County Ordinances vs HOA CCR's

After a lot of research several county ordinances are in conflict with our HOA's CCR's. For example, one issue is basketball goals. The county says yes to in the front yard but they must be adjacent to the driveway - the net must not face the street. Now, our CCR's say only portable bb goals & they must be kept out of the front when not in use. Who takes presidence when there are conflicts of this nature? We are in conflict with the county as well regarding commercial vehicles, fence allowances and the amount of votes it takes to turn our wet/dry pond over to the county. We are starting to have members do this same research & we aren't sure what to do.

Now then, if the county takes presidence over the HOA do we still need a quorum to change the CCR's/Bylaws to comply with the county.

Thanks

Debby

Debby,

Your CCRs can be more restrictive than county ordinances but they cannot allow something the county prohibits. Don't let your members get away with telling you they can do something that is restricted in the CCRs because the Co ordinance allows it! You do not need to change your CCRs to agree with the Co ordinance unless the CCRs allow something the Co prohibits. Hope this helps.

Thanks, Mary as well, you snuck in there after I posted.

That's a good list Donna, thanks for that.

Mary,

Don't you think that if the State says, ---"UNLESS THE GOVERNING DOCS" ETC, means that it has PRECEDENCE BUT it IS TURNING IT OVER TO THE ASSOC?

Like it or not, call them what you want, the Fed, State and City still are the heirarchy. So you stick to your opinion. You are entitled to it.

Debby,
A word of caution. Make very sure of your State statutes and how they are enforced by the state. Maryland laws seem to be headed toward less conservative influence that Georgia. I am no expert, and speak only from postings on this site. I know Georgia has some strange ways of looking at Homeowners associations. Not implying they are wrong but certainly not cookie cutter copies of other states. Also Maryland has in the past few years made some sweeping and radical changes in the statute and also the enforcement of the documents.
All the opinions above should be given due consideration and should serve as guidelines to establish what is going to work for you.

Rarely, very rarely does an owner win. Laws are written---guess what???
to be followed. Score? Law 1, owner, 0

Robert,

Remember back when my Association took the 2 Cadillac Escallade owners to court over the interpretation of "What is a pickup truck?" The Judge asked the Developer, under oath, what was his INTENTION of the covenant banning pickup trucks

The Developer stated that he "INTENDED" to keep out commercial and work pickups but did not mean to ban the fancy, schmancy Escallades. The Judge read outloud word for word the covenant. No where was there a distinction between fancy or work pickups. Score one--- for the documents and HOA.

But the HOA lost the part of the case where a distinction of those SUVs/PICKUPS were not considered trucks. GM sent documentation where they "segmented"(classified) them as SUVs because when people spent $65,000 for a truck, they did not want to call them trucks. Score 2--owners.

The end results were that the Escallades remained in the driveways overnight but the HOA was allowed to continue enforcing the no trucks in the driveways. In otherwaords, it was an expensive lesson for the HOA because they were judged to pay the legal bills.

Mary,

Never offended. Stubborn sometimes but not offended.

As everyone else here has stated, your documents can be more restrictive than the local zoning and county codes. That does not mean they are in "conflict." It simply means the county's minimum standard is less restrictive.

In our area, for example, 8-foot fences are allowed. Our community (HOA) only allows fences to be 6-feet high.

It was challenged, we won before it even got to court. The resident's attorney advised him to drop it.

Also, the county regulations allow for above-ground pools.

Our CC&Rs do not.

We had a resident challenge that, as well, and their attorney advised them to drop it.

And, in another case, our CC&Rs define "commercial vehicles" to include company vans with signage on it. The county "definition" of "commercial vehicle" deals more with tonnage and number of axles.

Our CC&Rs were challenged, and this time the residents backed down, but not before a lawsuit was filed. They ended up "agreeing" to a court order stating that they will comply with all parts of the CC&Rs, including the commercial vehicle "definition." Plus they ended up "agreeing" to paying our attorney fees.

Donna,

Sorry, but your last line is not quite true. If the state statute says, "unless otherwise provided in the community documents", it means the HOA gov docs prevail (override) the state law. Also if a covenant is more restrictive than city/co code it effectively overrides that city code.

HOA BODs must be familiar with Fed, State and local laws/ordinances and they must be aware that in some instances their gov docs may prevail. It's just not a cut and dried application.

You are really cracking me up.

What an exercise in hair splitting. . .and "override" that section if they apply.

Po-tay-toe, Po-tah-toe.

Really? You're telling a retired communication specialist that words have meaning? Kooky!

Your words, however, in this particular case are hair splitting.

Then again, that's just my opinion.

"Unless otherwise stated in the community documents" is NOT written into state statues as a 'preamble' to the entire satute but is used as needed for each PARTICULAR section/subsection as needed.

Mary now who is the one splitting hairs, that is for a particular sub-section on audits not the entire Title 33 nor does it apply to Chapter 16 on Planned Communities.

33-1801. Applicability; exemption

A. This chapter applies to all planned communities.

B. Notwithstanding any provisions in the community documents, this chapter does not apply to any school that receives monies from this state, including a charter school, and a school is exempt from regulation or any enforcement action by any homeowners' association that is subject to this chapter. With the exception of home schools as defined in section 15-802, schools shall not be established within the living units of a homeowners' association. The homeowners' association may enter into a contractual agreement with a school district or charter school to allow use of the homeowners' association's common areas by the school district or charter school.

C. This chapter does not apply to timeshare plans or associations that are subject to chapter 20 of this title.

Note that nowhere does this section give cart blance to ignore all of the HOA laws if covered under the existing HOA documents but only certain subsections can be ignored IF the section allows it and it is already covered in the documents. Before you go after others for the tone of their posts, I suggest you go back and examine your recent postings.

Debbie,

If you think that you were confused on your original posting, the last 10 replies should have sent you over the deep end. I can't even tell what this thread is about anymore.

I think that you asked, "Who takes presidence when there are conflicts of this nature? We are in conflict with the county as well regarding commercial vehicles, fence allowances and the amount of votes it takes to turn our wet/dry pond over to the county. "

Basic legal websites list the heirarchy of governing laws and documents, which I posted and from there it went down to splitting hairs.

But Donna, the key on this (and her original question) is that the CC&Rs are NOT in conflict with local ordinances.

If she comes away from this thread thinking that, then we have royally screwed up.

As a reminder:

CC&Rs can be MORE restrictive, but not LESS restrictive, than local, fed. or state regs. (Example, IF local ordinances say fences MUST be at least 6 feet high, and the CC&Rs require 8-foot fences, there is no conflict. IF, however, the CC&Rs require 4-foot fences, then they ARE in conflict and are unenforceable.)

If they are MORE restrictive they are not in conflict and they still can and should be enforced.

Quite possibly because we have a new poster who likes to see himself speak. And dearly wants to be "right" in every post.

I've got the drift. Our CCR's are just more restrictive which is acceptable.

Thanks for everyone's input