Community Website Advice > HOA Forum

Unanswered

Active Topics

Forums

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions

Subject: Community Website Advice

Prev Next

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Author

Messages

RobinW
(Tennessee)

Posts:7

09/06/2006 1:05 PM
I designed and set up my community website a little over 2 months ago. My husband, who is a Board member has been utilizing the site to keep the community up to date on some positive changes that have been going on in the community through the Discussions forum since they never were put in the newsletter. There has been a lengthy debaucle going on with allowing or prohibiting trampolines in our neighborhood. He recently posted an quick synopsis of the chain of events since he has been on the Board as well as a "unofficial" survey on the site. Both of these has prompted a lot of lively but civil discussion on the Discussions forum and there have been a lot of questions posed to the other Board members about details of this issue. (They sent violation letters out, a few people took them down, then a few months later, after the threat of a lawsuit, were allowed again.) To make a long story short, the other Board members have now voted to remove the Discussions from the site as well as to only allow "approved" surveys. The Survey feature aside - is it not against the residents' first ammendment rights to be censored in this way? I have not been officially told to remove anything but I will not be a part of an illegal action. Thanks in advance. Robin

JosephW
(Michigan)

Posts:788

09/06/2006 1:53 PM
Depends on who owns and runs the web site. If it was authorized by the board, and paid for by the association, then, rightly or wrongly, the board can exercise conrol over it. They are not removing anyone's "rights". They are removing the discussion board from the site. People can still talk, write and communicate. If it is private, owned by you, then you can pretty much do whatever you want. You'll probably have to take off anything that indicates it represents the association, that can be legally termed "Proprietary". It shouldn't be called the "XYZ Association" web site, as it wouldn't be any more. If it is the associations, then go ahead and set your own up, with a discussion board and continue as you have. Joe

Joseph West Official HOATalk.com Sponsor Community Associations Network, LLC www.CommunityAssociations.net *See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal

GeraldT1

Posts:0

09/06/2006 2:00 PM
RobinW, A discussion blog is not a constitutional right, nor one your by-laws had as mandatory. Therefore, you are not censoring owners by removing the feature to vent their frustrations to the entire community. IMO, an hoa association discussion blog on it's own website is not wise. I would not ever advise it. The HOA could be held responsible for the publishing of untruths. It's one thing to solicit community input on a secure website that is directed to the board or management privately. It's another to run the risk that debates can be viewed by everyone. IMO. GeraldT1 NNJ

RobinW
(Tennessee)

Posts:7

09/06/2006 2:46 PM
It was authorized by the Board but not yet paid for. I designed it and fronted the bill. I also personally bought the domain names. It does not have Association website on it. It says Community website. My next question would be that since I have not been paid for the receipts I submitted can I tell them they will have to use alternate service and they don't have to pay me on what I submitted? I bought .net and .com versions of the domain names. The HOA used the .com versions up until then so I don't mind giving them that one back as long as I was reimbursed for it.

GeraldT1

Posts:0

09/06/2006 4:00 PM
RobinW, All that I would do is remove the discussion blog feature but provide a method for owners to contact management via the web/email. If the board wishes to keep the .com and or .net, the should reimburse you for that, just have your husband recuse himself from tha particular vote. You can have the existing site point to another site that will host it for your community. I recommend this. Technically, the web-hosting site will know what to do, if they do not, don't use them. The service of a web-page you have provided for your community is wonderful. But the association should pay for it or the MC should provide it gratis. Mine does, so far. Designing and hosting a web-site is a great deal of work, especially for volunteer owners. Best of success!! GeraldT1

JulieS
(Georgia)

Posts:412

09/06/2006 5:47 PM
I highly recommend NOT having a blog board...nothing positive seems to come from it. Last spring we had some residents go through the board removal process. They created their own website with our association name.org. It was nothing but a bash board in which these people used it to spread lies about the community and board members that they were trying to remove. I did an internet search for my name recently and what popped up was something that someone had posted on the site. I am glad I am not in the process of looking for work right now as prospective employers are using the internet to search for information on possible employees. Also, a new board member who took my place posted lies about me, saying I am in violation of the covenants and that I just do what I want. He didn't bother to ask if I had ACC approval for what he considered a violation (as I do have approval and his posting is pure slander). After I was removed, a neighbor and I created a useful website without a blog board. It contains community news, our documents (covenants, by-laws, design standards, pool rules, etc.). We also post the meeting minutes, annual meeting presentation and things like that. There will never be a blog/message board on the official neighborhood website given the past experiences of the 'unofficial' website that is still out there. I can only hope that someone wanting to buy a home in our subdivision does not run across the ugly website...they would never want to live here after reading what is on it. The interesting thing is that most of the people posting the stuff don't live here any longer.

JosephW
(Michigan)

Posts:788

09/06/2006 5:58 PM
Just for the heck of it..... Slander Defamation Lawsuit Libel Defamation and libel are defined as a false statement that injures someone's reputation and exposes him to public contempt, hatred, ridicule or condemnation. If the false statement is published in print or through broadcast media, such as radio or TV, it is called libel. If it is only spoken, it is called slander. You often hear "Truth is the perfect defense against libel." A curious notion, not entirely supported by what goes on in the courts. Truth is a very good defense. It may prove an unshakable defense if you have unlimited funds to pay lawyers to defend it. If you don't you should build a better defense and or offense. Defamation is defined as an untrue statement which causes you to be held in contempt or ridicule and as a result causes you damages. Libel is a defamatory statement made in writing and slander is one made orally. If anyone has said anything that was offensive to you, you may have wondered if that person was guilty of having defamed you. A defamatory statement may either be a false writing, a picture or visual representation which exposes you to contempt, hatred, or ridicule, causes you to be shunned or avoided, or tends to injure you in you occupation. A slanderous defamatory statement would be one which was false but made through oral communication by word of mouth, radio or television. Examples of some of the common types of defamatory statements are the following: (1) statements which make a claim about whether a person has committed a crime; (2) statements which impute the presence of an infectious or loathsome disease; (3) statements which injure a person with respect to his office, trade or business; and (4) statements which impute some lack of moral dignity. Even if the statements fit into one of these categories, which are not all inclusive, it is not defamatory if it is true. Truth is an absolute defense in defamation cases. There are also other defenses in defamation lawsuits. A particular statement may be privileged in that the law allows certain statements to be made without them being classified as defamatory. For example, statements made by certain public officers during the performance of their official duties are privileges. Certain other communications may be privileged, but there are too many rules regarding privileges and they are too complex to be stated in the short length of this message. An attorney can help you with any particular case. False statements which are made maliciously, in other words, those generated with the sate of mind arising from ill-will or hatred, are more often to be held by the courts to be defamatory than false statements which are not malicious (such as simple jokes or something of that nature). However, if the statement is true, there is still no defamation, regardless of what the person’s state of mind was at the time. The defamation case is a difficult kind of lawsuit to win. The first amendment to the United States Constitution protects freedom of speech and the courts have set forth a complicated set of rules that are used to determine whether particular types of statements are protected by the first amendment, regardless of whether they are false. -------- Joe

Joseph West Official HOATalk.com Sponsor Community Associations Network, LLC www.CommunityAssociations.net *See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal

RobinW
(Tennessee)

Posts:7

09/08/2006 10:16 AM
Thanks for posting this here! This is very timely since the Board President is walking on a very thin line on committing this via emails to residents against my husband, also a Board member, who is copied in on them. He has full support of another Board member who recently resigned from his Vice President position for a number of reasons including the dishonesty of the Board President.

RobinW
(Tennessee)

Posts:7

09/08/2006 10:35 AM
I am actually considering going private with it. I have been reimbursed for hosting on a month by month basis when I submit the receipts but never charged for design or maintenance. I set it up as a "Community" site to begin with and all Board members viewed the site before it went live. Not one of them said anything about it not saying it was an HOA site. One of my announcement emails, which they all received, including the property manager, included the following: Current month's website updates: * "What your Board is doing for you" In Discussions * ALL Board Meeting Minutes through 2006 in Documents * Searchable CC&Rs in Documents * Suggestion Box added * Yard of the Month picture and announcement - added at the beginning of each month * All Committee members have the ability to make additions to the site as well This site is not Board controlled. It is here for you all of you, so please utilize it! ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ALL of the design, features, updates and additions were mine - not made by the request of a Board member. There has not been anything posted to the Discussion forum beside valid questions. It is because of this the Board president wants it pulled. She does not want to have to answer them. The history of this is that she has allowed minutes not to be taken at a recent Board/Appeal meeting at the request of a resident - against our CCnRs. The property manager, who was present at the meeting later agreed that this was wrong but said nothing even though he is paid to be in an advisory position. Sorry for the long post, but does anyone see anything wrong with going private and paying for it myself? Thank you all so much for you imput! Robin

GeraldT1

Posts:0

09/08/2006 11:47 AM
Robin, Is there anything private on the web? Actually I think a website with specific facts about a community association should be authorized by the board by contracting agents (mc, hosting company, etc.), and getting a website committee of volunteers to design or draft the features on it. Just because no one has posted info on your site that is defamatory yet, does not mean it can't happen. You see the discussion postings that occur on this site? Now imagine it is on a site that is directly tied to your association. While HOATalk is an amazing tool, there are matters that are opinion, not fact. Opinions are fine but they require a certain amount of anonymity, even if they are fact, and must be understood as such. As you can see on this site, there is no delay in posting a comment, no one editing content. Yes there is freedom of speach but not allowing the opportunity for owners to lash out, is not denying them their constitutional freedoms. It's actually protect the assets of the membership. That must prevail. Disgruntled owners don't always respect the idea of acting business-like, and not lashing out when they hear something they don't like. IMO, hand everything over to the HOA BOD and be done with it. GeraldT1 NNJ

RobinW
(Tennessee)

Posts:7

09/08/2006 12:10 PM
Actually, I set it up where residents have to register and be approved before they can utilize the site. As for Discussions, they must follow quite a discriptive and specific set of rules or their posting priviledges are suspended. I can also have every message be screened before I allow it to be posted if there are any issues that arise. They cannot post annonymously since the Discusion is tied to their profiles which must have a street address verified to be approved. All areas are the site are for approved members of the neighborhood only and cannot be viewed by anyone not approved. As for volunteers to take it over, we can't even get people to volunteer for empty Board positions never mind a new committee. If I gave it up, the Board would just remove it completely since no one has any web experience nor wants to bother with communicating with the community. Residents were recently told that any communication with the Board can only be done at a Board meeting from now on, period. If any of you have designed and maintained a site before, you know that "just turning it over" would be a travesty. The site has been a very positive change in an otherwise very negative HOA environment. I guess I will leave this one up to the residents of the community. Thanks for all of your feedback. It was very enlightening.

RogerB
(Colorado)

Posts:3726

09/08/2006 12:39 PM
Robin, you should be acknowledged and thanked for setting up a community web site at your expense. However, I strongly recommend the site be authorized and controlled by the Board of Directors. You have no protection against a law suit, whereas if you administer the site under the authorizion and control of the Board they do have protection and insurance can be extended to cover you. One must be very careful when creating security of an HOA web site and the contents of what may be posted on it.

Roger Borcherding Official HOATalk.com Sponsor DARCO Property Management (Colorado) (303) 925-0150 *See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal

GeraldT1

Posts:0

09/08/2006 12:48 PM
RobinW, The travesty, if there is one, is in a service provided pro-bono and the inability of owners and board members to understand its importance and inability to maintain it. In your case it was not entirely pro-bono but the design/labor was. If you are not willing to pass the torch of the website responsibilities, then don't. However, you may be called back to assist, and better appreciated once everyone realizes the loss of the website. That aside, I don't care how many login features there are on a community discussion board, it will either bog down your ability to keep the site current due to constant editing, or you'll run the very dangerous risk that someone will state something defamatory. It will only take one posting of something defamatory to bring the whole website down. Short of your hosting becoming a day and night job, a discussion board is something I would NEVER recommend. But that then places you in an unevienable postion of legislating content. Look at JosephW's post about defamatory statements. You've received several posts based upon this concern. Best of success!! GeraldT1 NNJ

RobinW
(Tennessee)

Posts:7

09/08/2006 1:00 PM
Thank you both VERY much for those last two comments! Excellent points I will seriously consider! Robin

DavidW5
(Virginia)

Posts:70

09/09/2006 7:24 AM
In our community, where the developer still controls the board of directors, the web site had a "Residents' Discussion Forum". The homeowners had been posting messages that the developer found embarassing, pointing out instances where the board was not in compliance with the statues or bylaws. The board directed the web master to provide a capability for the board to censor any message. The web master refused. The board then directed him to delete the discussion forum from the web site. Fortunately, the web master had access to another server not under the board's control so he moved the discussion forum to the other server. He then email'd a link to the new server to all users. The discussion forum continues to be the primary way homeowners communicate among themselves.

DonN
(Michigan)

Posts:242

09/09/2006 7:25 AM
Comments on various issues. To RobinW re to have or not to have The question of allowing discussion forums is well illustrated by what happened with your discussion forum. First a good exchange. Then the board eliminates the forum, and provides only official "survey" results. I think of a discussion forum (like HOA Talk's) as an internet New-England-style Town Meeting — an opportunity for interested people to exchange views on issues of interest. A soap box, or an opportunity for free speech. Does everyone agree? No!!! Useful? Yes!!! Your board should consider whether your HOA is of the members, by the members and for the members, or is of the board, by the board and for the board. When boards try to control rather than serve the members, individual members start blogs, discussion boards, owners for better HOA XYZ, etc. Democracy is messy; so are discussion forums. Members often communicate to the board; they should. With a discussion forum, members can post their communications to the board of directors on the forum for other members to read and comment on. Yes, messages posted will include those some board members don't want to hear. Capable board members will be interested. Unsure board members will likely want to control or prevent such messages. Board members serious about serving the members will likely welcome and read the forums. If you like, you can continue to offer the discussion forum as a personally-sponsored forum, and label it as the non-official forum for members of HOA XYZ.. There are service providers with free discussion forums (if you accept minimal advertising). I currently maintain two such "free" discussion forums. One is private with most of the information available only to members of the group for viewing and posting. The second is available for all to view, but only registered members are allow to post. For both, I post ground rules for using and do not allow anonymous postings. To GeraldT re liability The liability of the provider of a discussion forum has been well research. The bottom line is that the liability is minimal with publication and acceptance of the "terms of service" by each participant. Each of us participating in HOA Talk accepted their TOS. Attorney Amy Heffernan Bray wrote a comprehensive paper on managing the risk — on making the risk minimal. Search the internet with <"Amy Heffernan Bray">. General Comment In our democracy, we depend upon a free press to provide information and opinions on all sides of the issues. But HOAs generally don't have a free press. Members benefit from a method for each to communicate with all members. This is recognized in Virginia's POA Act which includes a provision "§55-510.2. Distribution of information by members. The board of directors shall establish a reasonable, effective, and free method, appropriate to the size and nature of the association, for lot owners to communicate among themselves and with the board of directors regarding any matter concerning the association." Our thanks to JoeW for his informative comments.

Don Nordeen Governance of Property Owners Associations

RobinW
(Tennessee)

Posts:7

09/09/2006 8:39 AM
We are having our annual HOA meeting this Tuesday where it will be discussed. Thanks to all of you I feel much more prepared. I will let you know how it all turns out.

hoatalk

Posts:490

09/09/2006 12:06 PM
DonN: That CAI article you referenced is very informative! Thank You! The link on your blog no longer works so please allow me to walk the members through how to get to the article: Visit: http://www.cai-nevada.org/ On the menu: Choose Chapter News...Search News Archive On the search form click Resource Center. Enter this word in the search box: Heffernan Click Search. The April 2005 newsletter will come up. The article is in there. Thanks again for posting that reference! HOATalk.com

HOATalk.com, A free service of Community123.com Provider of Upscale Community Websites CLICK HERE to get a FREE trial community website *See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal

DonN
(Michigan)

Posts:242

09/09/2006 5:53 PM
To: hoatalk Thanks for the info that the link to the Heffernan article on my weblog was obsolete. It has now been repaired. Because internet links often move, I usually provide the title of the article and name of the author so that an internet search will work even if a link becomes obsolete. Thanks again to hoatalk.

Don Nordeen Governance of Property Owners Associations

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > Community Website Advice