Teleconferencing Allowed

[AFS1970]

I am asking this based on something I saw in another topic.

 

A couple of years ago our state changed many of the laws that our HOA falls under. One of the changes was to allow for teleconferencing (including voice and / or video) for participation at meetings. Now I didn't even know this was something that the state had to allow, but they did that.

 

Our HOA has never been changed to allow for this possability. We have one member who lives out of state and has asked us to set up a video chat for him to attend meetings.

 

There are some technological problems with this, as the room we have our meetings in has no internet access and spotty cellular coverage, but is our only common space. However we might be able to get a homeowner to allow use of their internet connection.

 

My major concern with this is that we would first need to update our bylaws to allow for this kind of participation. I amssume that this is not covered in RONR, simply because of the time in which it was written, but am I at least correct in my thinking that we need an internal bylaw change to make this happen?

[George Mervosh]

My major concern with this is that we would first need to update our bylaws to allow for this kind of participation. I amssume that this is not covered in RONR, simply because of the time in which it was written, but am I at least correct in my thinking that we need an internal bylaw change to make this happen?

 

We can't answer questions based upon what some statute might allow or require, or whatever.

 

Oh, and the latest edition of RONR  was published was in 2011, so it's not ancient history. 

[Edgar Guest]

A couple of years ago our state changed many of the laws that our HOA falls under. One of the changes was to allow for teleconferencing (including voice and / or video) for participation at meetings. Now I didn't even know this was something that the state had to allow, but they did that.

 

The fact that your state may permit meeting via teleconference doesn't necessarily mean your state requires that your organization allow it.

 

If you've adopted RONR as your parliamentary authority then meeting via teleconference is prohibited (as is all absentee participation) unless your bylaws authorize it or some superior rule or law requires it.

[Gary Novosielski]

I'm in agreement with Edgar on this.  State laws supersede the rules in RONR, so even though RONR does not permit teleconferencing (unless your bylaws authorize it), if your state laws say it's okay, the prohibition in RONR would not apply.

 

But that's not the same thing as saying that your group must allow it.  That's still something that your group would have to arrange for, plan for, and probably pay for.  Or perhaps, even with your new-found permission, you might decide not to do it.

 

The only way to know your options for sure is to carefully read the applicable statute or code, preferably with the help of an attorney.  All we can tell you is that RONR prohibits teleconferences, but RONR isn't the highest authority in cases like this.

[AFS1970]

Thank you, I was not aware that RONR prohibited absentee participation, although I agree that State Statute supercedes this. We also allow for Proxies (a whole other issue) but this member wants to actively debate in meetigns which simply giving his proxy to soemoneelse would not accomplish.

 

I did not mean to say that RONR was ancient history, just that since General Robert never saw a video chat or a computer, he probably never thought about including them. There may be a concept that can be extended (like the absenttee participation) that would cover the situation but there most liekly would not be a specific mention of teleconferencing.

 

On a related note, given a sufficiently reliable connection, and whatever equipment would be required to allow all members to see and hear each other, would this truly be an absenttee participation? While I am not in full agreement with the request I would think that this is a whole different thing from things like absenttee ballots or proxy voting, as it would allow for real time participation in debate and discussion.

[Edgar Guest]

On a related note, given a sufficiently reliable connection, and whatever equipment would be required to allow all members to see and hear each other, would this truly be an absenttee participation?

 

If you're not in the meeting room you're absent. All the technology in the world won't change that fact.

 

I'm certainly not against using technology to facilitate participation (this forum is an excellent example) but I think it's worth preserving the distinction between those who are present (in person) and those who are not.

 

In any case, every organization is free to adopt the rules it wants.

[Josh Martin]

On a related note, given a sufficiently reliable connection, and whatever equipment would be required to allow all members to see and hear each other, would this truly be an absenttee participation? While I am not in full agreement with the request I would think that this is a whole different thing from things like absenttee ballots or proxy voting, as it would allow for real time participation in debate and discussion.

RONR does make a distinction between methods of absentee voting which allow for synchronous aural communication between all members and methods which do not. Meetings which allow for synchronous aural communication require much fewer special rules to get them to work properly. "Meeting" by e-mail or the like are much more complex and, in RONR's view, are not meetings of a deliberative assembly.