After listening to the complaints of owners and other residents, observing owners and board members, and listening to the professionals, I've concluded that there are a few improvements that might be helpful. This is a summary of some things to do and how they are being accomplished, and why. It is based on 10 years of observation at this association, discussions with attorneys (sometimes at my expense), discussions with various other professionals (accountants, property managers, reserve study professionals, architects, policemen, a city planning commissioner, CAI panelists, etc. which was sometimes at my own expense), and of course, the owners and many board members at BLMH over the years.
From all of that, I have these observations. Some of the following are "a work in progress." Some will happen, some will not. This is Part one of several posts.
1. Communications. There seems to be some confusion about this. First, the perception of some owners that "getting what I want" is improved communications, is simply incorrect. Ditto for former board members. The newsletter became the limited thing it was for several reasons. Possibly the largest was a statement made several years ago at an association meeting that "nobody can understand this stuff." Another impediment in the newsletter is the required research, actual writing and preparation. Finally, I think some people have viewed the newsletter as having as it's primary purpose the dissemination of "good news." I can understand that as an association, we might not want to broadcast problems on the web, which is where our newsletter is posted. However, reality is reality. Owners should be informed and that is my perception of the newsletter. Inform the owners, and other residents. That's appropriate for a business.
Others have complained about the complexity of the newsletter and suggested we provide less information. I think there is a middle ground. As an owner, my suggestions on this subject to board members via email were generally not answered. Once on the board, I began pressing to get us to this middle ground. This began with the creation of a lot of "stuff" for the board and much of it, which was rejected was edited for the internet and went to this blog. By the way, there are subtle ways to reject things. The method of choice with past boards was to simply ignore it.
But I persisted and cranked the stuff out. "The study" created a real need. Funny how people can talk about change, but can't in fact, operate from change. I produced a lot of information for the board, including a 9-page analysis of the study, charts, graphs, spreadsheets etc, etc, etc. Some of what I prepared, in the form of "pie" charts and graphs, was approved and I agreed to put this on a screen during a board meeting, for owners and the board. (All technology, including the high resolution LCD projector, screen, laptop, etc. was donated and operated by me). Some edited versions first went on this blog. Not surprisingly, I was soon requested by the board and also "volunteered" to provide specific charts for the newsletter. The ball was rolling. There is much more to be done.
2. Transparency. I've heard this used intermittently at BLMH, and I consider it related to communications. It was recently used by an owner at an association meeting. Is that merely a coincidence with events this past year? I doubt it; I think it's directly related.
The "transparency" word has usually been used by owners and in the past by certain board members in this association in a specific context. When used by owners, I have come to the conclusion that it is a code word for "You people are doing something behind our backs." What does this word mean and how can it be addressed?
I'm not sure that those who use the word really understand what they are saying. Let's assume there is an issue in the association. Was the issue, whatever it is, discussed among the entire board? Was the issue discussed in front of the owners? Was it discussed with professionals, and that includes management? If the answer to all three of these is "no" then I would say there could possibly be a transparency issue. Owners should understand that certain discussions are to be limited to "executive sessions" of the board. This is defined in the Illinois Condominium Act. If an owner has an issue with that, I suggest they write to their Illinois representative.
Another possible issue with transparency is the board itself. I would think it would be obvious, but emails between board members should be copies to the board, and other emails should include the entire board. "Transparency" is an issue for board members, also. Management should also be included in the communications. On very rare occasions do I exclude management and that's usually because I have a legitimate concern about their work load. There is no tangible excuse for creating sub-groups in an association board. All members should have equal obligations and responsibilities, and be included in emails. Why? There are so many good reasons, including treating board members as equals, and also creating board members who are experts on the association. The better trained and prepared we are, the better this association will be; that's my opinion. However, it's my opinion that board members should never send emails to small groups of owners. Such sub-groups are prohibited by the Illinois Condominium Act. It is acceptable to send an email response to the originating owner. However, I always include the board president in such emails, and frequently the board member who is responsible for the particular area addressed in such emails. After a year on the board, I have concluded it's better to copy all board members, so they are aware of any issues with a specific owner.
This and other communications issues has led me to wonder: 1) How to manage negative conversations, 2) How to responsibly put any board on notice, 3) How should meetings be structured and 4) How to control this and make meetings and events truly "transparent" and informative to the owners. Obviously, one thing is to improve and expand the newsletter and any other "official" communications in the association. Another is to adhere to strict guidelines (the Ilinois Condominium Act) pertaining to what should be openly discussed, and what should be discussed among the board during "executive session." Finally, ask and engage management and others on the board in operating a transparent board. Of course, there is a risk that in doing so, the board may not "look as good" to others; that's normal. Unfortunately, that's part of the job. It's not about looking good. It's about accomplishing good for the association and consistent with fiduciary duties.
So in an independent initiative, once on the board, I decided to expand the articles for the newsletter, which I was authorized to write. I also produced and provided some additional pieces of my own initiative. I resisted efforts to edit my work and issued instructions about how I would revise articles is asked. I also asked "how many words?" can I use for specific pieces. In several cases, I edited a lengthy piece, for example, the article on coyotes, to a much shorter one. My rationale in doing all of this was my perception that owner's infrequent requests for more information, which was sometimes stated as "more transparency" was authentic and genuine. The down side was the amount of work and time required to prepare spreadsheets and the resulting charts, articles, etc. I was also concerned that this information would be published on the internet. However, that decision was made by a previous board, a few years ago. My concern was authentic as a fiduciary. Let me again state that writing is easy. Collecting and researching the background information, then checking for accuracy and to see if the facts and purpose of the article are met, that's the difficult part. MS Publisher or Word does most of the formatting. Taking photos, cropping and editing them is also more difficult and time consuming. Manipulating charts to make them work is time consuming. I can deliver all of the newsletters in less time than it takes to create one good, full page article. I know because I have done it, repeatedly.
A good example of information that provides "transparency" is the lengthy article on the garage floors which was in a recent newsletter. I will admit, it is lengthy. But it demonstrated the evaluation process, it provided factual information and it provided some assurances to owners and potential buyers: 1) 90% of the garage floors are "fair" or better. 2) 75% are better than the one in the photo, and only 11 are considered in a state that replacement is necessary. Those are scheduled for replacement in 2011. Another board member has told me that the comments they received to that newsletter were generally positive, but that one owner specifically stated "it is too long." I look at it this way. There were 3,743 words in the document, which is issued every other month. That's 62 words to read a day. If owners don't want the information, they can ignore it. I'd rather provide more information if that's reasonable. Not one owner has come to me and said "that's too much work for you, you should do less."
In the past year I also expanded the information provided to the board as part of my reports for association meetings. It took several months to arrive at a good format. Now these reports, which are in the form of rough notes, are presented during meetings with a heading "Action Items" which clearly defines requests I will make at the meeting, so the board knows what to expect. In many cases, these "Action Items" are based upon a schedule I developed in winter 2010/2011 which defines "by when" dates for approval of various projects including roofs, painting, driveways, etc. I did state to the board that delay beyond these "by when" dates would negatively impact these projects.
My monthly notes are presented in verbal form to owners who are present and also to the board. I sometimes include visual aids such as photographs, charts and lists as well as descriptions, summaries, etc. This material was not developed for general dissemination because they are rough, contain opinions and items for discussion, and also present my case for proceeding with some work and soliciting approval from the board. My notes may also contain information that if used out of context could be "problematic". In response to an inquiry by a board member, I stated I wouldn't release my notes to the owners at large and explained to the board exactly why, and provided specific reasons and an example. Shortly thereafter an owner came to a meeting and brought up the issue of "transparency." Is there a connection between that refusal and the resurfacing of this word? I think there might be.
2. Other Communications Improvements. There are other areas discussed in the past year and they'll be elaborated upon in Part 2 of this post. They include a "Marketing Brochure" and a "Mission Statement." There is also an informal "Board Member Duties and Responsibilities" document, designed for use by board members. It states clearly and in straightforward language, what is expected of a board member, that there will be real responsibilities, duties and assignments and "work." It provides explanations of the differences of an owner and a fiduciary. It also provides examples of "fiduciary duty" as applied to a HOA board member.
Comments, Corrections, Omissions, References
Note 1. As is the case with all posts, they are the observations of "A BLMH condo owner" and are not official communications of the association. As I have noted in the past, this blog does not and never has existed according to recent association boards, and even some owners!
