Condo Association Management Blog

It should be spelled out in your By-Laws or Rules & Regulations. I would think 2 days means 2 days unless it says specifically 2 business days. You might work to have this changed if you perceive a problem. Often these regulations were written at a time when business days weren't spelled out. You could request written notice by email 2 days in advance if that suits you since it says "or other means." 
 
 
 
Our Board Meetings are scheduled at the beginning of each calendar year and we try to abide by that set of dates. Sometimes we have had to hold emergency meetings in order to sign contracts or deal with unit owners' immediate concerns.

I'm sorry, but I've got to question how it is that you feel you can participate adequately in Association affairs when living off site and out of state. 
 
Aside from that, if you did not receive notice two days in advance, that's a valid position, and you might make the claim that whatever action was taken at the meeting is invalid. 
 
The way I would look at a "2 day" requirement is that there need to be two full days in between the notice date and the meeting date, which in this case, there were. 
 
I would not infer that the "2 day" requirement meant "2 business days," because if the intent were "business days," the provision could easily have stated that. So I believe that the meaning is "2 (actual) days"

I suggest you read your bylaws. The reason is that bylaws will often discriminate between "Board Meetings" and "Members Meetings." With respect to the former, your bylaws may provide for a very short time period of notice (2-5) days to Board members and not require formal notice to all members of the Association, and instead require minutes of such meetings to be distributed. In contrast, meetings of all members, such as annual meetings, the bylaws may give separate (and longer times) for notices to all owners. Without reading your bylaws, my comments as well as the others contributing to this blog are just guesses. Good luck.... L. Lundquist

The Florida Condominium Act provides the information you require about meetings and advance notice. Look it up and obey the law.

It's easy to be right, but it's better to be effective! Recommend a solution to your Board of Directors to effectively reach everyone! Whether it's a smart web tool, or a private Facebook page, it's important that every Owner feel informed and relevant!

I'd be more concerned about "85% of the owners and 40% of the Board are off-site" than I would about a notice regarding a meeting. What does that mean for your Association regarding FHA certification and lenders wanting to know how many units are owner occupied? Did I misunderstand your owner occupancy percentages?

Thank you all for your comments and interpretations.  
 
 
 
Yes, I have read the governing doucments. That's the reason I asked for the 2 day vs 2 business day interpretations. It just seemed unusual to me. Common sense tells me the more notice you give, the better chance you have for participation from everyone. I have asked for the meetings for the year to be posted at the beginning of the year, but the senior officers do not want to do that. 
 
George, as for your comment about living out of state and participating in the FL activities, with the many communication alternatives today (email, fax, Facebook, cellphones) I can be as connected to the community as I choose or that the CAM chooses. FYI, 8 of our 9 Bd members have their primary homes in other locations. IMO, my level of particiapation exceeds the majority of our Board members. 
 
I am familiar with the different rules for Notice on Bd meetings and Owner meetings.  
 
 
 
Charles, You have a good point about obeying the rules and I will remind our senior members of those rules as well.  
 
 
 
Angela, Excellent comment!!! 
 
 
 
Kathy, My percentages are accurate. These condos are second homes for a lot of snowbirds. Many buy with cash.  
 
 
 
I personally feel there is a lot of potential for abuse with the 2 day rules. Our rules were last revised in 1996. The rule clearly favors those that want to have poorly attended meetings with limited opportunity for people that may disagree with their positions to be informed until after the fact. Anyone else see this as a problem?