CC7 (North Carolina)
Posts: 5
Posts: 5
Posted:
I am a member of the Board at a PUD in North Carolina. The PUD consists of townhouses and single family homes. Last year the Board called a meeting for a vote to a special assessment for the siding and roofs on the townhouses. For various reasons that I will try to be kind about, both the roofs and siding are in the last stages of failure. The vote was for an assessment to cover the cost of both, which had several merits, but which was also a large financial burden for the townhouse owners at about $18,000 each. The vote failed by a large margin.
A committee was convened this year to reach out to the residents and find out what they would need to have the vote succeed. That committee decided to have the roofs repaired first and then vote for the siding next year (theoretically). The committee has chosen vendors, asked for proposals and has considered all of the information they have from the homeowners. They plan to vote again this fall.
In the meantime, several townhouse owners have sold their home and moved (understandable) and the closing required repairs to be made to the siding and/or roofs, which the management company made. Other homeowners have had large roof leaks which have also been paid out of reserves. After several of these expenses the current Board wants to stop the repairs and wait for the vote. Personally, I don't think we can do that. I think a failed vote is as if there was no vote at all and we have to carry on our normal and customary practices as if it didn't happen.
I have two questions:
1) If homeowners vote no on a special assessment that involves upkeep of common property (roof repair, potholes in street causing car damage, insects due to rotten siding) at a meeting duly called, etc, etc, and then another homeowner suffers a negative consequence due to that "no" vote, what can they do, if anything?
2) To prevent further draining the reserves, with another vote coming soon, can the Board direct the management company to withhold repairs (but mitigate damages with a tarp over a roof, gravel in a pothole, covering over damp siding)? If so, what risk is there to do that, given that historically those repairs were made from reserves?
A committee was convened this year to reach out to the residents and find out what they would need to have the vote succeed. That committee decided to have the roofs repaired first and then vote for the siding next year (theoretically). The committee has chosen vendors, asked for proposals and has considered all of the information they have from the homeowners. They plan to vote again this fall.
In the meantime, several townhouse owners have sold their home and moved (understandable) and the closing required repairs to be made to the siding and/or roofs, which the management company made. Other homeowners have had large roof leaks which have also been paid out of reserves. After several of these expenses the current Board wants to stop the repairs and wait for the vote. Personally, I don't think we can do that. I think a failed vote is as if there was no vote at all and we have to carry on our normal and customary practices as if it didn't happen.
I have two questions:
1) If homeowners vote no on a special assessment that involves upkeep of common property (roof repair, potholes in street causing car damage, insects due to rotten siding) at a meeting duly called, etc, etc, and then another homeowner suffers a negative consequence due to that "no" vote, what can they do, if anything?
2) To prevent further draining the reserves, with another vote coming soon, can the Board direct the management company to withhold repairs (but mitigate damages with a tarp over a roof, gravel in a pothole, covering over damp siding)? If so, what risk is there to do that, given that historically those repairs were made from reserves?