P.E. from Hartford County writes:
Dear Mister Condo,
(Editor’s Note – This post references a previous question. You can read the original question and response here: http://caict.org/askmistercondo/devil-is-in-the-details-of-this-condo-deck-addition/)
Thank you for your response in regards to my recent letter about white posts on my deck. I am probably going to have to consult an attorney, but I had a couple more concerns in regards to this situation.
One is that the board is now saying they do not like the darker accent color that was added to the deck as well. The aluminum, no maintenance, rail that we put on the deck did not come in the lighter brown color so I picked the closest color I could. I feel it still falls within their guidelines of a “similar” color and feel that their guidelines were very vague. How can they provide such vague guidelines and expect such a specific outcome? I made it very clear that I was using Trex decking material and that I wasn’t sure if it came in a similar color. In addition all the steps that they have taken seem to be done incorrectly.
First they invited me to a meeting, but provided no agenda as to what was being discussed. That is when they told me I had to remove the white posts. Secondly, they had a hearing at the next meeting and provided me no advance notice that the hearing was taking place. I thought we were having a meeting to further discuss. Supposedly, the letter was mailed to me from their attorney, but I never received it until the actual night of the hearing meeting, when the board handed it to me. They are acting like they are moving forward with legal proceedings, but seemed to have skipped over a bunch of steps in between.
I have written up a petition which I plan on asking the other condo owners to sign, basically saying they do not support what the board is doing and that it is not in the best interest of the association to continue to pursue me legally.
Lastly, as a clarification, I am the owner of the condo, but my mother resides there. I inquired about getting a position on the board, but was told I could not be on the board as a non resident owner. The Vice President of the board (who clearly runs the show) has his car registered in AZ, where he resides 6 months and a day. I asked if he was a resident of AZ how could he be on the Board? The question was completely ignored. Thanks!
Mister Condo replies:
P.E., you are welcome for my previous response. Clearly there has been a breakdown in communications here: incomplete plans for improvements, letters from the Board not being received by you, meetings being called without agendas, questions about who is eligible to serve on the Board. It all needs to stop.
It sounds to me like your Board would benefit from some education about the dos and don’ts of running a common interest community in our state. From what you have described they are not functioning properly within the laws as set forth by the Connecticut Common Interest Ownership Act (commonly referred to as “CIOA”). You would do well to speak with a qualified attorney and present your side of the story and the actions taken by the Board. Some actions may be nullified just because proper procedure was not followed. That won’t make your issues go away but it may delay the process until a better solution can be reached.
If all that you state is true, the Board would likely hire their own attorney who would advise them to either bring suit against you or make some type of settlement offer to you by which you agreed to abide by the original permission to install the deck to your submitted specifications. The abundant grey area (deck post colors, new stain colors, etc.) should not have been left off of the original request and certainly shouldn’t have been approved as submitted. This should be a learning experience for both you and the Board should a similar request ever come up again. Stories like this serve to remind the rest of us why Boards so often simply reject requests for additions or improvements. A group of volunteer leaders trying to serve their community are placed between a rock and a hard place. Do they allow the improvements and keep the requesting unit owner happy or do they simply reject the request and keep the association in its current state of architectural compliance?
As for who is or isn’t eligible to serve on the Board, that answer is as close at hand as your condo documents. In most cases, unit ownership is all that is required. If that is the case, you are as eligible to run as the current Vice President. If residency is a requirement as well, you may not be eligible. If you are eligible and interested, I encourage you to run for office. This experience alone should make you quite sympathetic to the needs of your fellow unit owners. Just remember that as a Board Member you may be asked to make the same difficult decisions that your current Board members have been asked to make. My guess is that you won’t be approving too many additions or improvements without knowing all of the details before doing so. All the best!