Davis-Stirling.fyi

The board members and staff many times state that Davis-Stirling says, or David-Stirling requires…..

Let’s a take a look at it.

That can’t be paid from Reserves as there is no line item for it in the Reserve Study.

This results in the payment out of operating, which then distorts the budget and possibly creates other issues.

What the Law says:

Davis-Stirling requires a reserve or replacement fund and has requirement for funding the reserve fund.

The facts:

There is no legal requirement that states the repair or replacement be tied to a line item.

A reserve fund is just that, money set aside for a future expense. In the case of HOAs the fund is sometimes called repairs and replacement fund.

In the business world in general there are many ways to to fund a reserve. A formula is derived and the fund in funded accordingly. In the case of HOAs it’s not known when the expense will occur the exact nature of it. In other words, it’s not possible to have a line item in the reserve for every type of expense that comes up.

The Reserve Fund is simply a pool of money, coming from a formal methodology of funding to spent as needed sometime in the future. This is discussed on the David-Stirling.com website in a narrative about reserves and with the FYI detailed report at <reserves>.

Davis-Stirling says the board cannot discuss Executive Committee agenda items in the open board meetings.

While most of what the executive committee discusses is truly confidential, there’s much that gets discusses and can be revealed to the membership.

Examples may be contract disputes (in general, not the details), upcoming projects, competitive bidding (not the details but comparing bids in general).

While this section of FYI is promoting member transparency and what might be allowable to discuss, great care must be exercised in the process. One quick example would be the potential contract termination where, if made public, would hinder the process.

Davis-Stirling does not allow the HOA to make profit on events or other activities.

Reply and Comments by FYI

The quick answer is that there is no law, federal, state or otherwise that state such. This applies to all nonprofit-type entities, churches, nonprofit organizations and HOAs

Anytime this is stated by a well meaning board member or general members challenge them for their source.

However, the HOA governing documents may prevent such which is other issue in it’s entirety. But again, there are no laws preventing such.

<see xxxxx for a full in depth white paper>

HOA members must state their address when addressing the board in the open forum.

This is to ensure the person speaking is a homeowner, not a renter or outsider.

this is more of a policy issue, not a Davis-Stirling issue.

This is purely a ill-conceived and ineffective procedure that does not accomplish it intend objective. 

First, it’s implemented by those speaking out in a meeting and substantially every time, the speaker is known by the board.

The open board meetings are for members only. Verifying the member upon arrival is seldom done or done in an ineffective manner.

If the meeting is broadcast on Zoom or other similar platforms, anyone can be on the other end and this person could easily lie about their address.

Many members of HOAs that have communication issues with the members feel this is just a power play by the board and demeaning to the member.

This is not an easily solved issue and FYI is not offering a solution (maybe later) but there are many ways to ensure only members attend, either live or Zoom, thus eliminating the step of stating their address before speaking.

Document Filing System by Board Member email.

Filing of important documents in members email account is not an effective filing system. This is an inherent issues well beyond HOAs. This creates a massive waste of time and creates situations that are inconstant.

<more later and at xxxxx>

Refusal by the Board to follow up on member inquiries. 

This is tricky as Davis-Stirling does place limits on what the board can discuss.

FYIs comment.  The board can and should reply to member comments and questions in the open forum expectantly when general in nature. But the board’s ability to answer them is limited by statute. Basically, the discussion is to not be to such that that board is taking action on an issue.  

The team at FYI feels the board should respond reasonably on most all things mentioned as good communication with the member. They should not respond with a blank stare when a reply is inappropriate. But a professional reply can be given. 

Some things may need follow up and should be mention in the next meeting. 

<see xxxxx for a full discussion>

Not following generally accepted procedures for officer voting especially with modern electronic voting which results in poor voting participation.

FYI’s favorite board response. We don’t feel many of our members are Internet savvy (or web savvy or email)….some are older and….. A large HOA of over 1,000 households spent too much time focusing on the non-existent lack of savvy members (yes their were a small handful) and couldn’t answer the question of how many non-resident owners voted. It’s well documented that non-resident owners (land lords) are extremely apathetic about HOA activities such as voting.

One board was bragging about the the “meet the candidates” event. They had 74 members in attendance. So 74 members heard the candidates, another 20% were responsive to email and the remaining 1,200 members knew nothing about the election.

One HOA had zero about the election on their website. Another had a section on the election and candidates but the presentation was so poor, the net effect disappointing. “But is was on our website”. The board couldn’t answer the question of website traffic.

See <xxxxx> for a full report

In effective use of Internet technology including the HOA website.