ACTS OF MALICE
Acts of Malice
Q: My homeowners association passed a resolution that allows the board to suspend a member's voting rights and attendance at board meetings indefinitely due to acts of malice, such as verbal assault or menacing gestures, toward board members. Whether something is an act of malice is determined by the board members themselves. Can a homeowners association take away a member's voting rights indefinitely and restrict attendance at the meetings?—Alexandria, Va.
A: The first issue is the suspension of voting rights and the second is the prohibition from attending board meetings. I question the legal propriety of a board resolution that suspends a member's voting rights. What do the governing documents say about the suspension of voting rights? Who has the power to suspend voting rights?
Voting is one of the primary member rights in any formal organization. Voting rights in community associations are established by the governing documents, and any suspension or revocation of those rights should be done in accordance with those documents and not by a board-approved resolution. In addition, suspending voting rights does not stop the member's offensive conduct.
On the other hand, prohibiting a homeowner's attendance at board meetings is a reasonable consequence of acts of malice. The board has the right to take appropriate action to ensure that business can be conducted in a proper and business-like environment. You said the member's right to attend board meetings was suspended indefinitely. This implies there is the possibility of reinstating the member's right to attend possibly based on assurance of proper conduct. But is this the criterion of this board?
It would seem extreme to restrict attendance at the meetings indefinitely based on one act of malice. A resolution is similar to a rule, and rules must be reasonable. I would need to examine the wording of this resolution to determine whether it is legal with regard to the suspension of voting rights and whether it is reasonable in its terms regarding the ability of the board to prohibit attendance at board meetings indefinitely.
This resolution may be legally problematic and needs to be reviewed by legal counsel in the context of the governing documents and the issues presented by the individual who is committing acts of malice.
Michael A. Inman is an attorney with Inman & Strickler in Virginia Beach, Va., and a member of CAI's College of Community Association Lawyers (CCAL).