If you experience problems with this email newsletter, read it online.
by Sandra M. Bonato, Esq.
As summer nears, we wanted to tell you about this year's bills that affect CIDs and the associations that manage them. Pending bills cover subjects ranging from the future enforceability of rental restrictions, to new curbs on assessment collection, from email communications and executive sessions, to conference call procedures for board meetings. One bill covers electric vehicle charging stations in CIDs. Another would create a new CC&R override to protect fake grass. This is only part of this year's slate of bills.
The most significant bill pending is, of course, the California Law Revision Commission's restated Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act, which would simplify, reorganize and re-number the existing Act. This seminal legislation and each other bill of importance to those who read our newsletter are discussed in more detail below.
Over the last several years, a substantial amount of CID legislation was passed by the legislature and then vetoed by the governor. With the change in governorship, we will see at the end of the summer whether vetoes or signatures result. Actual texts of the following bills can be found at www.leginfo.ca.gov.
AB 19 (Fong)
Water Meters/Sub-meters in Condominium Projects
If enacted, AB 19 would require developers and builders of new condominium projects to install separate water meters for each unit in a common interest development. Sub-meters for units and/or master meters dedicated to domestic water use would not be permitted.
The concept would be to better inspire water conservation in individual units without creating significant administrative burdens for associations in the future.
STATUS: The bill did not move out of the Assembly in time to meet required deadlines and will go no further.
AB 20 (Halderman)
If enacted, AB 20 would require counsel for associations of developments with defective construction to make certain statements and disclosures to the association and its members before filing an action against a developer or builder. The bill would require State Bar discipline of counsel who fail to make such statements.
The concept is apparently an effort to stigmatize members into urging their associations to not pursue responsible parties for defective construction, on the premise that counsel manufactures problems for self-gain. The bill makes no case for abusive practices and would be an extraordinary effort to distance associations from the legal representation to which they are entitled.
STATUS: The bill failed passage in the Assembly Judiciary Committee.
No reserves. No Insurance. What's Left if a Natural Disaster Destroys a Community Association?
By Tyler Berding & Steven Weil
Copyright ©2011 BERDING | WEIL
All Rights Reserved.