HOA Nut House

A homeowner was initially involved in a dispute with a Board on numerous issues. A Meet and Confer session was held and many of the issues were resolved to both sides satisfaction. However, an second Meet and Confer session is now scheduled and the Board now wants the HOA attorney to be present at the meeting because Board members don't feel comfortable, or believe their HOA attorney needs to be in attendance to protect the HOA's interests. According to the homeowner, the first Meet and Confer session went well and issues were resolved amicably, without confrontation with just the homeowner and Board discussing the issues and reaching agreement on many of the issues. The homeowner now believes that having the attorney present is going to delay and block resolution of the remaining issues because the attorney will interject with legal mumbo-jumbo.

The homeowner has requested that the meeting be between the Board and the homeowner; the Board declined stating they want their attorney to attend. I thought a Meet and Confer was supposed to be an informal meeting between the parties where positions are explained and parties work out an agreement satisfactory to all. The informal aspect is removed if the homeowner has to try to discuss issues with a Board by going through an attorney.

Must a lawyer be present for an informal Meet and Confer?