ShelleyH
Posts: 11
Posts: 11
Posted:
In 1996 our HOA passed a Declaration of Permanent Membership. People could choose to become permanent members, whereby they would pay dues every year for use and upkeep of the HOA facilities (pool, tennis courts, small clubhouse, volleyball court, playground). The permanent membership would become part of their property deed. Those who chose not to consent could not use the neighborhood facilities.
In 2005 our HOA tried (but ultimately failed) to pass new covenants after our old ones had expired. One member disliked those covenants so much that he began to do some research on our 1996 Declaration of Permanent Membership. He found that only 99 people signed the consent form by Oct. 5, 1996, the date when 100 people were to have signed, as stated on the Declaration itself, in order for the membership to be valid. No one knew there were only 99 consent forms until 2005 - NINE years after the Declaration of Permanent Membership had been in place. At that point, one other member attempted to get out of permanent membership, but the HOA attorney advised the board NO WAY, so the person dropped it.
Back to 1996. Apparently our HOA pres at the time in charge of the permanent
membership drive must not have counted the consents correctly. He signed the affidavit as though all was in order. He claims he thought we had 103 consent forms signed by owners - we actually had 104 RECORDED about six weeks later.
"Owners" according to our attorney, can mean each individual owner, i.e., husband and wife can count as two owners, in which case our HOA is well ahead of the game. That interpretation does not conflict with the text in our 1996 Declaration, but our attorney agreed the "owners" argument is not an extremely strong one if the Declaration were ever challenged. He did say we'd probably win on "promissory estoppel," as we INTENDED, and for all intents and purposes, we all THOUGHT we had 100 members consent by the due date. And we now have 125 permanent members out of 158.
Flash forward to 2006. We recently drafted and passed new and improved covenants. Since the passage, one member sent a threatening letter to the board wanting out of permanent membership, and of course noted the 99 vs. 100 issue of our 1996 Declaration. Our attorney is drafting a letter to them as they're threatening to take this to court if they are not let out of permanent membership.
Sorry for the lengthy flash back and forward post. If I haven't made you dizzy or put you to sleep and you have some insight or viewpoint, would love to hear it!
Shelley
In 2005 our HOA tried (but ultimately failed) to pass new covenants after our old ones had expired. One member disliked those covenants so much that he began to do some research on our 1996 Declaration of Permanent Membership. He found that only 99 people signed the consent form by Oct. 5, 1996, the date when 100 people were to have signed, as stated on the Declaration itself, in order for the membership to be valid. No one knew there were only 99 consent forms until 2005 - NINE years after the Declaration of Permanent Membership had been in place. At that point, one other member attempted to get out of permanent membership, but the HOA attorney advised the board NO WAY, so the person dropped it.
Back to 1996. Apparently our HOA pres at the time in charge of the permanent
membership drive must not have counted the consents correctly. He signed the affidavit as though all was in order. He claims he thought we had 103 consent forms signed by owners - we actually had 104 RECORDED about six weeks later.
"Owners" according to our attorney, can mean each individual owner, i.e., husband and wife can count as two owners, in which case our HOA is well ahead of the game. That interpretation does not conflict with the text in our 1996 Declaration, but our attorney agreed the "owners" argument is not an extremely strong one if the Declaration were ever challenged. He did say we'd probably win on "promissory estoppel," as we INTENDED, and for all intents and purposes, we all THOUGHT we had 100 members consent by the due date. And we now have 125 permanent members out of 158.
Flash forward to 2006. We recently drafted and passed new and improved covenants. Since the passage, one member sent a threatening letter to the board wanting out of permanent membership, and of course noted the 99 vs. 100 issue of our 1996 Declaration. Our attorney is drafting a letter to them as they're threatening to take this to court if they are not let out of permanent membership.
Sorry for the lengthy flash back and forward post. If I haven't made you dizzy or put you to sleep and you have some insight or viewpoint, would love to hear it!
Shelley
