Residents take HOA woes to city council! in WA State

THIS is a new one. Anything like this happening in your area?

City of Lacey (WA) is very aware around the HOA issue and is the town that offers an "HOA Academy" that's open to
HOA board members in the area.

This particular development - HOA members beseech the city council for help - is something, something
new (to me!) in that it reflects the problems many HOA members have with their boards and don't know where to go for help.

But turning to the city makes sense, as cities impose HOAs on neighborhoods and new developments to take on responsibility for services
the city won't offer or impose taxes to pay for.

This move reflects the LACK of recourse to any helpful body that many HOA members feel they have when bad leadership and bad rules (CCRs, bylaws)
intersect and life becomes a challenge, battle or war inside the neighborhood.

Yes, HOA members can take their board to court, and often should, but many will hesitate because of the financial cost.
Residents no doubt feel they're already paying and they have to pay *more* to try and make the board do right, act right?

Yes, should HOA members have to go to court? There are arbitration services, at (one hopes) lower cost, but
how helpful are those?

Thoughts?

Lacey residents ask city for help with HOA board, accusing it of being ‘out of control’ BY ROLF BOONE UPDATED NOVEMBER 19, 2023 1:31 PM

https://www.theolympian.com/news/local/article282026063.html

In California, most big HOA issues can be heard and resolved in Small Claims Court. No attorneys allowed.

I’ve always felt that there should be low-cost (preferably free) arbitration/mediation services available to the public. In my area, the BBB had a mediation program for issues between its members and customers, and once I read about a mediation program sponsored by a prosecutor’s office (can’t remember the city) that helped iron out disputes between neighbors before someone resorted to gunfire.

I don’t know if either program exists anymore, but it seems to me this would be a nice program for a local law school. The BBB’s program recruited mediators from the general public and gave them six to eight weeks of training, which I heard was very intense. People were encouraged to use some common sense in trying to get both sides to meet in the middle – something too few people are willing to do these days.

Arbitration programs usually require the participants to pay in advance and agree to comply with the arbitrator’s decision in lieu of going to court (the winner gets reimbursed by the loser), which is what the program is designed to avoid. This way court dockets don’t get jammed up and people aren’t faced with escalating costs. I think that’s reasonable – all of this costs time and money anyway, so if you’re going to take this step, you may as well be willing to put some money on the line.

Now as far as HOAs go, I like the idea of the HOA academy – if you’re going to have them all over the county, there should be some sort of effort to educate would-be board members (and some experienced ones as well) on their obligations and best practices. That’s why I’m always talking up CAI’s education materials – you can debate their positions on various HOA issues in your area, but I think their most valuable contribution is in educating homeowners who grow up to become board members. You don’t always know what you don’t know and board members need to remember this is a non-profit organization that must be run as a business, not as poker night or treat the money as if it’s your own private stash to do whatever.

All of that said, homeowners need to become more familiar with their documents, preferably before they move in, so they understand what to expect. It’s ok if you don’t want to be in an HOA – if you find out that’s where your dream house is located, you’ll have to make a decision because you can’t go in and say “But I didn’t know this was an HOA!” You’re buying a house, yet people continue to treat the process like they’re buying groceries – except it seems more thought goes into buying groceries instead of what will usually be the largest purchase you’ll ever make in your life.

When you know what to expect of yourselves and each other, it’s easier to point out bad behavior, but you have to let folks know from the start that ethical behavior isn’t an option – it’s what they’re supposed to do. If you’re on the board and don’t understand or care your decisions have to be in the best interest of the entire community, you need to sit down and let someone with more integrity and a stronger work ethic take over. If you’re a homeowner, you must take the time to read income-expense reports, attend the annual meeting, and review board meeting minutes so you’ll have a clue about what’s going on.

Don’t like what the board is doing? The tools to vote them out, either at the next election or through a recall are there, but you have to use them. I’m not a fan of going to court, but if that’s what it takes to get really awful people out, rally together your neighbors, pass the hat so you can hire an attorney who’s part Dracula (going after your opponents, not you!) and let it do what it do.

If you take the “vote them bastards out” option, you’ll also need people ready and willing to step up and take over – and one of them may need to be you. Then you can get comfy in the hot seat and see what it really takes. But you have to be willing to make the effort and get your neighbors involved because it’s very difficult to do alone. If you can’t or won’t do that because it interferes with binge-watching Succession or you just want other people to fix your problems, it won’t matter what the city, state, or Congress does (and we know Congress won’t do jack because they’re not doing a lot about the current state of affairs!)

In CA, contra Terri, local and state agencies have plenty of authority over HOAs with fire code, building permits, etc., etc. etc.

Cities and counties have no say over how HOAs are run. That was the subject of the post.

I didn’t forget; those words weren’t necessary. The question dealt with bad boards. The question had nothing to do with planning dept or building dept issues. Plenty of bad boards to go around.

State laws absolutely address the governance of corporations, and some states have created ombudsman-like offices to address governance issues in HOAs. Florida, California, and other states have statutes that create and make available options for mediation and dispute resolution short of filing lawsuits for everything. The courts are jammed as it is, and it's in the interest of states to resolve the low-level stuff in other ways - hence the laws.

And don't all your stories of Adventures in Small Claims Court contradict your position that the law doesn't get involved in individual HOAs? Did I misunderstand the point of all that?

And now you even falsely claim that my "position" is that "the law" doesn't get involved in individual HOAs!!! A total fabrication by you. I never wrote that anywhere.

Seems the discussion turned to CA vs. WA

I think it's a good idea for the State, County or Municipality to hold free education classes for board members.

Many of the issues that I've seen come from interpreting Bylaws or Covenants.
Even States that have an Ombudsman Office for HOA/COAs tend to only get involved when a statute is being violated and run away from any Bylaw or Covenant interpretation.

I sure wish people could simply agree to disagree (even if it's a simple misinterpretation) vs. getting into insults and I did not/I did to arguments.

Keep in mind that mediation is the process of having the two sides reach a compromise. The mediator does not rule one way or the other. In my opinion, this makes mediation mute when one or both sides of an issue have already dug in their feet (so to speak) and drawn a line they won't cross.

Arbitration is the process of the arbitrator listening to both sides, reading relevant material each side presents and reach a verdict. If it's not binding arbitration, then it may or may not work.

If it is binding arbitration, if the individual/s isn't current on applicable statutes or methodologies, the whole issue could have a verdict that is simply wrong. For example, I remember a Judge Judy show (a sensationalized for entertainment binding arbitration) where she asked to see the contract. The contract was electronically signed. Judge Judy, you could tell, didn't have a clue what that was and ruled the contract invalid.

Shelia, you misunderstand me. It isn’t about having or not having a degree. It is about being a lawyer, student or otherwise. Every lawyer I have ever met has been far more influenced by (and eager to use) a juicy story to manipulate and misrepresent than solid facts. I wouldn’t trust a lawyer – or a law student – to have the wisdom to judge a dog show.

And lawyers also seem inordinately focused on grabbing for dollars.

(Apologies to any lawyers out there. Undoubtedly there are exceptions. I just haven’t met any.)

I didn't say "they're all just in it for the money". I said they "seem inordinately focused on grabbing for dollars." And they do. Over the welfare of their clients.

But that is not the worst part. The worst part is both lawyers and judges are so easily manipulated by a nice story over cold, hard facts.

I do not believe in the wisdom, insight, and objectivity of anyone who is far more interested in the sizzle than the steak.

I agree that the signs are that some (though not all) HOA attorneys seem to know that promoting conflict translates to more billable hours.An owner who time and again, gets the law wrong might be costing an association many dollars in attorney fees. It is not the HOA's job to explain the law to the owner. Similarly, the HOA attorney is not supposed to give legal advice to a non-client. An ethical attorney (as you put it) may very well advise either ignoring the owner; waiting until the owner lawyers up; or waiting until the owner files suit pro se, possibly regardless of the owner's claims. Forcing the owner to either lawyer means the owner has to find an attorney, and then said attorney will, on the owner's dime, explain why the owner does not have a case. Forcing the owner to go to court pro se may be punishment as well.

The net cost of this approach may very well be cheaper than the net cost of answering every claim (either frivolous, unfounded, or legally correct) the owner makes.

You appear to have been in the right at times (with the board, very wrong). On this forum, you have also made egregious errors concerning what the law says. I have seen enough of your blunders and misconceptions to believe it is entirely possibly your HOA's attorney and board have taken the position I describe above. It may very well be saving the HOA money (in comparison to having the HOA attorney look at every complaint of yours, unfounded, frivolous or otherwise).

Time and again nationwide certain owners allege their HOA has violated the law. In my opinion, often a board is prudent in sending such allegations to the HOA attorney. Once the HOA attorney is convinced that much of the time, the owner either (1) does not know what he/she is talking about; or (2) is incapable of understanding simple explanations; or (3) cannot communicate so that the HOA attorney understands his/her reasoning (or lack thereof), the HOA's budgetary needs might very well argue for ignoring the owner.

I saw this in one former HOA. A certain owner was insisting, among other things, that imposing the HOA assessment was a violation of the 13th amendment to the United States Constitution (prohibiting slavery). The board had the HOA attorney send the owner a long letter (over four pages, IIRC), explaining why the assessment was lawful. And then another letter. And still another. Eventually the board wised up. No more letters. The owner eventually actually sued in district court, largely on these grounds. And of course lost. Lesson learned.

It's also entirely possible a board and HOA attorney's strategy is to harass an owner, using legal means, until the owner moves.

It's not personal. It's just business. In this case for a nonprofit that does not have oodles of money. As well, associations certainly have no obligation to educate owners such that they are practically paralegals.

Benign neglect = fiduciary negligence

Did they say the writing was appalling? I thought it said appealing.