BabbsJohnson

The general membership in this case is 332 homeowners that are mostly non-responsive to general questions put out to them. I also fear that raising these questions would cause some kind of retaliation from the board member in question. Every time I have spoken up in the past, it has cost me something. I’m starting to think that there is little hope for this situation. btw I am NES I forgot I had an account before I posted.

Thank you for the response When you say seek legal counsel, what would I be asking them exactly? Re: talking to the other board members Based on recent past communications with the other board members, I believe that she has told them not to talk to me outside of meetings, and she personally stonewalls me when I ask for conversation outside of meetings.

Hello Parliamentarians I have a question that I’m going to try to explain, and I hope that it’s clear. We currently have a president who acts as chair, but also seems to dominate every meeting by rebutting everybody’s discussion and expounding at length of her own opinions about any topic that we happen to be discussing. This usually happens before any motion is made, outside of our normal debate/discussion time. My concern is that since she leads almost every discussion and puts a lot of opinion out into the arena before anyone has had a chance to think about it, and that she influences the tone of the discussion and how it should be thought of, before anybody gets to talk after a motion is made, and the “official” discussion begins. She often interrupts people, talks over them, and then when someone is talking, does a constant comment stream as they’re talking, which can be very intimidating to some people. The current board members have been there for a short time, and only know this environment for our meetings. None of them know anything of Roberts rules. In the past when our board has distributed the RONR, that was the end of the topic of the discussion, and it was never referenced again-not in practice or in review. I feel that she has already set the tone to discourage people from opposing her in anything. No one of the board members feels empowered to make points of order or to interrupt or oppose her. How can I make them understand that she does not rule the meetings? How do I say this to them without her basically steamrollering over me to prove that she does in fact rule the meetings? Also, every time I’ve spoken up in the past she’s used her assumed power to make sure that I pay for it in some way. The fact is, this has been going on for a long time, and I have contemplated leaving the board, moving from my HOA, and even suicide, because I feel so personally helpless in this situation. I thought of suggesting that we hire a parliamentarian, and that would be a good first start, but I think that she would be on her best behavior for that meeting that the parliamentarian attended, or that she will shoot down the idea, saying that we can “make do” and don’t need that. This has taken a huge toll on me emotionally and mentally. All of the previous entries that I have made in the past that reference another female on our board, is the person that I’m talking about. She enjoys belittling people and “putting people in their place”. I honestly don’t know what to do.

This is why I keep coming back.

Thank you all for your help. Seems like I'm always turning a corner to discover a mountain of information to learn and try to remeber. Along with the realities of elections and removals etc, seems like quite the uphill batlle.

Wy is it moot? If they did not have the required vote, does that not invalidate it?

There was no previous notice of this action, and there were only 5 out of 7 present, the vote was 'passed' with 3 out of 5. Instead of reviewing the charters, the president judged the work and referenced 'information she had heard" about some issues, and made her judgement decision from there. She would not elaborate on the information, and there is no guarantee that the information was correct , in context or complete.

I believe, by the Board, by a main motion. Stated in our By laws: "There shall also be such boards, or committees as shall be determined from time to time by the Board of Directors, consisting of those persons who may be selected therefor and invited to become members thereof by the Board of Directors and having such powers and duties as may be delegated by the Board. Any such board or committee and the members thereof shall serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors." And later, on another page: "To establish such additional committees, officers or employees of the association, as shall be determined, from time to time, by the Board of Directors as having such powers and duties as may be delegated by the Board. Any such board or committee or officer shall serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors."

So...is how it was done 'wrong' in any way?

Hmm. So is there any 'right' way to disband or dissolve a committee?

I did see that...Hmmm.....well, if Roberts Rules are to preside, how does one disband a committee, and if there are no guidelines, how does one know what kind of voting is required?

I've been looking and looking if Roberts Rules gives any guidelines of disbanding committees. All I can find is information on 'discharging' committees. Is disband and dissolve and discharge all the same? Can any of you tell me if RR has anything to say about dissolving or disbanding a committee? Last week the president (vice in absence of president), under the agenda item of "board to review revised charters" for two committees, (background, one committee chairperson suggested a rewrite of the charters, that took place and the board was to review them or at least give their feedback for the charters to be then re-revised by the committees and respective chairpersons of each) gave vague reasons for doing so, but made a motion to "disband" both committees. In the preliminary minutes it said that the board voted to "dissolve" the committees. Is disband and dissolve the same? This did not have a 2/3 vote, there were 5 people present and three of them, including the president, and the mismanaging chairperson mentioned in the later paragraphs, and a person who seems to always vote "with" that board member/committee chairman, voted to pass it. Two people were absent from the meeting, two people voted against passing this motion. The president indicated she had received information about interpersonal situations and questions that people on the committee had (that have still gone unanswered and unresolved). One of the board members asked her for proof of what she was referring to when she cited her reasons why she was moving to "disband" the committee, and she said she did not have to give any. This honestly felt like an arbitrary quasi trial, that went from vague hearsay-based accusation without any presented proof, that skipped over formal accusation with proof, and without letting the accused answer (since no actual real accusations took place) and then went straight to 'sentencing', in which the committees were disbanded.. The committee had existed in another form for many years and had just been split off from another committee to be its own. It had two members from the prior committee, and two new members. One of the prior members is a board member and became the chairperson, and the other prior member is the (usual) president, who was absent from the meeting. This was to be a standing committee and was only formed three months ago. The committee was not charged with any clear formal goals for the short or long term, and in one committee member's opinion, was being mismanaged by the chairperson, who had also done some questionable things within the committee as far as his power and abilities. This committee member had asked in several ways to the chairman, the board president, and someone who would have acted as a mediator for time to discuss these issues face to face in the next committee meeting or before that point, but never got the chance (those who were asked skirted around the request in preliminary discussion or ignored the request) before this action in the board meeting took place, and that committee member's former request was never satisfied. The chairman told the committee member who asked him that he had to know explicitly 'what and why' the committee member needed some time to address the committee at the next meeting. Because the subject was of a sensitive nature (the mismanagement issue) the committee member chose to take it up with the board president and the mediator, asking for the chairman to be present also, and that request was the one that was either delayed or ignored, or when asked a series of questions, dismissed, to a point. Feedback? Looking for specific answers to the disband vs dissolve vs discharge questions, and also about the 2/3 vote. Also there was another indication from another website that stated that the president could not be on a committee unless special verbiage in the by-laws stated they could. Not sure if this is something anyone could give feedback on, but I'll throw it out there anyway.

And also everyone on the board is supposed to get a copy of RONR by next month, but how does a non-board member insist that they actually read, learn, and implement it faithfully?

When you say assembly do you mean the board members or the associatiob members attending the meeting?Also as a very dominant and loud person in a roomful of very polite passive board members who do not know roberts rules even though our by laws state meetings will use roberts rules for our meetings, they all seem to allow her habits to go unchalleneged. I asked the president, who was absent at the last meeting, if a motion that passed to dissolve a committee can be brought back to restart or recreate a similar committe in the future and she said no it cannot. She said the board voted it through and so it stands. Is that right? Can a new motion to create a committee not be brought to the table?

This is probably going to be a hard question to get right. Our current vice and sometimes acting president of our HOA board of directors is involed as president in a number of organizations. I have no doubt she is well respected in some circles, but she seems to be a very pushy person who uses bullying tactics in meetings. She allows herself unlimted time to talk on a subject during discussion, but then cuts people off, tell them who gets a "last comment" and decides when the meeting is "moving on" even if others have something to say. She uses her opinion a lot in debate that is sometimes half baked and its obvious that her mind is already made up and that she will not accept input from others. When she is not there the meetings go smooth, peaceful, and cooperative. When she is there, they are loud, chaotic, and she dominates the meetings every time. We always have a very low voter turn out, and most homeowners never attend baord meetings. How does one rally people either to remove her or run themselves and then get those new people elected? It seems like such a huge job, and even though there are many what I see as negative things about her, I've been told its better to keep things positive, but how?? Very frustrated and already feeling tired for the battle to come...help?