City mandated Contruction (retrofiting)

If you know better and experience offer assistance. Otherwise your HOA is funded by it's members for it's members. That means ALL of you foot the bill. Better deal if split between all members than hiring your own. Otherwise the bills would vary so widely that it would lose all control

The HOA is responsible for the roof.
The roof will not be accessed or touched during this construction in any way shape or form.

It is perfectly reasonable to schedule and abide by any rules the HOA has.
I am not sure why there needs to be a special assessment either.

The PM is new. They are not as well versed as we are being we have spent 3 years learning about the construction process knowing this was coming. But no time to learn about the HOA involvement.

The PM may be a good resource for HOA law and basics. But they are not a good resource with retrofitting vendors and construction of this magnitude (no Pun).

If anyone can point me toward something to support learning more about how the HOA can choose my vendor for me. Calling this a special assessment? You seem a bit confused as I am too. which makes me feel better. I thought I was missing something.

Yes, I am admittedly ignorant about such a project. I don't know if you're missing anything.Yes, I figured the roofs were the only common area and not involved in this project.

But in my 14 years of board service in my urban condo building HOA, every PM we had (about 8 over 16 years, sadly) knew of vendors and contractors or knew of other PM firms who knew of them OR their MC new of some. I'm talking major projects like recaulking the entire twin towers exterior, recladding the building exterior of two stories with decorative granite to replace defective granite, hiring a giant crane to mount new cooling towers on our 25 story high twin roofs.

But I still don't see WHY your association is involved at all? Your PM, who probably is your HOA's "agent," didn't receive a notice from the "city."You know? a batch of you may have to pool some $$ to hire an attorney to advise why this needs to be a HOA project and not an individual one among 4 owners of attached THs.

Ask your PM to show you in your governing documents why the HOA is involved. Ask your board at its next open board meeting during open forum to show you in your gov. docs why the HOA must be involved.

Look up "capital expenditure" in your CC&Rs, starting with the definition section. You should see that such expenditures apply only to the common area. So what the hell would any "special assessment" pay for?

Please tell me if the entire HOA comprises each building being basically the same with 4 units and all the same sf?? I don't know why this should matter, though.

As I'd already mentioned, of course the HOA would make specific rules for the project re: scheduling, parking, work hours, etc. This is simple stuff and in CA, the proposed rules would need to be sent to Owners for a 28-day comment period.

Yes, scheduling is not an issue. For something of this magnitude there is no friction on parking and no friction with working with all the HOA rules like you would if a contractor came to your condo to do work. This is not some totally isolated rogue construction project. Board members are volunteers, they are not trained during their two-year term in advanced project management skills. PM groups are hit and miss as well. The faith we have in a PM group that is 2 months old to run a massive project like this is not really worth the risk and they want additional fees to be involved in this as the try to learn what is going on.
There is no bulk rate discount? 4 units will cost the same as 400 units. They explained they are not going to Costco to buy parts,lol steel is steel. Labor is labor. More hours of work for them does not equate to cheaper rates which I can respect. Someone who is involved in project management and construction. Your experience with vendors may differ, not the topic here.
All the buildings are the same and there are multiple vendors that are proficient at this work.
Offering assistance to the board to encourage the board to go with a more experienced vendor that has a better methodology with retrofitting means I am trying to convince not just the board but then they have to justify this to hundreds of homeowners who probably do not care as much as our group of young families looking for longevity rather than to split and sell soon.
This is our home, and we do not want the cheap guy the Board feels is middle of the row.
Why do we have to pay for a special assessment for a CIty-mandated project? This is not a capital improvement.
The Board members, bless their hearts, who pick out flowers and umbrella colors should not be trying to help create a million-dollar assessment with one vendor and have everyone pay this out.

Look there is no bad blood and everyone is great, no friction, just more of an educational process and no one is fighting over this. Constant contact with the Board, all the CC&Rs are transparent, conversations are being had and nothing is heated. Trying to see if anyone out there has been through this as this has occurred to millions of folks in Southern California and we are not re-inventing the wheel here. There must be a community leader who can shed some light on this. Our PM can not.

Should have some options this could be broken down into. Rather than this rigid strange path this is going.

Again, PM is not a bunch of rockstars, they are new, their minor vendors have not worked out over the last two months and they seem fine and capable of doing day-to-day PM work. But this is another level and larger scale. Something we are not super confident they would be good at or have the bandwidth to get involved in. They are dipping their feet into this and we have three years of outreach and research working with vendors, vetting, project management, lots of phone calls. Non of us are in this arena nor are asking to be a part of some shady kickback action. If we are spending our own money, on our own home, we want to do our retrofit with someone we all agree on. Which most likely is not a great fit for the other folks looking to move soon.

BoardT, I read all your posts. In my opinion, if the Declaration says that the maintenance responsibility for this infrastructure is the responsibility of each owner, then the HOA Board does not have the legal authority to sign any contract for this infrastructure's improvement. Furthermore, if the board does sign off on any contract, it is undertaking potential liabilities.

In my opinion you should consider starting with a "demand letter lite" to the board from the four owners in your building. If time is of the essence, then hire an attorney immediately and also immediately let the board know and politely but firmly suggest they not sign any contracts. The instant the board signs a contract for this retrofitting, things become a lot more complicated.

In preparation for this meeting with the attorney, I suggest you post here exactly what the Declaration says about who has the maintenance responsibility for (1) the garages, beneath living spaces; and (2) any walls involved; and (3) any plumbing and electrical systems affected.

You can also attend the next open board meeting and point out what the covenants say on this matter. Ask the board to explain its justification for undertaking responsibility for property for which the covenants (according to you) say the HOA does not have the maintenance responsibility.

I would be surprised if some of this infrastructure were not what is known as "common area" for which the HOA has responsibility. Systems (wall systems, structural support yada systems, plumbing systems, electrical wiring) that are shared or use by more than one unit might very well be the HOA's responsibility, with the HOA having the legal right to bill the affected owners.

If the order came to the owners from the City, and the work does not affect a common area or an area subject to architectural review, and if the work doesn't get done, the owner is liable to the City, then it seems the association or management company would not be involved a all. I presume your governing documents don't address this scenario.

If no common area is involved, then you should seek Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR) and start shopping for an attorney. The davis-stirling.com site has everything one needs to know about IDR at it. It has a great search engine, too.