Input Source: Past President

Interview:  John E., 20-year property owner (owns two homes in the community) and 18-year member of the board. Immediate past president from 2004-2010.  Conducted on Oct. 22. Duration 1 hour. The interview was conducted after survey results were in, and after meeting minutes were analyzed,  so that these results could be shared and discussed.

• The survey board of board members showed a near unanimous agreement that meetings are too long. What is the reason?
• Should the board be acting on more of its agenda items?
• Do you favor a more formal and business-like approach to meetings?
• What is your knowledge/experience with best practice meeting facilitation?
• What do you believe would most help the board be more productive in handling community business?

Key Findings:
Length of meetings:  The meeting chair (the president) is careful not to step on toes and so some members can continue to “harp on” issues longer than the discussion is productive. However, John pointed out,  the harmony of the board is important to its productivity, to the morale of its members, and  to the fact that members are neighbors who need to live together peacefully.  John pointed out that previous boards have been very contentious and, while productive, served as an outlet for a few individuals to manage the neighborhood as they desired.  Any current assessment of the board should take this into account.
At the same time, John said, some members will not serve on the board of EpCom as they have little tolerance for the social aspects of these meetings.  As he would like to stop serving on the board some day, John appreciates that long meetings may discourage retention of members.  “I think some people have been on the board too long.”
Action items:  There are multiple reasons some items are not acted on, often because the members do not have the full information at the meeting time. Sometimes, members with the information do not attend; sometimes the management committee rep or treasurer do not have information needed to make a decision.
John would like to see the average of about 50 percent of delayed items raised with some new procedures.
Business approach to meetings: John is adamantly opposed to a system such as Robert’s, which limits discussion unless there is a motion on the table. John pointed out that previous boards have been very contentious and, while productive, served as an outlet for a few individuals to manage the neighborhood as they desired.  Any current assessment of the board should take this into account.
At the same time,  there should be a system to limit discussion on items that do not really require extended discussion. To this end, he would like to see “a compromise between Robert’s and the current loose structure of meetings.”
Knowledge: As an independent business owner, John works with a small staff that does not schedule meetings. He has no prior experience with a governing board.  As an 18-year member of the board (with some absences of a year or two), the Forest Glen Board constitutes the whole of his experience.
Most helpful to productivity:  1) a part-time staff member, though the budget will not allow it 2) sharing of information ahead of time to limit information sharing in the meeting 3) organize a better platform for owners to share concerns with the board 4) an increase of community outreach to the board/community involvement in the board. 5)