It’s our privilege to welcome Legacy at Bryant Ranch Association to Tinnelly Law Group’s growing family of HOA clients.
Legacy is a gated community of single family homes located in the city of Yorba Linda. Residents enjoy mountain-top views and close proximity to parks and walking trails.
 |
Our HOA lawyers and staff look forward to working with Legacy’s Board and management. |
It’s our privilege to welcome Stone Harbor – Bridgeport Homeowners Association to Tinnelly Law Group’s growing family of HOA clients.
Stone Harbor – Bridgeport is a community of custom single family homes located in the city of Riverside. Residents enjoy large lots in a beautiful park-like setting.
|
Our HOA lawyers and staff look forward to working with Stone Harbor – Bridgeport’s Board and management. |
In case you missed it, Issue # 39 of our ‘Community Association Update’ newsletter is available now!
Topics covered in this issue include:
A link to the newsletter is here.
Need to be added to our mailing list? Click here to sign up. Links to previous editions of our newsletter can be found here.
*Unpublished Opinion
The Court of Appeals recently rendered an unpublished opinion in Harbour Island Condominium Owners Association, Inc. v. Alexander (2019), which provides some clarity regarding a tenant’s right to attend board meetings and the ban on noxious activities within the community.
The Harbour Island Condominium Owners Association (“HOA”) sought a restraining order (known as a preliminary injunction) against two tenants and their landlord to abate the tenants’ noxious behavior. The HOA relied on the provision in the CC&R’s, which stated that residents cannot disturb the neighborhood or occupants of a neighboring property or create a nuisance.
Neighboring residents made several complaints to the HOA about the tenants’ excessive and purposeful noise: the tenants consistently stomped on their floors and slammed their doors. In addition to the noise complaints, tenants permitted their dog to urinate in the Common Area, despite the posted “No Dogs” signs. Lastly, the tenants engaged in aggressive behavior against the Board of Directors in an apparent attempt to intimidate Board Members. For example, the tenants secretly photographed a Board Member at the pool on different occasions.
The trial court granted the preliminary injunction, ordering the tenants and their landlord to install throw rugs throughout the unit and a sound-muffling device on the doors; to cease photographing Board Members; and to prevent their dog from urinating on the Common Area. The trial court ruled in favor of the HOA because the tenants’ noxious behavior unfairly oppressed the rest of the community, while the ordered corrective measures were minimally oppressive to the tenants.
The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s decision. Despite the fact that the HOA’s nuisance provision did not mention dogs, the Court broadly interpreted the existing provision to encompass the exclusion of dogs from the Common Area for health and safety reasons.
Furthermore, the Court held that the nuisance provision bans acoustic nuisances that interfere with a neighbor’s right to quiet enjoyment. In this case, the nuisance claims were supported by credible witness testimony that the tenants’ noise was excessive.
Lastly, the Court of Appeals disagreed with the tenants that their due process rights had been violated since the tenants were not permitted to challenge the violation notices at hearings. The Court held that only Owners with vested property rights are Members of the HOA. As such, only Members may participate in HOA meetings.
|
The Harbour Island case highlights the broad reach of nuisance provisions in CC&Rs and serves as a reminder that Owners, not tenants, have the right to attend and participate in HOA meetings. |
-Blog post authored by TLG Attorney, Sarah A. Kyriakedes, Esq.
It’s our privilege to welcome Brisbane Homeowners Association to Tinnelly Law Group’s growing family of HOA clients.
Brisbane is a condominium community located in the city of Oceanside. Residents enjoy a pool, spa, tot lot, and dog park.
|
Our HOA lawyers and staff look forward to working with Brisbane’s Board and management. |
It’s our privilege to welcome Lexington Community Association to Tinnelly Law Group’s growing family of HOA clients.
Lexington is a community of new single family homes in Escondido by KB Homes. These spacious 10,000 square-foot+ homesites are surrounded by rolling hills and offer easy access to nearby parks and recreation.
|
Our HOA lawyers and staff look forward to working with Lexington’s Board and management. |
*New Library Article!
Workplace harassment and hostile work environments are nothing new for management professionals. Emotionally charged conversations can become uncomfortable and antagonistic for many managers. Unfortunately, such dialogue frequently crosses the line from demanding direction to demeaning personal attacks.
Previously, employer liability for employee claims based on nonemployee conduct was generally limited to sexual harassment. Effective January 1, 2019, newly adopted California law (Senate Bill 1300) lowers the burden by which California employees can bring successful harassment claims against California employers and expands the scope by which those employers may now be responsible to their employees for third party, nonemployee conduct, among other things.
Our HOA attorneys have authored a new article to generally summarize SB 1300 and to discuss its application to common interest development practice.
|
The article, entitled “Workplace Harassment in a HOA Environment,” is available for download from our firm’s library. You can access the article by clicking here. |
Amending a HOA’s Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (“CC&Rs”) can be a challenging endeavor. This is true, in large part, to the onerous approval requirements imposed by the CC&Rs themselves. Indeed, many CC&Rs require a super-majority (i.e., 67% or more) of the HOA’s members to approve an amendment. Such requirements make it difficult for an association to pass a proposed amendment, often as a result of member apathy or lack of participation in the voting process.
When this occurs, California Civil Code Section 4275 provides a mechanism for a HOA to “petition the superior court of the county in which the common interest development is located for an order reducing the percentage of affirmative votes necessary for such an amendment.” Section 4275 thus serves to provide a HOA “with a safety valve for those situations where the need for a supermajority vote would hamstring the association.” (Blue Lagoon Community Assn. v. Mitchell (1997) 55 Cal.App.4th 472).
Accordingly, in order to successfully bring a petition to reduce the percentage of affirmative votes necessary to approve an amendment to the CC&Rs, a HOA must demonstrate the following:
(Cal. Civ. Code § 4275(c).)
In the recent case of Orchard Estate Homes, Inc. v. The Orchard Homeowner Alliance, the California Court of Appeal rejected an argument brought by a group of homeowners (The Orchard Homeowner Alliance) objecting to the HOA’s petition to reduce the percentage of affirmative votes necessary to amend their CC&Rs. ((2019) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, 2019 Cal.App.Lexis 144.) (“Orchard Estate”) In particular, and relying on the Mission Shores Assn v. Pheil case, the homeowners argued that, in order to prevail on their petition, the HOA must demonstrate that the CC&R amendment failed due to “voter apathy.” ((2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 789, 794-95 (stating that section 4275 of the California Civil Code was to “provide homeowners associations with the ‘ability to amend [their] governing documents when, because of voter apathy or other reasons, important amendments cannot be approved by the normal procedures”).)
The Court in Orchard Estate rejected this argument, noting that the statutory language contained in California Civil Code section 4275(c) clearly and unambiguously identified the “elements required to be established to authorize a reduction in the required voting percentage to amend a provision of the governing CC&Rs.” (Id. at p. **6-7.) As such, the Court was unwilling “to imply an element that was not expressed by the Legislature” based on off-hand statements made in appellate decisions. (Id. at p. *7.)
|
Although the Orchard Estate case appears to make CC&R amendments easier to accomplish, Board members should nevertheless be aware that amending CC&Rs can be an expensive endeavor. Therefore, it is important for Board members to discuss potential CC&R amendments with the HOA’s legal counsel to determine if they are necessary and/or advisable, or if other avenues are available to achieve the Board’s desired result. |
-Blog post authored by TLG Attorney, Matthew T. Plaxton, Esq.
It’s our privilege to welcome East Garrison Community Association to Tinnelly Law Group’s growing family of HOA clients.
East Garrison is a master planned community located on the land formerly known as Fort Or, East Garrison. Its 244 acres include distinct neighborhoods of new homes within easy strolling distance of a planned town center. Cordell Hull Park, part of Phase I, features a basketball court, playground and large grass field. Lincoln Park, will offer ball fields, picnic and barbecue areas. An Arts District will repurpose historic buildings into what promises to be a vibrant cultural asset for the entire region. Close by are all of the amenities that make the Monterey Peninsula a world-class destination.
|
Our HOA lawyers and staff look forward to working with East Garrison’s Board and management. |
It’s our privilege to welcome Costa Viva Homeowners Association to Tinnelly Law Group’s growing family of HOA clients.
Costa Viva is a condominium community located just minutes to Mission Bay in the Clairemont Mesa region of San Diego. Residents enjoy bay views, amazing amenities, and a peaceful neighborhood.
|
Our HOA lawyers and staff look forward to working with Costa Viva’s Board and management. |
HOA Lawyer Blog