hoa fees for nonhomogenous units

Kirsten,

Lots of condos have this situation of different fees for different units. It is usually handled by each pay a pro rata share. But I am puzzeled why you fall undor a condominium. What say your documents?

A condominium is designed to provide maintainence and upkeep of the real property. Is all your buildings real property? Do you have designations of common, and limited common properties. How is your condo insurance paid?

If you met the test of being registered by the state as a condominium and have a declaration and Master deed and by laws, all your conditions required for maintainence should be detailed in your CC&R's.

Suppose you are a legal condo and the issue of whether the payment of your fees is fair and equitable has never come up. You have to do what the documents require to change what you want changed. This will of course require the support of your members and and especially the Board. If all is as presented, you have a tough road to travel. I am always amazzed at what difficulties the simple act of forming a mutual benefit association turns out to be not simple at all and difficulties of all kinds are never covered with the initial organization. But you usually start out with a State Statute and any government document is subject to all kinds of hidden pitfalls.

KirstenJ - Wow. Imagine every condo association deciding to pass the buck of its obligation to maintain and replace the common elements once the going gets tough? Think about what you are suggesting. Your coa started out whereby everyone pays the same thing. Probably because while every unit may be unique, it all balances out in the end. Yes, I'm sure you can amend the bylaws, yada, yada, yada.

In my COA every one of the 40 end units have more roofs, more vinyl siding, bigger decks, more gutters. However, we all pay the same maintenance.

RobertR1 - The difference between your regime and KirstenJ's is that yours was established with a tiered maintenance fee. KirestnJ stated the CCR's provide for external maintenance of the buildings including the roofs, and all homeowners are currently paying the same HOA fee. More importantly she stated it is starting to worry her, since she sees very expensive roof replacements and mud-adobe maintenance in their not-too-distant future. She's afraid the 5 cottages in particular are going to take all their resources.

The 5 cottages aren't "taking" all their resources. They are contributing just as much as everyone else, just that their units have unique features, balconies, roof overhangs, etc.

The unique features benefit everyone in that they can raise property values upon resale to those who find them more charming than the other units? However, if the community gets together and decides to tier their maintenance that is always a possibility to amend.

You started out with 5 units, now you have 19. I am going to assume, that the other 14 are all similar. Now I want you to think about twin brothers, one of whom smokes - in all other ways, they are identical, however, the smoker is paying 3 times as much for health insurance. Let me cite another example, 2 identical buildings, one with a tar roof, and the other with wood shingles - naturally, a Reserve Specialist would be able to give the respective replacement costs, so that assessments can be accordingly prorated.

It is the same with your situation, and you should get this resolved with the help of a Reserve analyst. When work starts on the various units, someone may raise the issue of unjust enrichment - my assessment paid for the work done to my unit to be completed in 1 week, and they've been working on cottage 1 for the past 2 weeks, why am I paying for their unit.

RobertR1
My apologies, reading it over now, I guess it does appear that I was talking about the Reserve transfers. What I really meant to say, was the regular monthly assessment needs to be prorated.
"there is a whole mess" - could not agree with you more, different types of dwellings, spanning generations.

Thanks, everyone, for your help and opinions. JoeW: Wow. Obviously this is a sore spot for you, but thanks for trying to work through your irritation and be so helpful.
To answer some more constructive questions,
The origins of the complex are this:
Originally one (the biggest) cottage was built, sometime in the 30's. The owner of that cottage then eventually built 4 more for his children to live in once they were grown. At some point in the early 70's, townhomes were built in between them and the whole thing was legally formed into a condo. All 19 homes are indeed legally part of the condo association. There is no question about that. Apparently the original owner or one of his children still lived in the big, original cottage, and the CCR's, which have never been revised since their inception in the early 70's, seem devised to blatantly favor that house in particular. As JoeW pointed out, having the cottages does add to the charm of the place, but has not, as far as I can tell, increased the overall property values. The cottages sell for much more than the townhomes, and obviously the owners of those are the sole beneficiaries of such a sale, ie the association as a whole does not share in the proceeeds. Wow. Imagine a single homeowner approaching the board and demanding that his entire clay-tile roof be replaced - at a mimimum bid of $20,000 - so that he can sell his cottage and make a much bigger profit thanks to a brand new roof at the association's expense. Think about what THAT suggests. (This actually happened last year).
What really adds to our property values, though, is the huge amount of beautiful mature vegetation and old trees on the grounds, as well as the very beautiful courtyard common area, gardens, pool, spa etc. That is also the source of most of the 'charm' which people site as their primary motivation for buying into the complex. Lush vegetation in particular is a very scarce commoditiy in southern Arizona!
Maintaining those common elements is extremely expensive and our association is perpetually broke. The members are historically reluctant (I am being nice here)to vote for an increase in HOA fees, which currently barely cover monthly maintenance of the commmon areas let alone maintenance which has been deferred for far too long. Last year we lost several trees because the board in place at the time refused to spend the money to water enough (in Southern Arizona this is a big deal - vegetation simply cannot survive underwatering in the 106 degree daily heat for three straight months - and water is in short supply and expensive). Now THAT affected our property values.
As a consequence of all this, we have had to start levying special assessments for everything, since we cannot increase the monthly fees without a vote. Our homeowners here, although they receive monthly statements and have all the information at their disposal, have an extremely difficult time understanding that the association is not their fairy godmother and we simply cannot do what we need to without the money.
So, we have that to contend with too. But my thought is, if we want our fees to stay where they are (that affects property values too - the higher the HOA fee, the less interested people are in buying) the best choice is to concentrate the money where it benefits everyone - ie on the very high-maintenance common areas - and put something else in place to address the buildings. When the CCR's were written 30-some years ago, the only buildings needing maintenance were the cottages (the townhomes were brand new then) and it was more manageable to pay for them. But, things change.
Another solution I though of, since the homewners of the cottages will likely feel the most loss from any adjustment of fees, maintenance rules etc, it this: to make it fair and manageable, we could make everyone responsible for their own roof, as I mentioned earlier, but then issue a yearly 'roof allowance' to everyone - in some sort of designated equal amount - which they would have at their disposal to do maintenance, repair, replacement or whatever they want. The townhomes, by the way, have flat roofs with the air-conditioning units on top of them. The homowners provide and are responsible for their own cooling units, which often leak huge amounts of water especially in the summer, and it pools on the roofs and damages them. However, since those homewners are not paying for their own roof maintenance, there is no motivation to check or service the air conditioners to prevent this - when the roofs become compromised enough to start leaking into their homes, they simply get the HOA to fix the roofs. Wow, JoeW, imagine being able to be as negligent and personally irresponsible as you want and then making it everyone elses' problem. What does that suggest?
I am aware that all this will require a changing of the CCR's (which never were very specific or helpful except inasmuch as they appear to protect the interests of the main cottage) and that in itself will be a big challenge. I particularly am thankful for the comments regarding other HOA's with adjusted fees for square footage or whatever - that makes a lot of sense to me. I would love eventually for us to be just aan HOA and NOT a condo, but that is an even longer road I'm afraid. I'm not ill-versed in the legal aspects and all that, so I know we have a ticking time bomb here, legally and organizationally. But I really really appreciate the feedback, suggestions and well-considered guidance. It must be pretty clear by now that we need all the help we can get!

JoeW,
Thanks for that input. But no, I am not seeking to change the maintenance fee structure because now things cost. I am seeking to change the maintenance fee structure because of the things about which you were entirely correct: there was extremely poor planning in the early years, we are in dangerous disarray organizationally speaking,our 30-some year old CCR's are very vague and offer very little guidance aside from special dispensations for one house (that is where the 'favoring' comes in, not in any personal 'one-sided' bias toward the newer units). And, we have absolutely noone
Historically, we were grossly mis-managed for years by our management company (one man, actually) who was completely unfamiliar with our CCR's, gave mis-information and bad advice without apparent awareness, let alone remorse. On the occasions I called him to ask a question (long before I was on the board) about the CCR's - which I had in front of me while I spoke - he frequently told me something completely contradictory to what I saw in black and white, and when I called him on it, he would dismiss the whole thing with "oh, those are so outdated anyway". We actually, I discovered a few years ago, had been having illegal and completely improper elections for years at his behest: and noone on the board or anyone else even thought to question it because owners here are so uninterested in anything that does not pertain directly to their interests that they are only too happy to throw all the responsibility on the shoulders of the property manager despite the fact that he averred repeatedly that he was 'not in charge, the BOD was in charge". In fact, when I pointed out (ie read out loud)to him privately the election provisions we had been flouting for years and asked why he had actively misdirected us, he actually said, "Well, I was just stating my opinion. Its not my fault if everyone listened to me." The property manager said this. Of course it is not entirely untrue. However, people insisted on seeing him as the main authority figure, so his advice was taken seriously. And since the BOD is always made up from the same pool of apathetic and often self-serving owners, noone had even noticed. This is where we were when I came on the board.
The BOD is made up of only three members and it seems, from what I have been told and heard (no actualy records exist that anyone can tell) that in general it has been run almost from the beginning as kind of a monarchy, with one dominant board member making all the decisions and the others essentially invisible. None of them, howerver, did very much work (although I understand one such man was responsible for our lovely gardens and I give him credit for that, whoever he was). So, in short (too late for that now, I guess), we have never, ever, had anything approaching organization. I came on the board to try to remedy some of that because, well, it just wasn't working. Fortunately, the offending proerty manager retired (I was just about to replace him)and sold his company. I was thrilled.
As far as the BOD inspecting the elements to be repaired and replaced: uh, we have a list a mile long of obvious things that need one or the other. Trust me, there is no lack of awareness as to how many things are falling apart here, mostly in the common areas. The biggest problem is that we have no money, never have, because the CCR's don't provide for a way to increase the monthly dues without owner votes, and the owners will not vote for an increase (we have had a 'temporary' increase which has been reluctantly re-approved for the past 3 annual board meetings, but noone wants to commit permanently). Inspecting the flat roofs on a regular basis, for example, requires that we pay someone quite a bit of money to get a very tall ladder (they are two stories) and climb up there to examine things. Its a big deal to get up on those roofs. When our funds are so limited and we have a choice between a roof inspection or fixing the tile mosaic over a second-story window whose tiles are falling off one by one, potentially hitting any passerby underneath and causing a legitimate safety, not to mention legal, concern - guess which we pick?? Of course, we should not have to make these choices.
You mention that roof maintenance is paid for by the owners so they are entitled to it. Obviously thats true. But what I said exactly, is that they are not paying for their OWN roof maintenance. They do not own a roof; the condo association does. They are paying for EVERYONES' roof maintenance. And people who negligently allow damage to occur to the condo's property cost EVERYONE more money. That was my point. And it is not the BOD's job, as I said, to service the cooling units. They are specifically, according to our CCR's, entirely the choice, expense, and responsibility of the individual homeowners. They service each home individually. The BOD has NO right to go up there and do anything to them. I suppose if we wanted to police it better, we could pay someone a whole lot of money to go up there, see whose a/c is leaking egregiousy, issue a notice to the homeowner and then fine them if they don't fix it. But that would cost all kinds of money we don't have too. Incidentally, the cottages don't have this problem - you can't put an a/c unit on a clay-tile roof, so those are on the ground where deferred maintenance doesn't affect the integrity of the buildings. Yes, I agree we need installation guidelines at the least. We need all kinds of things - we need brand-new CCR's and that is what I'm thinking of when I ask this advise and how other places do it.
As far as the homeowner who insisted on a new roof: he did NOT need a new roof. He wanted one, very badly. He had just bought his unit as an investment and planned to resell it when the market was crazy. He had some roof leaks, about which he informed me. I got bids to have them fixed and arranged to do so;, but he wanted a new one and leaned on me, then when I said 'no' the management company, to buy him one. Then I started getting calls from a roofer I had never heard of who promised to do it for a really good price but only if I let him replace the whole thing. When I said 'no' he called my husband at work, telling him I clearly didn't understand the situation! Then he harrassed the management company for a while. Yes, a roofer did this. Since I had not initially called him for a bid, I can guess where he got the contact information, etc.
This is the kind of thing that goes on here all the time, and from what I can gather, always has. The core problem, I think, is lack of honest, constructive leadership, as well as mind-numbing apathy on the part of most homeowners and a kind of 'scarcity mentality' which creates much disharmony and jealousy when someone else gets the tree branch overhanging 'their' porch trimmed first or gets the broken tiles on 'their' roof replaced before someone else's. Its ridiculous.
My thinking at this point is, OK, if everyone is only interested in addressing interests they insist on seeing as 'theirs', maybe thats the way we should do it: the things that pertain to you can be your responsibility. Then noone has the frustration of wondering what others are getting that they are not - you take care of what affects you in the way you see fit, and have no reason to blame the board or the association if a repair you arrange does not please you for some reason. The common areas of course are another story, but I figure if people are made more responsible for their own buildings, we can us the money and energy we do have on the common areas which truly do bear on everyone equally.
The other big problem we have besides lack of money is lack of willinglness to contribute or even be the slightest bit informed among homeowners. I am actually no longer on the board, having resigned when we moved several months ago. I am now in an 'advisory' capacity, often called for advice by the current board president since I am the only one - ever,as far as I can tell - who went to the trouble to do a really good job and spent huge, huge, chunks of personal time researching everything from HOA and condo laws in Arizona, how to fairly and legally address specific problems as they came up, what, exactly our CCR's do say and MEAN (there was no clarity even on that, as I've mentioned), our insurance policies, new management companies, new landscaping and maintenance companies. I am the resource for all these things for the one simple reason that I worked and sacrificed my time to gather the information and put in place sonme kind of system to run a place that has had none of that since its beginning. Basically I had to scramble and work to make up for 30 years of management neglect, something noone else had bothered to do and that the other two board members left all in my hands the entire time (one never even came to meetings, once begging out on the grounds that she had to be at work and then, as I was walking to the meeting, was observed by me to be in the pool with her boyfriend. She was not even embarrassed. I am not kidding when I say 'apathetic'.) I took classes on HOA issues, I got an arborist to come look at our trees and advise, I scheduled contractors, plumber, handymen for repairs and consultaions and then arranged my own schedule to be there when they arrived, sometimes juggling my own life and needs several times a week just to get things accomplished. Of course this is a board member's job. But when you are the ONLY board member doing it and trying not just to maintain but to catch up 30 years worth of slack it is an incredibly draining job.
In doing all this, I was also spending as much of our small reserves as I dared to fix everything I could by prioritizing safety issues first, then things that had been tagged as priorities (mostly aesthetic) in our last board meeting, then whatever i thought would most increase our property values for the least money. When I informed homeowners that we would need a special assessment for painting, I was contacted by several saying such an assessment would constitute a terrible 'hardship' for them. They hadnt been asked for a special assessment before, and were still busy complaining about the extra HOA fee currently in place, so it was a rude awakening for them.
I spent a very large portion of my tenure expalining that the association could only do so much with the money we had and that the reason more hadn't been done in the past was because the homeowners simply refuse to vote the money we needed. Almost to a person I was asked how the fees could be so high and we be so short on money. When I explained that if people wondered where the money was going all they had to do was look at the financial statements they received monthly, they either indicated it was shocking news to them that they had been getting regular monthly statements for years and years, or that it was quite a novel and fairly audacious suggestion that they should actually go to the personal trouble of reading and interpreting them, wondering why 'the board' didn't 'take care of that'. I am not kidding.
I spend an average of 40 hours a week of my own time trying to manage and make constructive progress on a 19-unit complex. I had a toddler and a life, but I relally love the place and hated to see it going down the tubes.
So, this is the context in which my ideas for change are born. It used to be that every year, one or two people would want to be nominated for the board, usually because they had some particular agenda. That was fine, if ineffective. After my tenure, people run like their hair is on fire at the very idea of serving, since I have 'raised the bar' by actually doing some work. My service was very highly lauded and very much appreciated of course, since people were getting results without actually having to do anything. The most 'help' I got came from one woman who wanted to 'support me any way she could' and then when I did delegate simple things to her (reading a statement for me at a meeting I was unable to attend or ordering new numbers for the mailboxes) acted as if it were all some kind of outrageous imposition. I got lots and lots of validation and gratitude, which of course didnt cost anyone anything to give. Sorry thats so cynical, but its been very very discouraging.
Currently our BOD consists of two self-avowed conflict-avoiders and one narcissist (she is the one who killed our trees two years ago). None of them were voted on, but all appointed as others left and noone else - despite my begging - would serve.
I didnt mean to go on painting such a specific picture of our situation, but it sounds, JoeW, as if you come from an association that actually has some structure and effectiveness, so your perspective is different. Because of the factors I've mentioned, I have really no hope of that, given the dynamics of the small group who live here coupled with the high-maintenance nature of our complex, so am trying to think of ways to minimize the problems we cause each other and keep our place beautiful and special and harmonious. Perhaps you cannot imagine the vitriol it will certainly cause the first time someone with a $20,000 tile roof really DOES need it replaced and we have to send out special assessment notices to everyone demanding over $1000 apiece to buy Unit X a new roof. THEN we will have real problems, but it will be too late because a precedent will have been set. I'd like to head all this off before it blows up. people are simply more willing to spend money when it benfits them personally, so why not arrange it that way? That is my general thinking. If we had all the money in the world, and well-meaning mature homeowners, that would be a different story altogether I'd imagine. But we have what we have. Incidentally, my concern stems from the fact that we would like to move back to this place (we are currently renting out our unit) but have constant second thoughts because of everything mentioned.
You missed my point about the cottages and property values. They do not, as I said, drive up the property values of the other houses. They are viewed by buyers and owners alike as seperate entities (although they are included legally as part of the condo) which have minimal relation to the townhouses. To the degree that cottage owners have in the past actually started major additions or renovations to their units without even consulting the board - just brought in a contractor who started working; then been shocked when told that there was a process by which they had to submit plans, ask permission etc and that they were in violation of the CCR's. Apparently the county, which issues the building permits, didn't realize they were part of a condo either and simply issued permits without going through required channels. Thats because the cottages do not look like they are part of a condo, are not perceived as such, and thus apparently do not raise the value of the other buildings. At least the values of the other buildings have not gone up in relation to the selling prices of the cottages.
Again I hadn't planned on going into all this, just posted at first wanted to know how any other complexes of our general design handled such maintenace issues so I could approach the board and say, 'Look here's how others are doing it, why don't we look into this?" Realize in a lot of ways I am just venting. But to suggest that I show favoritism to any particular element or interest in our complex is just very uninformed, and some of your comments are invalid not because I don't agree with them, but because you lack the information to make them. However, I appreciate your response and maybe the frustration I've expressed here will help clarify some of your questions as to why the board is not more on top of these things, etc. If you have any advice along these lines (if you are still reading!) it is welcome.
KirstenJ

Kirsten,

We live in an era of enormous cynicism. Do not be fooled.

-- John Patrick Shanley

And that's the truth!

I find nothing you say unusual or anything other than the truth shining through. Both you and Joe write with the ring of sincerity. Joe may have heard your story a hundred times and is not shocked by it. I lived it and it still shocks me.

I also had a nagging suspecion your (and mine) experience, as bad as it was, doesn't rank close to the top of some associations. But, truth is truth and all have to pay the piper, some are lucky and get out, some are unlucky and have just bought in and some let it happen and are now overwhelmed. You're on the right track if you care enough and it would be a shame if your association would lose you as a member. That decision is yours and I wish you good luck. I hope you have learned the hard lesson that some people don't know enough to really appreciate what you have done.
And the important thing is what they think don't matter, only you have to be satisfied. Of course your life becomes more pleasent if you husband is proud of you.