A President's rights

[Vera Powers]

If the HOA BOD president no longer has ownership of any unit within the HOA, and therefore is not a member of the HOA, can he vote or make motions that will affect the HOA?  The BOD voted to allow him to hold his title until the annual meeting this year. 

[Joshua Katz]

What do the bylaws say about membership and about the qualifications for office? While we're at it, what do they say about the powers of the BOD? In particular, do they give it the power to allow the president (or not, I guess) to hold his title until the annual meeting?

[Guest Puzzling]

Not very sure but I doubt that the president may stay on. He is not a member anymore and I guess one of the rules is that all officers are members , but this is all guessing from my side. 

Have a look at the website of the homeowners protection bureau www hopb.co they are much more focused on homeowners associations and the legal side than we are in this forum. (And for your (state) laws and hereto find other governing documents)

If the rules of RONR apply ( and that means that no other law  governing document, or rule of order says anything about it) and the president can not stay in office the Vice President takes over his function.

 

[Richard Brown]

22 minutes ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Not very sure but I doubt that the president may stay on. He is not a member anymore and I guess one of the rules is that all officers are members , but this is all guessing from my side. 

Guest Puzzling, you are really going out on a limb there. We do not know what the bylaws say about membership or whether the president must be a member. Pursuant to RONR, there is no requirement that the president be a member of the organization. Many organizations do not specifically require that the president be a member.  It is best to wait until we have more information before opining as to what the answer probably is.   Mr. Katz has asked the appropriate questions and we should wait on the responses.

[Guest Puzzling]

15 hours ago, Richard Brown said:

Guest Puzzling, you are really going out on a limb there. We do not know what the bylaws say about membership or whether the president must be a member. Pursuant to RONR, there is no requirement that the president be a member of the organization. Many organizations do not specifically require that the president be a member.  It is best to wait until we have more information before opining as to what the answer probably is.   Mr. Katz has asked the appropriate questions and we should wait on the responses.

You are right (but I did some hedging) 

The problem is (especially with hoa's and other semi(un) voluntary organizations ) is they are much more regulated by law covenants and other legal requirements than by the organizations own bylaws. 

Just checking the bylaws won't cut the cheese.

Still puzzling about other related aspects but will start a new thread over that after thinking about it (is a rule that the board cannot appoint non members (of the organization)  as boardmembers a rule of order or a standing rule , and what vote does it need?)

[Joshua Katz]

1 hour ago, Guest Puzzling said:

The problem is (especially with hoa's and other semi(un) voluntary organizations ) is they are much more regulated by law covenants and other legal requirements than by the organizations own bylaws. 

Just checking the bylaws won't cut the cheese.

 

Okay, but this is the RONR forum. We do not give legal advice and, in my opinion, while including a caveat when appropriate is nice, it isn't 100% necessary. And certainly we are going out of our lane, and raising all sorts of issues, if we try to give advice based on governing law, rather than simply saying governing law may mandate a different answer and they should consult with an attorney. Parliamentarians must steer clear of the unlicensed practice of law. (Also, I think lawyers should steer clear of the uncredentialed practice of parliamentary procedure, but they don't get in trouble for that.) 

 

[Dan Honemann]

13 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

(Also, I think lawyers should steer clear of the uncredentialed practice of parliamentary procedure, ...) 

I disagree (unless I get to be the one doing the credentialing)  🙂

[Joshua Katz]

4 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

I disagree (unless I get to be the one doing the credentialing)  🙂

You can set different standards. I am just tired of lawyers giving absurd advice and then saying "it's in RONR," apparently in the faith that no one will crack the book open to check.

And of having people challenge me on elementary points of procedure, then say "we'd better ask the lawyer about this." (Leave aside the absurdity of me being a lawyer.)

[Dan Honemann]

35 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

You can set different standards.

I don't do any credentialing, being of the opinion that the only "credentialing" of any significance being done in this connection is that being done by the 2FP.

 

42 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

(Leave aside the absurdity of me being a lawyer.)

I don't think that you being a lawyer is absurd.  🙂

[George Mervosh]

2 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said:

I don't do any credentialing, being of the opinion that the only "credentialing" of any significance being done in this connection is that being done by the 2FP.

A P2FP credential, methinks.    We'll discuss it at the next meeting.