Much has been written about the lack of civility within community associations and, in particular, between board members and homeowners. Why do these situations arise so often? One person said she thought it was because “condo meetings almost always lend themselves to arguments because, just like a marriage, money is involved.” While there is validity to that statement, I believe the reason there is so much conflict in communities has more to do with a lack of appropriate communication on matters at hand, very poor advocacy and communication skills on the part of individuals, and virtually no consequences for the obstructionists. Add ego, frustration, plain bad manners, and certain psychological disorders, and you have all the ingredients for the average cantankerous association meeting. Let’s look at what can take some of the fight out of fight night.
HOAs Should Provide Structures for Civil Discourse
It is the responsibility of all boards of directors to provide the platform for civil discourse for their community. Without this platform, owners and even board members are left to find their own way in how to best communicate within the structure of the association. This hit or miss approach can lead to great frustration, and eventually to outright anger, as members struggle to take part in the process of community governance without a clearly defined path. Though failing to adopt a defined platform for communication is usually benign neglect on the part of the board, it can be very detrimental to civil discourse within the community. It may also give the board the appearance of being secretive and/or elite, giving rise to a lack of credibility in the eyes if the owners.
Adopt Basic Parliamentary Procedures
All boards should adopt some sort of basic parliamentary procedure so there is structure within which to conduct their meetings, including membership meetings. Boards should also publish and distribute procedural information to all board members and homeowners. Next, have an agenda for each meeting, and follow that agenda. If homeowners are present and wish to address the board, there should be a designated time for them to do so, within or outside the meeting, depending upon the particular laws in your state. Each person should be allowed 3 – 5 minutes to speak, depending on which rule your board adopts. Adopting, and following, these simple suggestions will go a long way toward promoting civil discourse among your board members and owners.
Communicate Regularly with Owners
One of the major reasons associations have so many seemingly silly problems is a lack of communication between the board and the owners. When there is an information vacuum (believe me) it will get filled with gossip, innuendo, and downright falsehoods. This situation not only adds to the negative image of your association, but it also makes it very hard for a board to remain credible in the eyes of the owners, despite good intentions. Communicate regularly via newsletter and Web site.
Many communities neglect their newsletters because they think they need to publish the New York Times, and the volunteers just don’t have the time or skill to write long and informative prose. Both of these assumptions are incorrect. Newsletters are best when they are two to four pages long. And for boards that don’t include members with the time or skill for writing, there are newsletter services out there that specialize in community association publications. For a very reasonable price, these organizations will take your minimal input and produce a professional, top-notch newsletter.
Turn to the Web
Web sites are very, very valuable for getting out information in real time. Web sites, however, do not diminish the need for a snail-mail newsletter; in fact, quite the opposite is true: the newsletter should be driving members to the Web site for that real-time information. Be aware that if you do go this route, your Web site must be kept up-to-date (and there are several companies that provide this service at very affordable rates). If your owners go to the site looking for the minutes of the last board meeting, and the most recent they can find are minutes from 2005, you have created another credibility problem through very poor communication.
Developing and Maintaining Credibility: The Crucial Element to Effective Advocacy
Recently, I attended two meetings of the owners in my own association, in which I am a board member. The meetings pertained to a proposed amendment to our governing documents. The amendment would change our method of assessing unit owners from staggered assessments based on square footage to a uniform amount for each home. The first meeting, held 60 days before the second meeting, was informational only, with the board taking questions from about 80 attendees. This meeting went relatively well, and the following week ballots were sent to all owners on the issue. The second meeting was a general membership meeting on the budget, as well as the final date for allowing members to cast their votes on the proposed amendment. The vast majority of owners were in favor of the change because it lowered almost everyone’s dues except the affected few, who will be facing slightly higher dues.
At the second meeting, there was a small group of folks who just didn’t like the changes proposed, and by gosh, they were going to let everyone know about their feelings! As political process, this is the way it’s supposed to work: everyone has a say, tries to persuade others to see their point of view, and then votes on the matter. From my perspective, watching this particular group of “opposition advocates” was fascinating because they made every classic mistake they possibly could for advocating their position, each one leading to a total lack of credibility. What are those “classic mistakes?” Let’s take a look:
Strategies for Being an Effective and Civil Advocate
Be Proactive: Come Forward Early in the Process
Whatever the issue you are for or against, you must come forward as early as possible in the process. In this particular situation, complete information about the proposed changes was made available early and often to the owners. Despite this fact, the spokesman for the opposition failed to attend the first owner’s meeting on the issue. Regardless of why the owner elected to skip the meeting, by not attending the meeting specifically designed for him and other owners to voice their opinions, the decision forced the spokesman to jump in with both feet at the final meeting. The result? He looked like a petulant spoiler instead of an advocate with a bandwagon everyone should jump on.
If you have a position to advocate, get in the mix as early as you can. If, through no fault of your own, you can come in to the process toward the end, you must adjust your message to fit that reality. Acknowledge your “Johnny-come-lately” status (a little self-deprecating humor goes a long way here), and advocate in a clear and concise manner meant to sway—not alienate—as many people as you can in the short time you have to do so. You do not have the luxury of being able to go back and fix what you may have broken with a less-than-stellar presentation.
Be Well-Prepared
In our case in point, the opposition group was prepared to do only one thing: let everyone know how unhappy they were in a most negative and confrontational manner. They were not prepared to present their position with information, facts, answers to objections, or a positive spin on why people should side with them.
If you have a position to advocate, make sure you go in to the arena with all available arrows in your quiver. Prepare an opening statement on why you are taking the position you are taking. Explain your reasoning and cite facts and events. Provide successful precedents or actions by other associations. Anticipate objections, have answers to those objections in hand, and present them before anyone has to question you. Summarize your position concisely and reasonably, and thank the group for listening. This method develops credibility for you and your cause.
Be Willing to Change Your Position in Light of Facts
Once again, consider our opposition group. As it turned out, the group had based their entire opposition position on an erroneous assumption. The erroneous assumption was pointed out and explained clearly to the group on several occasions. To make the error clear, the opposition group was also given the background, information, reasoning, and facts for the proposed change, including information from the association’s counsel. Yet, in a stunning example of groupthink, the entire opposition group stuck to their original arguments, regardless of the facts presented to them. Result? No credibility.
Clinging to a position that has no merit does not do you, or the group you may represent, any favors. You will not be seen as a tenacious leader crusading for a just cause; you will be seen as a person foolishly wasting his time and the time of others on a non-issue. Re-evaluate the facts and choose those that most strongly make your point. Letting go of what doesn’t work presents you as the reasonable and thoughtful opposition, and it leaves the door open for you to advocate any position with credibility in the future. If you don’t let go, you are fighting the Battle of the Heart, having left your brains somewhere else. If you advocate a certain position publicly and passionately, only to find that the basic tenet of your position was in error, acknowledge it and move on but don’t give up!
Be Passionate, Not Emotional
It was clear the moment he stepped through the door into the owners’ meeting that our leading opposition advocate was very angry. His small band of followers followed suit, making snide remarks and stage-whispered comments behind their hands, glaring at the crowd, shaking their heads, and harrumphing whenever someone attempted to answer their concerns. This angry, hostile, and negative behavior wasted the group’s credibility with the board and other owners before even one of them had a chance to speak. Unfortunately, these folks made the mistake of letting their emotions get the best of them. When emotions rule, people say things they shouldn’t, make baseless accusations and sarcastic remarks, and generally join the ranks of the polite-impaired.
People can become outwardly emotional when they have strong feelings about something, and for some reason homeowners associations and their dealings seem to bring out a lot of strong feelings. When you are trying to advocate a position, it is best to keep your emotions in check, yet let your passion for the subject come through. Nothing loses credibility faster than letting emotions run away with you, regardless of whether you are speaking to one person or to a large group. And nothing brings more people to your way of thinking than clear, passionate, logical, and positive advocacy.
Don’t Make Empty Threats
Going back to our case in point, the opposition group, having failed to turn the tide of community opinion in their favor because of a poorly thought out position, very poor advocacy skills, and downright bad manners, threatened litigation.
Even at your most desperate, don’t threaten to sue unless you mean it and have a course of action and the wherewithal to proceed. The minute any savvy board member or manager hears a threat, he or she will refer you to association counsel. Even worse for you, the board member or property manager will then be obligated not to speak with you on the issue at hand from that point on. The situation doesn’t work out all that well if you didn’t really intend to sue and were trying to get something accomplished for yourself or your group, because now you have no one to talk to but yourselves. Threatening litigation stops dialogue and negotiation in its tracks.
Let Go
Whether the position you are advocating “wins” or “loses,” you must let go and move on for the betterment of the community. Nothing is worse than a gloating victor, except maybe the spoiled loser. Either way, you lose credibility for the next position you may wish to advocate.
Common Decency Takes the Fight Out
As a former manager and now a vendor (consultant) and board member, I still find it fascinating that people will do and say things as board members or homeowners that they would never dream of doing or saying at work, or in their homes. It’s as if they need a little fantasy world where they can vent their frustrations and yet face no little or no consequences, and they have found that satisfying world in their homeowners associations. I always want to ask these people: “Didn’t your parents teach you any manners?”
It seems to me that we could all use a course in manners and civility in this country. Whether being an advocate for a position in your homeowners association, dealing with the clerk in the market, driving down the freeway, or talking on the phone to the cable company, there are a few basics of human decency to which we should all adhere. As Robert Fulghum said in his book All I Need to Really Know I Learned in Kindergarten:
“Everything you need to know is in there [kindergarten] somewhere. The Golden Rule and love and basic sanitation. Ecology and politics and equality and sane living.”
I emphasize the sane living part of this wisdom-filled treatise on human interaction because this is what really applies to the position I advocate. Civil discourse within the structure of homeowners associations is not only possible, it’s far easier than many would think if we and our associations would only follow some simple, clear, and commonsense tenets.
First, our associations must resolve to provide the basic platform for civil discourse, and doing so starts with adopting parliamentary procedures and providing regular communication with owners.
Next, we as owners must do our part, by gaining and maintaining credibility so the position for which we advocate will be given the attention it is due. We must be proactive, coming in to the process early. We must be well-prepared and have all the pertinent facts that support our position at hand. If facts change, we must be willing to adjust our position to reflect those facts. This may require us either to abandon our advocated position altogether, or to adjust our talking points for positive advocacy and then continue on.
We must not let our emotions run away with us because doing so makes us lose credibility very quickly, but we must allow our passion for the position to show through. If the tide seems to be going against us, we must not make empty threats. Threats make a mockery of the position for which we advocate, and credibility suffers the same fate. And, perhaps most importantly, we need to let go once the issue is over. No matter which position we were “for,” it’s the graceful and classy thing to do. And we maintain our credibility for the next issue.
Lastly, let’s remember the things we learned in kindergarten. Thank you, Robert Fulghum. I wish every association would make your book required reading for all owners prior to purchase.
Julie Adamen is the President of Adamen Inc., a consulting and placement firm specializing in the community management industry. She can be reached through her website, www.adamen-inc.com or via email at Julie@adamen-inc.com.