unequal size units of members

In our association we have 116 units that are in mutiple dwelling building , and 12 units that are in separate house type buildings ..The "houses" pay 10% more in dues than the bulding units. The "houses" have larger exclusive use areas per unit ,more square footage per unit , and are landscaped more extravegently , such that the percent of expendtures for the maintenance of the "houses" is larger than their percent contibution of the annual total dues as contrasted to the "buildings" ( 20% to 80%)..Is this a breach of the fiduciary responsibility of the board to the members in the "buildings"? Do different sized units create separate problems because of the disparity of size and maintenance cost? How does one adjust the needs vs. the contribution ?

Irwin,

Your CCRs should state what the rate of assessment will be for each type dwelling. Whatever is stated therein is how it must be regardless of whether some think there is a disparity or not.

Just out of curiosity, are the "house type" building like townhomes. Does the assn provide landscaping and exterior maint to these buildings also?

In our hoa of townhomes corner units with the largest amount of lawn are charged higher than those with practically none. It seems fair to me since the largest expenditure we have is landsacping. It is covered in our covenants.

Marianne,

The rate of assessment to be charged to each unit should be designated in the CCRs. In a planned community (single family homes) the rate is usually the same for each home. The reason for this is because each prop owner is resp. for the maint of his home and the assn is only resp for the upkeep of the common areas and any amenities. Therefore there is no need to proportion the assessment according to lot size, home size, etc. In a condo or townhouse assn where the HOA is resp for the exterior maint of each unit and perhaps the landscaping around each unit, the assessment may be apportioned according to size of unit and amount of landscaping. I doubt any of this is addressed by state law but it certainly should be addressed in the CCRs.

Our neighborhood has lots ranging from .25 - 1.0 acres and home ranging from 1800 - 3000+ sq. ft. The assessments are equal throughout the neighborhood of just over 1000 lots. Essentially, we each own an equal stake in the association. Of course we each manage our own landscaping/maintenance and assessments go to maintenance/improvement of common areas and our amenity centers. If I were the big home on the property and HOA assessments were used to maintain my property then I would expect to pay more than the residents of the small home/lot on the property. Anything less would certainly not be fair in my opinion.

Scott,

I understand what you're suggesting since your lots encompass a range of sizes. However, in our case and in the case of my previous paired patio home, the lot sizes are practically zero lot lines. There is very little property to be maintained and there is not wide disparity in lot sizes although clearly some are larger than others. Each home has a driveway to be cleared of snow and each driveway is approximately the same size - a negligible difference there. Of course the maintenance of the common areas is included in the association fee too. To portion out fees in accordance with the percentage of property in the whole, to then add in 1/115th of common area maintenance, and then to maintain books on the fees would be an unnecesary nightmare in our community.

There is also a value in having all lawns maintained by the same lawn care company at the same time. We don't have overgrown lawns here. The community has a well-manicured look at all times. The same is true with snow removal. The community is all done at one time. We have control over the process. Those aesthetics are a value to us and we're willing to pay to achieve a good-looking neighborhood that is well-managed.

It seems to me that there are so many different types of communities that an association's fee structure depends on the type of community. One size does not fit all. The formula for determining fees may very well depend on whether the community is made up of condos, townhomes, single-family homes, age-restricted, mixed housing, or any other type of housing.

Wow.

I'm so bad.

I saw the subject line of this thread and was thinking. . . something completely different. . . .

Marianne,

I know nothing about the laws in your state but here in Florida one only owns a "share" in the corporation is a co-op and not a condo or hoa. Is yours a co-op?

Good question, Ellen,

We are neither a cooperative nor a condominium. We are a patio home community, which seems to be a hybrid of sorts. From the Declaration of Covenants -- "...each Owner of a Lot which is subject to assessment shall, automatically upon becoming an Owner, be and become a Member of the Corporation and shall remain a Member until such time as his ownership of a Lot ceases....". Perhaps I should have used the word "Member" of the Corporation instead of "share."

I own my entire lot from the sidewalk to the back fence and my half of the building. If the roof fails, I must pay for any replacement. If windows, doors, shutters, walls fail or are damaged, I must pay for them. I carry full homeowners insurance - not renters insurance. In fact, a few years ago, our building sustained hail damage. My neighbor and I had the roof replaced. Our insurance paid the bill after we paid our deductibles.

As far as lawn care and snow removal, the BOD hires and oversees the companies which care for our lawns and do snow removal. That's one of the reasons many of us chose to buy in this 55+ community. We don't want to do snow removal or mow lawns any more. We do NOT have an assisted living facility here -- only 13 single homes and 112 paired homes. We may claim a homestead and a mortgage deduction on our taxes.

In the 70's (now you know I've been around for a while), I lived in one of the first cooperatives in the nation. There was no income ceiling, but there was an income floor. If anything needed maintenance, inside or outside, the cooperative took care of that. And yes, we each owned a share of the cooperative and our share was tax deductible.

It is my understanding that in a condominium, one owns only the inside of the home. The condo association owns and maintains the outside of the buildings. The condo owner carries renters' insurance. At least, this is how I understand a condo works.
Marianne

Marianne,

From your description of your property I would say your patio home assn would be classified as an HOA (planned community). In a planned community the members own their own homes and the assn owns the common areas. In a condo assn the members own the inside of their unit and a proportional share of the common areas. Many states only have statutes for condos, but some do also have statutes for planned communities (HOAs). However, I've never come across a state that has statutes for patio homes or townhomes so they either fit into the condo statutes or the HOA (planned community) statutes.

I think we still call those type of "homes" "condos."

Anything where units share a wall.

It can still be a planned community.

Michele,

If the OP says the owner is responsible for repairing their unit it is not a condo. Our state has very different laws for townhomes and condos and I suspect her state may too.

Guys, I was just making a point about nomenclature.

It may have specific legal definitions (condo).

All *I* was saying is that here, everyone, including those in realty, call anything that shares a wall a "condo."

They may also call them patio homes or townhouses, or duplexes or four-plexes.....

My comment was more or less rhetorical.

Hey Marianne; you got a box. Good job!

That smiley was made by typing a colon followed by ). A frown can be made by typing a colon followed by (. Also, if you click "reply" (next to quote), the message you are responding to will appear above the space for your message but it will not show up after you click "send". This is a good feature as it allows you to have access to the message you are responding to so you won't "forget" what info the msg contained.

I think you can bold face text as follows (I'll know if this works after I've posted this msg!)

bold face

Thanks, Mary . No more . for me now that I'm "with it.". That's all any of us need, isn't it - just a "little help from our friends."