North Dakota HOA Board Elections

Section 1: Overview

North Dakota keeps its condominium election law thin. The Condominium Ownership Act sets up the legal form of a condominium and then steps back, handing the actual machinery of a board election to each community's bylaws. For planned communities that are not condominiums, the state offers no election statute at all — the recorded declaration, the bylaws, and corporate law carry the load. Condominiums answer to the North Dakota Condominium Ownership Act, N.D. Cent. Code ch. 47-04.1, a traditional condominium statute that assigns day-to-day administration to the bylaws and prescribes no election procedure of its own.¹ Non-condominium planned communities run their elections on the recorded declaration and bylaws, and where the association incorporates as a nonprofit — the usual arrangement — the North Dakota Nonprofit Corporation Act, N.D. Cent. Code ch. 10-33, fills in the corporate defaults for electing directors, setting their terms, removing them, and filling vacancies.² North Dakota has not adopted the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act, so the declarant-control and deemed-ratification rules that drive UCIOA states do not apply here. The state also runs a distinctive court system: it has no standing intermediate appellate court, so an appeal travels from the District Courts straight to the North Dakota Supreme Court.³ Put those features together and North Dakota lands among the states where board elections are contractual and corporate, not statutory. The sections that follow lay out the framework, walk through the rules mechanic by mechanic, and review recent legislative and judicial activity.

Section 2: The election framework

2A. The North Dakota Condominium Ownership Act and condominium board elections

The Condominium Ownership Act is the only North Dakota statute that reaches condominium governance, and it is brief.¹ It covers how a condominium comes into being — formation by recorded declaration, unit boundaries, ownership of the common elements, assessments, and liens — but it never builds the machinery for a board election. Section 47-04.1-07 tells the unit owners they "shall provide for the administration of each project" and that they shall provide "by bylaws" for maintenance, the assessment of expenses, and "similar matters," with a true copy of the bylaws annexed to the recorded declaration.⁴ The Act stops there. It does not fix board composition, the length of a director's term, the timing of an election, a notice period, a quorum, or a voting method; all of that lives in the bylaws. The statute does impose a few substantive rules in corners that have nothing to do with elections — political-sign display under § 47-04.1-14, electric-vehicle charging stations under § 47-04.1-16 — but it says nothing about how a director gets nominated, elected, or removed.¹ That silence is the mark of a traditional condominium statute: it creates the legal form and leaves internal governance to the recorded instruments. The approach parts ways sharply with the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act, which spells out detailed governance defaults, and with California's Davis-Stirling Act, which mandates secret ballots, independent inspectors of election, and fixed nomination and ballot timelines. For condominiums, North Dakota requires none of that by statute.

2B. Planned communities: no statute, declarations and corporate law

North Dakota has no planned-community statute and no statutory election machinery for non-condominium HOAs. For those communities, the recorded declaration — the covenants, conditions, and restrictions — and the bylaws are the first place to look for the board-election rules. When the association incorporates as a nonprofit, which is the common structure, the North Dakota Nonprofit Corporation Act, N.D. Cent. Code ch. 10-33, supplies the corporate director defaults.² Those defaults set a floor and a frame: a board of three or more directors (§ 10-33-28);⁵ an election method and any extra qualifications fixed by the articles or bylaws (§ 10-33-29);⁶ a fixed term that may not exceed ten years and defaults to one year if no one sets it (§ 10-33-30);⁷ removal of a director by the same members who are eligible to elect that director (§ 10-33-36);⁸ and vacancy-filling by the voting members or by the remaining board (§ 10-33-38).⁹ To decide which framework governs, start with one question: did a recorded declaration submit this community to ch. 47-04.1 as a condominium? If so, the Condominium Ownership Act and the condominium's bylaws control, with the Nonprofit Corporation Act filling the corporate gaps when the association is incorporated. If instead the community is a non-condominium planned community, no HOA-specific statute applies, and the declaration, the bylaws, and — where the association is incorporated — ch. 10-33 govern. Whether those corporate defaults apply at all turns on the association's incorporation status, which you can confirm through the North Dakota Secretary of State.

2C. Bylaws and corporate law as the operational rulebook

For both kinds of community, the operational details — board size, terms, staggering, nominations, quorum, and the mechanics of balloting — come from the bylaws. The precedence runs in a clear order: any Condominium Ownership Act provision that applies (condominiums only), then the recorded declaration, then the bylaws, then the Nonprofit Corporation Act gap-fillers for incorporated associations, and finally the rules the board itself adopts. Because the Condominium Ownership Act says nothing about elections and no planned-community statute exists, the working rules almost always come from the declaration and the bylaws, with the Nonprofit Corporation Act backstopping the corporate questions. Where the governing documents and any statute both fall silent, common-law contract and property doctrine takes over: North Dakota courts read the declaration as a contract among the owners and enforce its covenants as equitable servitudes, consistent with § 47-04.1-04.¹ The practical lesson is blunt. A manager cannot recite a generic North Dakota board-election rule. Every question gets answered by reading the specific community's declaration and bylaws, confirming whether the Condominium Ownership Act applies at all, and checking whether the association is incorporated under ch. 10-33.

Section 3: Election mechanics

Quick-Reference Election Mechanics Table

A. Eligibility and nominations

The Condominium Ownership Act does not touch director eligibility or the nomination process, so for condominiums the bylaws set both. For an incorporated planned community, the Nonprofit Corporation Act asks only that a director be an individual and then lets the articles or bylaws layer on further qualifications such as membership, good standing, or residency (§ 10-33-29),⁶ while capping financially interested individuals at no more than 49% of the board (§ 10-33-27).¹⁰ Candidate nomination is statutory for neither community type; the declaration and bylaws set the method.

B. Notice, annual meeting, and quorum

For condominiums, the Condominium Ownership Act sets neither the annual-meeting timing, the notice, nor the quorum; the declaration and bylaws govern all three. For an incorporated planned community, the Nonprofit Corporation Act supplies the defaults: a corporation with voting members must hold an annual meeting of members (§ 10-33-65),¹¹ notice runs at least five days unless a longer period is fixed (§ 10-33-68),¹² and a member quorum sits at ten percent of the members entitled to vote (§ 10-33-76).¹⁶ Each of those defaults bends to the articles or bylaws, so read the governing documents first.

C. Voting methods, proxies, and ballots

The Condominium Ownership Act is silent on how members vote, so for condominiums the permitted methods — in person, by proxy, by mail, or electronically — come from the bylaws. For an incorporated planned community, the Nonprofit Corporation Act lets members act in person, by voice or ballot, by mailed ballot, or by electronic communication (§ 10-33-72),¹³ and it permits proxy voting (§ 10-33-77).¹⁴ There is no cumulative voting unless the articles provide for it (§ 10-33-34).¹⁵ North Dakota imposes no statutory secret-ballot requirement and no statutory inspector of election on either community type; either procedure exists only if the governing documents create it.

D. Terms, vacancies, removal, and recall

For condominiums, the bylaws set director terms, vacancies, and removal, because the Condominium Ownership Act says nothing about them. For an incorporated planned community, the Nonprofit Corporation Act lays down the corporate defaults: fixed terms that may not exceed ten years, defaulting to one year if unspecified, with staggering allowed (§ 10-33-30);⁷ removal by the members eligible to elect the director, with or without cause, unless the articles or bylaws set another method (§ 10-33-36),⁸ and judicial removal as a further option (§ 10-33-37);¹⁷ and vacancy-filling by the voting members or the remaining board (§ 10-33-38).⁹ These are corporate defaults, not HOA-specific mandates, and the declaration and bylaws can override most of them.

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

4A. Recent bills

No bill enacted in the past 24 months touches board-election provisions, director-election procedures, removal, or voting rules for North Dakota condominiums or planned communities. The Legislative Assembly meets in regular session only in odd-numbered years, and the most recent relevant enactment — from the 2025 regular session — deals with pre-sale disclosure, not elections. It appears below for completeness, with a plain note that it leaves election procedure untouched.

4B. Recent North Dakota Supreme Court rulings

A search of the North Dakota Supreme Court opinions database turned up no opinion in the past 36 months that addresses board elections, contested elections, a declarant-control transition, director removal, or a voting or proxy dispute in a North Dakota common-interest community. The two recent association opinions worth flagging land on other subjects.

Because North Dakota has no standing intermediate appellate court — the temporary Court of Appeals is rarely convened and hears only the matters the Supreme Court assigns to it — an election dispute that gets appealed runs from the District Courts straight to the North Dakota Supreme Court.³

4C. Active legislative debates

No active proposal would create a comprehensive North Dakota planned-community statute, add statutory board-election procedures, or substantially modernize the Condominium Ownership Act, at least as of the last verification date. The recent energy has gone to resale disclosure, not to the machinery of governance.

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

North Dakota sits among the states where board elections are contractual and corporate, resting on recorded declarations, the bylaws, and the Nonprofit Corporation Act, with a traditional condominium statute and no comprehensive planned-community statute. That sets it apart from the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act states — Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Minnesota, Vermont, and Washington — which supply statutory governance and declarant-control defaults, and from prescriptive-procedure states such as California, where the Davis-Stirling Act mandates secret ballots, inspectors of election, and fixed timelines. North Dakota also runs a distinctive single-tier appellate structure, with no standing intermediate court. For a multi-state operator moving into North Dakota, the practical takeaway is straightforward: the rulebook for any given board election is the community's declaration and bylaws, backed by the corporate gap-fillers in ch. 10-33, and an appeal of an election dispute goes directly to the North Dakota Supreme Court.

Federal frameworks — the Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, and the FCC's OTARD rule — also reach North Dakota associations regardless of the state framework.

1. N.D. Cent. Code ch. 47-04.1, Condominium Ownership of Real Property (official text) ↩
2. N.D. Cent. Code ch. 10-33, Nonprofit Corporations (official text) ↩
3. North Dakota Court System, Court of Appeals (temporary court established 1987; hears only cases assigned by the Supreme Court; appeals otherwise proceed from the District Courts to the North Dakota Supreme Court) ↩
4. N.D. Cent. Code § 47-04.1-07, Administration; Bylaws; Rules and regulations (unit owners "shall provide for the administration of each project" and "by bylaws" for maintenance, assessment of expenses, and similar matters) ↩
5. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-28, Number of directors (board must consist of three or more directors, subject to a narrow exception for corporations with one or two voting members) ↩
6. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-29, Qualifications and election of directors (directors must be individuals; method of election and additional qualifications set by the articles or bylaws) ↩
7. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-30, Terms of directors (fixed term may not exceed ten years; one year if unspecified; staggered terms permitted) ↩
8. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-36, Nonjudicial removal of directors (removal at any time, with or without cause, by those members eligible to elect the director, unless a different method is provided in the articles or bylaws) ↩
9. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-38, Filling board vacancies (members with voting rights, or the remaining directors though less than a quorum, may fill a vacancy unless the articles or bylaws provide otherwise) ↩
10. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-27, Board (no more than forty-nine percent of the individuals serving on the board may be financially interested individuals) ↩
11. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-65, Regular meetings of members (a corporation with voting members must hold a regular meeting of members annually) ↩
12. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-68, Notice of member meetings (at least five days' notice unless a longer minimum period has been fixed) ↩
13. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-72, Action by members (in person, by voice or ballot, by mailed ballot, or by electronic communication; affirmative vote of a majority of members present and entitled to vote required for member action unless a greater vote is required) ↩
14. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-77, Proxy voting (members with voting rights may vote by proxy) ↩
15. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-34, Cumulative voting for directors (unless the articles provide otherwise, there is no cumulative voting) ↩
16. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-76, Quorum of members (ten percent of the members entitled to vote, subject to the articles or bylaws) ↩
17. N.D. Cent. Code § 10-33-37, Removal of directors by judicial proceeding ↩
18. North Dakota Legislative Branch, Senate Bill 2229, 69th Legislative Assembly (2025 regular session), bill overview (Governor signed; filed with Secretary of State March 18, 2025; effective August 1, 2025) ↩
19. Berger v. Sellers (Misty Waters Owners' Association), 2023 ND 171 (North Dakota Supreme Court) ↩
20. Industrial Commission of North Dakota v. Gould, 2024 ND 32 (North Dakota Supreme Court; HOA assessment-lien priority; no super priority over a later recorded mortgage) ↩