Michigan HOA Director Qualifications

1. Overview

Michigan takes a moderate-touch approach to who may sit on an association board. The state governs condominiums — including the widely used site condominium — under the Condominium Act, and it governs traditional homeowners associations through their recorded covenants. But the rules that actually decide who may serve as a director, how a board is composed, and how a director is removed come from a different place: the Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act. That Act imposes no certification requirement, sets no term limit, and disqualifies no one automatically — not delinquent owners, and not people with criminal histories.¹ The Michigan Condominium Act, MCL 559.101 et seq. (Act 59 of 1978), supplies the condominium framework.² Michigan developers often organize detached single-family subdivisions as condominiums — people call them site condominiums — so the Condominium Act, rather than ordinary covenant law, reaches the community.³ Traditional, non-condominium HOAs run on their recorded declarations and on the Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2101 et seq. (Act 162 of 1982), because Michigan has never enacted a comprehensive statute for non-condominium HOAs — and director qualifications for both kinds of association live in that corporate act.⁴ All of this sets Michigan well apart from heavy-touch states such as Florida, which screens candidates through statutory certification or education, term provisions, and automatic disqualification rules that Michigan has simply never adopted.⁵ The sections that follow show where each rule lives, how it applies to condominiums and to traditional HOAs, and what recent activity in the Legislature and the courts means for director service.

2. Where director qualifications come from

2A. The Condominium Act and the site-condominium reach

The Michigan Condominium Act, MCL 559.101 et seq. (Act 59 of 1978), governs how condominium projects in Michigan are created, administered, and operated.² One Michigan habit stands out: the site condominium, a development of single-family detached homes organized as a condominium instead of as a platted subdivision. The Act never defines the term. LARA's Condominium Buyer's Handbook calls a site condominium a term “used to describe a condominium development with single-family detached housing instead of two or more housing units in one structure,” and it states plainly that “[s]ite condominium developments must comply with the Act.”³ Because of this practice, the Condominium Act reaches many communities that other states would treat as ordinary HOAs. That makes classification the first practical step for any manager or attorney: figure out whether a community is a condominium — including a site condominium — or a traditional, non-condominium HOA, because that answer dictates which framework applies.

On the board itself, the Condominium Act governs the project bylaws (it sets mandatory provisions at MCL 559.154 and permissible provisions at MCL 559.156, and it addresses administration and recording at MCL 559.153) and the developer-to-co-owner transition of board control at MCL 559.152.⁶ Here is what the Act does not do: it does not set director eligibility. It requires no certification or education, imposes no term limit, and disqualifies no one automatically — not delinquent co-owners, not people with felony convictions. A condominium practitioner who reads the Act looking for candidate screens will not find them; those rules sit in the corporate act and in the governing documents.⁷

2B. The corporate-law layer: the Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act

Most Michigan condominium and homeowners associations organize as nonprofit corporations under the Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2101 et seq. (Act 162 of 1982), and that Act is the principal source of the rules on director qualification, board composition, and removal.⁴ The board provision — qualifications and powers included — sits at MCL 450.2501. It provides that the board manages or directs the business and affairs of the corporation, that a director need not be a member unless the articles or bylaws require it, and that the articles or bylaws may prescribe qualifications for directors.¹ Board meetings are addressed at MCL 450.2521.⁸ Two provisions govern removal: MCL 450.2511 covers removal by a vote of the members, and MCL 450.2514 covers removal by the circuit court.^{9, 10} Because the Condominium Act establishes no director qualifications, the Nonprofit Corporation Act governs both condominium associations and traditional HOAs on this point.

Associations file their articles of incorporation with the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, or LARA. LARA's job is corporate filing, not day-to-day HOA governance. The agency has said it has “no authority to take complaints or enforce any requirements of the Condominium Act in regard to the actions of condominium associations,” and that “[o]nly a court can order an association to comply with the Act, administrative rules and bylaws.”¹¹ So the director rules flow from the corporate act and the governing documents, and the courts — not an agency — enforce them.

2C. The master deed, declaration, and bylaws

Within the baselines the Nonprofit Corporation Act sets, the governing documents supply the candidate-eligibility screens that actually operate. For a condominium, the master deed and condominium bylaws control; for a traditional HOA, the declaration of covenants and the association bylaws control. For a condominium, precedence runs from the Condominium Act (for the project and the project bylaws) and the Nonprofit Corporation Act (for director qualifications), to the master deed and condominium bylaws, to the corporate-default rules, and finally to board-adopted rules.¹ For a traditional HOA, precedence runs from the covenants and bylaws and the Nonprofit Corporation Act, to corporate defaults, and then to rules. So in practice a manager or attorney classifies the community first (condominium, including site condominium, versus traditional HOA), then reads the governing documents against the Nonprofit Corporation Act to decide who is eligible to serve.

3. Director eligibility, disqualification, and tenure rules

3A. Eligibility to serve

The governing documents, working against a permissive corporate baseline, decide whether a director must be a member or co-owner. MCL 450.2501(1) provides that a director need not be a member of the corporation unless the articles of incorporation or bylaws require it, and that the articles or bylaws may prescribe qualifications for directors.¹ The source layer here is the Nonprofit Corporation Act, supplemented by the master deed or declaration and the bylaws, and it applies to both condominiums (including site condominiums) and traditional HOAs. In practice, most condominium master deeds and HOA declarations do require directors to be members — but that requirement is documentary, not statutory, and the documents can vary it. Two document-level accommodations come up again and again. When a co-owner or homeowner is an entity — a corporation, LLC, partnership, or trust — rather than a natural person, the documents usually extend eligibility to that entity's officer, member, manager, partner, or trustee. And some documents extend eligibility to the spouse of a co-owner who is not personally on title. Michigan sets no statutory residency or age floor specific to association directors, though the Nonprofit Corporation Act addresses director minimum age generally at MCL 450.2501a; any residency, age, or good-standing screen for an association director comes from the governing documents.¹²

3B. Disqualification and removal

The members may remove a sitting director. MCL 450.2511 provides that, unless the articles or bylaws say otherwise, the members may remove a director or the entire board with or without cause by a majority vote of the members entitled to vote at an election of directors, and the articles may require a higher vote for removal without cause.⁹ Separately, MCL 450.2514 lets the circuit court for the county of the corporation's principal office remove a director. The corporation, or members holding at least 10 percent of the voting power, may bring that proceeding, and the court may act on a finding that the director engaged in fraudulent, illegal, or dishonest conduct or a gross abuse of authority or discretion, and that removal serves the corporation's best interest; the court may also bar the person from serving as a director for a set period.¹⁰ The source layer is the Nonprofit Corporation Act, and it applies to both condominiums and traditional HOAs. The mechanics of calling and conducting that removal vote belong to board elections, not to qualifications. On disqualification, Michigan imposes no statutory bar on a delinquent owner or a person with a criminal history serving as a director; any such bar is documentary — written into the master deed, declaration, or bylaws — and not a Condominium Act mandate.⁷ Conflict-of-interest limits on a director's role in particular transactions appear at MCL 450.2545a, which sets out when a transaction involving an interested director may stand (it must be fair to the corporation, or disclosed and approved by disinterested directors or members); that provision governs conduct in office, not eligibility to serve.¹³

3C. Board composition and terms

The minimum board size is a corporate default. MCL 450.2505 provides that the board of a nonprofit corporation that is not a private foundation or a dental-care corporation must have three or more directors, with the bylaws fixing the number or the manner of fixing it.¹⁴ Most Michigan condominium associations run with three or five directors. The articles or bylaws set term length, staggered or classified terms, and the manner of election under MCL 450.2505, and the Act permits dividing directors into as many as five classes for staggered terms at MCL 450.2506.¹⁵ The source layer is the Nonprofit Corporation Act, with the governing documents supplying the specific number and term, and it applies to both condominiums and traditional HOAs. Michigan imposes no statutory term limit on association directors; any term limit has to come from the governing documents. For condominiums, MCL 559.152 governs developer control of the board and its transition to a co-owner-elected board. It requires an advisory committee of nondeveloper co-owners and sets a graduated schedule tied to the percentage of units conveyed: nondeveloper co-owners elect at least one director, and not less than 25 percent of the board, within 120 days after 25 percent of the units are conveyed; not less than 33-1/3 percent within 120 days after 50 percent are conveyed; and all directors once 75 percent are conveyed (and before 90 percent), subject to the developer's right to designate at least one director while it owns and offers for sale at least 10 percent of the units.¹⁶ The source layer for that transition is the Condominium Act, and it applies to condominiums, including site condominiums, only; traditional HOAs handle developer transition through their declarations.

3D. Onboarding and ongoing qualification duties

Michigan requires no director certification or education as a condition of service, for either condominiums or traditional HOAs. This is the sharpest contrast with Florida, where Fla. Stat. 718.112(2)(d) requires a newly elected or appointed condominium director to certify in writing, within the statutory window, that he or she has read the governing documents and will work to uphold them — or to complete an approved educational course instead.⁵ Michigan has no equivalent, so onboarding obligations come from the governing documents, not from statute. The substantive baseline that does apply is the standard of care at MCL 450.2541, which requires a director or officer to discharge duties in good faith, with the care an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would exercise under similar circumstances, and in a manner the director reasonably believes serves the best interests of the corporation.¹⁷ The same section lets a director rely on information, opinions, and reports from legal counsel, accountants, engineers, or other professionals acting within their competence. The source layer is the Nonprofit Corporation Act, and it applies to both condominiums and traditional HOAs. Conflict-of-interest disclosure expectations track MCL 450.2545a, discussed above.¹³ These are duties of office, not eligibility screens, and they explain why so much of a Michigan director's qualification picture is corporate and documentary rather than a creature of the property statute.

4. Recent legislative and judicial activity

4A. Recent bills

No qualifying bill in the past 24 months amended the Michigan Condominium Act or the Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act to change association director qualifications, board composition, or director removal. General condominium and HOA legislation in the period — such as the Homeowners' Energy Policy Act (MCL 559.301 et seq., effective April 1, 2025) — addressed owners' energy improvements and solar installations, and it did not touch director eligibility, composition, or removal.¹⁸ Proposals in earlier sessions that would have required condominium directors to live in the condominium and certify familiarity with the condominium documents never became law, and no comparable measure is on the books today.

4B. Recent appellate rulings

One Michigan appellate decision in the past 36 months bears directly on board composition and removal in a nonprofit corporation — and it arises under the very act that governs most associations.

4C. Active legislative debates

Community-association practitioners report that a reserve-study bill for condominium associations may surface in the 2026 session, and longstanding commentary keeps urging the Legislature to enact a comprehensive non-condominium HOA statute. Neither proposal is law, and neither targets director qualifications, composition, or removal.

5. National positioning and related coverage

Michigan sits in the moderate-touch tier for director qualifications. The Condominium Act — which reaches many communities through the site-condominium practice — governs the project and the developer transition, while the Nonprofit Corporation Act supplies the rules on director qualification, composition, and removal; traditional HOAs lean on their covenants and that same corporate act, because Michigan has no comprehensive non-condominium HOA statute.⁴ That places Michigan between heavy-touch states such as Florida — which layers on statutory director certification or education, a four-consecutive-two-year-term limit, automatic loss of office for directors more than 90 days delinquent, and disqualification of delinquent owners and certain felons⁵ — and light-touch states such as Iowa, where eligibility is largely documentary and most associations operate as nonprofit corporations under the Revised Iowa Nonprofit Corporation Act.²⁰ For a multi-state operator, the practical takeaway is simple: in Michigan the threshold question is classification — is the community a condominium (including a site condominium) or a traditional HOA — after which director qualifications come from the Nonprofit Corporation Act rather than the property statute. Michigan imposes no director certification requirement and no statutory term limit.

HOA Weekly's Michigan Director Qualifications coverage updates quarterly as the Legislature and the Michigan courts act. Federal frameworks rarely dictate director qualifications, but Michigan associations remain subject to federal law — the FHA, ADA, FDCPA, SCRA, and OTARD — across their broader operations.

1. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2501 (Board of directors; management of business and affairs of corporation; qualifications; powers) ↩
2. Michigan Condominium Act, Act 59 of 1978, MCL 559.101 et seq. ↩
3. Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, The Condominium Buyer's Handbook (Rev. 10/2018) (site condominium description) ↩
4. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, Act 162 of 1982, MCL 450.2101 et seq. ↩
5. Fla. Stat. 718.112(2)(d), (n)–(o) (director certification or education, four-consecutive-two-year-term limit, delinquency abandonment, and felony/delinquency disqualification) ↩
6. Michigan Condominium Act, MCL 559.152 (advisory committee; developer-to-co-owner transition); see also MCL 559.153, 559.154, and 559.156 (project bylaws) ↩
7. Michigan Condominium Act, Chapter 559 index (Act sets no director certification, term limit, or automatic delinquency/felony disqualification) ↩
8. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2521 (regular or special meetings of board) ↩
9. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2511 (removal of director; vote) ↩
10. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2514 (removal of director by circuit court) ↩
11. Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, Condominium Act Frequently Asked Questions (LARA has no authority to enforce the Condominium Act; only a court can order compliance) ↩
12. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2501a (board of directors; minimum age; requirements) ↩
13. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2545a (transaction in which director or officer has interest) ↩
14. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2505 (board; number, term, election or appointment, and resignation of directors) ↩
15. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2506 (dividing directors into up to 5 classes; election or appointment; term) ↩
16. Michigan Condominium Act, MCL 559.152(1)–(2) (advisory committee and graduated developer-to-co-owner board transition formula) ↩
17. Michigan Nonprofit Corporation Act, MCL 450.2541 (director or officer; discharge of duties; standard of care; reliance on information) ↩
18. Homeowners' Energy Policy Act, MCL 559.301 et seq. ↩
19. Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. Arthur, ___ Mich App ___ (2025) (Docket No. 372134), 2025 WL 3545227 (Mich Ct App Dec 10, 2025) (published); opinion retrievable by docket number through the Michigan Courts case search ↩
20. Revised Iowa Nonprofit Corporation Act, Iowa Code ch. 504 (governs HOAs and condominium associations organized as nonprofit corporations in Iowa) ↩