Amending Governing Documents

Amending your condominium or homeowners association governing documents is no easy chore. It can be a long and costly process, and even then, you may not receive enough votes to approve the amendments. The process of amending goes like this:

1. Identify the reasons for amendments 2. Determine any statutory requirements 3. Determine voting requirements 4. Decide on the method of voting 5. Solicit owner feedback on proposed amendments 6. Conduct the vote 7. Prepare the amendments for recording 8. Sign and notarize 9. Secure any governmental approvals 10. Record the amendments with the county recorder

Here are some things to consider before embarking on an amendment project:

Identify the Reasons for the Amendments

There are many reasons to amend governing documents. Common reasons include:

1. Legislative changes 2. Ambiguous provisions 3. Outdated provisions 4. Community demographic has changed 5. Removal of “declarant” language 6. Adding or removing restrictions

It’s critical that the reasons for each amendment are conveyed to the owners. After all, most amendments require owner approval. Making a convincing case to the ownership will result in higher voter turnout and more “yes” votes.

Find out What’s Required

Most CC&R amendments require a vote of between 65%-75% of the entire ownership. Bylaw amendments typically require a majority vote of the owners. However, sometimes state law will require different approval requirements. For example, in Oregon condominiums the approval of 75% of all owners is required for any amendment related to pet restrictions or the rental or leasing of units. (ORS 100.410(4)). In Washington, a homeowners association may amend its governing documents to remove discriminatory provisions by a majority vote of just the board of directors (RCW 64.38.028)

Method of Voting

Most associations will find it impossible to approve a governing document amendment at a physical meeting of the owners. For a CC&R amendment requiring 75% approval, the chances of that many owners attending a physical meeting in person or proxy is slim. The most common method is to conduct the vote by written ballot. Better yet, some communities may conduct the vote via online ballot. This often generates the most voter turn out. For an example of an online ballot, click here.

Finalize and Record

Once the required number of votes have been received, the amendment must be prepared for signature and recording. In some cases, approval by the state or a governmental authority must be received and reflected on the amendment. The amendment should contain references to the original documents which are subject to the amendments, and must be signed and notarized. The amendments do not become effective until recorded with the county recorders office.

To learn more, check out our document amendment timeline.

Understanding Governing Document Restatements

The process of amending governing documents is no easy task. Changes to the CC&Rs typically require between 66%-75% of the owners to approve.  Bylaw amendments, on the other hand, are a little easier to modify, usually requiring a majority vote of the owners.

But suppose over the years your governing documents have been amended several times. Numerous amendments can make things complicated. When reading the CC&Rs or Bylaws, the reader must frequently refer to the amendments to confirm which sections have been modified.

“Restating” a governing document means combining the original document with all subsequent amendments. The association prepares a document incorporating all amendments and records a single “restated” version. Now, members can use and refer to a single document instead of an original and multiple separate amendments.   

For example, let’s suppose your original Bylaws were adopted in 1995. In 1998 the association (via an amendment) increased the number of directors. Then, in 2000, the members voted to change the date of the annual meeting. Two years later, another amendment was adopted increasing the quorum requirement. Lastly, a recent amendment mandated that the board of directors carry liability insurance. Reading the Bylaws now requires the reader to review each of the amendments to ensure whichever section they are reading hasn’t been modified.

Oregon and Washington both provide procedures for restating. Washington, however, only addresses the process to restate the articles of incorporation. (RCW 24.03.183).

The procedure for Oregon planned communities and condominiums is the same. The board of directors adopts a resolution to prepare, codify, and record individual amendments. This does not require a vote of the owners. At the beginning of the restated document, the board must:

1. Include a statement that the board has adopted a resolution authorizing a restatement;

2. Not include any other changes which have not been properly adopted by the membership (except for scriveners’ error or to conform with format or style);

3. Include a certification by the president and secretary that the restated document includes all previously adopted amendments;

4. Cite to the document recording numbers of the previous amendments; and

5. Record the restatement in the county records where the community is located.

If your association has adopted multiple amendments over the years, talk with a qualified attorney and consider codifying and restating your documents.

2015 Case Law Review

Lawyers depend on case law to provide advice to homeowner and condominium associations.  While cases in other states are not binding, they often provide guidance to lawyers and board members. The following is a short summary of cases from around the United States involving community associations.

Filmore LLLP v. Unit Owners Association of Centre Pointe Condominium - Washington

The association attempted to adopt a cap on the number of rentals in the community. While the governing documents stated that only a majority of owners were required to vote in favor of the amendment, the Court imposed a higher approval threshold of a supermajority of all owners.

Acorn Ponds Homeowners Association vs. DeBenedittis - New York

Pedestrian filed action against homeowners association and association's snow removal contractor to recover damages for personal injuries pedestrian allegedly sustained when he slipped and fell on a patch of ice on property owned by association. The court found that the snow removal contractor did not substantially contribute to the injuries.

Neufairfield Homeowners Association v. Wagner - Illinois

The court in this case determined that two daycare businesses did not create sufficient traffic to violate a use restriction prohibiting frequent commercial traffic in the subdivision.

100 Harborview Drive Condominium Council of Unit Owners v. Clark - Maryland

An owner sued the association after the board refused to provide copies of it’s legal invoices. Under the law, communications between an association and it’s legal counsel are considered privileged. The court denied the owner’s request for copies of those documents.

Bluff Point Townhouse Owners Ass'n, Inc. v. Kapsokefalos - New York

An owner within the community claimed that the association did not have the authority to levy assessments. The Court found that the governing documents provided the authority to levy assessments and that the board had followed the proper procedures to levy and collect monthly assessments.

Arbors at Sugar Creek HOA vs. Jefferson Bank - Missouri

Owners of five lots in 18-lot subdivision brought action against lender that acquired from developer, through foreclosure, the 13 unsold lots and against contractor that agreed to build on the unsold lots seeking, among other things, declaratory and injunctive relief relating to management of the subdivision. The court made the following rulings:

1 lender could establish a successor homeowners association for the subdivision;

2 lender did not violate its duty of good faith and fair dealing by amending subdivision's declaration of covenants so as to remove residency requirement for members of association's board;

3 sufficient evidence supported trial court's finding that board acted reasonably and in good faith in approving building plans for one of the unsold lots;

4 lender was not entitled to recover from the lot owners the expenses it incurred to maintain the subdivision; and

5 lot owners could not be held liable to lender for abuse of process or slander of title.

Belleville vs. Malvern Hunt Homeowners Association - Pennsylvania

The developer of the community recorded CC&Rs before starting construction of the homes. During construction, the developer decided that a portion of the community would receive certain services (snow removal, landscaping) and that other portions would not receive those services.  Shortly after that decision, an owner purchased a lot. The developer gave the owner an unrecorded and unsigned amendment to the CC&Rs. The Court held that without recording the amendment, it was not valid or binding on the owner.

Houston v. Wilson Mesa Ranch Homeowners Association, Inc - Colorado

An owner in the community began leasing his home using VRBO (a short-term vacation rental website). The association took the position that frequent short-term rentals violated the commercial use provision in the CC&Rs.  The Court found that even though the owner was making a profit, the rentals merely provided a place for others to eat and sleep—therefore the use was “residential” and not commercial.

Gonon v. Community Management Services, Inc. - Indiana

Law firms or agencies which handle the collection of assessments are subject to the Federal Fair Debt Collections Practices Act. In this case, an owner sued the association’s management company for violations of the Act. The Court found that because the owner was not delinquent at the time the association hired the management company, the management company was not subject to the Act.

Walker I Investments, LLC v. Sunpeak Association, Inc. - Utah

In this case the Court found under the state’s nonprofit corporation law, the homeowners association was not obligated to provide an owner with the email addresses or phone numbers of the other owners in the community.

Online Voting for Community Associations

We recently concluded a membership vote to adopt an entirely new set of CC&Rs and Bylaws.  The CC&Rs require 75% of all owners to approve, and the Bylaws require 51%. With nearly 300 lots in the community, it was a high number of "yes" votes to receive.  Surprisingly, within a matter of weeks the necessary votes were received and the documents approved. The Association appointed a committee to oversee and coordinate the "governing document project." After an initial meeting to review the challenges with the original governing documents, CALAW created a first draft of the CC&Rs and Bylaws.  Those drafts were reviewed, comments were solicited, and revisions were made.  After one more round of meetings and revisions, we were ready to present the proposed documents to the owners.

First, we posted drafts of the proposed documents on the internet for owners to review and download. Shortly after the documents were provided to the owners, the first of two townhall-style meetings were held.  At the first meeting, attorney Kevin Harker reviewed each section of the CC&Rs and Bylaws, explaining the meaning of each provision and reasons for inclusion.

For the next several days after the meeting, we collected feedback from the owners. Once the owners' concerns and comments were incorporated into a new draft, a second townhall meeting was held to ensure that owners understood the importance and significance of adopting new CC&Rs and Bylaws.

Then came the voting. Owners voted through an online ballot:

As soon as owners clicked "submit", the vote was recorded in an online spreadsheet:

The spreadsheet contained a separate area which kept a live tally of the votes:

With the required number of votes received, the next step was to sign and record.  Community Association Law Group uses Simplifile to upload and record documents to the county recorder's office:

Thirty minutes later the documents were recorded with the county recorder's office:

Once recorded, the documents were official!

Marijuana in Community Associations

For some condominium and homeowner associations, marijuana (smoking and growing) is becoming a concern. There are a handful of tools the board of directors may consider to handle these issues.

1. Nuisance

A nuisance claim is most frequently used in banning smoking in multi-family residential units.  A “nuisance” is defined as conduct that causes a substantial and unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of the premises. 

In Christiansen v. Heritage Hills 1 Condominium Owners Association, a Colorado District Court held that second-hand cigarette smoke qualifies as a nuisance.  The Court also noted that smoking is not a right protected by the Constitution.

Although the courts in Oregon and Washington are not required to follow the holding in this case, the courts do still have discretion to follow the holding.  Both the smoking of cigarettes and the smoking of marijuana emit harmful chemicals that can cause serious health complications.  In fact, marijuana smoke has joined tobacco smoke on a list of substances that, in California, regulators say cause cancer. It is harmful to anyone’s use and enjoyment of their property to be involuntarily exposed to dangerous chemicals that can seriously damage their health.  The Board can point to the fact that marijuana can be ingested instead of smoked, which eliminates the dangerous exposure to other people. 

In banning the growing and cultivation of marijuana the Board may rely on a nuisance claim.  The growing of marijuana often emits a noxious odor that can travel from unit to unit.  Additionally, the use of chemicals and lighting for growing could be a fire hazard. The water and lighting required for growing could also constitute extra use of “common utilities.”  That kind of use could be costly and unfair to the other residents.  A community would likely be within its rights to ban growing and cultivation of marijuana.

2. Insurance Issues

In addition to the issues presented above, there is the issue of insurance liabilities.  Fires caused by smoking marijuana or growing it may not be covered by the insurance company.

3. Amendments and Rules

There are a couple different options a Board can use to control smoking and growing.  The first is to amend the CC&Rs.  The other option is to implement a new Rule and Regulation.

The advantage of amending the CC&Rs is that this method provides constructive or record notice to prospective purchasers—i.e. because the amendment is recorded in the county records, owners and perspective buyers are presumed to have notice. 

Additionally, CC&R amendments generally have stronger enforceability.  However, the disadvantage is that it requires membership vote which means it could take longer and it is more expensive.  Some state courts have actually held that the only way a board can implement a no smoking ban is to amend the CC&Rs.  Although there are disadvantages, this is the most reliable method of implementing the ban.

In the alternative, the Board may add a new Rule and Regulation.  The advantage is that these are easier to adopt because they require only board approval and not membership vote.  This also means it is less expensive.  However, prospective purchasers will not have constructive notice of the ban and the enforceability will not be as strong as an amendment to the CC&Rs.

Dealing with Renters in Community Associations

Most individuals in community associations fall into one of three categories:

- Owner/Occupants: motivated to maintain value and foster relationships

- Investor Owners: motivated by financial benefit; less regard for the quality of the community

- Renters: Often view community associations as apartment living

In many homeowner and condominium associations, there exists a stigma against renters.  Often this stigma is unwarranted.  If rental issues arise in your community, ask a few preliminary questions:

1. Do tenants receive governing documents?

2. What communications (if any) do tenants receive from the association?

3. What steps are taken to involve tenants?

4. Is there a record to support the idea that tenants cause more problems in the community?

Communicating and involving renters in the community may resolve rental issues facing the association and the membership.

What Constitutes a “Rental”

Under Oregon law, “rent” means “any payment to be made to the landlord under the rental agreement, periodic or otherwise, in exchange for the right of a tenant and any permitted pet to occupy a dwelling unit to the exclusion of others and to use the premises.”

If the association has a rental restriction and there is a question of whether an owner is in violation, it may be difficult to determine if an owner is actually “renting.” For example, if the owner’s child lives in the home and is not paying any rent, then that arrangement does not likely constitute a “rental.”

But what if someone other than the owner is residing in the property and it is difficult to determine whether the arrangement is a rental? One thing an association can do is have the owner sign a rental affidavit.  The affidavit is a signed and notarized document stating that the owner is not renting their unit.  This satisfies the board’s obligation to inquire whether the property is in violation of any rental restriction. Click here for: Sample Rental Affidavit

Adopting a Rental Restriction

Restricting an owner’s right to rent or lease their lot or unit requires an amendment to the governing documents. There are several things to consider before embarking on a rental amendment.  First, will the association get enough owners to vote “yes” to approve the amendment? Should the rental amendment be retroactive, or should existing owners currently renting be exempt?  Lastly, consider adding a “hardship” clause which gives the board discretion to allow a rental which exceeds the rental cap in the case of extenuating circumstances (military service, overseas job transfer, etc.)

Other Options

There are other options in addition to a blanket rental restriction.  First, the association could adopt an amendment regulating leases or rentals. Requiring, for example, all rentals must be at least 30 or 60 days, all lease agreements must include a provision that the tenants will receive and follow the governing documents (including rules and regulations), and owners who rent their property must provide the association with the tenant’s contact information.

In most cases, the association is better off focusing on the fair and equitable enforcement of the association’s governing documents.  If renters are causing parking issues, enforce the parking restrictions.  If tenants are creating noise complaints, enforce the nuisance or noise provisions.  In other words, deal with the effects of renters rather than attempting to restrict or limit rentals.

Renters and Rental Amendments

There are usually three types of occupants in condominium or homeowner associations:

1. Owners - motivated to maintain value and foster relationships

2. Investors - motivated by profit; usually less interested in quality of community

3. Renters - often view community association living as apartment living

The term “renters” often carries a stigma in condominium and homeowner associations. Not all renters are bad (and not all owners are good). If renters are a problem in your community, your best bet is to deal with the behavior rather than attempting to ban or limit rentals. If renters are causing parking issues, adopt a parking resolution. If renters are causing noise, enforce the noise or nuisance provisions in your governing documents.

In some cases, adopting a rental amendment makes sense. For example, prospective buyers in community associations may find it difficult to secure financing if the number of rentals is too high.

Adopting a rental amendment is no easy task. In most cases, at least 75% of the ownership must vote “yes” on the amendment. Grandfathering existing rentals will often increase the amount of yes votes. In addition, a good explanation to the ownership about why the board is proposing the amendment and the benefits to the community will go a long way in receiving support for the amendment. Have a lawyer draft or review any proposed amendment to your governing documents.

Here are some things to consider when contemplating a rental amendment:

1. Minimum lease periods - typically a 30 day minimum.

2. Grandfathering existing rentals - any owner renting their unit or lot when the amendment becomes effective is exempt from the rental cap unless that owner sells or transfers their interest in the property.

3. Tenants must receive governing documents - consider requiring owners to put a provision in the lease agreement mandating that tenants receive copies of the association’s governing documents.

4. Contact information - owners should be obligated to provide contact information of each tenant to the association or management company.

5. Hardship provision - think about including a hardship provision allowing an owner to rent their property in excess of the rental cap if circumstances require. A good example of a hardship is military service.