Not every decision is subject to review by owners

Q. Can the unit owners in our condominium file a petition to require a unit owner vote on any decision made by the board?

A. No. Under the Illinois Condominium Property Act, there are only a few decisions of the board that can be subject to a subsequent vote of the owners.

When allowed, a unit owner vote is required when the board receives a timely petition to hold such a meeting from owners representing 20% of the ownership in the common elements. Examples where this is allowed are decisions regarding certain assessment increases, certain special assessments, certain expenditures, and contracts with a board member.

Q. Can the board of a common interest community association make its decisions by email, and then ratify them at a future board meeting?

A. There is no authority for a common interest community association, under the Illinois Common Interest Community Association Act, to make its decisions by email, and then ratify the decisions at a future board meeting. Votes on matters of the board need to take place at properly noticed meetings or portions thereof that are open to members of the association.

Note, too, that the Illinois Common Interest Community Association Act does not include the language found in the Illinois Condominium Property Act that allows a board to make decisions outside of a board meeting in an "emergency" and then to ratify at a board meeting.

Q. Does the president of a condominium or common interest community association have "veto" power over decisions of the board with which she does not agree?

A. In a word, "no." While state statutes grant a "veto" power to, for example, a governor, the governing statutes for condominium and common interest community associations do not include a similar power for the president of an association.

Q. Our association's 2022 budget had a $700,000 reserve. A few months ago, owners received an email from one of the other owners advising us the board borrowed $400,000 from a bank, and that the board did not inform the owners. Can you tell me why, if we had $700,000 in reserve, the association needed to borrow?

A. I don't have enough information to comment on the need for the board to borrow money here. However, there can absolutely be circumstances where an association borrows money despite what might be a robust reserve. For example, if a project would deplete reserves and there are other projects for which that reserve is needed, a board might borrow money to fund a particular project or projects.

The decision to borrow money would need to be made at a board meeting, and the decision reflected in the board meeting minutes. By attending board meetings or reviewing meeting minutes, owners can stay informed of association business.

Let me add that information about association matters supplied by one of the owners may or may not be accurate, and may have gone through a chain of people resulting in unintentionally distorted information before it was disseminated in the email. I suggest speaking to a board member for details on this matter.

Q. The required number of board members, and then some, called a meeting to remove a board member from our seven-member board. The secretary refuses to issue the notice of the owner meeting to vote on the removal because of his friendship with the board member in question. The board has a meeting coming up. Can the board members do something about this at the board meeting?

A. Friendship aside, the board member who refuses to issue the notice of a meeting called by the necessary number of board members is in breach of his fiduciary duty. At the upcoming board meeting, the board can vote to remove the secretary, and to elect another director to serve as secretary who will issue the meeting notice.

• David M. Bendoff is an attorney with Kovitz Shifrin Nesbit in the Chicago suburbs. Send questions for the column to him at CondoTalk@ksnlaw.com. The firm provides legal service to condominium, townhouse, homeowner associations and housing cooperatives. This column is not a substitute for consultation with legal counsel.