[WSBAPT] HOA meetings

Mon Mar 16 12:37:35 PDT 2020

Rob:

Excellent overview.

Somewhat related are issues surrounding associations who never achieve quorum requirements at meetings.  I know of Associations who “transact business” at meetings without a quorum.

If a virtual meeting occurs that is not authorized under applicable law – statutes, governing documents, etc. – and the business of the meeting is then published/distributed to owners/members, with the passage of time would a dissenting owner/member be estopped from later challenging the action taken?  There seem to be instances where business must be transacted recognizing the risk of a procedural challenge.  Fortunately, with most associations the transacted business is not controversial.  Of course if the business is controversial – such as ratification of a huge repair project budget – then the risk of a procedural challenge is huge.

Thanks again.

Ron

I AM TYPICALLY IN THE SEATTLE OFFICE ON TUESDAY AND THURSDAY AND IN THE MOUNT VERNON OFFICE ON MONDAY, WEDNESDAY AND FRIDAY 

Ronald G. Housh, P.S.

Attorney at Law

Seattle Office:

1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3000

Seattle, WA 98101-2393

Phone:   206-381-1341

Fax:        206-464-0461

Email:     <mailto:ron at housh.org> ron at housh.org

Mount Vernon Office:

21411 Bluejay Place

Mount Vernon, WA 98274

Phone:  206-235-2459

Email:    <mailto:ron at housh.org> ron at housh.org

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com On Behalf Of Rob Wilson-Hoss
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 12:22 PM
To: 'WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv' <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBAPT] HOA meetings

Warning – this is more HOA technical stuff, but it does also apply to many general nonprofits as well.   

Does anyone have any thoughts about how an HOA can manage meetings when no one is there? Board meetings and member meetings are by the terms of the governing documents required at certain times, and decisions have to be made. There are statutes, but they depend on what the governing documents of the association say. This matters for whether or not they have a quorum, and whether or not they can make decisions. 

The following is organized this way:

1.	Statutes, member meetings, 24.03 and 24.06, the two nonprofit state statutory schemes, followed by comments in red;
2.	Statutes, board and committee meetings, 24.03 and 24.06, followed by comments in red;
3.	Unanimous consent statutes;
4.	Discussion, governing documents provisions;
5.	Discussion: what if the combination of governing document provisions and the statutes leads to a dead end – Board and member meetings have to have people present.

1.	Statutes, member meetings:

24.03.075: Except as otherwise restricted by the articles of incorporation or the bylaws, members and any committee of members of the corporation may participate in a meeting by conference telephone or similar communications equipment so that all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other at the same time. Participation by that method constitutes presence in person at a meeting.

If they fall under 24.03, then they can have member (or member committee) meetings with what I will call virtual access. But if their documents otherwise specify, there is no help for them here. 

24.06.100: If the articles of incorporation or bylaws so provide, members or shareholders may participate in any meeting of members or shareholders by any means of communication by which all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other during the meeting. A member or shareholder participating in a meeting by this means is deemed to be present in person at the meeting.

If they fall under 24.06, then the rule is opposite. They can only virtual access if their Bylaws or Articles so provide. 

2.	Statutes, Board meetings:

24.03.110: A majority of the number of directors fixed by, or in the manner provided in the bylaws, or in the absence of a bylaw fixing or providing for the number of directors, then of the number fixed by or in the manner provided in the articles of incorporation, shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or the bylaws; but in no event shall a quorum consist of less than one-third of the number of directors so fixed or stated. The act of the majority of the directors present at a meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the act of the board of directors, unless the act of a greater number is required by this chapter, the articles of incorporation or the bylaws.

First, there is nothing directly addressing whether virtual access is possible or not. Second, according to the Court of Appeals, “present” means, well, “there.” Lowe v. Foxhall, unpub. Div II, Jan. 7, 2020, no. 51898-8-II. I have never thought that 24.03 Directors could appear at a meeting by proxy or otherwise than being present. One reason is that the next statute says that if you are under 24.06, you can virtual access to a Board meeting. A reviewing court would say, they chose to allow it under 24.06, and not under 24.03. Pardon my bluntness, but the legal fiction that the Legislature actually thought about any of this is, well, what they call in the world of real fiction, “magical realism.” Or better, “magical fantasy.”  

24.06.150: Unless the articles of incorporation or bylaws provide otherwise, any or all directors may participate in a regular or special meeting by, or conduct the meeting through the use of, any means of communication by which all directors participating can hear each other during the meeting. A director participating in a meeting by this means is deemed to be present in person at the meeting.

Under 24.06, then, the default setting is yes, virtual access. But only a few are under 24.06. The choice, incidentally, to recommend one or the other requires a spreadsheet showing about 20 differences that might matter, most of which weigh in favor of 24.06. But it is impossible to predict for any particular association which of those factors may matter during its lifetime. Such as, this one. 

3.	Unanimous Consent statutes

RCW 24.03.465: Any action required by this chapter to be taken at a meeting of the members or directors of a corporation, or any action which may be taken at a meeting of the members or directors, may be taken without a meeting if a consent in the form of a record, setting forth the action so taken, shall be executed by all of the members entitled to vote with respect to the subject matter thereof, or all of the directors, as the case may be.

Such consent shall have the same force and effect as a unanimous vote, and may be stated as such in any articles or record filed with the secretary of state under this chapter.

RCW 24.06.510: Any action required by this chapter to be taken at a meeting of the members, shareholders or directors of a corporation, or any action which may be taken at a meeting of the members, shareholders or directors, may be taken without a meeting, if a consent in writing, setting forth the action so taken, is signed by all of the members and shareholders entitled to vote thereon, or by all of the directors, as the case may be, unless the articles or bylaws provide to the contrary.

Such consent shall have the same force and effect as a unanimous vote, and may be stated as such in any articles or document filed with the secretary of state.

So there is an exception for both statutes – unanimous written consent. They can hold a “meeting” which is informal, discuss everything you they need to discuss, but then vote by unanimous written consent. This will very likely only work with Boards, or very small associations, because they aren’t going to get unanimous consent from members on whether or not the earth is round. See, e.g., Kyrie Irving.

4.	Governing document discussion. 

These things vary widely. Few associations ever think of these issues. Few lawyers drag their clients through this part of their recommendations. Some associations want to make sure everyone is there to hear a discussion and vote. Some don’t. There is no uniformity. So, each association must look at its own documents, compare them to the statutes, and see where they are. 

5.	What to do if they are at a dead end?

For Board meetings, one possibility is to have virtual access meetings, and then get everyone on the Board to agree to support the results, in writing. For membership meetings, that will not likely be practical.

What to do when they have to meet both statutory requirements, and governing document requirements, and they can’t get there from here? Is there a national emergency, war time, pandemic, nuclear meltdown, earthquake, flood, fire, etc. exception to the rules that says if the times are extreme enough, then the process rules are adapted so that the association can make the best out of a bad situation?

Practically, this works, except when it doesn’t. What if something looks like an emergency, emergency powers are invoked, someone’s ox gets gored, and then, it wasn’t so bad after all. I have much experience with how far some members will go to work out their anger on their associations. A lawsuit from one of them is not outside the possibilities. 

          I would love to hear from anyone with any other thoughts. I get this question at least daily. 

Rob

Robert D. Wilson-Hoss

Hoss & Wilson-Hoss, LLP

236 West Birch Street

Shelton, WA 98584

360 426-2999

www.hossandwilson-hoss.com <http://www.hossandwilson-hoss.com> 

rob at hctc.com <mailto:rob at hctc.com> 

This message is intended solely for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not the addressee, you are hereby notified that any use, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or by telephone (call us collect at the number listed above) and immediately delete this message and any and all of its attachments.  Thank you.

THIS OFFICE DOES DEBT COLLECTION AND THIS E-MAIL MAY BE AN ATTEMPT TO COLLECT A DEBT, ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.  To the extent the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692) applies this firm is acting as a debt collector for the condominium/homeowners' association named above to collect a debt owed to it. Any information obtained will be used for collection purposes. You have the right to seek advice of legal counsel.

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of Sarah McCarthy
Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2020 8:22 AM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Need for Guardian in Public Pay Case

In these cases I've started with contacting the Office of Public Guardianship in Olympia, and they have a form you can fill out describing the case for which you're seeking a professional guardian, and they'll do a "blast" to all of the CPGs.  <http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/publicUpload/Office%20of%20Public%20Guardianship/OPG%20FRMReferral%20Fill%20in%20Form.pdf> http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/publicUpload/Office%20of%20Public%20Guardianship/OPG%20FRMReferral%20Fill%20in%20Form.pdf  Every now and then this yields a response, though often I think that gets ignored.  If that doesn't work, then I've resorted to sending personal emails to every CPG on the list for that county providing general descriptive information.  These personal emails have yielded better results.  I can't recall quite where it is on the web site, but there is a place on the site where you can find a listing of every CPG in WA, per county. 

Sarah

Sarah O’Farrell McCarthy
Attorney | Kelly, Arndt & Walker, Attorneys at Law, PLLP
6443 Harding Avenue | P.O. Box 290 | Clinton, WA  98236
Phone: (360) 341-1515 | Fax: (360) 341-3272
sarah at kawlawyers.com <mailto:sarah at kawlawyers.com>  | www.kawlawyers.com <http://www.kawlawyers.com> 

This electronic message transmission contains information from the law firm of Kelly, Arndt & Walker, PLLP which may be confidential or privileged.  This information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above,  If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any further review, disclosure, printing, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message transmission in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete the original message.  Thank you.  

We do not accept service of any kind by e-mail unless expressly authorized in writing by the attorney of record.  This e-mail is NOT a contract and is not binding upon the author pursuant to CR 2A. This e-mail is, at most, a negotiation under ER 408.

On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:09 PM John J. Sullivan, Esq. <sullaw at comcast.net <mailto:sullaw at comcast.net> > wrote:

Sandi:

I have a similar problem in a case that’s been open a full year in a couple of weeks.

John J. Sullivan

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of sgay at sbglaw-wa.com <mailto:sgay at sbglaw-wa.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 2:29 PM
To: 'WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv' <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Need for Guardian in Public Pay Case

Christie, both in King County.  One is hospitalized but is ready to be discharged when a placement can be identified.

Sandi Gay

SANDRA BATES GAY, PS

Attorney at Law

Sandra Bates Gay, PS

23515 N.E. Novelty Hill Rd.

Suite B211-397

Redmond, WA  98053

Ph:  (425) 637-3040

Fax: (425) 952-0156

E-Mail:  sgay at sbglaw-wa.com <mailto:sgay at sbglaw-wa.com> 

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>  <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > On Behalf Of Christie Martin
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 2:07 PM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Need for Guardian in Public Pay Case

What county?  are they already in placements?

Christie L. Martin | Martin & Richards, PLLC

Attorney at Law

B: 503-444-3449

C: 503-545-9199

F: 360-637-0300

From: <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> > on behalf of "sgay at sbglaw-wa.com <mailto:sgay at sbglaw-wa.com> " <sgay at sbglaw-wa.com <mailto:sgay at sbglaw-wa.com> >
Reply-To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2020 at 11:59 AM
To: 'WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv' <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
Subject: [WSBAPT] Need for Guardian in Public Pay Case

In a couple of public pay guardianship cases, as the appointed GAL, I am having great difficulty locating a CPG or independent (unrelated) guardian who is willing to accept appointment for a couple of AIPs who do not have appropriate family members who could serve.  Is anyone aware of CPS who may be willing and have the capacity to accept appointments in these difficult cases?  Many thanks,

Sandi Gay

SANDRA BATES GAY, PS

Attorney at Law

Sandra Bates Gay, PS

23515 N.E. Novelty Hill Rd.

Suite B211-397

Redmond, WA  98053

Ph:  (425) 637-3040

Fax: (425) 952-0156

E-Mail:  sgay at sbglaw-wa.com <mailto:sgay at sbglaw-wa.com> 

***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***
_______________________________________________
WSBAPT mailing list
WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com> 
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20200316/c993c11a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 346 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20200316/c993c11a/image001.png>