During a community election in December of 2013, four (4) homeowners sought to be elected to two (2) open seats on a board of directors. In the end Candidate One received 125 votes, Candidate Two received 115 votes, Candidate Three received 112 votes and Candidate Four received 75 votes.
Fast forward to August 2014 (8 months later) – Candidate One is serving on the board, Candidate Two has resigned, Candidate Three is still active in the community, and Candidate Four has moved and is now leasing his/her condo.
The community By-Laws allow for the board of directors (not a specific officer) to appoint a replacement, by majority vote, whenever another board member resigns.
My approach would be to herald back to the election results of December 2013 and ask Candidate Three if he/she is still interested in serving as a member of the board. One could safely assume that the majority of the community would support his/her appointment as there were only 3 votes between Candidate Two and Candidate Three during the last election. Besides, appointing the “runner up” from the previous election would be a non-political approach if a community has opposing internal factions.
Without knowing the results – How do you think the board in the example above acted?
If you are a CAI professional – How would you advise your board in this scenario?
If you are a board volunteer – How would you handle this situation?
In an effort to validate my approach – I consulted with some CAI industry pals who are managers, attorneys and community volunteers. To them, it made logical sense to review the previous election results and ask those who were not elected if they were interested in filling the vacancy. If so, appoint one of those folks to the board. This is the advice many of them have provided to various boards they work with or represent. Some commented that if one of the other candidates was willing to serve yet the board chose not to appoint them – the board was being political and not acting in the best interest of the community. Agree?