COLUMN: Amorous board members raise eyebrows

Q. I live in a condominium complex that has five board members. Two of the board members have started dating and have been seen kissing, holding hands and going out.

This would appear to be a conflict of interest when you have a couple on a board that has a nonvoting president and four voting members. Is a couple allowed to legally serve on the board? Is one required to resign?

A. Unless your association's governing documents prohibit a couple from serving on the board, there is no law that would require either one of them to resign.

The board could adopt restrictive language to amend the bylaws, in which case the homeowners would have to approve those changes. However, there may be a problem in determining what the restrictions should be. For example, should they not allow married or dating couples, brothers or sisters (even if they own separate units), cousins, or anyone who works for the same company? Where would you stop?

Yes, there always may be a conflict of interest, but you don't have to be dating to cause stalemates. Just having two people with the same agenda can cause stalemates.

Your statement that the president is a nonvoting member needs clarification. The president probably may vote to break a tie, and can always vote in written ballots.

Some associations would love to see directors holding hands and showing love and friendship instead of the continual bickering, fighting and back-stabbing that often takes place when politics become more important than the good of the community.

Q. I am on the board of a 132-unit condominium complex which has 27 rental units, or 20 percent of the total number of units.

We are looking for ways to discourage additional units from being turned into rental property and the possibility of amending our covenants to assess an additional $100 per month to units used as rental property. Can we do this if we receive approval from a majority of voters?

A. Charging $100 more per month for rental units than owner-occupied ones would probably be illegal.

State law requires that monthly assessments against units are in accordance with the allocations set forth in the declaration. It also requires that the monthly assessments be proportionate to the total undivided interests. If the rentals represent 20 percent of the total undivided interests, their share of the assessments must equal 20 percent of the association's operating expenses.

However, state law allows an association to assess any common expense or portion thereof that benefits fewer than all of the units. If the association, for example, were maintaining the front lawns of only a section of the community, these units could be charged an additional fee. To charge a higher fee to some units simply because they are rental units without providing additional services would most likely be an illegal practice, potentially even unconstitutional.

As a property manager, I find in many ways it is easier to manage an unruly tenant by forcing the owner to evict that tenant than it is to control an obnoxious owner.

Questions for Barbara Holland may be sent to Association Q. & A., P.O. Box 7440, Las Vegas, NV 89125. Her fax number is 385-3759.

Barbara Holland, Certified Property Manager, is president and co-owner of H&L Realty and Management Co. She is a member of the Institute of Real Estate Management and is the author of two books on the subject. Holland is a past president of the Greater Las Vegas Association of Realtors.

Real Estate home