From Sacramento: Tweaking Davis-Stirling

Apparently, California has signed into law a revision to its Common Interest Development Act.  California, unlike Idaho and a shrinking handful of other jurisdictions, recognizes the important role played by HOAs and other common interest ownership associations.  One California Court said:

Indeed, the homeowners associations function almost ‘as a second municipal government, regulating many aspects of [the homeowners’] daily lives.’ [Citation.] ” ‘ “[U]pon analysis of the association’s functions, one clearly sees the association as a quasi-government entity paralleling in almost every case the powers, duties, and responsibilities of a municipal government.

Wikipedia(citing Villa Milano Homeowners Association v. Il Davorge).  

On the surface, the new California laws, Assembly Bills 805 and 806 simply simplify the existing common interest ownership law:

In response to concerns that the Davis-Stirling Act is not well organized or easy to use, the California Law Revision Commission (CLRC) recommended that the existing Davis-Stirling Act be repealed and replaced with a revised version that would continue the substance of existing law in a more logical and user-friendly form.

Senate Rules Committee Digest.  In the judicial committee hearing  minutes regarding AB 806, arguments in favor were summarized as follows:

…this bill and its companion measure, AB 805, will bring much needed logical order to the Davis-Stirling Act, making it much easier for board members and practitioners to navigate and clarifying the relative authority of statutory law, by-laws, and different types of governing documents.

However, at least one commentator identifies 16 substantial changes.  CAI promises to educate its members on the changes before the law goes into effect.

 

Rather than dive into legal analysis of another state’s statutes, I would just like to point out that Idaho has an opportunity to learn from the experiences of other states.  Idaho could adopt a nice, clear, concise statute from the start, number its sections in a clear way for ease of use, and avoid overhauls like California is undertaking.  But first, Idaho needs to recognize the the value and service that HOAs, Condo associations and other CIDs provide.

-Jeremy

P.S.

If, like me, you try to follow news relating to homeowner associations, you no doubt have noticed that there is not much of it.   If you live somewhere like Idaho, relevant news is even more thin.  Only occasionally do we see an embezzlement scandal or a flare-up about American flags or the like.

This blog is going to try to avoid taking the route of mindless content farming.  I’ll try to comment on  a real event.  Or a real issue that has really stuck in my craw.  So, out of necessity, I’ll have to watch national, as well as Idaho, news. Anyway, that’s a long way to apologize for talking, again, about California law.

Advertisements

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: