💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

JimR24 (Texas)
Posts: 399
Posted:
Hi everybody - i was wondering about how special assessments were handled in your Association. Our definition of a special assessment (according to our DCC&R) is:

""Special Assessments." In addition to the common assessments described
above, the Association may levy, in any assessment year, a special
assessment applicable to that year only for the purpose of defraying, in
whole or in part:
1. The cost of any construction, reconstruction, repair or replacement of
a capital improvement upon the Common Area, including fixtures and
personal property related thereto; or
2. The expense of any other contingencies or unbudgeted costs; provided,
that any such assessment shall have the assent of two-thirds (2/3) of the
votes of the Members who are voting in person or by proxy at a
meeting duly called for this purpose. Any amounts assessed pursuant
hereto shall be assessed to Owners in proportion to the interest in the
Common Elements owned by each."

So far, the interpretation has been that any special assessment has to have a 2/3 majority vote of our membership and can only occur during the year of the assessment expense.

Are you interpreting this in the same way?

So far, our Attorney is agreeing that a 2/3 majority would be required; however, the period of time for the expense is 12 months...in place of the actual fiscal year. What do you think?

oljim, in texas

Lovin' life with my honey!
and, President of HOA in Texas
RichardP13 (California)
Posts: 3,868
Posted:
Jim

I would double check your state statues also. My own CCRs required a majority of the voting power approval, which in theory meant 159 out of 317 homes. Most people don't know this, but in California, it is now approved by a majority of a quorum of the members, the action shall be approved or ratified by an affirmative vote of a majority of the votes represented and voting in a duly held election in which a quorum is represented, which affirmative votes also constitute a majority of the required quorum.

Since our statues require a secret ballot, and the ballot could have a yes or not on the approval, but if you didn't want to vote, could have a box for "quorum purposes only". In that case, it might take only one person to approve the assessment.

My advice would be double check statues first. I saw three special assessment election go out recently from a former company I worked for that were all wrong.
FredS7 (Arizona)
Posts: 927
Posted:
It is not completely clear to me whether #1 spending requires a 2/3 vote.

It might come down to the exact punctuation, paragraphs, and capitalization. And how you interpret them. There are two messages here. Caps say these are two independent sentences. Semicolons say they are to be read together as one sentence.

NpS (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 4,216
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By JimR24 on 04/21/2016 11:11 AM

""Special Assessments." In addition to the common assessments described
above, the Association may levy, in any assessment year, a special
assessment applicable to that year only for the purpose of defraying, in
whole or in part:
1. The cost of any construction, reconstruction, repair or replacement of
a capital improvement upon the Common Area, including fixtures and
personal property related thereto; or
2. The expense of any other contingencies or unbudgeted costs; provided,
that any such assessment shall have the assent of two-thirds (2/3) of the
votes of the Members who are voting in person or by proxy at a
meeting duly called for this purpose. Any amounts assessed pursuant
hereto shall be assessed to Owners in proportion to the interest in the
Common Elements owned by each."

IMO, it wouldn't make sense for the sentence "Any amounts assessed pursuant hereto shall be assessed to Owners in proportion to the interest in the Common Elements owned by each" to apply only to item #2.

Therefore, I think that everything after the second semi-colon was intended to apply to both #1 and #2.

Could be read the other way, but is it worth the fight that is likely to erupt.

Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550
Posted:
Since is says "assessment year," Jim, I take it to mean the period for which you have your budget, which seems to be your fiscal year. I do not see it meaning any old 12 month period.

It's also not clear to me, as with Fred, that #1 requires a vote. But even if not, your state statutes probably have a limit on how much --by what %--dues can be raised in a fiscal year.
RichardP13 (California)
Posts: 3,868
Posted:
Jim

The 2/3 requirement would be for both #1 and #2. I had the same exact word in my CCRs but it didn't have the 1 or 2, but OR separated the two difference instances.

Again, I would check state statues to see if they override your governing docs.
JimR24 (Texas)
Posts: 399
Posted:
Thanks everybody, for your responses. I have checked our state statutes and found that our state condo act is silent on the subject. It appears that the only governing document we have on this subject is our DCC&R - and it's appearing to most of us that the wording we have is not the best.

oljim, in texas

Lovin' life with my honey!
and, President of HOA in Texas

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here