HOA Sidewalk Maintenance

We have Association owned sidewalks - common sidewalks.

We have 314 houses with private sidewalks.

We have no municipal sidewalks.

Are you certain of yours? If the city owns them, why would you want your HOA to pay to repair them? (btw, 4” cannot be ground down)

Walter, My lesson learned on stuff like this is that if it ain't HOA business, it ain't HOA business. No matter how tempting it is. Pressure your city delegate to put some emphasis on some tax payer funded sidewalk maintenance.

Reach out to your city council person. twist their arm until they scream Uncle. Call your local Investigative news, get people in your affected streets that use scooters or wheelchairs, make tons of noise. Under no circumstances call for a special assessment to have owners subsidize the responsibility of the city entity.

You answered your own question.

I suggest only going to this extreme as a last resort . . . after all attempts at working with the city are exhausted. Your HOA getting on the news for an undesirable situation (regardless of who is actually responsible for the situation) will most likely harm the reputation of your HOA and make it a place that (some) home-buyers will avoid. Sure it may more quickly help fix the immediate issue, but a reputation once tarnished takes time to reestablish.

Walter,

Do you have plans indicating sidewalk ownership? Has the city/county agreed they belong to them?

You’re not basing your statements on heresay?

Not sure I really understand your statement or where you are going with it. According to you, neither negative media attention, nor aesthetically disastrous mailboxes, nor common area neglect and safety issues would have any influence on a home's value since banks only care about comparable property values and that by itself determines another home's value.

You seem to stand alone on your inaccurate fixation on how a home's "value" is determined.

But yes, negative media attention toward an HOA, lack of curb-appeal or a sloppy aesthetic, and unsafe conditions . . . in my opinion will all definitely have a negative impact on a home's value and it's ability to sell rapidly and at the desired price. I don't know if any one of those things impact value to a greater extent than the others since that's something not easily measured. However I can guarantee they aren't adding value, and it's almost guaranteed that deteriorating conditions are not maintaining value . . . so all that's left is that they are harming value.

I don't see that in your quote above, Walter. It specifies items that ARE the HOA's responsibility.

Walter,

Do you have a plat? I'm sure your county/city has a GIS system that allows one to review plats on line? If not, you could certainly do it in person.

First steps!

It sounds like you are headed down the same path of spending HOA money on things not declared ...

Our Declaration specifies "repair" twice in the same sentence... the first application is explicitly for assets that are declared to be responsibility of the HOA, and the 2nd application is non-specific.

Here it is again:
"In addition to Regular Assessments, the Board of Directors of the Association may make Special Assessments against each Residence Unit, for the purpose of defraying, in whole or in part, the cost of constructing, reconstructing, repairing or replacing any capital improvement which the Association is required to maintain or the cost of special maintenance and repairs or to recover any deficits (whether from operations or any other loss) which the Association may from time incur, but only with the assent of two-thirds (2/3) of the members of each class of members of the Association who cast votes In person or by proxy at a duly constituted meeting of the members of the Association called for such purpose."

====
Note the phrase "or the cost of special maintenance and repairs" -- the words repair and maintain are mentioned twice in this sentence. The first instance is explicit, and the 2nd is not.

If the 2nd instance were supposed to only apply to explicit assets, then why bother even saying it the 2nd time -- it would be redundant. It is reasonable to assume that the 2nd usage wasn't just redundant/useless, but actually adds meaning to the sentence.

The Declaration enumerates responsibility, but then explicitly says "The responsibilities of the Association include, but shall not be limited to:", which means more powers may be derived.

The most important thing is that if we derive a new relevant responsibility, it must be supported by 2/3rd vote, to help ensure it's a good idea for the HOA, and not just something that benefits a few members, but not others.

If the super majority wants it, we are open to considering sidewalk repair as a HOA funded cost. We will note the risks to all members voting so that they can be informed before they vote.

Risks being:
1. Someone could file a grievance claim to stop the repairs. (we could choose to proceed only after 30 days after approval, to give folks time to file a complaint BEFORE we start work; if they file a claim, the HOA would then have to vote on how to deal with the claim - ignore it or concede).
2. HOA could be sued for poor workmanship. (maybe this is alleviated by getting bonded contractors who are self-insured?)

What are the other real risks here?

As always, I especially value your input. Thank you for the empathy.

The IC 36-9-36-17 thru -19, covers the procedure for sidewalk repair, and all of this implies that the homeowner must pay for it.

That said, just as with Goshen, there might be a cost-sharing plan that overrides the IC law for certain cases.

Despite your lack of optimism, I am very optimistic that we can make a few changes here that'll raise property values, while also raising overall HOA morale. We're more focused on doing things that garner super-majority support (of the 50%+), and using our surplus funds to conduct a few improvements that overall will let folks know "this HOA is alive, healthy, and happy". The angry members will be in the minority, and probably scant in number. You can't please everyone, and that's OK.

Our alternatives are "status quo" or taking unpopular actions that make the majority unhappy. Status quo would be the easiest, and very few would raise a stink about it, although many here would like to see some things upgraded/restored.