More Hoosier Bylaws/Declaration Legal Questions

A few weeks ago I asked about the Indiana code that requires Bylaws changes be "set forth in an amendment to the declaration." A poster wrote that a 2009 Indiana law might indicate that our 1991 condo is not subject to this unless we opted in. The 2009 code changes did not mention the issue, but as the code in question was "... added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.10," I decided today to look at Indiana's 2002 Acts. I found the 11 Mb acts_2002.pdf which adds the "new" Bylaws/Declaration requirement, but also appears to say that it does not apply to condos which have yet to "submit the property to this article." (see following acts_2002.pdf excerpt)

Questions:
1. If the membership has never voted on this, does the new code apply to our HOA?
2. Does Sec. 1 really mean that every owner (32 in our case) has to agree to "executing and recording a declaration under this article"?
3. Does "executing and recording a declaration under this article" simply mean amending our present (1991) Declaration?

http://iga.in.gov/static-documents/4/5/c/5/45c50be9/acts_2002.pdf
P.L.2-2002 page 328
SECTION 10. IC 32-25 IS ADDED TO THE INDIANA CODE AS
A NEW ARTICLE TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2002]:
ARTICLE 25. CONDOMINIUMS
Chapter 1. Application of Law
Sec. 1. This article applies to property if:
(1) the sole owner of the property; or
(2) all of the owners of the property;
submit the property to this article by executing and recording a
declaration under this article.
Sec. 2. (a) The following are subject to this article and to
declarations and bylaws of associations of co-owners adopted
under this article:
(1) Condominium unit owners.
(2) Tenants of condominium unit owners.
(3) Employees of condominium unit owners.
(4) Employees of tenants of condominium owners.
(5) Any other persons that in any manner use property or any
part of property submitted to this article.
(b) All agreements, decisions, and determinations lawfully made
by an association of co-owners in accordance with the voting
percentages established in:
(1) this chapter;
(2) the declaration; or
(3) the bylaws;
are binding on all condominium unit owners.

Frank,

I agree with Glen. You are asking very specific legal questions about your governing documents and Indiana law. It's best to ask those of a local attorney.

One person's definition of a "reasonable person" may be another person's idea of a lunatic. It's a good idea to think things through, but as others have said, the vast majority of posters here (including me) aren't attorneys. You might want to think about what your interpretation of these regulations are and discuss them with fellow homeowners (and/or board members) to compare notes and use that to put together questions for your attorney.

I suspect what you really need is a formal review of your documents by an attorney to see what areas need to be clarified, added or dropped. Part of that might involve rewriting the documents in plain English so most people will understand them. Yes, you'll have to pay for it, but it's better to do it right the first time rather than make a guess that may eventually cost the Association a lot more money.

We have only 34 units. No one but me and my wife have the ever shown the slightest interest in reading our foundation docs. Because my wife is on the Board, it will be discussed there, but because of lack of time and interest, it is likely to be pretty superficial. We will present what info we have gathered and suggest questions for the lawyer (which lawyer is still in question), there will probably be a short discussion and they will vote.

Doubtless, our docs could profit from a review, but we have very shallow pockets at this point and giving what we have to lawyers is not near the top of anyone's list. I don't even think such a review should be a priority. Our documents are not the issue. What needs to be in plain English is these Indiana codes. After the 2009 additions, they tell you "Sec. 1. (a) This article applies to the following: (1) A homeowners association established after June 30, 2009. (2) A homeowners association established before July 1, 2009:"
which seems (almost) clear enough, but after the 2002 additions they use the more mystifying "Sec. 1. This article applies to property if: ... (2) all of the owners of the property; ... submit the property to this article by executing and recording a declaration under this article." I wish someone (preferably an Indiana legislator) would cite an instance of **any** organization that got a 100% yes vote on **anything.**

Well, unless the rest of the board wakes up and gets interested, you may be stuck (I think the thought of wading through legalese is too intimidating to most people – which is how many people get ripped off daily and haven’t a clue as to how it happened!) If people are really worried about the documents, it might help for each board member to take a section, mull it over and report back to the group.

In the end, you may not get away with not hiring an attorney – your association will need to decide if they want to do this in a hurry or do it right (you don’t always get both). Take your time in finding one you’re comfortable with - an attorney who’s not willing to take the time to explain things in plain English is not an attorney you want. That’s not the same thing as telling you what you want to hear – sometimes the law is what it is.

(Given the dismal state of Hoosier education, I sometimes wonder if the entire Indiana Code should be written Dr. Seuss style – if people can understand Horton hears a Who, maybe they can understand the condo or traffic code! Actually, those little Golden Books I read when I was 5 and might be even better.)

You’re right about the laws needing to be written in plain English – I work with a lot of attorneys and several of them have spoken about how you learn one way to write for most of your life and then you get to law school and you’re taught another way to do it. Of course, most of what you write won’t make any sense to anyone except….other lawyers (Job security, yea!)

All that said, I wonder if a paralegal might be able to at least translate your documents into plain English (it might be a lot cheaper than paying an attorney) – call the local Bar Association and see if they have any suggestions.

Thank you for the two suggested questions. We will prolly ask a few more, but these hit the nail on the head. In fact, they raise this question in my mind:

Would it be copacetic to pose question #1 as a kind of test while interviewing lawyers by email?

Agree with Sheila.