like him/her and think he/she is doing a good job.

The board members of my assn are very well informed and do run the show, but it's the PM who does most of the work. She knows all about the delinquencies, CCR violations, contractors,etc., etc. She is the Pres. of the mgmt co we contract with and her husband is a CPA and does all the accounting. They both attend all the meetings but speak only when called upon. The Pres presides over the meeting and the Treas. gives the financial report.

A prudent Board would ask the PM to attend all meetings. A knowledgeable PM's experience and guidance can be very valuable to the association. As far as having them attend it is up to the Board to either request their presence or not. When discussing matters about the PM the Board should ask them to leave the meeting.

Thank you Roger and SusanW!

I agree for what it's worth and especially coming from you two.

But, you have to admit, we are funny animals. Now if the Board wants to discus anything about the manager, our board would not be able to do it. I suppose they could go into ES and cover it under Personanel matters, but if a member wants to challenge the conduct of the manager, it has to be done in an open forum. And again in our case, the manager would be present.

I referred to the large number of absentee owner Board members. I am convinced this practice of routinely including the manager in all meetings, in our case he has been named an ex-officio member of all committees; this routine is due to the board allowing and directing the manager to not only be manager but CEO. The reason is he knows the most about what is going on.

Alex, would you like to follow up on your original post ???

Of course it's a real board meeting. Yes, minutes have to be taken. Answer these questions:

Is the PM a board member as defined in your bylaws?
Is the PM counted towards meeting the quorum?
Is the PM entitled to make motions?
Is the PM entitled to vote?

The answer to all of these questions should be in your bylaws and should be no. The PM does not have to be there for it to be a "real" board meeting. A "real" board meeting is defined in your bylaws. If the meeting concerns the management company, the PM does not have to be there unless the board invites him or her. Go ahead and have your meeting.

I, too, agree with Bruce.

If you have an issue with the PM and want to discuss it with the BOD, by all means have a meeting called w/o the PM being present and get all your frustrations out. The PM doesn't run the show, the BOD does. The fact that he/she is present at all meetings is probably because the board feels he/she has valuable info and insight that should be available to them at the meetings.

MaryA,
I wonder how deep your conviction is that the reason the Manager is at all meeting is the board has considered the fact and decided their presence is necessary because they have valuable insight. You say it is probable, my impression is: It has always been this way and no one opbjected and we as a board never gave it a thought. Certainly, I have never heard it announced or written the Board invites or has no objection if a request is made to excuse the Manager or PM. from the meeting.
I have brought this up to a few boards and their reaction is immediately defensive. Without thought they seem to jump at defending the presence of the manager. How many here have considered this factor, and how many have attended BOD meetings with no non-member management people there.

I never have. In fact on reflection I have never even heard of it happening. I would also say with some accuracy there was never a BOD or annual meeting that I attended that I didn't know of some dissatisfaction about the PM. And when that issue is broached at a meeting is can go from unpleasent to downright nasty.

I also recall a case in Florida a year or so ago when the Manager was banned from a Homeowners meeting in an association Club House and the manager called the cops and directed them to clear the door so he could enter the room and attend the meeting. No bull this happened and in fact was videotaped and made the papers and TV. I don't really know how it was resolved and it really don't matter but it highlights my spiel.

Someone corrected me when I suggested that the Board go into Exectuvie Session to discuss disciplinary or contracts. Apparently in FL, the Board must have an attorney present (was that right?) for ES. That's restricting the board, IMHO.

ANYWAY . . . There should ALWAYS be an evaluation of staff done by your board, with the "staff" not in attendance. Somehow you've got to make this happen.

I can't imagine a PM having a discussion stanglehold on the board, but it sounds like this is what is happening.

"Uninvite", if you can.

Bruce,

Because it seems to be the norm that PM's attend all meetings, my feeling is that it might be addressed in the contract. I would say the contract might say the PM will attend all meetings, or be available to attend all meetings. I'm sure if the board doesn't want their presence they can, as you say, relieve them of that duty. If it's written in the contract, which the board has agreed to, I'm not sure that it's included as a requirement of either, just that it's something the management co has felt necessary to include in the contract. Both parties to the contract must adhere to the terms. I imagine some contracts might state there is a fee to be paid if the PM attends a meeting. There are a whole host of scenarios that could apply.

Please state WHAT the criteria is for Florida boards to go into ES.

If you insist, then do your own "homework" online.

Glen, where do you see any mention of "Executive Session" that SusanW mentions all the time ???

Susanw, first of, you have never lived, owned property or belonged to any HOA in FL. In FL, nobody calls a private meeting of board members with the HOA association, an "executive session."

Mary,

Our docs state the manageent is to attend 12 meetings per year and if they are ASKED to attend any others there is an additional charge.

Susanna,

Quite splitting hairs with Susan. I would be very surprised to learn that you didn't know what was meant. Sometimes an executive session is called a closed session. FL didn't put a name to it so I guess you can call it whatever you like. When Susan or anyone else says "executive session" or "closed session", what is meant is a meeting of the board that members are not allowed to attend.

All, as you can see it's a matter of interpretation.

From Wikipedia:
"More generally, an executive session is a term for any block within an otherwise public meeting (often of a board of directors) in which minutes are not taken, and the contents of the discussion are treated as confidential.

Robert's Rules says that a VOTE can be taken at an ES. In FL, the board cannot vote in secret.

Happy Holidays to you all!

Susanna,

It's not a good idea to qoute Wikipedia as a definitive source of information. The home page for the site refers to it as "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" and that should tell you that information you find there may not be accurate. In particular, the definition you quoted is incorrect, The true definition of executive session, in the parliamentary sense, is:

"An executive session in general parliamentary usage has come to mean any meeting of a deliberative assembly, or a portion of a meeting, at which the proceedings are secret." (Roberts Rules, 10th ed, p. 92, lines 24-26.) The part that you quoted about minutes not being taken in executive session is also incorrect. Minutes ARE taken in executive session. Continuing in Roberts Rules, 10th ed., p.93 lines 16-21: "The minutes, or record of proceedings, of an executive session must be read and acted upon only in executive session unless that which would be reported in the minutes - that is, the action taken, as distinct from that which was said in debate - was not secret, or secrecy has been lifted by the assembly."

What all this boils down to is that an organization can meet in executive session and that the discussion and debate remains secret, but that the final motion to be voted on can then be taken outside of the executive session and voted on in a normal meeting. Thus, the definition of executive session, as stated in Roberts Rules, appears to meet the requirements of the Florida statute.

To all,
Here is another good example of reason. I don't suppose we are going to find in some rule board somewhere that the board is directed to do this, nor should they do this because they can or don't have to. It just makes good sense and IMO I applaud it.

Sorry guys if I burts your bubble, but the bottom line is that the OP is in FL, and so you should stick to FL Statutes, Laws, and customary proceedings. What Roger says makes sense to me and, as for the rest of "opinions" voiced on this thread, well, that's what it is, just opinions based on poster's own experience in their own states, not in FL.

I would also like to suggest, if I am right, that Roger speaks from a Management chair, so it is possible for a management company to have some integrity and still serve the Board and the Owners.
I am NOT suggesting ROGER is perfect, I don't know that, but his proposal speaks to some thought process to get to where he is. It is a statement of reason and concern for doing a job well. He also has stood the test of time on this board. This Board is sorely lacking in input from the management (strictly) side. I also suspect there are a lot of Management types that think this type of site is pure crap.

Bruce, with all due respect, if you want to continue arguing back and forth with our sponsor Roger, start a new thread about the topic of ES. That's not the header of this thread.

Bruce, you present a good argument for not having minutes of an executive session. When no minutes are taken there are no minutes to provide in discovery.

Ions ago, I asked this question: "It seems that at all of our meetings, the property manager from our Management company has to attend... Is it possible to have a meeting to decide on something without their attending? particularly if it pertains to THEM?"

Since that time, all sorts of statements, answers about Growing Apes in Sumatra which has nothing to do with the question I originally asked and for which I still do not have an answer. Thanks anyway......