|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
JudyP1
(Florida)
Posts:21
 |
| 06/10/2010 6:44 PM |
|
| If a meeting is officially called to order, but the first part of the meeting is closed because our attorney is going to discuss some sensitive information, then the rest of the meeting continues with the attorney gone and the homeowners welcomed, does the meeting again have to be called to order? |
|
|
|
|
GlenL
(Ohio)
Posts:3526
|
| 06/10/2010 11:02 PM |
|
Judy the meeting would be called to order. A Board member would make a motion to go into ES for consultation with attorney which would be voted on. When the ES was complete the Board would then return to the meeting and a motion to leave ES with a brief description of what happened in ES. For example:
Mr. Crist made a motion to go into Executive Session at 8:48 p.m. pursuant to Section 720.303 (2) (A) of the Florida Revised Code for the following:
1. Conferences with the Law Director concerning disputes those are subject to pending or imminent court action.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Bush.
Mr. Obama - yea: Mr. Crist - yea: Mr. Bush - yea.
Mr. Obama made a motion to leave Executive Session at 9:58 p.m. with no action taken. Motion was seconded by Mr. Crist.
Mr. Obama - yea: Mr. Crist - yea: Mr. Bush - yea.
The homeowners are not entitled to know what was said in ES but they are entitled to know of any decisions made in ES. i.e. hire a new attorney, instruct the attorney to commence a civil suit against X. |
|
Too bad the only people who know how to run the country are busy driving cabs and cutting hair. - George Burns |
|
|
MaryA1
Posts:0
|
| 06/11/2010 6:54 AM |
|
Glen,
Perhaps what you say applies to OH but it does not apply to AZ. In AZ the BOD is not required to state in the open session what business was transacted, if any, in the closed session. |
|
|
|
|
DonnaS
(Tennessee)
Posts:5671
|
| 06/11/2010 9:27 AM |
|
Judy,
The meeting with the attorney should have been either done before any meeting was called or at another time and place. How did they handle the privacy issue within a meeting already being called? Yes, a members meeting needs to be properly noticed and verified prior to a meeting but the attorney meeting would not need to be. |
|
|
|
|
MaryA1
Posts:0
|
| 06/11/2010 9:55 AM |
|
Donna,
In AZ, the OML requires that ALL meetings of the board and assn be properly noticed. Therefore if the BOD is going to meet in ES they must notice the meeting even though members would not be able to attend. Members have a right to know when the board is meeting even though they may not be able to attend the meeting because confidential info will be discussed -- in this case the purpose is to meet with an attorney. |
|
|
|
|
JudyP1
(Florida)
Posts:21
|
| 06/11/2010 10:00 AM |
|
| Maybe I asked my question wrong. Our Property Manager, althought she was running bother parts of the meeting, said that the part of the meeting following our closed session does not count as a meeting. Nothing voted on would mean anything because the second part of the meeting was not re-called to order. (The homeowners were not present during our talk with our attorney). |
|
|
|
|
MicheleD
(Kentucky)
Posts:4491
|
| 06/12/2010 6:54 AM |
|
I would disagree with your property manager.
|
|
|
|
|
MaryA1
Posts:0
|
| 06/12/2010 12:58 PM |
|
Posted By JudyP1 on 06/10/2010 6:44 PM
If a meeting is officially called to order, but the first part of the meeting is closed because our attorney is going to discuss some sensitive information, then the rest of the meeting continues with the attorney gone and the homeowners welcomed, does the meeting again have to be called to order?
Judy,
Whether a closed session or an open session, the meeting should be called to order and adjourned. In this instance, the closed meeting should have been called to order and adjourned when it ended, then when the meeting was opened to the members it should have been called to order and adjourned when it ended. The open session should be treated as a complete meeting as should the closed session. Separate sets of minutes should be taken for each meeting.
Even if the open session was not called to order, IMO, it would still be a valid meeting. If the PM was running the meeting as you say, I can't imagine why she didn't inform the Pres to call the meeting to order. |
|
|
|
|
GlenL
(Ohio)
Posts:3526
|
| 06/12/2010 6:02 PM |
|
| Simple tell the MC you called the meeting to order, they just must not have heard you. |
|
Too bad the only people who know how to run the country are busy driving cabs and cutting hair. - George Burns |
|
|
DianeW
(Florida)
Posts:147
|
| 06/15/2010 6:11 AM |
|
| At a recent meeting with our attorney re taking an owner to foreclosure, we were advised that no recording of the meeting should be done. And I believe I read here sometime in the past that minutes should not be taken during ES because of the paper trail if someone requests copies of minutes. This is applicable to Florida. |
|
|
|
|
DonnaS
(Tennessee)
Posts:5671
|
| 06/15/2010 7:44 AM |
|
Diane,
I would get a new attorney. Where does it become okay to not document decisions that are made by a Board regarding legal issues? I would not be comfortable with that. Hey, if you make a decision and that becomes an issue, be it right or wrong, the Board must take responsibility for their actions. |
|
|
|
|
DianeW
(Florida)
Posts:147
|
| 06/15/2010 8:17 AM |
|
| No decisions were made in this meeting. It was discussion re foreclosure with one individual only. We were meeting to address what direction to take. I can understand necessity for documenting decisions but personal/personnel info was not to be documented. |
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
General Legal Notice: The content of forum messages are from the posting member and have not been reviewed nor endorsed by HOATalk.com. Messages posted by HOATalk or other members are for informational purposes only, are not legal or professional advice and do not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. HOATalk is not a licensed attorney, CPA, tax advisor, financial advisor or any other licensed professional. HOATalk accepts ads from sponsors but does not verify sponsor qualifications nor endorse/guarantee any sponsor's product or service.
HindmanSanchez Legal Notice: (For messages posted by HindmanSanchez) This message has been prepared by HindmanSanchez for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Members of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send us confidential information unless you speak with one of our attorneys and get authorization to send that information to us. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in our firm. Our attorneys are licensed to practice law in the state of Colorado only.
Legal Notice For Messages Posted by Sponsoring Attorneys: This message has been prepared by the sponsoring attorney for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send any sponsoring attorney confidential information unless you speak with the sponsoring attorney or an attorney from the sponsoring attorney’s firm and get authorization to send that information to them. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in the firm of the sponsoring attorney. Sponsoring attorneys that post messages here are licensed to practice law in a specific state or states as indicated in their message signature or sponsor’s profile page. (NOTE: A ‘sponsoring attorney’ is an attorney that is a HOATalk.com official sponsor and is identified as such in the posted message or on our sponsor page.)
|
|