HOA Goes Ahead With Project Without Needed Votes

Our condo association has decided to go forward with a project to install water meters on each unit despite not getting the needed owner votes. This was after two attempts to get the project approved by the owners. The president told the board that we will never be able to get the needed votes and that we should just go ahead with the project anyway. The board agreed and voted yes. The project is slated to begin in a month or two. The president calls all the shots in this community with the board just rubber stamping what ever he says. This is what they did again this time. Any thoughts on this and what the ramifications might be for the president and the board of directors? There is a little more to the story but I will start with this....

If votes are required, it would take someone to take the HOA to court. And I doubt anyone will do that, so the ramifications are zero. Although most HOA's vote on everything, its typically not "required" and more of a courtesy to make sure the HOA is doing something everyone wants.

Thanks for the responses. I'm one of the board members that voted for this. I feel strongly that the project is right for the community but I'm struggling with "the end justifies the means"approach. There are also some down stream issues with this project. We will not be able to make people sign up for an account with the city and some will not. The president said we may need to set up some dummy accounts for these people then shut them down shortly afterwards. I'm not sure of all the details which is part of my problem. This president does get things done but I'm not a big fan of him or his methods. I don't want to share a prison cell with this guy....that would be hell....haha! I know that most HOA issues are civil in nature but that some do cross over into the criminal. This president checked with our insurance carrier to make sure that the board is covered in case we get sued.

Rich, I'm not an attorney but it would seem to me that if water was a part of the assessments, guaranteed in the Covenants then it WOULD require a homeowner vote to change. Is the Board prepared to drop the average cost of water from the monthly / yearly assessments.

Again not an attorney but I see no legal way for the Board to enter into a "dummy account" binding a property to a city service. Where I'm from that is a criminal offense, I would highly recommend that the Board consult with the HOA attorney before it goes any further.

Steve again not an attorney but IMHO the only way the HOA could set up the account would be in the HOA's name which would obligate it to paying the bill, that is if the utility would even accept a service order from someone who was not the owner of record. Then what they are now obligated to pay it, sure they could refuse to pay it, maybe even instruct the utility to shut it off to try to force the property owner to open their own account but I would expect to see lawsuits filed over it.

And let us not ignore my underlying premise, if water is part of the assessments according to the covenants then you would need to amend the covenant to do what the HOA is attempting by fiat to do. Take our Covenants for example, water is included but the Covenant gives the Board the option to install individual meters as long as they reduce the monthly assessments by the amount of the assessment dedicated to water usage.

I strongly agree with having water meters on each unit. It is the only fair way to do it. We have snowbirds, year around owners and a lot of renters. Our HOA fees are 270 dollars a month of which 90 dollars goes towards water and sewer. Each building is metered. Some of our building towards the back of the community are mostly renters and their water consumption is twice that of the other buildings. We have also had people that were being evicted and knew how things worked leaving their water running 24/7 to stick it to the association. Why should the snowbirds that are only here 4 months a year supplemnt the renters who could care less how much water they use after all it's free! It's just a matter of getting the meters installed in an ethical manner when there is so much to deal with....I'm just not a "the end justifies the means kind of guy".....it's my parents fault.....

Rich

If the end result is a good/fair/proper one then maybe the end does justify the means.

Jack

I think one of the premises in this case, was there were no rules.

When no rules, what is fair works.

If water was included in the CCRs, then encouraging the poster or many one else for that matter, to break a strict procedure, doesn't speak well for the purpose of this site. If $40.00, for example, is now being billed directly to the homeowner, then the dues need to be reduced by the same amount, UNLESS, someone has a good reason for keeping it.

Seeing that owners would be paying for their own water and sewer usage the monthly fees would be lowered from 270 to 190. Currently each building (17 buildings 196 units) is metered and the association pays the bill. We can have each unit metered and the owner would have to open an account with the city and pay their own bill. We can also go with what is called sub metering in which each unit would be metered but the association would be responsible for collecting the money and paying it to the city. The sub metering would be much cheaper but the association would still be responsible for paying the water bill to the city even if they were not able to collect fees from all the owners. I resigned from the board last night. I strongly agree with the metering project but I can not be a part of how they are going about doing it. Once trust is lost it is lost for good and where does the underhanded practices end? I'm 54 years old and over the years I have built a reputation as being someone that is trustworthy and fair. I'm unwilling to tarnish that reputation even for a good cause.

Rich

I am for metering or sub-metering. You want the city to be in charge as they have more authority in the event the owner doesn't pay. If sub-metered and billed by a third party, you are pretty much back to square one in collecting. Meters can be pulled, but it may be a state issue and you really have to educate the owners and have the proper, legal language in the governing documents.