Community with a 55+ community within

Are you suggesting that the way residents are assessed (with those in the 55+ section paying a different amount compared to those not in this section) is unfair?

Of course, the manager's assertion that "usually there are two charters" intrigues. I have read a lot here at hoatalk and on the net. I have yet to read of a HOA that has two sections, with one designated for 55+ folks and the other for non-55+ folks. Of course, I believe they can exist. But the manager is talking like this is common.

You like the idea because... ? It sounds like a big expensive legal hassle to me. I think the developer gave a lot of thought to how the subdivision would be set up. Furthermore, the developer assuredly spent a lot of money getting approval from the city and county for the developer's plans.

Suggest away. Expect the developer's answer to be a smile and a "the developer is not interested in repeating the city/county approval process and assessing the current Owners a great deal of money for this."

Barbara - thanks! Yes, a sub-association and master-association is the terminology the manager used. Thanks for summarizing the pros and cons. The current governing documents are as you mentioned first - they specify deed restrictions based on specific lots.

The initial advantage I can see with a sub-association right now has to do with COVID restrictions. The property manager has put together re-opening plans for our clubhouses and pools. The problem is, while I believe those on the 55+ side have the ability to pull off the plan, those on the other side do not. If we can't execute the plan for both sides, then neither side will get their amenities. However, if the 55+ was its own association it could open the clubhouse and pool without concern over what happens on the all-ages side.

We have similar issues with landscaping (the HOA provides lawn services), social committee, etc.

So it seems as if our current structure is not an outlier, but neither is the alternative structure. It's a question of whether the advantages are worth the extra trouble. Thanks for the insight.

David, you are part of the developer keeping the monthly fees way too low to build up the money for future costs. I hope that you do not plan on being there in about 20 years when a lot of the common elements will need to be replaced and or repaired. I hop your roads and your street lights are not privately owned since you already have buildings and pools that will need to be replaced and or repaired. Sounds like you have received some very good responses. A lot to think about and work with.

-- Why does the 55+ side have the ability to pull off the plan while the other side does not?

-- Why, practically speaking, is the HOA unable to open just the 55+ pool and clubhouse (and not the other side)?

-- The HOA's Declaration undoubtedly gives the Board to create "reasonable rules" for the common areas. I do not see why there cannot be a rule on pool usage for the 55+ side and a different rule on pool usage for the other side.

-- Does the Declaration say anything about having different rules for one pool (or one side) vs. the other, other than the obvious main FHA rule that 80% of the homes on the 55+ side must have at least one occupant who is 55+?

-- I do not think there is an age discrimination problem by having different rules for different pools. Partly because, as CathyA3 has indicated, the allowable age discrimination here is "built in" to the fact that the one side is a 55+ community. But I admit I am not 100% sure. And again, I have yet to see a HOA set up with two different age-based sections (one 55+; the other not). Granted they may exist beyond the OP's example.

-- How would an FHA complaint by the younger side go? Young-ish family Owners: "The HOA is allowing the 55+ side to use their pool. Meanwhile, our family has two kids, and the HOA is prohibiting our family from using the HOA's pool." But the pandemic has created extraordinary times. Lots of Bylaws are being violated to accommodate the reality and risk of the pandemic. Law firms nationwide are saying, "Do the best you can." Conventional wisdom here is to choose the lesser of the two evils: "Break the bylaws (on say the annual in-person meeting requirement), or help stop the death and disability the pandemic is causing."

-- By the time an FHA complaint made its way through the mighty cogs and gears of HUD, the HOA may have decided things were safe enough to open both pools.

-- If a master-sub association arrangement were adopted (at some expense), then the sub-association could adopt rules to the extent the sub-association's rules do not conflict with the master association's Bylaws and Declaration. It appears the rules of the sub may lawfully conflict with the rules of the master.

For the archives: "Charter" refers to "articles of incorporation." Two different charters implies two different corporations. If the 55+ side and the other side share roads, for one, then I agree two different charters does not make good sense.

Can you share your math to back up this contention?
Each year:

$100 per month per home * 12 months * 650 homes
+
extra $10 per month per 55+ home * 12 months * 200 homes
= $804,000 of assessment income each year

Landscaping may very well cost on the order of $300,000 to $500,000 per year.

Management may run $200,000 or so per year.

Nothing leaps out at me as necessarily indicating the developer has set the assessment too low.

Barbara

Thanks. The reason the 55+ side could "pull it off" is that we will either need a large number of volunteers who are taking reservations and checking people in to make sure we don't go over the state's COVID capacity restrictions, as well as clean all high-touch areas every two hours, or it will require a 3rd-party to provide those services at considerable costs. The 55+ residents currently do all of the volunteer work in the community, and would almost certainly have no trouble finding enough volunteers to execute that plan -- the All Ages side would almost certainly not be able to do it. Also, the 55+ would almost certainly agree to a special assessment of $100 each to get our pool open, but the All Ages side would never pass something like that.

As I've dug deeper into this, it does appear that the Board could present those options, and if only the 55+ does what is needed we could open just the 55+ side. I just know the howling from the other side would be loud.

Other reasons include the Social Committee. Currently the All Ages committee is strongly opposed to sponsoring events for 55+ members only, using the 55+ clubhouse. So all of a sudden a group of people who thought they were joining an "active adults" community are being told by others that they can't have active adult events. Which naturally is not going over well. Our 55+ members of the facilities committee would like to hold fundraising events to install a "beer garden" type area by our clubhouse, along with other improvements; but the other side doesn't want to do anything like that. It's just one thing after another where the 55+ folks are not able to do things for themselves.

Bottom line - your first post gave me the background I needed to understand our situation regarding the HOA organization. Thanks. I believe I am simply going to try to form separate committees - one for each side of the community - so they can all do things the way their side of the community wants to do them.

DavidG45, I would like to interject a bit on the subject of "social committees." "Social committees" come up a lot here. The first questions on the subject from the veteran posters at hoatalk usually include: "What do the HOA Declaration/Covenants say about a Social Committee?" "Do the Declaration/Covenants authorize spending money on what the social committee requests? If yes, please quote exactly what the covenants say."

In my opinion, if the Declaration/covenants are silent on the subject of a "social committee," then an HOA should not sponsor in any way a "social committee." If people want organized social events, then they can plan them without input from the Board; using their own money or donations they collect, independent of the HOA; and conforming with the official rules for use of the HOA's common areas.

There's a lot that can be said about alcohol events for family HOAs, and the serious legal hazards of the HOA sponsoring events with booze. Do ask and I am sure many will answer.

The declarations say the Board President can create committees as he sees fit. The Social Committee was one of the first ones created, and one of the ones most enthusiastically received. I believe they have too large of a budget, but that's a separate issue. This is an Active Adult community, and Social Committee is a given.

David

Good that you are stepping up but the bottom line is the developer controls things, not the BOD.

Clarify something for me. The young pay an additional $15 per month. Do the old pay $10 more per month only or $10 per month in addition to the $15 for a $25 per month total.

For sake of clarification let us call them the young and the old.

It is not uncommon to have an association within an association and the dues to be different. I know of one situation where each association pays a specific amount but the old pay more as they have an additional set of amenities. Old get to use the young amenities as they pay the same dues as the young but the young do not get to use the old amenities as the old pay more to have those amenities.

If if read it correctly, in your situation old get the use of the the young clubhouse and their pool. The young do not get the use of the old clubhouse nor their pool. This is a common occurrence based on a number of factors, 55+ not being the only one. I know of one master association where the amenities run deeper between associations such boat docks, tennis courts, pool, etc. Of course the additional dues run to $hundreds per month difference.

I get that the Declaration says that the President may create committees. But does the Declaration say whether the committees are to be funded by money from the HOA? That Declaration is a contract between the HOA corporation and the Owners. Using the money only as the contract directs is important. Two cents.

Barbara - lol, you are correct. This loudest complainers do not work whatsoever for the community - they simply complain. We have a large retention pond that is developing a large geese population, with about 50 homeowners now finding tons of goose poop in their backyards. There was quite an outpouring on the community Facebook page, so I invested and found there were two genuine options - an expensive option of paying a 3rd party, for which there was no room in our budget. Or an inexpensive option that would involve about a dozen volunteers.

I reached out to the community telling them I wanted to form an ad-hoc committee to find potential solutions, and exactly one person volunteered. And that was an elderly lady in the 55+ who lives nowhere near the pond.

At that point I figure, well, I guess they don't mind goose poop bad enough to do anything about it!

BTW, yes, the developer holds two seats on the board, and the residents hold one.