California Legislature Considering Mandatory Board Member Education
What? Attorneys supporting this bill? Not a shocker when you consider they just happen to offer these types of classes for a fee. Kind of smacks of conflict of interest. Hard enough getting board members, require they attend a course and we will have no one to volunteer.
That's a good Calif. legislative proposal. However, I'd augment it by requiring all commnity assn. directors/officers/managers to have an annual psychiatric examination, in order to confirm that each of them is on the ok side of imminent mental imbalance! If those persons aren't looney-tunes before taking those positions with their respective HOAs, they soon will be! Steve Susman, Pelican Pointe HOA,Denver.
Horray!!! for SB948 in CA! All board members in all states should be required to take at least 1 class every year they are on the board. I served on our board for 7 consecutive years and attended many classes. It was extremely helpful in dealing with all kinds of situations. None of the 7 members of our current board has attended any classes, and most do not have previous "board" experience from anywhere and it shows!!
I would definitely support any legislation in CO for board education. And it should not be attached to CCIOA as there are still some associations out here that are not required to comply with CCIOA.
I would certainly hope that this not succeed. Although I understand the benefits of requiring a greater level of competence among board members, it would be my fear that associations would have a much more difficult time getting people to volunteer to be board members. Although I have taken part in quite a number of classes that have assisted me in understanding my obligations I am afraid that if this were a requirement in Colorado that I would be alone on the board.
Mandatory education sounds nice in theory. But it'd be another barrier to recruitment and retention of board members.
Our association already has an issue where board members can't step down because there are no volunteers to replace them. If CO instituted mandataory education, I'm certain the issue of finding someone willing to volunteer to be on the board would become an even bigger issue.
While the intentions of this bill are highly commendable, the practical aspect is questionable. It is already difficult to enlist responsible board members. If, in addition, a certain training should be required, most boards would be operating with illegal board members.
Good intentions, but impractical and an enormous burden to the few responsible homeowners representing the core of the board.
This strikes me as a very bad idea. We have a hard time already getting people to commit to the board. Now we're going to tell them they have to fit classes into their schedule too?
I manage a 3-unit association with a 3-member board. Are we going to tell people that they have to take classes when they close on a unit there?
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of board members getting more educated. I think the allowance for reimbursement is plenty, though.
Perhaps a size restriction? You need to take classes to be on the board of a "large" association. Maybe use the classifications regarding required audits from the '05 SB100?
Just my 2 cents.
RE: SB 948
Education is good, this would do two things, one educate the members and two it would encourage and or challenge all owners to be more proactive and more involved.
Ed