The Nomination Process: Should We Encourage Floor Nominations? 📣

The question of nominations from the floor at the annual meeting is a common point of contention. While it seems democratic, it can often lead to administrative issues and poorly vetted candidates.

 

The Case for Advance Nominations

 

Most well-governed associations require a Notice of Intent to Run deadline well before the meeting.

• Vetting: Allows the manager to confirm the candidate meets basic eligibility requirements (e.g., is an owner, is current on assessments).

• Informed Voters: Allows the association to distribute the candidate's statement to all owners, ensuring the vote is informed and fair.

• Compliance: State laws often mandate that elections be fair and visible, which is hard to prove with surprise candidates.

 

The Risks of Floor Nominations

 

While they provide a last-minute opportunity, they often compromise fairness:

1. Uninformed Vote: Homeowners are forced to vote for a complete stranger with no time to read their qualifications or background.

2. Unvetted Candidates: The person nominated may be delinquent on assessments, creating a legal issue if they are elected.

3. Chaos: The election process can be derailed by arguments or procedural challenges stemming from surprise nominations.

 

Board Best Practice

 

If your Bylaws permit floor nominations, it is wise to:

• Require Verbal Affirmation: The person nominated must be present and immediately confirm their willingness to run.

• Immediate Vetting: The manager should be prepared to quickly verify basic eligibility (like ownership and account status) before the election proceeds.

• Limit Campaigning: Strictly prohibit campaigning or speeches for floor candidates to ensure fairness to those who submitted statements in advance.

Conclusion: While floor nominations feel inclusive, encouraging homeowners to submit their intent to run before the deadline leads to a more transparent, legally sound, and informed election.