DonnaS19 (Texas)
Posts: 2
Posts: 2
Posted:
If we sold half of our lot to a neighbor, would will be able to have 1/2 vote in a Texas HOA?
A service of:
Community123.com
Professional websites for HOAs & condos, since 2004
Professional websites for HOAs & condos, since 2004
🎁 1st year FREE for HOATalk members! →
How Votes Are Counted in a HOA
Started by DonnaS19 • 25 replies • 398 views
💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.
Create Free Account →
⚡ Takes 30 seconds
Already a member? Log in
MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 462
Posts: 462
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DonnaS19 on 10/30/2022 6:10 AM
If we sold half of our lot to a neighbor, would will be able to have 1/2 vote in a Texas HOA?
If we sold half of our lot to a neighbor, would will be able to have 1/2 vote in a Texas HOA?
I can't speak for Texas, but our CC&Rs / by-laws say that if a property is owned by multiple people, the people have to work together amongst themselves to decide how to vote and can cast a single vote during the election.
Thus, in our state and under our CC&Rs, no half-votes are allowed.
CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299
Posts: 6,299
Posted:
Ditto to what Michael said. I can't remember ever hearing about fractional votes, although I suppose it's possible in some unusual circumstances.
Here's how I think about it:
In Texas, as far as I know, two legally married persons must both have their names on the deed for them both to be considered owners. In situations like this, the two persons named on the deed don't split a vote - they have to figure out how to cast that single vote. If the community uses proxies to establish quorum, the two owners also share a single proxy if they're going to be out of town for the meeting - there is no such thing as half a proxy.
The folks who create software to handle HOA voting would know the answer to this, since they'd have to account for fractions.
Here's how I think about it:
In Texas, as far as I know, two legally married persons must both have their names on the deed for them both to be considered owners. In situations like this, the two persons named on the deed don't split a vote - they have to figure out how to cast that single vote. If the community uses proxies to establish quorum, the two owners also share a single proxy if they're going to be out of town for the meeting - there is no such thing as half a proxy.
The folks who create software to handle HOA voting would know the answer to this, since they'd have to account for fractions.
CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299
Posts: 6,299
Posted:
Also, my two cents' worth: talk to a lawyer before you sell half your lot to a neighbor. This may violate deed restrictions or zoning laws, and may have some other unintended consequences.
DavidG45 (Delaware)
Posts: 994
Posts: 994
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By DonnaS19 on 10/30/2022 6:10 AM
If we sold half of our lot to a neighbor, would will be able to have 1/2 vote in a Texas HOA?
If we sold half of our lot to a neighbor, would will be able to have 1/2 vote in a Texas HOA?
Are you talking about sub-dividing your lot into two lots? Are do you plan to sell 50% undivided interest of the entire lot?
KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550
Posts: 14,550
Posted:
Sounds like she wants to "subdivide" her lot into 2 lots, David. Right, local Planning or Zoning agencies might have something or a lot to say about that.
CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299
Posts: 6,299
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By KerryL1 on 10/30/2022 10:20 AM
Sounds like she wants to "subdivide" her lot into 2 lots, David. Right, local Planning or Zoning agencies might have something or a lot to say about that.
Sounds like she wants to "subdivide" her lot into 2 lots, David. Right, local Planning or Zoning agencies might have something or a lot to say about that.
And the HOA's CC&Rs may also say something.
For example, if the HOA property is described as containing X number of lots, with sizes varying between Y and Z, then people can't just subdivide their lots without jumping through a lot of legal hoops - and that's if it even would be possible. Assessments, among other things, are determined in part by the number of homes in the HOA.
In this case, the HOA would have to hire a lawyer to, at a minimum, amend the CC&Rs, and that will cost the HOA money. The amendment, I assume, would also require homeowner approval.
This is potentially a big deal.
KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550
Posts: 14,550
Posted:
Oh, I totally agree, Cathy, & noticed that'd been mentioned above.
CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299
Posts: 6,299
Posted:
Same discussion going on here: https://www.hoatalk.com/Forum/tabid/55/forumid/1/tpage/1/view/topic/postid/338458/Default.aspx#338477
DavidG45 (Delaware)
Posts: 994
Posts: 994
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By KerryL1 on 10/30/2022 10:20 AM
Sounds like she wants to "subdivide" her lot into 2 lots, David. Right, local Planning or Zoning agencies might have something or a lot to say about that.
Sounds like she wants to "subdivide" her lot into 2 lots, David. Right, local Planning or Zoning agencies might have something or a lot to say about that.
Yes, it seems to me that voting rights is one of the lesser questions here.
DavidG45 (Delaware)
Posts: 994
Posts: 994
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By KerryL1 on 10/30/2022 10:20 AM
Sounds like she wants to "subdivide" her lot into 2 lots, David. Right, local Planning or Zoning agencies might have something or a lot to say about that.
Sounds like she wants to "subdivide" her lot into 2 lots, David. Right, local Planning or Zoning agencies might have something or a lot to say about that.
Yes, it seems to me that voting rights is one of the lesser questions here.
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059
Posts: 21,059
Posted:
Same question asked two different ways on two different threads.
Discussions are on both threads.
Here is a link to the other thread:
https://www.hoatalk.com/Forum/tabid/55/forumid/1/postid/338458/view/topic/Default.aspx
Discussions are on both threads.
Here is a link to the other thread:
https://www.hoatalk.com/Forum/tabid/55/forumid/1/postid/338458/view/topic/Default.aspx
BillH10 (Texas)
Posts: 1,217
Posts: 1,217
Posted:
I agree with the comments regarding what would take place in the 'lot-splitting' process but I think some of you may have jumped into the deep end too soon.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided. The local civic agencies, and the HOA, have no say as regards the ownership in a partial sale, other than the administrative processes of recording the transaction, unless the boundaries of the lot are to be changed.
We have more than one owner in client associations in which the deeds stipulate the parents own 90% and a child owns the other 10%. In those several situations, the child resides on the property and is eligible to hold office, attend meetings, cast the vote, etc.
These clients are located near a major medical teaching facility/school, a major university is located nearby. The parents purchase the condominium for the child while they are in med school or at the university, the child resides on the property and can participate as an owner, then the property is sold when the education is complete.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided. The local civic agencies, and the HOA, have no say as regards the ownership in a partial sale, other than the administrative processes of recording the transaction, unless the boundaries of the lot are to be changed.
We have more than one owner in client associations in which the deeds stipulate the parents own 90% and a child owns the other 10%. In those several situations, the child resides on the property and is eligible to hold office, attend meetings, cast the vote, etc.
These clients are located near a major medical teaching facility/school, a major university is located nearby. The parents purchase the condominium for the child while they are in med school or at the university, the child resides on the property and can participate as an owner, then the property is sold when the education is complete.
AugustinD
Posts: 1,027
Posts: 1,027
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By BillH10 on 10/30/2022 12:39 PM
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 462
Posts: 462
Posted:
This is a very valid question....
There is a trend about eliminating single family zoning and allowing duplex, triplexes, and 4-plexes in areas that were previously built as single family homes. In those situations, lots legally could be split in half.
If such a law was passed, and if such a law overrode CC&Rs, it would be very interesting how the votes would be cast for the newly created lots. Would each owner get 1 vote, so a HOA that previously had 150 votes might now have 450 votes? How would the dues work? Lots of questions.
This is more theoretical right now because the laws are just talk at the moment and haven't been passed by the legislatures. I expect they will be passed at some point in the future, and this will become a very real question.
There is a trend about eliminating single family zoning and allowing duplex, triplexes, and 4-plexes in areas that were previously built as single family homes. In those situations, lots legally could be split in half.
If such a law was passed, and if such a law overrode CC&Rs, it would be very interesting how the votes would be cast for the newly created lots. Would each owner get 1 vote, so a HOA that previously had 150 votes might now have 450 votes? How would the dues work? Lots of questions.
This is more theoretical right now because the laws are just talk at the moment and haven't been passed by the legislatures. I expect they will be passed at some point in the future, and this will become a very real question.
CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299
Posts: 6,299
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By AugustinD on 10/30/2022 2:09 PM
I think going from Posted By BillH10 on 10/30/2022 12:39 PM
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 462
Posts: 462
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By CathyA3 on 10/30/2022 5:43 PM
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
Posted By AugustinD on 10/30/2022 2:09 PM
I think going from Posted By BillH10 on 10/30/2022 12:39 PM
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265
Posts: 14,265
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/30/2022 6:38 PM
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
Posted By CathyA3 on 10/30/2022 5:43 PM
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
Posted By AugustinD on 10/30/2022 2:09 PM
I think going from Posted By BillH10 on 10/30/2022 12:39 PM
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
My first blush, zoning aside, is if "split" each unit still gets one vote. Say 100 lots spit into to duplexes, now 200 lots/votes instead of 100.
MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 462
Posts: 462
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By JohnC46 on 10/30/2022 6:54 PM
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/30/2022 6:38 PM
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
Posted By CathyA3 on 10/30/2022 5:43 PM
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
Posted By AugustinD on 10/30/2022 2:09 PM
I think going from Posted By BillH10 on 10/30/2022 12:39 PM
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
My first blush, zoning aside, is if "split" each unit still gets one vote. Say 100 lots spit into to duplexes, now 200 lots/votes instead of 100.
I agree.
And that means, if each lot pays the same dues, converting 100 lots into 200 would mean twice the revenue, or half the dues.
of course, 100 units are not going to split into 200 units overnight. But the principle is the same whether 1 splits or 100 splits.
CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299
Posts: 6,299
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/30/2022 7:34 PM
My first blush, zoning aside, is if "split" each unit still gets one vote. Say 100 lots spit into to duplexes, now 200 lots/votes instead of 100.
Posted By JohnC46 on 10/30/2022 6:54 PM
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/30/2022 6:38 PM
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
Posted By CathyA3 on 10/30/2022 5:43 PM
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
Posted By AugustinD on 10/30/2022 2:09 PM
I think going from Posted By BillH10 on 10/30/2022 12:39 PM
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
My first blush, zoning aside, is if "split" each unit still gets one vote. Say 100 lots spit into to duplexes, now 200 lots/votes instead of 100.
I agree.
And that means, if each lot pays the same dues, converting 100 lots into 200 would mean twice the revenue, or half the dues.
of course, 100 units are not going to split into 200 units overnight. But the principle is the same whether 1 splits or 100 splits.
It could work that way if the CC&Rs allow for it. Many of the CC&Rs I've read would not allow for it. The community is planned before any construction begins, with the number of lots and number of votes already defined. At that point you'd have to refer to the section that discusses what happens if the HOA acquires more land, sells off land, or makes any other changes that alter the original plan.
In addition, any changes to the original plan may require a unit/lot owner vote.
Also, I believe that any change that would result in different assessments is a hint that you need to look before you leap. My CC&Rs state that any change to how assessments are calculated requires unanimous approval from the membership, not just the normal 75% super-majority for other amendments.
In the example above, where a community with large lots is transitioning to a higher density one with smaller lots, it's obviously unfair for those with postage stamp sized lots to be assessed the same amount as those with the original sized lots. But many HOAs I've seen assess all unit owners the same amount, and the CC&Rs state that. The CC&Rs would need to be amended to allow for the transition period (and the board would need to be prepared to scratch their heads over the budgets every year).
This was another of those easily-stated questions that has some sneaky complexities underneath.
MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 462
Posts: 462
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By CathyA3 on 10/31/2022 6:17 AM
I agree.
And that means, if each lot pays the same dues, converting 100 lots into 200 would mean twice the revenue, or half the dues.
of course, 100 units are not going to split into 200 units overnight. But the principle is the same whether 1 splits or 100 splits.
Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/30/2022 7:34 PM
My first blush, zoning aside, is if "split" each unit still gets one vote. Say 100 lots spit into to duplexes, now 200 lots/votes instead of 100.
Posted By JohnC46 on 10/30/2022 6:54 PM
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/30/2022 6:38 PM
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
Posted By CathyA3 on 10/30/2022 5:43 PM
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
Posted By AugustinD on 10/30/2022 2:09 PM
I think going from Posted By BillH10 on 10/30/2022 12:39 PM
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
If Party A desires to sell 50%, or 10%, or whatever amount of their interest in their real property to Party B, that does not necessarily mean the lot will be split or subdivided.
{the OP's query about selling 'half of their lot to a neighbor'}
to
{a tenants in common situation where the entire lot would be owned by one or more entities, with the percentage interest each owner has in the entire lot as specified in the deed}
is quite the leap.
We shall see
It may be a leap. But in my non-lawyer mind, "selling half our lot" to someone else either means splitting the lot, with each owner becoming the sole owner of his/her piece, or becoming tenants in common of the original lot with the ownership percentages defined by legal agreement between the two parties.
The first option may be limited by deed restrictions, zoning laws, or other.
The second option can be high risk for the OP if they don't understand the ramifications. All of a sudden they're not the sole owner of the land underneath their home. If they have a mortgage, I'm sure the bank would be very interested in this, as would the county taxing division. Ditto their insurer. Ditto whoever has to run additional utility lines. It's why I recommended getting a lawyer involved from the get-go before someone else has the right to tell the OP what they can and can't do with what used to be their property.
As David mentioned elsewhere, what happens with the HOA vote is the least of their issues.
Michael mentioned zoning changes to allow higher density housing. Some cities have been allowing lot owners to built Accessory Dwelling Units (AUDs), sometimes referred to a mother-in-law quarters. These are often tiny houses, under 500 square feet, but entirely separate from the main home. I'm sure cities use a variety of options to handle the lots, but in all the articles I've read, lot ownership remained in the hands of the original owner - the person who owned the AUD had a written rental agreement with the lot owner to allow them to place the home there. It didn't come up in the articles, but I'm assuming that AUDs would be an issue in HOAs.
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
My first blush, zoning aside, is if "split" each unit still gets one vote. Say 100 lots spit into to duplexes, now 200 lots/votes instead of 100.
I agree.
And that means, if each lot pays the same dues, converting 100 lots into 200 would mean twice the revenue, or half the dues.
of course, 100 units are not going to split into 200 units overnight. But the principle is the same whether 1 splits or 100 splits.
It could work that way if the CC&Rs allow for it. Many of the CC&Rs I've read would not allow for it. The community is planned before any construction begins, with the number of lots and number of votes already defined. At that point you'd have to refer to the section that discusses what happens if the HOA acquires more land, sells off land, or makes any other changes that alter the original plan.
In addition, any changes to the original plan may require a unit/lot owner vote.
Also, I believe that any change that would result in different assessments is a hint that you need to look before you leap. My CC&Rs state that any change to how assessments are calculated requires unanimous approval from the membership, not just the normal 75% super-majority for other amendments.
In the example above, where a community with large lots is transitioning to a higher density one with smaller lots, it's obviously unfair for those with postage stamp sized lots to be assessed the same amount as those with the original sized lots. But many HOAs I've seen assess all unit owners the same amount, and the CC&Rs state that. The CC&Rs would need to be amended to allow for the transition period (and the board would need to be prepared to scratch their heads over the budgets every year).
This was another of those easily-stated questions that has some sneaky complexities underneath.
Cathy, there is some talk about zoning changes that override CC&Rs, and that is the situation that I am most interested in. State law of course can override CC&Rs, and if they do regarding number of units, assessments, etc, that will create some challenging complexities for our Board. In our situation, revising the CC&R is nearly a non-starter due to the onerous requirements, so we probably would look to the state legislature to cleanup the mess that they created if they ever do this.
This is all speculation. No law has been passed yet, just talk about potential laws. I think it'll eventually happen.
In our neighborhood, there are a numerous large homes on relatively larger lots, so we are ripe for conversion to duplexes if state law changed the zoning and overrode the CC&Rs.
AugustinD
Posts: 1,027
Posts: 1,027
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/30/2022 6:38 PM
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
You seem to think that the city/county could override the covenants on this issue. Covenants nearly always require at least a super-majority of owners to amend.
This is either never going to happen, or I would say the city/county and developer would never prevail in the ensuing litigation, due to the clash with the covenants and the covenants being contractual terms between all owners in the HOA.
At a former HOA of mine around 2012, the Declarant was long gone, and two large lots (of about 2000 lots total) had been unused for twenty years. A developer came to a well-attended board meeting to speak about buying the lots and building multi-family, two-story apartment complex on them. This was the first step to then proceeding to apply to the city for the development. The developers brought diagrams and handouts showing their plans. One of the developers made a joke about all the seeming anger in the room, with one of those big, excrement-eating, used car salesmen grins on his face. One of the HOA directors responded, "Sir, we do not get angry here. We sue." The HOA never heard from the developers again. The lots remain unused to this day.
I post for the archives. I disagree with MichaelT21's notion here. AFAIC, it's not going to happen except in possibly extraordinary situations where the HOA is so run-down, with no board, with multiple homes condemned by the city, that the covenants are seen as being in, I would say, some state of abandonment.
MichaelT21 (Arkansas)
Posts: 462
Posts: 462
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By AugustinD on 10/31/2022 6:44 AM
First, zoning laws of this type are a city/county matter, not a state matter. What you are talking about is a developer coming along and buying one or more lots in a HOA zoned for single family homes, with covenants also specifying single family homes (per plat and more), with the intention, per your thoughts, of obtaining a variance from the city or county to build multi-family housing. Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/30/2022 6:38 PM
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
The zoning changes that I am talking about are not Accessory dwelling units, but rather, allowing multiple separate homes on the same lot (i.e., a duplex, triplex, 4-plex, or six-plex). I have no idea how that will work with HOAs if it ever get passed by the state legislatures.
You seem to think that the city/county could override the covenants on this issue. Covenants nearly always require at least a super-majority of owners to amend.
This is either never going to happen, or I would say the city/county and developer would never prevail in the ensuing litigation, due to the clash with the covenants and the covenants being contractual terms between all owners in the HOA.
At a former HOA of mine around 2012, the Declarant was long gone, and two large lots (of about 2000 lots total) had been unused for twenty years. A developer came to a well-attended board meeting to speak about buying the lots and building multi-family, two-story apartment complex on them. This was the first step to then proceeding to apply to the city for the development. The developers brought diagrams and handouts showing their plans. One of the developers made a joke about all the seeming anger in the room, with one of those big, excrement-eating, used car salesmen grins on his face. One of the HOA directors responded, "Sir, we do not get angry here. We sue." The HOA never heard from the developers again. The lots remain unused to this day.
I post for the archives. I disagree with MichaelT21's notion here. AFAIC, it's not going to happen except in possibly extraordinary situations where the HOA is so run-down, with no board, with multiple homes condemned by the city, that the covenants are seen as being in, I would say, some state of abandonment.
Augustin, it something we on HOA Boards should be aware of and realize what is going on. California eliminated single family zoning on January 1st, 2022. I did a quick search and it was "unclear" as to the impact on HOAs. I don't have time to research but know that there was potential impacts. This was a statewide bill, not a local issue.
There is a movement nationwide to eliminate single family zoning in communities. How this will play out is beyond me.
You can disagree with me all you want, but I'm not the one passing legislation in state legislature houses. I'm just along for the ride. The ones you should disagree with are not part of this conversation.
AugustinD
Posts: 1,027
Posts: 1,027
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By MichaelT21 on 10/31/2022 6:51 AM
Augustin, it something we on HOA Boards should be aware of and realize what is going on. California eliminated single family zoning on January 1st, 2022. I did a quick search and it was "unclear" as to the impact on HOAs.
Augustin, it something we on HOA Boards should be aware of and realize what is going on. California eliminated single family zoning on January 1st, 2022. I did a quick search and it was "unclear" as to the impact on HOAs.
Contrast certain California statute changes on rentals: These do override HOA covenants. The statutes even expressly require the HOAs to amend their covenants to conform with state law.
CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299
Posts: 6,299
Posted:
We're getting away from the original question, but I think the need to increase housing density will be dependent on location and population to a large extent. In mostly urban areas. there is often a need for more affordable housing and limited space to build it. In my area (suburban/rural) the need doesn't exist yet.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think that there is a big difference between local regulations on pets, parking, and even rentals in HOAs overriding the CC&Rs vs. a change in zoning law that retroactively changes the nature of the property that an individual bought and pays taxes on. I suspect there's be less legal wrangling in the future if they'd changed the taxation structure to penalize under-developed land - this would encourage people to voluntarily make the desired changes. But nobody asked me. :-)
They also didn't ask me about the potential consequences of increasing housing density in an area experiencing severe water shortages, but I 'spects they'll find out. You can change the laws, but you can't make Mother Nature rain.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think that there is a big difference between local regulations on pets, parking, and even rentals in HOAs overriding the CC&Rs vs. a change in zoning law that retroactively changes the nature of the property that an individual bought and pays taxes on. I suspect there's be less legal wrangling in the future if they'd changed the taxation structure to penalize under-developed land - this would encourage people to voluntarily make the desired changes. But nobody asked me. :-)
They also didn't ask me about the potential consequences of increasing housing density in an area experiencing severe water shortages, but I 'spects they'll find out. You can change the laws, but you can't make Mother Nature rain.
AugustinD
Posts: 1,027
Posts: 1,027
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By CathyA3 on 10/31/2022 8:28 AM
They also didn't ask me about the potential consequences of increasing housing density in an area experiencing severe water shortages, but I 'spects they'll find out. You can change the laws, but you can't make Mother Nature rain.
They also didn't ask me about the potential consequences of increasing housing density in an area experiencing severe water shortages, but I 'spects they'll find out. You can change the laws, but you can't make Mother Nature rain.
I expect the state law coming down the pike to address the effects of water shortage is going to make new legislation encouraging higher building density look trivial.
🎯 You've read this entire discussion
Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:
- ✓ Ask follow-up questions
- ✓ Share your experience
- ✓ Get expert advice
- ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →
⚡ Takes 30 seconds
Already a member? Log in here