Exclusive use grants of common area

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

I have a couple questions about CC§4600.

https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/Statutes/Civil-Code-4600

As this doesn't specify a period of time, what does it default to? For example, would it be OK to grant exclusive use of a portion of the common area for shorter periods of time such as one hour, but not for longer periods of time such as three days?

How does this apply to a non-fixed area of the common area? For example, a parking pass which is for parking in the common area, but is not tied to a specific parking spot?

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059

Posted:

Parking issue continues. . . .

SheliaH (Indiana)
Posts: 6,964

Posted:

Yup.

I guess some people find it easier to look for loopholes in the laws instead of telling their visitors to be mindful of the time and READ the parking signs so they don't risk their car getting towed. Or park on the street if possible and perhaps avoid all of this. Or simply suggesting to the board that it rethink the parking policy....

If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it. Marcus Aurelius

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

If CA's statutes and the person's individual CC&Rs are anything like mine, there will be language spelling out owners' rights.

Ours say specifically that all owners have the right to use all parts of the common elements for any purpose for which the common elements are intended. In addition, no owner may interfere with others' rights to use the common elements for said purposes. Finally, the differences between Common Elements and Exclusive Use Common Elements are clearly defined, down to describing which elements of the property fall into which category (eg. parking areas are not limited use common elements unless the CC&Rs say they are).

Long story short, the board would have no right to do what the OP wants, especially since that would also involve not enforcing parking restrictions which they are obligated to do.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 01/13/2021 5:37 AM
If CA's statutes and the person's individual CC&Rs are anything like mine, there will be language spelling out owners' rights.

Ours say specifically that all owners have the right to use all parts of the common elements for any purpose for which the common elements are intended. In addition, no owner may interfere with others' rights to use the common elements for said purposes. Finally, the differences between Common Elements and Exclusive Use Common Elements are clearly defined, down to describing which elements of the property fall into which category (eg. parking areas are not limited use common elements unless the CC&Rs say they are).

Long story short, the board would have no right to do what the OP wants, especially since that would also involve not enforcing parking restrictions which they are obligated to do.

Other than wanting an answer to my questions, I haven't specified what I want. So I don't quite understand your third paragraph.

It sounds like you are saying there would be a section in the CC&Rs spelling out if parking usage falls into the exclusive use category. But what about the period of time? What about a moving location? See my questions in the OP.

As this doesn't specify a period of time, what does it default to? For example, would it be OK to grant exclusive use of a portion of the common area for shorter periods of time such as one hour, but not for longer periods of time such as three days?

How does this apply to a non-fixed area of the common area? For example, a parking pass which is for parking in the common area, but is not tied to a specific parking spot?

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By TimB4 on 01/12/2021 10:29 PM
Parking issue continues. . . .

This isn't necessarily about parking. For example, let's say there are four swimming pools in our complex. Can we grant exclusive use of one pool to one homeowner for a single day (perhaps they want to have a pool party)?

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By SheliaH on 01/13/2021 5:18 AM
Yup.

I guess some people find it easier to look for loopholes in the laws instead of telling their visitors to be mindful of the time and READ the parking signs so they don't risk their car getting towed. Or park on the street if possible and perhaps avoid all of this. Or simply suggesting to the board that it rethink the parking policy....

Not looking for loopholes. Trying to find out how to interpret this section of the code.

For example, let's say a homeowner wants to use one of our four pool areas for a private party for one day. Would it be a violation of the aforementioned exclusive use code to grant them that?

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/12/2021 8:57 PM
I have a couple questions about CC§4600.

https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/Statutes/Civil-Code-4600

As this doesn't specify a period of time, what does it default to?

For purposes that I think you have in mind, to me the statute is clear that a HOA may not grant exclusive use of common areas to anyone for any amount of time.

If you disagree, please quote the parts of the statute that you think support your position.

Quote:

How does this apply to a non-fixed area of the common area? For example, a parking pass which is for parking in the common area, but is not tied to a specific parking spot?

If the parking pass is for residents and owners only, I see no violation of Civil Code 4600 here.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 8:34 AM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/12/2021 8:57 PM
I have a couple questions about CC§4600.

https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/Statutes/Civil-Code-4600

As this doesn't specify a period of time, what does it default to?

For purposes that I think you have in mind, to me the statute is clear that a HOA may not grant exclusive use of common areas to anyone for any amount of time.

If you disagree, please quote the parts of the statute that you think support your position.

Quote:

How does this apply to a non-fixed area of the common area? For example, a parking pass which is for parking in the common area, but is not tied to a specific parking spot?

If the parking pass is for residents and owners only, I see no violation of Civil Code 4600 here.

Our association management is granting exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month), but insists it would be illegal to sell permits for such use. As duration is not mentioned in 4600, I see this as a blatant inconsistency. Your thoughts?

Are you saying that the exclusive use language of 4600 would not apply to a parking permit which can be used for any parking spot?

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 8:43 AM

Our association management is granting exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month),

To whom is the association granting these exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month)? Residents? Owners? All residents? All Owners?

Quote:

Are you saying that the exclusive use language of 4600 would not apply to a parking permit which can be used for any parking spot?

To comment with any intelligence, I would have to see everything your HOA's Declaration says about parking. Quote these Declaration sections verbatim, and I might have more to say.

I have my eye on Civil Code 4600 (b) (3) (G), which talks a bit about exceptions for parking.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 8:58 AM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 8:43 AM

Our association management is granting exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month),

To whom is the association granting these exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month)? Residents? Owners? All residents? All Owners?

Quote:

Are you saying that the exclusive use language of 4600 would not apply to a parking permit which can be used for any parking spot?

To comment with any intelligence, I would have to see everything your HOA's Declaration says about parking. Quote these Declaration sections verbatim, and I might have more to say.

I have my eye on Civil Code 4600 (b) (3) (G), which talks a bit about exceptions for parking.

Here is what it says:
"All common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units shall remain permanently available for guest parking. Owners are to use their garages for parking of their vehicles so that parking will be available for guest parking. The Association may establish rules and regulations from time to time for the parking of vehicles in the common areas."

I could be wrong, but this suggests to me that if they can provide temporary parking passes for residents, then they could sell parking permits for the same area. And if they can't sell parking permits, then they wouldn't be permitted to provide temporary parking passes.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:12 AM

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 8:58 AM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 8:43 AM

Our association management is granting exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month),

To whom is the association granting these exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month)? Residents? Owners? All residents? All Owners?

Quote:

Are you saying that the exclusive use language of 4600 would not apply to a parking permit which can be used for any parking spot?

To comment with any intelligence, I would have to see everything your HOA's Declaration says about parking. Quote these Declaration sections verbatim, and I might have more to say.

I have my eye on Civil Code 4600 (b) (3) (G), which talks a bit about exceptions for parking.

Here is what it says:
"All common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units shall remain permanently available for guest parking. Owners are to use their garages for parking of their vehicles so that parking will be available for guest parking. The Association may establish rules and regulations from time to time for the parking of vehicles in the common areas."

I could be wrong, but this suggests to me that if they can provide temporary parking passes for residents, then they could sell parking permits for the same area. And if they can't sell parking permits, then they wouldn't be permitted to provide temporary parking passes.

It suggest they could do a lot of things, including do nothing. I expect you will not be pleased no matter what they do. What is your problem?

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:12 AM

Here is what it says:
"All common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units shall remain permanently available for guest parking. Owners are to use their garages for parking of their vehicles so that parking will be available for guest parking. The Association may establish rules and regulations from time to time for the parking of vehicles in the common areas."

I could be wrong, but this suggests to me that if they can provide temporary parking passes for residents,

Are these "temporary parking passes" for "common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units"?

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 9:22 AM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:12 AM

Here is what it says:
"All common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units shall remain permanently available for guest parking. Owners are to use their garages for parking of their vehicles so that parking will be available for guest parking. The Association may establish rules and regulations from time to time for the parking of vehicles in the common areas."

I could be wrong, but this suggests to me that if they can provide temporary parking passes for residents,

Are these "temporary parking passes" for "common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units"?

Correct. None of the common area parking spaces are assigned to a specific unit.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:44 AM

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 9:22 AM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:12 AM

Here is what it says:
"All common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units shall remain permanently available for guest parking. Owners are to use their garages for parking of their vehicles so that parking will be available for guest parking. The Association may establish rules and regulations from time to time for the parking of vehicles in the common areas."

I could be wrong, but this suggests to me that if they can provide temporary parking passes for residents,

Are these "temporary parking passes" for "common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units"?

Correct. None of the common area parking spaces are assigned to a specific unit.

Again, to whom are these "temporary parking passes" being assigned: Owners, residents, guests, or some combination of the above?

Please answer the questions put to you. Why? Because it spares me having to write all of the following. Plus some of us here get cranky and snarky when we have to repeatedly ask simple questions. "I didn't volunteer for this." [wink; tongue in cheek]

If the HOA is granting "exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month)" // to Owners // that are applicable only to "common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units," then my opinion is that this is a violation of the covenants. I do not care if the Owners who have these (bogus, afaic) parking passes give the passes to their guests. The problem is that the HOA is issuing the passes to Units (via the Unit's owner), not guests, and so the passes are assigning these "common area parking spaces to units that are not assigned to units," to units (!) (sic). This is a freakin' logical contradiction.

Where's Iowa Jeff? GenoS? CathyA3? KerryL1? See what they say.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 10:08 AM
Where's Iowa Jeff? GenoS? CathyA3? KerryL1? See what they say.

Add on: Texan BillH10, Tar Heeler KellyM3, Thee Virginian TimB4 and Hoosier SheliaH. There's a Supreme Court right there.

SheliaH (Indiana)
Posts: 6,964

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 7:56 AM

Posted By SheliaH on 01/13/2021 5:18 AM
Yup.

I guess some people find it easier to look for loopholes in the laws instead of telling their visitors to be mindful of the time and READ the parking signs so they don't risk their car getting towed. Or park on the street if possible and perhaps avoid all of this. Or simply suggesting to the board that it rethink the parking policy....

Not looking for loopholes. Trying to find out how to interpret this section of the code.

For example, let's say a homeowner wants to use one of our four pool areas for a private party for one day. Would it be a violation of the aforementioned exclusive use code to grant them that?

Oh, for goodness sake - why don't you get a private attorney to interpret this?? Most of the people on this website aren't attorneys. Even then, a judge may look at the situation differently, depending on the situation.

As for your question about the pool, it's possible for the board to rent out the pool, perhaps for a party, although I'd probably require some waivers if someone were to injure themselves. The waiver language would be drafted by the association attorney, and the association master insurance would also have a hand in it. It's similar to renting out the community clubhouse. Give all homeowners a copy of the policy and they either abide by it or face the consequences.

As for parking (since you seem obsessed with this), some communities do issue parking passes for a specific spot which they use as long as they own the unit - that's how it works in my community. Depending on the size of the lot of number of vehicles, the board might be able to designate one or two spots per unit and the rest of the lot reserved for visitors. Obviously, they aren't expected to stay there forever, so you may be able to say no overnight parking or issue special passes for visitors from out of town. Set a start and end date - if the vehicle's still there after the deadkine, the homeowner is required to ask for an extension of the vehicle will be towed. No vehicles with expired plates and/or inoperable may be stored in the lot under any circumstances.

That's just an example of how a board might set rules regarding use of an area that it has jurisdiction over (because it's part of the common area). Now as far as the spot issued to the homeowner, it's up to him or her to ensure whatever parked in that area is displaying a as well as getting it returned it it's used by a visitor. Otherwise it's subject to being towed.

If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it. Marcus Aurelius

GenoS (Florida)
Posts: 4,276

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 10:08 AM
Where's Iowa Jeff? GenoS? CathyA3? KerryL1? See what they say.

Heh. I'm here but honestly our single-family subdivision doesn't have many parking problems. Every home has its own driveway and garage so "where to park" isn't an issue. "What to park," on the other hand, rears its ugly head once or twice a year. But that's about it.

I've been laying low around here of late to avoid getting any more aggravated than I already am due to our Directors approving last year's Annual Meeting Minutes at last week's 2021 Annual Meeting. That should have been a vote of the Members, not the board. The stupid... it burns.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By SheliaH on 01/13/2021 11:07 AM
some communities do issue parking passes for a specific spot which they use as long as they own the unit - that's how it works in my community.

But from what the OP posted, it sounds to me like the HOA is issuing parking permits for parking spaces the covenants specifically say may not be assigned to units.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Parking is a major problem in many associations. One of the main culprits are those that do not use their garages for parking with stuffed full of stuff. Additional problems arise when the number of cars per unit increases such as children getting their own cars.

I think in Paul's case he is wanting additional parking spaces assigned to himself and/or he is unhappy that other owners are always parking in the visitor spots due to the above reasons I stated. I forget his initial complaints and it is not worth my time to go looking for them.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 10:08 AM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:44 AM

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 9:22 AM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:12 AM

Here is what it says:
"All common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units shall remain permanently available for guest parking. Owners are to use their garages for parking of their vehicles so that parking will be available for guest parking. The Association may establish rules and regulations from time to time for the parking of vehicles in the common areas."

I could be wrong, but this suggests to me that if they can provide temporary parking passes for residents,

Are these "temporary parking passes" for "common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units"?

Correct. None of the common area parking spaces are assigned to a specific unit.

Again, to whom are these "temporary parking passes" being assigned: Owners, residents, guests, or some combination of the above?

Please answer the questions put to you. Why? Because it spares me having to write all of the following. Plus some of us here get cranky and snarky when we have to repeatedly ask simple questions. "I didn't volunteer for this." [wink; tongue in cheek]

If the HOA is granting "exclusive use parking passes for short periods of time (e.g. one month)" // to Owners // that are applicable only to "common area parking spaces that are not assigned to units," then my opinion is that this is a violation of the covenants. I do not care if the Owners who have these (bogus, afaic) parking passes give the passes to their guests. The problem is that the HOA is issuing the passes to Units (via the Unit's owner), not guests, and so the passes are assigning these "common area parking spaces to units that are not assigned to units," to units (!) (sic). This is a freakin' logical contradiction.

Where's Iowa Jeff? GenoS? CathyA3? KerryL1? See what they say.

The temporary passes are assigned to a particular vehicle associated with a particular unit (most are owner occupied). It may or may not be a permanent resident's vehicle. Examples of reasons people would request such a pass are:
- A guest is staying at their house for 2-3 weeks
- A health care worker is assisting someone as the house 24/7
- Remodeling in the house requires that furniture be put in the garage

The aforementioned parking passes are tied to a vehicle - not transferable.

The association also gives each unit one visitor pass, which also gives the homeowners exclusive use for short periods of time.

What questions in here did I not answer? I would be happy to answer.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 11:34 AM
Parking is a major problem in many associations. One of the main culprits are those that do not use their garages for parking with stuffed full of stuff. Additional problems arise when the number of cars per unit increases such as children getting their own cars.

I think in Paul's case he is wanting additional parking spaces assigned to himself and/or he is unhappy that other owners are always parking in the visitor spots due to the above reasons I stated. I forget his initial complaints and it is not worth my time to go looking for them.

Quite the contrary. The problem is excess unused outdoor parking is causing disgruntled residents and their guests to have to park farther away than necessary, often causing the local public residential streets to get inundated with vehicles from our community. Usage rate of our outdoor parking is seldom over 50%. I seldom have a need to park my vehicle(s) outside of my garage. And I prefer to park in my garage. Hope that helps.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 11:35 AM
The temporary passes are assigned to a particular vehicle associated with a particular unit (most are owner occupied). It may or may not be a permanent resident's vehicle. Examples of reasons people would request such a pass are:
- A guest is staying at their house for 2-3 weeks
- A health care worker is assisting someone as the house 24/7
- Remodeling in the house requires that furniture be put in the garage

The aforementioned parking passes are tied to a vehicle - not transferable.

The association also gives each unit one visitor pass, which also gives the homeowners exclusive use for short periods of time.

What questions in here did I not answer? I would be happy to answer.

-- You have now answered them. Thank you.

-- You wrote: "The temporary passes are assigned to a particular vehicle associated with a particular unit (most are owner occupied)." In my opinion this is the same as assigning guest parking spaces, which are not supposed to be assigned to a unit, to a unit. This violates the covenants and is unacceptable, at least from where I am sitting in the cheap seats.

-- Re health care workers assisting someone: This is too close to a disability situation. I think such passes should be allowed to reasonably accommodate a disabled person.

-- Re a pass to use a guest parking space for a a guest staying at the house: No. Period. End of discussion.

-- But whatever I post here from the cheap seats is ignoring the reality game show in which you are playing: To rectify the situation will be a huge battle.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

My two cents on assigning exclusive right parking spaces in common element: nope, not unless the CC&Rs give the board the right to do so and the definition of exclusive use common area includes this reserved parking.

The correct things to do to amend the CC&Rs if the current parking restriction does not meet the needs of the community as a whole. Which in fact we did several years ago, making all of the common areas first-come-first-served.

Our amended restriction also gave the board the right to make additional "reasonable" rules about this area. If we were going to make additional rules, though, it would be with the goal of making the situation better for the entire community, not to benefit one particular owner at the expense of the rest. So this would also rule out creating reserved space. The only situation I can think of that would justify it would be in the case of an accommodation for someone who is entitled to it by law - for instance, a reserved space in front of the person's unit. That's because federal law supersedes HOA governing docs.

Parking tends to be tight in condo communities. Our attorney once noted that people need to buy housing that meets their needs. If someone with three cars chooses to buy a condo with a one-car garage, that's their problem - it does not create a requirement for the board to make exceptions, especially ones that impinge on others' rights.

(This is also different from renting out the pool or portions of the clubhouse for private events, because the owners' right to use the facilities in this way will be in the governing docs somewhere. These events can create liability and other legal issues for an association, so there'd better be legalese somewhere to assure that the association is properly protected.)

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Paul

Is the answer to not have any spots designated such as Visitor? Meaning have all spots on a first come first served basis.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By GenoS on 01/13/2021 11:27 AM

I've been laying low around here of late to avoid getting any more aggravated than I already am due to our Directors approving last year's Annual Meeting Minutes at last week's 2021 Annual Meeting. That should have been a vote of the Members, not the board. The stupid... it burns.

Outrageous. I would vote that all directors now will suffer a 50% reduction in pay.

But seriously: Outrageous.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 11:51 AM
Paul

Is the answer to not have any spots designated such as Visitor? Meaning have all spots on a first come first served basis.

That's what we did, and it boiled down to the difficulty of enforcing our original restriction which said that common area parking was reserved for visitors only - and the fact that we usually had only a few cars in this space and many, many open spots.

How do you identify visitors?

Most associations won't have access to DMV databases, so looking up owner info won't be free, not to mention time consuming. The cost would be passed on to the community in the form of higher assessments.

So... require owners to display parking tags?

You'll need someone to issue the tags, which will also be an expense. And how to you stop owners from just not using their tags and pretending to be visitors? Back to the DMV databases.

Require guests to display guest tags? Many communities don't have an on-site manager, and even on-site managers don't work 24/7.

How do you tie a visitor to a particular homeowner in the event of a violation?

As you probably see, the effort required to enforce the old restriction far outweighed any benefit to the community.

Now it's up to homeowners to make sure that their visitors have a space to park.

GenoS (Florida)
Posts: 4,276

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 12:20 PM
But seriously: Outrageous.

I know. I would have objected but I wasn't there. I handed in a proxy and left before the meeting started. I didn't feel like sitting outside in 60 degree weather. Which is cold for Florida

Looking at the draft meeting minutes, the same thing happened at adjournment. Motioned and seconded by Directors. Voted on only by the Directors.

It bothers me not because I'm outraged, but because if they can't be trusted to get the little things right, why should they be trusted with any of the bigger decisions? That's a nagging unease as opposed to a white-hot outrage.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By GenoS on 01/13/2021 1:28 PM
It bothers me not because I'm outraged, but because if they can't be trusted to get the little things right, why should they be trusted with any of the bigger decisions? That's a nagging unease as opposed to a white-hot outrage.

Indeed. 'Where there's smoke there's fire.'

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 01/13/2021 11:50 AM
My two cents on assigning exclusive right parking spaces in common element: nope, not unless the CC&Rs give the board the right to do so and the definition of exclusive use common area includes this reserved parking.

The correct things to do to amend the CC&Rs if the current parking restriction does not meet the needs of the community as a whole. Which in fact we did several years ago, making all of the common areas first-come-first-served.

Our amended restriction also gave the board the right to make additional "reasonable" rules about this area. If we were going to make additional rules, though, it would be with the goal of making the situation better for the entire community, not to benefit one particular owner at the expense of the rest. So this would also rule out creating reserved space. The only situation I can think of that would justify it would be in the case of an accommodation for someone who is entitled to it by law - for instance, a reserved space in front of the person's unit. That's because federal law supersedes HOA governing docs.

Parking tends to be tight in condo communities. Our attorney once noted that people need to buy housing that meets their needs. If someone with three cars chooses to buy a condo with a one-car garage, that's their problem - it does not create a requirement for the board to make exceptions, especially ones that impinge on others' rights.

(This is also different from renting out the pool or portions of the clubhouse for private events, because the owners' right to use the facilities in this way will be in the governing docs somewhere. These events can create liability and other legal issues for an association, so there'd better be legalese somewhere to assure that the association is properly protected.)

Do you consider it to be a violation of the CC I cited to rent out parking spots (e.g. sell parking permits).
Parking is not tight in our community; we have the inverse problem; outdoor parking is grossly underused and both residents and guests are needlessly forced to park far away on surface streets.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 01/13/2021 12:56 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 11:51 AM
Paul

Is the answer to not have any spots designated such as Visitor? Meaning have all spots on a first come first served basis.

That's what we did, and it boiled down to the difficulty of enforcing our original restriction which said that common area parking was reserved for visitors only - and the fact that we usually had only a few cars in this space and many, many open spots.

How do you identify visitors?

Most associations won't have access to DMV databases, so looking up owner info won't be free, not to mention time consuming. The cost would be passed on to the community in the form of higher assessments.

So... require owners to display parking tags?

You'll need someone to issue the tags, which will also be an expense. And how to you stop owners from just not using their tags and pretending to be visitors? Back to the DMV databases.

Require guests to display guest tags? Many communities don't have an on-site manager, and even on-site managers don't work 24/7.

How do you tie a visitor to a particular homeowner in the event of a violation?

As you probably see, the effort required to enforce the old restriction far outweighed any benefit to the community.

Now it's up to homeowners to make sure that their visitors have a space to park.

I know of one high rise condo that had some visitor parking spots. The condo resident had to go to the PM office and get a Visitor Only parking permit that went on the dashboard. I do not know if there was a limit as I was never there as a visitor more than two nights. ye were very strict on towing if parked in Visitor Parking spot with no permit.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 11:51 AM
Paul

Is the answer to not have any spots designated such as Visitor? Meaning have all spots on a first come first served basis.

Nope; I assume by 'answer' you mean what my objective is. If so, I am trying to give homeowners who do have a 3rd or 4th vehicle an opportunity to get a spot closer to their home. Of course, first we would send out feelers to see how many want these passes so we could determine what to rent the spots for. Our visitor parking overnight is at around 10-20% usage and it is seldom over 50% usage. My thoughts would be to cap the visitor permits sold at no more than enough to fill 25% of the spots.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 1:46 PM

Posted By CathyA3 on 01/13/2021 12:56 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 11:51 AM
Paul

Is the answer to not have any spots designated such as Visitor? Meaning have all spots on a first come first served basis.

That's what we did, and it boiled down to the difficulty of enforcing our original restriction which said that common area parking was reserved for visitors only - and the fact that we usually had only a few cars in this space and many, many open spots.

How do you identify visitors?

Most associations won't have access to DMV databases, so looking up owner info won't be free, not to mention time consuming. The cost would be passed on to the community in the form of higher assessments.

So... require owners to display parking tags?

You'll need someone to issue the tags, which will also be an expense. And how to you stop owners from just not using their tags and pretending to be visitors? Back to the DMV databases.

Require guests to display guest tags? Many communities don't have an on-site manager, and even on-site managers don't work 24/7.

How do you tie a visitor to a particular homeowner in the event of a violation?

As you probably see, the effort required to enforce the old restriction far outweighed any benefit to the community.

Now it's up to homeowners to make sure that their visitors have a space to park.

I know of one high rise condo that had some visitor parking spots. The condo resident had to go to the PM office and get a Visitor Only parking permit that went on the dashboard. I do not know if there was a limit as I was never there as a visitor more than two nights. ye were very strict on towing if parked in Visitor Parking spot with no permit.

In that instance, what is the typical % usage rate? Why be Nazis about it if the % usage rate is very low?

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 2:00 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 1:46 PM

Posted By CathyA3 on 01/13/2021 12:56 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 11:51 AM
Paul

Is the answer to not have any spots designated such as Visitor? Meaning have all spots on a first come first served basis.

That's what we did, and it boiled down to the difficulty of enforcing our original restriction which said that common area parking was reserved for visitors only - and the fact that we usually had only a few cars in this space and many, many open spots.

How do you identify visitors?

Most associations won't have access to DMV databases, so looking up owner info won't be free, not to mention time consuming. The cost would be passed on to the community in the form of higher assessments.

So... require owners to display parking tags?

You'll need someone to issue the tags, which will also be an expense. And how to you stop owners from just not using their tags and pretending to be visitors? Back to the DMV databases.

Require guests to display guest tags? Many communities don't have an on-site manager, and even on-site managers don't work 24/7.

How do you tie a visitor to a particular homeowner in the event of a violation?

As you probably see, the effort required to enforce the old restriction far outweighed any benefit to the community.

Now it's up to homeowners to make sure that their visitors have a space to park.

I know of one high rise condo that had some visitor parking spots. The condo resident had to go to the PM office and get a Visitor Only parking permit that went on the dashboard. I do not know if there was a limit as I was never there as a visitor more than two nights. ye were very strict on towing if parked in Visitor Parking spot with no permit.

In that instance, what is the typical % usage rate? Why be Nazis about it if the % usage rate is very low?

It was beach side condo where parking spaces were at a premium. Each unit had two assigned spaces with few Visitor Spaces so the Visitor Spaces were coveted. One Holiday Weekend we waited so long to commit to visit, our family was unable to secure a visitor spot for us. We had to park in a municipal lot a bit away. They picked us up in their car.

There was a "black market" in the association of people "renting" one or both of their spaces to other owners, but the association kept a blind eye to it.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 1:43 PM

Posted By CathyA3 on 01/13/2021 11:50 AM
My two cents on assigning exclusive right parking spaces in common element: nope, not unless the CC&Rs give the board the right to do so and the definition of exclusive use common area includes this reserved parking.

The correct things to do to amend the CC&Rs if the current parking restriction does not meet the needs of the community as a whole. Which in fact we did several years ago, making all of the common areas first-come-first-served.

Our amended restriction also gave the board the right to make additional "reasonable" rules about this area. If we were going to make additional rules, though, it would be with the goal of making the situation better for the entire community, not to benefit one particular owner at the expense of the rest. So this would also rule out creating reserved space. The only situation I can think of that would justify it would be in the case of an accommodation for someone who is entitled to it by law - for instance, a reserved space in front of the person's unit. That's because federal law supersedes HOA governing docs.

Parking tends to be tight in condo communities. Our attorney once noted that people need to buy housing that meets their needs. If someone with three cars chooses to buy a condo with a one-car garage, that's their problem - it does not create a requirement for the board to make exceptions, especially ones that impinge on others' rights.

(This is also different from renting out the pool or portions of the clubhouse for private events, because the owners' right to use the facilities in this way will be in the governing docs somewhere. These events can create liability and other legal issues for an association, so there'd better be legalese somewhere to assure that the association is properly protected.)

Do you consider it to be a violation of the CC I cited to rent out parking spots (e.g. sell parking permits).
Parking is not tight in our community; we have the inverse problem; outdoor parking is grossly underused and both residents and guests are needlessly forced to park far away on surface streets.

I think that it technically it's probably a violation, but it also sounds like your governing docs as currently written do not fit your community's needs.

As I'd mentioned, we legally amended our docs to deal with an unworkable restriction.

One a lawyer I'd talked to opined that the board could use the "business judgement" defense to ignore that restriction. I'm not sure about that. I'm not a lawyer - but I believe that business judgement should apply to limited situations where the issues aren't clear, not act as a wholesale get out of jail free card for the board to ignore restrictions that they don't like or find inconvenient. The latter is a slippery slope, and boards are obligated to enforce the governing docs as they are written.

You'd really need to talk to a real lawyer to understand what the implications are for selling exclusive access to parts of the common elements and if it would be different to give that access for free.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 2:00 PM
In that instance, what is the typical % usage rate? Why be Nazis about it if the % usage rate is very low?

Is this guy saying that a board that lawfully enforces covenants (also known as contractual terms) is a board of Nazis?

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 01/13/2021 2:15 PM

I think that it technically it's probably a violation, but it also sounds like your governing docs as currently written do not fit your community's needs.

As I'd mentioned, we legally amended our docs to deal with an unworkable restriction.

One a lawyer I'd talked to opined that the board could use the "business judgement" defense to ignore that restriction. I'm not sure about that. I'm not a lawyer - but I believe that business judgement should apply to limited situations where the issues aren't clear, not act as a wholesale get out of jail free card for the board to ignore restrictions that they don't like or find inconvenient. The latter is a slippery slope, and boards are obligated to enforce the governing docs as they are written.

-- I agree. By my reading, so does the case law.

-- It will be one sorry day when an appeals court rules that a HOA/condo board has discretion, not expressly authorized in the governing documents, to blatantly violate lawful covenants, and so the terms of a contract between the HOA and all HOA members. Such a court ruling would be nonsense. Such a ruling would reduce the value of a written contract (which covenants are) to zero.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 2:14 PM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 2:00 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 1:46 PM

Posted By CathyA3 on 01/13/2021 12:56 PM

Posted By JohnC46 on 01/13/2021 11:51 AM
Paul

Is the answer to not have any spots designated such as Visitor? Meaning have all spots on a first come first served basis.

That's what we did, and it boiled down to the difficulty of enforcing our original restriction which said that common area parking was reserved for visitors only - and the fact that we usually had only a few cars in this space and many, many open spots.

How do you identify visitors?

Most associations won't have access to DMV databases, so looking up owner info won't be free, not to mention time consuming. The cost would be passed on to the community in the form of higher assessments.

So... require owners to display parking tags?

You'll need someone to issue the tags, which will also be an expense. And how to you stop owners from just not using their tags and pretending to be visitors? Back to the DMV databases.

Require guests to display guest tags? Many communities don't have an on-site manager, and even on-site managers don't work 24/7.

How do you tie a visitor to a particular homeowner in the event of a violation?

As you probably see, the effort required to enforce the old restriction far outweighed any benefit to the community.

Now it's up to homeowners to make sure that their visitors have a space to park.

I know of one high rise condo that had some visitor parking spots. The condo resident had to go to the PM office and get a Visitor Only parking permit that went on the dashboard. I do not know if there was a limit as I was never there as a visitor more than two nights. ye were very strict on towing if parked in Visitor Parking spot with no permit.

In that instance, what is the typical % usage rate? Why be Nazis about it if the % usage rate is very low?

It was beach side condo where parking spaces were at a premium. Each unit had two assigned spaces with few Visitor Spaces so the Visitor Spaces were coveted. One Holiday Weekend we waited so long to commit to visit, our family was unable to secure a visitor spot for us. We had to park in a municipal lot a bit away. They picked us up in their car.

There was a "black market" in the association of people "renting" one or both of their spaces to other owners, but the association kept a blind eye to it.

In our community, the outdoor spots are only coveted because the parking rules make it so difficult to use them. They remain largely unused. What a waste of a valuable resource.

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 2:16 PM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 2:00 PM
In that instance, what is the typical % usage rate? Why be Nazis about it if the % usage rate is very low?

Is this guy saying that a board that lawfully enforces covenants (also known as contractual terms) is a board of Nazis?

The point is if parking usage rates are extremely low (I cited the usage rates earlier), it is senseless to be overly strict about the rules and/or enforcement. There might be some underlying reason I am not aware of which makes it desirable to keep our outdoor parking rates so low, but the board is silent on that matter.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

Aacck.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

As in, please, anyone, please make this stop.

Bill is pleading with you.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 3:44 PM
The point is if parking usage rates are extremely low (I cited the usage rates earlier), it is senseless to be overly strict about the rules and/or enforcement. There might be some underlying reason I am not aware of which makes it desirable to keep our outdoor parking rates so low, but the board is silent on that matter.

I see no point in entertaining a hypothetical here. I wish you would be more careful about calling a board "nazis." I am not persuaded you have the full picture of a board's legal obligations and all the work involved, for zero pay and a lot of criticism from people who are not informed about HOA law, the implications of covenants, and so on, possibly like yourself. I post this as someone who is perhaps on the members' side more often than most.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

Thppt!

Aacckk!

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/13/2021 7:38 PM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 3:44 PM
The point is if parking usage rates are extremely low (I cited the usage rates earlier), it is senseless to be overly strict about the rules and/or enforcement. There might be some underlying reason I am not aware of which makes it desirable to keep our outdoor parking rates so low, but the board is silent on that matter.

I see no point in entertaining a hypothetical here. I wish you would be more careful about calling a board "nazis." I am not persuaded you have the full picture of a board's legal obligations and all the work involved, for zero pay and a lot of criticism from people who are not informed about HOA law, the implications of covenants, and so on, possibly like yourself. I post this as someone who is perhaps on the members' side more often than most.

It sounds like you are saying from your POV, they are not permitted to issue such permits. If this is correct, what do you know about the process to either report them or get them to straighten out their policies?

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By GeorgeS21 on 01/13/2021 7:48 PM
Thppt!

Aacckk!

Agree.

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 1:58 PM
I assume by 'answer' you mean what my objective is. If so, I am trying to give homeowners who do have a 3rd or 4th vehicle an opportunity to get a spot closer to their home. Of course, first we would send out feelers to see how many want these passes so we could determine what to rent the spots for. Our visitor parking overnight is at around 10-20% usage and it is seldom over 50% usage. My thoughts would be to cap the visitor permits sold at no more than enough to fill 25% of the spots.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:56 PM
It sounds like you are saying from your POV, they are not permitted to issue such permits. If this is correct, what do you know about the process to either report them or get them to straighten out their policies?

-- If a Californian has a dispute with her/his condo or HOA, claiming it is violating the covenants, then the Californian should comply with California statutes on the subject. Per California statutes, your first step is to ask for Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR). See
https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/Internal-Dispute-Resolution and all the links at the latter site.

-- I do not know what side you're on at this point. Giving assistance is difficult under these conditions. I suppose this is why a cartoon character is now voicing his opinion here. You seem to be jumping from a position of wanting to attack the board's actions to wanting the Board to violate the covenants. All on account of you do not want to bother with pursuing the correct legal route, which seems to be to seek an amendment to the covenants? I cannot tell.

-- I do not think I have any sympathy for those with three or four vehicles. The covenants were disclosed to them when they bought into here. The covenants are a contract. A deal's a deal. Per the contractual terms, their recourse is to seek amendment of the covenants.

SheliaH (Indiana)
Posts: 6,964

Posted:

What AugustinD said!

If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it. Marcus Aurelius

PaulL12 (California)
Posts: 116

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 01/14/2021 7:21 AM

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 1:58 PM
I assume by 'answer' you mean what my objective is. If so, I am trying to give homeowners who do have a 3rd or 4th vehicle an opportunity to get a spot closer to their home. Of course, first we would send out feelers to see how many want these passes so we could determine what to rent the spots for. Our visitor parking overnight is at around 10-20% usage and it is seldom over 50% usage. My thoughts would be to cap the visitor permits sold at no more than enough to fill 25% of the spots.

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/13/2021 9:56 PM
It sounds like you are saying from your POV, they are not permitted to issue such permits. If this is correct, what do you know about the process to either report them or get them to straighten out their policies?

-- If a Californian has a dispute with her/his condo or HOA, claiming it is violating the covenants, then the Californian should comply with California statutes on the subject. Per California statutes, your first step is to ask for Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR). See
https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/Internal-Dispute-Resolution and all the links at the latter site.

-- I do not know what side you're on at this point. Giving assistance is difficult under these conditions. I suppose this is why a cartoon character is now voicing his opinion here. You seem to be jumping from a position of wanting to attack the board's actions to wanting the Board to violate the covenants. All on account of you do not want to bother with pursuing the correct legal route, which seems to be to seek an amendment to the covenants? I cannot tell.

-- I do not think I have any sympathy for those with three or four vehicles. The covenants were disclosed to them when they bought into here. The covenants are a contract. A deal's a deal. Per the contractual terms, their recourse is to seek amendment of the covenants.

Perhaps some clarification is in order. With respect to the discussion in this thread, what I want is to establish if there is indeed a contradiction and if so, get a reconciliation. If they are right that they can't rent or sell permits to use common area, then it would seem to be that they are in the wrong to be giving out parking permits to use common area. And if they are right that they can give out parking permits to use the common area, then it seems they would be able to rent/sell permits to use common area.

As our parking rules are not built into our CC&Rs and are highly ambiguous, one who buys into our community ends up learning the hard way.

The side I am on is to help make our community better for the homeowners. If the board is against making the community better for the homeowners, then I am against the board. If the board is in favor of making the community better for the homeowners, then I am with the board.

As I stated earlier, parking is highly underused at our complex and the rules are overly strict when taken into consideration the usage rates. What ends up happening is residents and guests end up having to park much farther away than necessary - and this I have been told has a detrimental effect on property values.

GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808

Posted:

Gah.l

AugustinD
Posts: 5,144

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By PaulL12 on 01/14/2021 10:27 PM
they are in the wrong to be giving out parking permits to use common area.

The above is my reading.

Quote:

And if they are right that they can give out parking permits to use the common area, then it seems they would be able to rent/sell permits to use common area.

Many folks here will be happy to share with you the best ways to violate the covenants or to encourage same by the board (as both your board and you seem to favor), in one flavor or another. For the greater part, I think I am not one of them.

In my opinion, the best choice is to start a campaign to amend the covenants with regard to parking. "A deal's a deal."