The board is the board and the corporation is the collection of owners that the board represents, so they get to decide. The reason for this is that it was an election by the corporation/owners that put the current members on the board. If a board tried to remove a sitting member that would be seen as overstepping the democratic will of the corporation.
That said, board membership has certain requirements that, if not met, make an individual ineligible for office. This includes mainly bankruptcy, but also a few other issues like having been declared incompetent. Bylaws may also have a limit on the number of consecutive absences without notice from board meetings. In such cases it is probably best to explain the requirement to the person and suggest they resign. Then there would then be no need to share personal information about the individual with the owners.
If the issue is a dysfunctional board resulting from personality conflicts, it might be less contentious to try to use whatever dispute resolution there might be in the act or the bylaws. If none, then find one.
Regardless, should the board opt for the general resolution approach, care must be taken with how the facts of the case are presented, both because of privacy, and also to avoid the perception of a personal vendetta against the person. Even then, you should be aware that bad feelings may result on the part of the owners (I have seen this in the context of a non-condo organization), and possible legal challenges of the result. It might be helpful to get legal advice on this.
Alastair D on May 27 2018 at 01:24 PM