The Uncommon Area

By Action Property ManagementBusiness Education How To Management

The Uncommon Area episodes

July 28, 2025Understanding AB 130: New Rules for HOA Fines | Ep.71

AB 130 Is Here: What California HOAs Need to Know About the New Fine Restrictions
The HOA landscape in California changed overnight with the passage of AB 130, a sweeping piece of legislation that places new limits on how community associations can issue fines. The law was tucked into the state’s budget bill, passed without hearings, and became effective immediately on July 1, 2024—leaving many HOAs scrambling to understand what it means for their enforcement powers.
In a special edition of The Uncommon Area, Matthew Holbrook spoke with HOA attorney Steve Tinnelly to break down what this law means in real terms.
The $100 Fine Cap
At its core, AB 130 limits fines to $100 per violation. That alone is a major shift, especially for communities that relied on escalating fines to encourage compliance. Gone are the days of issuing $500 or $1,000 fines to habitual rule-breakers—at least not without meeting very specific conditions.
“The idea is to increase the affordability of homes by insulating homeowners from ungodly fine amounts,” said Tinnelly. “But what it’s really done is gutted the enforcement authority of associations.”
A Complex “Opportunity to Cure”
The law also requires that homeowners be given an opportunity to “cure” a violation before a fine can be imposed. Sounds simple—but the ambiguity creates a compliance minefield. If someone parks illegally but moves their car the day before a hearing, have they cured the violation? What about short-term rentals that temporarily stop?
Even attorneys are interpreting this differently. As Tinnelly explained, “We had 15 attorneys in a room trying to agree on what this law means—and we couldn’t. Now imagine volunteer board members trying to figure this out.”
Health and Safety Exceptions
Not all fines are capped. AB 130 allows boards to issue higher fines if a violation may result in an adverse health or safety impact. But to do so, boards must adopt written findings in an open meeting, specifying which violations fall under this category.
Common examples might include:
Short-term rentals (due to transient guests, unfamiliarity with community rules, etc.)
Loud parties in high-rises that disturb sleep
Hazardous maintenance conditions on private property
“The word ‘may’ is key,” said Tinnelly. “It doesn’t have to result in a safety issue—just the potential is enough, if you document it properly.”
What HOAs Should Do Now
Tinnelly recommends that every HOA in California:
Review and revise fine policies to comply with the $100 cap.
Adopt a resolution listing health and safety violations with associated fine caps.
Ensure due process: 10-day notice before hearings, written decisions within 14 days, and cure periods.
Avoid budgeting for fines. Relying on fines for revenue is both legally and ethically problematic.
If there’s one thing this law makes clear, it’s that HOAs need to shift from informal enforcement to a procedurally airtight approach.
Final Thoughts
AB 130 may have been passed with good intentions, but it has introduced confusion, risk, and cost into HOA governance. The path forward requires proactive planning, clear documentation, and likely more engagement with legal counsel.
“It’s not about collecting money,” said Tinnelly. “It’s about compliance. And if fines don’t get the job done, boards need to escalate—legally.”
Read Transcript

13:18:32:13 – 13:18:40:05
Matthew
So you are the third attorney I have talked to that has used the word nonsensical nonsense related to this bill. Yeah.
13:18:40:07 – 13:19:07:04
Steve
Yeah. It just it just doesn’t make sense. The idea is to, you know, increase the affordability of homes by insulating homeowners from, you know, their nasty homes, being able to find them. These ungodly amounts. And essentially what it’s done is it’s really gutted the enforcement authority that associations have, which I think in a lot of the cases is going to require the associations to utilize legal services more.
13:19:07:06 – 13:19:36:05
Matthew
Welcome to the uncommon area where we’re dedicated to reimagining ways we provide board members and managers with the resources to create uncommon communities where residents love their HOA and truly love where they live. Welcome to the Uncommon area. I am Matthew Holbrook, and this episode in particular is probably a little bit more helpful and relevant than even most of our other episodes.
13:19:36:05 – 13:20:06:10
Matthew
And that’s because we are talking about California Assembly Bill 130. This particular legislation is specific to the state of California. And so this is relevant for our board members and managers in the state of California. But it is a bill that has immediate impact and significant impact on how homeowners associations are able to impose fines related to violations in the communities.
13:20:06:12 – 13:20:30:13
Matthew
And so we want to dive into that and understand what those ramifications are. And joining me to talk about, this topic for this episode is attorney Steve Tinley of the Tinley Law Firm. And, I think you’re going to find that this is a particularly, interesting and relevant episode. So I hope that you watch it. Well, Steve, welcome back.
13:20:30:13 – 13:20:32:15
Matthew
Glad to have you back in the uncommon area.
13:20:32:16 – 13:20:34:15
Steve
Good to be back. Thank you so much.
13:20:34:17 – 13:20:57:14
Matthew
Yeah, things are interesting in California for HOAs right now. We’ve had, some new legislation that has turned, a lot of HOA upside down a little bit. And we’re going to talk about that, California Assembly bill. 130. Yes. And, this episode is going to be all about that. So, why don’t we start off with, just give us a little bit of an overview.
13:20:57:14 – 13:20:59:01
Matthew
What’s this bill about?
13:20:59:02 – 13:21:19:03
Steve
Well, what’s interesting is that this this bill was kind of written into the budget bill at the 11th hour. So there was a separate piece of legislation, actually a Senate bill that was proposed and that dealt with the aspects of this legislation. And the legislature was working to pass the budget package, and they actually slipped the components. That impact goes into that budget.
13:21:19:07 – 13:21:31:03
Steve
Budget package at the 11th hour. No hearings, no public comment. And the governor signed it as an urgency statute. So we didn’t even see this coming. And it was signed and it took effect immediately.
13:21:31:07 – 13:21:37:20
Matthew
So to clarify, when you say it’s attached to the budget package, this is not a budget package related to HOA.
13:21:38:01 – 13:21:39:00
Steve
No.
13:21:39:02 – 13:21:51:02
Matthew
So this is this is a bill that had nothing to do with HOA fees at all to start with. And then it was just kind of slipped in at the last second without any warning and no hearings, and then had an immediate effect.
13:21:51:03 – 13:22:09:11
Steve
Immediate effect. Yeah. I mean, the legislature and they’ve been on this mission for a while now. They’re attacking different fronts, different crises. There’s a housing affordability, housing and homelessness crisis in California. So there was two separate pieces of legislation that were proposed for this. And they do a bunch of things relating to the development of projects and rent controls.
13:22:09:13 – 13:22:25:16
Steve
But also there’s this component of HOAs and limiting their fining authority. And we’ll get in all that and their enforcement authority. That was a separate bill. And then it got wrapped into this at the 11th hour and signed at midnight. And, you know, takes effect immediately. And now we’re just left picking up the pieces, trying to figure this stuff out.
13:22:25:16 – 13:22:31:12
Steve
And this has got to be one of the more complicated and seemingly nonsensical bills I’ve ever, I’ve ever seen.
13:22:31:14 – 13:22:36:15
Matthew
So you are the third attorney I have talked to that has used the word nonsensical.
13:22:36:15 – 13:22:37:03
Steve
Nonsense.
13:22:37:03 – 13:22:38:08
Matthew
Related to this bill.
13:22:38:08 – 13:23:07:15
Steve
Yeah, yeah. It just it just doesn’t make sense. The idea is to, you know, increase the affordability of homes by insulating homeowners from, you know, their nasty HOA fees, being able to find them, these ungodly amounts. And essentially what it’s done is it’s really gutted the enforcement authority that associations have, which I think in a lot of the cases is going to require the associations to utilize legal services more, their attorneys more, which, you know, is going to have financial impact on the entire community.
13:23:07:15 – 13:23:18:05
Steve
So, so many times we see the legislature try to make things more affordable, right, for the homeowner. But what it ends up doing is actually compounding the problem by putting a financial strain on every homeowner in the community.
13:23:18:05 – 13:23:24:00
Matthew
Yeah. So I think we’re at the point now just what’s the bill basically about? What does it do?
13:23:24:04 – 13:23:45:05
Steve
Bill basically is about this, here’s the quick and dirty HOA cannot impose monetary penalties. And these are fines for violations of the governing documents. Right. Somebody parked overnight in the common area commences construction without approval, violates poor rules, myriad of fines that we deal with on a day to day basis. You cannot find them in an amount over $100.
13:23:45:07 – 13:24:04:00
Steve
Right. And there are some exceptions. We’ll get into that. And they’re very complicated. Maybe reading it the first time I started crossing. But that’s basically it is really to, to to cut down the authority for associations to impose fines. And for some communities, depending on where they are, $100 isn’t really the deterrent effect that we want it to have.
13:24:04:00 – 13:24:22:03
Steve
Some people would say, okay, well, if I have a late night party in the middle of the night and I get cited by the association, it just basically cost me $100 to throw to throw that party, and it’s worth it. So, yeah, that’s the issue. That’s number one. Number two, homeowners have to be given an opportunity to clear their violation prior to the hearing.
13:24:22:03 – 13:24:48:00
Steve
And if they do, the board can impose any fine whatsoever, additional rights to request IDR and resolution agreements and, you know, a whole other host of procedural aspects that really make, what was a pretty easy enforcement process that made sense regarding notices to the homeowner and stuff. It’s now a lot more complicated. That requires a lot more for community managers and boards to be able to follow just in order to feel like, okay, we did this according to the law.
13:24:48:01 – 13:25:10:02
Matthew
So we’re really boiling this bill down to a couple of components. One, there’s a limit with exceptions, which we’ll get to, but a limit of $100 that an association can fine. A homeowner. And secondly, there has to be this opportunity to cure before you can. Fine. So both of those present some, some challenges for a homeowners association.
13:25:10:04 – 13:25:20:17
Matthew
Before we start, you know, following the path down, what are the implications of that? What happens if an association doesn’t abide by this bill?
13:25:20:19 – 13:25:43:08
Steve
Well, the way that the code and there was language in there before. So they amended sections 5850 and 58, 55, right. And under 58, 55. If you’re going to impose discipline on a homeowner, monetary penalty, a fine, or charge them for damage, they to the common area, you have to comply with all those procedural requirements. If you don’t, whatever you impose against them is not valid and it’s subject to challenge.
13:25:43:08 – 13:26:00:07
Steve
So, you know, we’re seeing more and more of these homeowner attorneys, right? They’re getting more sophisticated. Homeowners are getting more sophisticated. It just provides a lot more grounds for a homeowner to contest the associations enforcement action. And, and, you know, present liability in the event the association doesn’t comply.
13:26:00:09 – 13:26:16:13
Matthew
But theoretically, if an association were to find a homeowner $300 and the homeowner pays the $300, nothing really would happen out of that other than if the homeowner were to challenge it. Then the association would have a hard time enforcing that. That 300.
13:26:16:13 – 13:26:39:09
Steve
Dollars. Exactly. Yeah. You have to reimburse them or. But I mean, usually the fines are in connection with another matter as well. Right? So if you want to take legal action against a homeowner and now they start tripping and saying the procedural components of what the association did initially were wrong, now the case and the arguments become about procedural noncompliance by the association rather than focusing on what it is that the homeowner is not doing.
13:26:39:09 – 13:26:57:19
Steve
And that’s what comes up the works. Right. And that gets a situation where the association has to spend more on attorney’s fees combating these arguments than it would traditionally, because we didn’t have all of these different landmines, that we could potentially step on in reading all these different aspects of the codes and all the different notices and the written resolution agreements that we have to provide.
13:26:57:19 – 13:26:59:06
Steve
Now, there’s just a ton.
13:26:59:07 – 13:27:18:23
Matthew
So I have heard the argument that some have tried to make that the bill is in some way tied to an association’s budget, and so therefore it may not go into effect until the new fiscal year for the association. How do you see that?
13:27:19:01 – 13:27:40:09
Steve
No, not necessary. I mean, it’s in effect right now. So if there is an association today, if a board was conducting a disciplinary hearing today and imposed a fine in excess of $100 that didn’t meet one of the exceptions I will get into that would be invalid. That would be a violation of of statute. I think the arguing you’re pertaining to is when an association if they adopt if an association has a policy where we find our homeowners, right.
13:27:40:10 – 13:27:56:15
Steve
We are adopting a schedule of fines. Right. This is a list of fines that we can impose for violations. That schedule has to be disclosed to the members as part of the annual policy statement. Right at the beginning of the fiscal year. So maybe they’re thinking, hey, it’s got to take effect next year when we send out our next annual policy statement.
13:27:56:15 – 13:28:09:12
Steve
And that’s all well and good, but that doesn’t change the fact that any violation that an association poses from July 1st of this year, moving forward has to comply with the statute irrespective of whatever your annual policy statement said.
13:28:09:12 – 13:28:24:12
Matthew
So that brings us to some of the practical implications. If an association has an existing fine policy with fines that either start or escalate to over $100, that policy is no longer valid, correct?
13:28:24:14 – 13:28:46:07
Steve
Yes. Well, I mean, depending on the way in which it’s drafted and, you know, our attorneys, we ran table this for an entire day in terms of the new fine policies that that we want to adopt and recommend for our clients. So we are providing avenues to get creative for continuing fines and recurring violations. But in general, it’s probably very doubtful that in association right now, their existing fine policy is compliant with the new statute.
13:28:46:11 – 13:29:18:15
Matthew
So, and a new policy would have to be distributed to the homeowners and have the 30 day review process exactly. So let’s say that an association is right on top of this. And the day after this became effective, they adopted a new fine policy and sent it out for a 30 day review. Best possible case scenario, does that essentially mean that the association is, not able to enforce their cars to the point of imposing a fine for at least 30 days.
13:29:18:17 – 13:29:38:18
Steve
Potentially? I mean, you know, the amount of the $100, they can just decide, okay, for the next month, we’re only going to impose up to $100, but they still have to comply with the procedural aspects of what this law requires to cure, period. For example. And if the homeowners in the hearing and they come to an agreement, the board actually has to pen a written agreement that has to be signed by everyone.
13:29:38:23 – 13:30:06:06
Matthew
So, okay, let’s get to that. But, to start with, an association has an existing fine policy that does not comply with the new bill. Can the association follow their existing policy to the extent that it complies with the new bill, without having to send out a new policy for all of the homeowners to review and to go through that review process?
13:30:06:06 – 13:30:14:10
Matthew
In other words, if they have a if their current policy says a $200 fine, could they just say, okay, we’re only going to fine up to $100, even though the policy doesn’t say that?
13:30:14:12 – 13:30:29:06
Steve
Yeah, I think in large part there is an avenue to do that provided that they follow the procedures. And the homeowner, I guess, could argue and say, well, you’re only supposed to levy fines in accordance with the policy. I don’t know what any homeowner would say. The policy says you can levy up to 200 and you only levied 100 against me.
13:30:29:06 – 13:30:45:12
Steve
I mean, I think that would be, you know, to use that word again, a little nonsensical, but yeah, it’s just we’re in limbo right now. And candidly, I have some clients that are saying, hey, Steve, do we even have to tip our homeowners to this? Like, do we have to get started on this right away? Because we like to deter an effect of our fines?
13:30:45:12 – 13:30:57:05
Steve
They’re working. And for us as lawyers, ethically, we have to say we can’t advise you to not comply with the law. So, you know, it’s the board’s decision ultimately. But yeah, this is definitely something that they want to get the ball rolling on.
13:30:57:07 – 13:31:13:08
Matthew
So just to sum up this portion, there’s a limitation of a $100 maximum fine. And that includes any escalation. Right. We’re not just talking a starting fine. So you get the law doesn’t allow for escalating beyond $100.
13:31:13:08 – 13:31:36:18
Steve
Well, it depends. And that’s a matter of interpretation. Right. Even attorneys in our firm, when we were round tabling this, we came to, hey, what’s the most sensible solution here. So we do have in our policies we do have avenues. And it also depends on the client’s governing documents as well, which is why, you know, for the community managers that are listening, boards that are listening, a lot of times you think, okay, we’ll give you a new fine policy, and it’s just a standard product that can apply to every association.
13:31:36:18 – 13:32:03:16
Steve
And that’s not the case, right? There’s different fining authority, disciplinary authority in different communities by laws and CRS. And we look for that. Right. So to the extent that there is some language to support that, we do have versions of the documents that we’re drafting that allow for after that initial hearing in that initial fine for a continuing violation to allow for each day that that violation remains unresolved, to be treated as a separate violation, for which another hundred dollars, up to $100 could be tacked on.
13:32:03:17 – 13:32:12:12
Matthew
So it could be on a daily basis after that, so that it’s essentially the fine doesn’t escalate past $100, but you could start imposing it more frequently.
13:32:12:12 – 13:32:25:04
Steve
The fine for that violation doesn’t escalate up for $100, but every day you’re doing that, that is a separate and distinct violation. So you committed a violation on Wednesday, on Thursday, on Friday, $100, $100, $100.
13:32:25:06 – 13:32:30:09
Matthew
So do you have to have a new hearing and go through a new process for each one of those $100 fines?
13:32:30:10 – 13:32:44:00
Steve
And it depends on the language in the documents, and some attorneys disagree with it. But, you know, I have some clients, we have some policies where we take the approach that the notice of decision that’s given to the homeowner after the hearing, which, by the way, the law is cut down now, it has to be within 15 days previously.
13:32:44:00 – 13:32:54:05
Steve
Now it’s 14 days. So they shortened it by a day. Another fun fact. As in that notice of hearing. Yes, we’re going to levy continuing fines on this without a further hearing.
13:32:54:05 – 13:33:01:01
Matthew
What I’m hearing you say there is that may not be etched in stone, but there is a legal argument to be made to do that.
13:33:01:01 – 13:33:13:22
Steve
Yeah. Oh, definitely. There are always legal arguments to be made. There’s nothing that expressly prohibits that under the law. But I guarantee you, any firm within our industry, you’re going to have attorneys within that same firm that are arguing both sides of that coin.
13:33:13:22 – 13:33:21:03
Matthew
So let’s talk about some of the, the procedural aspects, specifically relating to the opportunity to cure.
13:33:21:05 – 13:33:22:11
Speaker 3
13:33:22:13 – 13:33:37:02
Matthew
So you have an association, who has a resident who is in violation. They send a notice, they invite them to a hearing, they give the proper notice ten days. That’s still the proper timeframe.
13:33:37:06 – 13:33:37:14
Steve
Ten days.
13:33:37:15 – 13:33:51:07
Matthew
So ten days. Notice the and the homeowner then comes to the hearing. And by the time the homeowner comes to the hearing, the homeowner has remedied whatever the the violation was.
13:33:51:10 – 13:33:52:12
Speaker 3
13:33:52:13 – 13:33:55:03
Matthew
Does the association have the right to fine at that point.
13:33:55:03 – 13:34:14:07
Steve
According to the the text of the statute? No, they do not. But and this is where, you know, your eyebrows start raising, you start scratching your head. It all depends on the type of violation and different industry attorneys you’ve got, you know, different communications where we’re sending out group emails. How are you guys looking at this? You know, how can you cure something right.
13:34:14:07 – 13:34:25:15
Steve
So if somebody, let’s say, parks overnight in a guest parking space in violation of the parking rules, does that mean they just they can continue to leave the car there and they just have to move it sometime between now and the and the hearing date?
13:34:25:15 – 13:34:29:15
Matthew
Yeah, they move it the day before the hearing and then they go back to doing it the day after that. Yeah.
13:34:29:17 – 13:34:54:00
Steve
We don’t really don’t really know. I mean, you park overnight in the common area. That’s a violation. I don’t think that that is something that is curable unless, you know, somehow you tell the homeowner that night and then they move the vehicle that that evening. So it all depends on it. I think the most I think the easiest hypothetical situation to imagine is, let’s say a homeowner is getting cited for violation because they are not performing, you know, adequate maintenance on their property.
13:34:54:01 – 13:35:11:21
Steve
Right? Hey, this whatever’s going on in the landscape is terrible. It’s a fire risk. Whatever the circumstance is, we’re calling you to a hearing at which we may consider imposing discipline. And between that time in the hearing, the homeowner goes in there and cleans everything up. In that situation, I could see that, okay, that’s a pretty easy scenario to understand.
13:35:11:23 – 13:35:30:11
Steve
They cured the violation prior to the hearing. No fine can be levied. And, you know, just from a practical standpoint, especially with homeowners that are first time violators, and this is kind of a just a governance issue. One of the things that our firm is always a proponent of for these boards, homeowner, it’s a first time violation. A lot of times they don’t understand the governing documents.
13:35:30:11 – 13:35:48:07
Steve
They don’t understand what’s going on. They might have this type of maintenance violation. You need to paint your garage door, whatever the circumstances. They come to the hearing. And I tell, you know, my boards consider imposing the fine, but giving the homeowner 30 days to fix it. And if they do it within that time frame, you’ll waive the fine.
13:35:48:07 – 13:36:06:02
Steve
You build a little good faith right in the, you know, with with the homeowner. So I in spirit I like the the theory of an opportunity to cure. But the way this bill is drafted and kind of that pre hearing opportunity to cure and there’s so much ambiguity in it, I think it’s just going to be very, very difficult for anybody to make heads or tails of it.
13:36:06:02 – 13:36:23:01
Steve
I mean we were joking because you know as attorneys if we’re, you know, 1516 attorneys in a room, if we can’t agree on how to administer what they call it with the code now requires the expectation now is for volunteer board members, community managers, to be able to do it. It’s it’s it’s going to be challenging.
13:36:23:07 – 13:36:47:00
Matthew
All right. So to summarize where we are so far in this conversation, the new law limits fines to $100 for ongoing, violations. An argument could be made to make a decision at a hearing to continue to levy some amount of fine of $100 or less for each following day of that violation. And that might be open to argument, but there.
13:36:47:00 – 13:36:48:10
Steve
Is definitely there’s, there’s a.
13:36:48:14 – 13:37:10:17
Matthew
There’s a discussion to be had there, the ten day notice to invite somebody to a hearing is still the same time frame. Results of hearings need to be sent out now, 14 days after the hearing instead of 15 days. And homeowners have to be given the opportunity to cure. And if they cure before the hearing, then you can’t find them.
13:37:10:19 – 13:37:38:06
Matthew
And on the straightforward where there is an ongoing violation that just gets resolved, like a maintenance issue or a painting of a garage door, those are pretty clean cut. But there are some areas of, types of violations that might be a little bit more complicated. And if I’m hearing what you’re saying, this is going to play out in time, and there’s probably going to be case law that will help to define that car parked in a guest parking space overnight.
13:37:38:08 – 13:37:43:00
Matthew
And then they move it before the hearing and then they go back. Those types of things are going to get worked out in time.
13:37:43:00 – 13:38:03:16
Steve
Yeah. I mean, and hopefully there is case law and especially because, I mean, the more restrictive the legislature has gone, there’s been this interesting dichotomy. And I think we spoke about it the last time where courts have actually been on the other side, more deferential, the boards. So we would welcome, you know, published case law on this. The challenges, the nature of these disputes, these fine disputes are so nominal, such small dollars.
13:38:03:18 – 13:38:15:21
Steve
I don’t think it’s likely that people are going to take this to court, let alone on appeal, right, to argue it over fines. So the likelihood that we’ll actually get some judicial, you know, insight is, is, you know, relatively minimal.
13:38:15:23 – 13:38:42:23
Matthew
Yeah. The situation that I hear coming up most often is short term rentals. So Airbnb so somebody is renting out their home in violation of the association rules or documents and they’re renting it out, you know, through Airbnb or whatever it might be. And they get called to a hearing that rental period comes to an end.
13:38:43:00 – 13:38:56:06
Matthew
The homeowner shows up and says, I’m not doing it anymore. And there’s no advertising for that online anywhere. The board is going to have a difficult time in that situation imposing a fine.
13:38:56:07 – 13:39:13:01
Steve
Yeah, potentially. Again, it depends on the language of how the documents are structured. I mean, you need to have some deterrence, right, to homeowners doing this. If, you know, a homeowner says I can get 5 or 600 bucks a night for my unit, and at most, you know, I can rent this out, the most they can do is paying me for $100 at the end.
13:39:13:06 – 13:39:47:02
Steve
I’m. I’m sitting pretty. Yeah. You know this. You know, the short term rentals brings up another interesting aspect of the bill, and this is one of the more complicated ones. So at that, late in the, in the bill’s formation, I think through Clarke’s lobbying efforts, we were able to actually get an exception to that $100 that allows the board to levy fines in excess of that amount when the violation may, as, quote, may have an adverse health or safety impact on the common area or neighboring members properties.
13:39:47:07 – 13:39:58:18
Matthew
So we’re going to get to that. So we might as well do that. Now I don’t know in my mind as I’m just thinking about this, it seems like that would be a difficult argument to make, to be made regarding short term rentals.
13:39:58:19 – 13:39:59:21
Speaker 3
13:39:59:23 – 13:40:22:08
Steve
Well, I mean we’ve, we’ve looked at it and we analyzed that, we analyzed a whole host of them. And why this is important is because for the board to levy a fine in excess of $100 under these adverse health and safety violations, the code now requires, as part of this bill, the board to adopt written findings specifying those things in order then to be able to levy that fine and those written findings have to be adopted in a board meeting.
13:40:22:08 – 13:40:42:02
Steve
So I’ll I’ll simplify it. But we we looked at okay, what could be adverse health and safety violations. And people can argue oh well that really is that likely to occur. Is that a is that a likely scenario in which a short term rental prevents those safety concerns? And yes, I mean, we can argue security concerns. These people are coming.
13:40:42:02 – 13:41:12:11
Steve
They’re they’re for transient purposes. It’s a security risk, utilizing the common area. They’re not familiar with the association’s rules. There’s a variety of things that you could argue, well, how likely is that to happen? And then we go to the text of the bill. And the bill now says that may result in these types of things, which to us is a very, you know, broad and, and, and, you know, cautionary interpretation rather than something that requires like a definite impact, right, a tangible impact, right?
13:41:12:12 – 13:41:31:01
Steve
Something that is easily definable, proven impact that it actually, yes, this resulted in a health or safety violation. The code doesn’t say that. It says it may result in these things. And certainly a somebody who’s violating the short term rental restriction, that use of that property may definitely may result in adverse safety concerns. So that.
13:41:31:01 – 13:41:32:11
Matthew
Word may opens the door for.
13:41:32:11 – 13:41:32:19
Steve
A board.
13:41:33:00 – 13:42:13:17
Matthew
To impose fines, at a greater amount, if it meets that health or safety consideration. So just to summarize what you just said there, a board could impose fines greater than $100 when there is the possibility that, such violation could cause a health or safety concern to the association at large, but the board would have to document prior to trying to enforce that, some type of justification, that would say why we think this particular violation is a risk to the association.
13:42:13:17 – 13:42:15:09
Steve
Yeah, that’s that’s exactly right.
13:42:15:09 – 13:42:35:17
Matthew
I would imagine that in time that the attorneys in the industry are going to come up with some standard language for the, the, the frequently cited types of violations that would meet those standards, like what we were just talking about short term rentals or, whatever else that might possibly fit into that category.
13:42:35:17 – 13:42:50:01
Steve
Yeah, we have, we have everything. So how we’re approaching it, you know, we’re blessed to have our team and all these different attorneys looking at these things from different angles. We actually came together with a list. So understanding all these documents need to be produced, like how could we add value to our clients and make this simple?
13:42:50:01 – 13:43:11:14
Steve
So we produced the package of documents, the new five policy, new things. One of the documents is a board resolution that the board adopts in an open meeting, presumably at the same time they adopt this policy, and that resolution serves as the purpose of the board formally recognizing a laundry list of things right. That could be, you know, quote, adverse health and safety violations.
13:43:11:14 – 13:43:42:08
Steve
And we’ve got essentially just three pages of bullet points that, depending on the community, will strip some stuff out. But we thought of absolutely everything possible. And that’s in order to be able to put the board in a position, okay, you’ve adopted this new fine policy. You’ve adopted this resolution containing written findings of what you think are adverse health and safety violations in order for you to moving forward, still have some sense of normalcy, to charge somebody a greater fine for an egregious violation, because usually we can tie it to some sort of underlying health or safety concern.
13:43:42:10 – 13:43:53:04
Matthew
So the adverse health or safety concern for an association, are there any limits on the dollar amounts that could be imposed for a fine for those?
13:43:53:04 – 13:44:02:11
Steve
No, no, there are no limits. The only limit that’s there is language that was in the prior version of the statute that’s retained in the statute that says fines must be reasonable.
13:44:02:13 – 13:44:14:11
Matthew
Taking that a step further, you are essentially saying that most violations for an association could probably be argued to have some type of health or safety concern.
13:44:14:13 – 13:44:15:21
Steve
Yes, easily.
13:44:15:23 – 13:44:23:01
Matthew
Which then would result in nullifying the effects of this law in large part. Yeah.
13:44:23:01 – 13:44:44:12
Steve
And it’s, you know, you know, looking at Cod, is this a workaround? Well, no. But I mean, it makes sense, especially in a short term rental scenario, $100 is not going to tear somebody from monetizing their property and bringing in a cascade of Airbnb renters into a community, using the common area facilities and all those things. It’s definitely reasonable to charge $1,000 per night fine in order to say, we don’t allow this here, right?
13:44:44:13 – 13:44:54:05
Steve
That it’s reasonable. We need to be able to deter the conduct. And if this homeowner’s conduct, if they’re actually deriving a financial gain over $100, well over $100, there’s no deterrent effect.
13:44:54:11 – 13:45:09:13
Matthew
So when you adopt that resolution that specifies the various health and safety risks that the board is calling out ahead of time, as part of that resolution, do you have to assign a dollar amount to each of the fines associated to those violations?
13:45:09:13 – 13:45:22:07
Steve
Oh, I mean, again, this is something that and that should have been that should have been the disclaimer at the beginning. I mean, any attorneys that, you know, boards, managers, you I guarantee your attorney might have a different take on this or might have a similar take, but there might be some kind of all this stuff can be argued.
13:45:22:07 – 13:45:42:23
Steve
And that’s how, you know, it’s really bad legislation, right? Because everything is subject to interpretation in ways that just are mind boggling. How we’re drafting our policies is we’re basically specifying us, violation. That’s an we call it an adverse health and safety violation. The board may levy up to X amount. Right. So we set a cap on it to give the board the discretion to.
13:45:43:01 – 13:45:54:02
Steve
And we think that that satisfies the law which says the fine shall be in accordance with the fine schedule. And the fine schedule says up to X amount. And as long as we stay within that amount, we’re fine.
13:45:54:04 – 13:46:06:17
Matthew
Now, just to press this a little bit further, are you are you, suggesting that there be an up two amount that’s the same for each one of those violations? Or do you have a different up to amount for each of them?
13:46:06:19 – 13:46:25:06
Steve
I mean, you can go in with that level of specificity. I mean, some, you know, some some boards might prefer that. They might think it’s just I don’t think it’s necessary. We just define a broad category of an adverse health and safety violation up to this amount. And then we specify a menu of violations that can be deemed adverse health and safety violations.
13:46:25:06 – 13:46:26:22
Steve
And that’s kind of how we tie it together.
13:46:27:00 – 13:46:32:12
Matthew
Is there anything else process wise that’s different with these health and safety concerns.
13:46:32:18 – 13:46:52:16
Steve
Yeah. So let’s say the board adopted this resolution. They’ve adopted their written findings. And now there is a violation that comes up and we say Holy smokes we did not catch. We didn’t foresee this type of violation when we did our resolution right. But it is an adverse health and safety. What do we do then? Well, the board has to go through the process with respect to that particular violation.
13:46:52:16 – 13:47:07:14
Steve
So the board would have to at an open board meeting. And we provide our clients with a blank resolution to do this. We found a new adverse health and safety violation that we didn’t think of before. We’re formally documenting it. That’s got to get on the books before they can start fining over $100 for that type of violation.
13:47:07:16 – 13:47:09:23
Steve
That procedure as well.
13:47:10:01 – 13:47:14:23
Matthew
Yeah, I would imagine that list would would be growing pretty regularly over time as different things come up.
13:47:14:23 – 13:47:25:21
Steve
Yeah, that’s why we have one in our initial one that we’re giving to our clients. It’s three pages long. We try to contemplate absolutely everything, but I’m sure there’s going to be things that pop up that aren’t there and, you know, the boards are going to have to deal with it.
13:47:26:02 – 13:47:32:02
Matthew
Are there any other states in the country that have adopted this type of, of a bill?
13:47:32:04 – 13:47:53:07
Steve
You know, what’s interesting is in talking with the legislative advocates for our industry, not just in California, but but nationally and internationally. And this was a surprise to me. There are jurisdictions where associations can’t find any amount whatsoever. They’re prohibited from finding. Oh, yeah. So, I mean, that’s seems like it’s news to you. I didn’t know that.
13:47:53:13 – 13:48:11:20
Steve
And, the author of of this bill, the senator they’re going to be working on amendments to it. And she kind of understood at the beginning that $100 might not be practical, but they did want to put in some type of statutory cap. And I don’t think there’s going to be appetite to raise that ceiling much higher, if at all.
13:48:11:22 – 13:48:22:10
Steve
The way I’m kind of hearing things is that this is likely to, to stay. And by the way, you guys, you should be saying thank you because we could be like other states and say you can’t find whatsoever.
13:48:22:15 – 13:48:23:20
Matthew
So interesting.
13:48:23:22 – 13:48:25:05
Speaker 3
13:48:25:07 – 13:48:30:12
Matthew
Is there anything else in this bill that we should be thinking about or that managers or board members should know?
13:48:30:14 – 13:48:51:05
Steve
Yeah, I mean, there’s just the procedural aspects of it, again, and this is why it’s so important, because you want to have all this stuff dictated in your fine policy so that you can follow it. Kind of similar to how the legislature keeps expanding our procedural requirements with regard to how we conduct elections. Now, we rely on our set of election rules basically to everything out your your enforcement and find policy needs to be that detailed.
13:48:51:07 – 13:49:13:22
Steve
For example, we obviously have the cure period. If the homeowner and the board are meeting in the hearing and they come to an agreement as to how to resolve the violation, there’s actually an affirmative obligation. The board shall have a written resolution agreement. So they actually have to pen an agreement that’s got to be signed by the homeowner and the board if they’re in agreement.
13:49:13:22 – 13:49:14:16
Matthew
In the meeting.
13:49:14:18 – 13:49:30:19
Steve
Yeah, it’s part of the I mean, does it say specifically in the medium of theoretically, that’s when you would and that is and the code now says that agreement is judicially enforceable. It’s binding similar to an agreement reached in IDR. You know, on that point, let’s say we go to the hearing on the homeowner. You’re the board member.
13:49:30:19 – 13:49:50:21
Steve
I say, I think this is nonsense. You say, stop violating. We’re not in agreement. The homeowner now can, request IDR, which is essentially a rehearing. So we already conducted the hearing, and some homeowners say, well, now I want to conduct ADR, or is it wait a second, we just had a hearing that’s IDR. Your your rights to meet with the board have been satisfied.
13:49:50:23 – 13:50:00:17
Steve
No. Now the code is explicit. You go through the hearing. If you’re not in agreement as a homeowner you can basically, you know, hit the button that says, now I want an IDR with less than the entire board.
13:50:00:19 – 13:50:14:17
Matthew
And you do the same thing all over again. So just less than the entire board. Now I want to go back to this written agreement. So a homeowner shows up. They’ve been called to a hearing for not painting their garage.
13:50:14:19 – 13:50:15:22
Speaker 3
13:50:16:00 – 13:50:17:23
Matthew
They paint their garage prior to the hearing.
13:50:18:01 – 13:50:18:23
Speaker 3
13:50:19:01 – 13:50:27:09
Matthew
And they show up at the hearing, they say it’s all resolved and the board says, yeah, I went by, I saw it is resolved. Do they need an agreement? No.
13:50:27:09 – 13:50:35:03
Steve
Right now I would say in that case because they’re, they’re I mean, they’re not agreeing how to resolve the violation. If anything, they’re agreeing that the violation is resolved. So I don’t think there’s anything that’s.
13:50:35:04 – 13:50:41:19
Matthew
So that’s what I was clarifying is so you don’t need to have a written agreement that agrees that it’s resolved. No. You can just have the minutes reflect that.
13:50:41:19 – 13:51:00:22
Steve
Exactly. But let’s say the homeowner comes to the meeting and they say, hey, we’re going to find you $100 and we’re going to find you $100 every day that you don’t paint that thing until it’s done. Okay, listen, I’m going to paint it. My contractor, I have an appointment. My contractor is coming next week. Can you give me ten days and hold off on any fines?
13:51:00:22 – 13:51:17:19
Steve
In that case, if I was at the table, I would encourage the board. Yes, right. Fines are meant to compel compliance. We’re not here to make money, right? We should not be budgeting based on fine revenue. So in that case, sure, the board comes to an agreement. He’s going to paint it in ten days, right? Otherwise he’s going to be subjected to fines.
13:51:17:20 – 13:51:27:14
Steve
That type of resolution would then need to be documented inside. And in the event the owner doesn’t comply, traditionally enforceable, you actually go right to court and see judicial enforcement of it.
13:51:27:17 – 13:51:43:17
Matthew
So let’s say a homeowner shows up, and they say, I haven’t painted my garage and I may or may not get to it. And the board says, okay, it’s $100 fine and $100 a day until you do paint your garage. Does that need an agreement?
13:51:43:19 – 13:52:00:22
Steve
Well, no, because they’re not they’re not necessarily in agreement. The homeowners probably not in agreement with that. That’s the board would just give that to the homeowner in their notice of decision. Right. That’s got to go out 14 days now after the hearing, not 15. And that would be the process. The homeowner, what the homeowner could do at that point would be, okay, well, now I want ADR, I want another hearing to talk about this again.
13:52:01:01 – 13:52:14:06
Matthew
Okay. So just clarifying that just because a board imposes a fine doesn’t mean they need a separate agreement with the homeowner. No, this is just if there is some negotiated settlement essentially between the the association and the homeowner.
13:52:14:08 – 13:52:30:02
Steve
Okay. Yeah. And I and I don’t have that much issue with that. Would that aspects of the bill. I mean there’s been so many times, you know in recent years where the legislature has adopted something and there’s been a lot of reaction from our industry immediately. Why do we need this? What’s so bad? My head has always gone to, okay, what’s the purpose here?
13:52:30:02 – 13:52:50:22
Steve
What’s the value? Could there be something? Why is the legislature looking at it this way? And in most scenarios I could say yeah, there’s there’s some value to that. Right. The elevated element inspection, the balcony bill. Right. The different election procedures, the limitation on our candidate qualifications. For example, this is the first bill where I’ve been really stretching to find, you know, the silver lining in it.
13:52:50:22 – 13:52:55:14
Steve
And, and I can’t, I can’t yet. So. Yeah. That’s tough.
13:52:55:16 – 13:53:19:11
Matthew
Well, understood. Well, if I was to just try to summarize all of this now, I know I keep doing this, but there’s a lot of information. There’s so much so limitation of $100 to fine for non emergency risks to health or property in the, in the community. So $100 limit on those fines. Again ten days notice to invite to the hearing 14 days answer.
13:53:19:11 – 13:53:46:13
Matthew
After the hearing, homeowner gets the opportunity to cure before the hearing. And if they cure before the hearing, the board can’t. Fine. The board can adopt ahead of time. A list of, violations that do meet the standard of potentially creating an adverse risk to health or safety in the community. And those particular fines can have a limitation up to a certain dollar amount, as determined by the board.
13:53:46:13 – 13:53:50:04
Matthew
That could be more than $100, as long as that’s adopted ahead of time.
13:53:50:07 – 13:53:51:01
Steve
And it’s reasonable.
13:53:51:01 – 13:54:13:07
Matthew
And it’s reasonable. And as other types of violations come to the board’s attention that meet that standard, they could adopt that, add those in at future board meetings. A homeowner who comes to a hearing and negotiates some type of a settlement with the board. You need to have a written agreement theoretically in the meeting that both parties signed, from that point going forward.
13:54:13:08 – 13:54:15:11
Matthew
So that that’s essentially the.
13:54:15:11 – 13:54:17:08
Steve
That was fantastic. I mean.
13:54:17:10 – 13:54:18:04
Matthew
I’m paying attention.
13:54:18:09 – 13:54:50:03
Steve
You got that pretty quick. I mean, that’s yeah, for the most part, the only thing that we didn’t cover, is understanding that the law and we actually had this discussion to the way these bills are written, the way the statutes are written, because everybody thinks, okay, you know, we’re going to impose a fine. There’s a very clear distinction, a very important distinction that needs to be made between a fine, which is a monetary penalty for a violation of the governing documents as compared to a monetary charge that you would assess the homeowner for them, causing damage to the common area.
13:54:50:03 – 13:54:52:10
Matthew
So reimbursement, fines, reimbursement.
13:54:52:10 – 13:54:52:22
Steve
Yeah, it.
13:54:53:03 – 13:54:54:08
Matthew
Can go over $100.
13:54:54:09 – 13:55:16:05
Steve
They can go over, they can go over $100. And I’m sure different attorneys will, you know, argue over what aspects of what we just talked about applies to the procedure for imposing monetary charges. That’s what the code calls them. We in our office call them reimbursement assessments. Some communities call them build back assessments or special charges. The legislature hasn’t necessarily touched, touch that.
13:55:16:05 – 13:55:27:02
Steve
So we still have that authority that you can you know, a homeowner caused $2,000 worth of damage. You can still, you know, impose a monetary charge, a reimbursement assessment of up to that amount.
13:55:27:04 – 13:55:32:15
Matthew
So last thing I was going to ask about is, nuisance violations.
13:55:32:17 – 13:55:34:08
Speaker 3
13:55:34:10 – 13:55:59:10
Matthew
This seems to be already prior to this bill, just kind of a gray area to begin with. Where does an HOA get involved with defining what a nuisance is from one homeowner to the rest of the community? Does this just fall into that same category of, if somebody is determined to be a nuisance, usually you’re not doing that ongoing, you know, every minute of every day.
13:55:59:10 – 13:56:03:02
Matthew
So theoretically it stops when you’re in a hearing.
13:56:03:04 – 13:56:12:07
Steve
Yeah. I mean, so, you know, that’s it’s interesting that you brought that up. So give me an example. So when you say a nuisance violation, what are you contemplating? What type of.
13:56:12:09 – 13:56:17:21
Matthew
Scenario oftentimes that would be a noise issue from neighbor to neighbor.
13:56:17:23 – 13:56:19:00
Speaker 3
13:56:19:02 – 13:56:36:05
Steve
Got it. So there’s so many circumstances where and this kind of gets to the heart at you know, what’s the association there to do? I mean, yes, we have a duty to enforce our governing documents. We’re really there to maintain common areas, maintain esthetic controls. Right. We’re not there to make two people that live next door to each other, like each other.
13:56:36:07 – 13:57:01:12
Steve
And in the law of nuisances, especially in the community context, there’s very helpful case law that says just because and I’m boiling it down just because something’s annoying to you or disturbing you doesn’t make it a nuisance. There has to be a material injury to your rights in the case, says people who live in communities must accept some annoyance consequent on their neighbors reasonable use of their property.
13:57:01:13 – 13:57:18:20
Steve
So what does that mean? My neighbor is in the backyard. The kids are loud screaming, playing in the pool. Well, yes, this community is a family community. Large homes. So there’s pools in the backyard. It’s not reasonable. That’s not a nuisance. If the kids were playing in the pool at 2 a.m., I unfortunately, some time I found my kids doing all right.
13:57:18:20 – 13:57:46:19
Steve
That’s not reasonable. That could be a nuisance. But things like dogs barking, you know, drifting smoke from a barbecue or a pellet grill, those aren’t necessarily nuisances. There’s no material injury that’s there. It’s reasonable for people to have dogs in their yard, right, to be barbecuing in their backyard. So in all those scenarios, we like to, you know, counsel our boards and their managers to say, just because somebody says, oh, this is our kids prohibit nuisances, you got to do something about it.
13:57:46:21 – 13:57:58:07
Steve
Usually it doesn’t warrant the association’s involvement. And in most of those scenarios, the association can take its hands off and say, listen, this is a neighbor to neighbor issue, and the association’s not going to become engaged in it.
13:57:58:12 – 13:58:19:08
Matthew
But if you have a situation, let’s take it to an extreme and you have a high rise and somebody is blasting their music in their unit at 3:00 in the morning and nobody on the floor can sleep. I would imagine the association would be in a in good standing legally to be able to say no, you got to turn your music down or there’s going to be consequences.
13:58:19:08 – 13:58:19:21
Steve
Definitely.
13:58:20:01 – 13:58:43:01
Matthew
I would even go so far based on what I’m hearing you say, that that seems to be, an adverse impact of health and safety, not letting people sleep. And you could you could impose a greater than $100 fine. My question is more about this opportunity to secure prior to a hearing, if the music is turned off before they get to the hearing, does that constitute it’s been cured?
13:58:43:03 – 13:59:00:10
Steve
I don’t think so. I don’t think so. I would treat every instance right every day. And that’s where, you know, it’s kind of a common sense scenario. Homeowner gets the hearing notice and let’s say they’re blasting, you know, their music at full volume. All right. Great. So the hearings ten days from now. So I’m going to keep it at this volume for nine days.
13:59:00:12 – 13:59:18:15
Steve
And then I’m just going to turn it off right before the hearing. Hey I’ve I’ve cured. No. And that’s something where if the association was imposing significant amounts of fines for a health and safety violation, I would have no problem whatsoever if the homeowner challenge it sitting in front of a judge or a mediator explaining the scenario, because that’s just a common sense.
13:59:18:19 – 13:59:38:20
Matthew
So what about taking it to a different extreme? You just have a neighbor who tends to have a lot of loud parties that go really, really late. And take it to that extreme where it’s in a high rise where it’s very, you know, contained. And somebody has a, has a loud party every 2 or 3 weeks, each time they have that party you call them to a hearing.
13:59:38:20 – 13:59:44:23
Matthew
By the time they come to the hearing, there’s been no noise issues for the previous ten days. But a week or two later, they do it again.
13:59:45:03 – 14:00:07:17
Steve
So yeah, I don’t think that that’s a curable violation. Right. And that’s something that you would want your enforcement policy to dictate, you know, what is a curable violation. But big picture beyond this. And I guess if this is a little bit of silver lining, I think a lot of times boards get so deep in the violation enforcement process, levying fines, when really, if you think about it, fines are there to deter violations and compel compliance.
14:00:07:17 – 14:00:29:23
Steve
If you have a homeowner that’s thumbing their nose at you and you’re loving the fines and you’re doing it, the board really isn’t satisfying its fiduciary obligation by saying, okay, we’re going to keep popping them with fines. So in some aspects, I think this bill is might be helpful in getting boards to understand from more of a, you know, bird’s eye view that if you’ve got a serial violator, your job is not to continue to levy fines.
14:00:29:23 – 14:00:45:16
Steve
Your job is to make them stop doing what they’re doing. And that’s when you have to call your attorney. Right? So that’s, you know, unfortunately, that’s the you know, a lot of times that’s the cost of of doing business. But if you’re serious about, okay, we need to enforce these restrictions to make sure these homeowners are not getting burned by this, by this terrible neighbor.
14:00:45:18 – 14:00:56:00
Steve
We got to call our lawyer. We got to put an end to this, you know, and if we need to sue them, we need to sue them to get a court order. Right? We need to do that. But we need to let this homeowner know that we’re serious about this, rather than to just keep calling them to hearings.
14:00:56:05 – 14:01:10:10
Matthew
If you had a homeowner who was blasting music in the middle of the night, affecting a whole neighborhood or a whole floor, whatever it might be on a regular basis, you would not be particularly concerned, as things stand right now, to invite that person to a hearing and to impose a fine.
14:01:10:16 – 14:01:31:05
Steve
No, not at all. Not at all. Yeah, I don’t think that’s a curable violation because the injuries already happened. Right. The adverse health and safety impact right has already happened. You can’t really cure that. That’s again, we went through a ton of different hypotheticals. Somebody come up with a curable violation. Right. And the most we could think of is, you know, property that needs maintenance or some, you know, right.
14:01:31:06 – 14:01:38:03
Steve
Fix on your property that needs to be done. It was tough to find really anything outside of that. Yeah.
14:01:38:05 – 14:01:48:01
Matthew
One last thing on a, I’m just going to this is an add on that’s a little bit off the topic, but you mentioned this. You said boards shouldn’t be budgeting for fines.
14:01:48:02 – 14:01:50:01
Steve
Yeah.
14:01:50:03 – 14:01:58:15
Matthew
Talk to me about just from a, an attorney’s perspective, from a legal perspective. Why that’s not a good idea.
14:01:58:17 – 14:02:21:05
Steve
I mean, you shouldn’t be anticipating that that fine revenue, right, is going to help you pay your bills because, I mean, it’s not guaranteed. And as we see right now, there’s a there’s there’s circumstance where the legislature can step in and limit that authority, plus your ability to collect fines. It’s not as strong as assessments, right? When you’re thinking about how much money you need to run your community.
14:02:21:07 – 14:02:39:07
Steve
Right? The law requires you to shall levy assessments sufficient to perform your obligations, not shell levy and assessments in an amount that’s probably going to be sufficient, provided that you collect X amount of fine revenue because your homeowners don’t comply with the rules. It just does it. It doesn’t make sense. So and that’s why I tell a client like you’re not here.
14:02:39:07 – 14:03:01:06
Steve
Fines are here to deter violations and compel compliance. So if you get a homeowner it’s their first violation. They come into compliance, waive the fine, build some goodwill. This is a community right. And do that. But if you get a homeowner that’s they’re not moved by fines or anything along those lines. The answer is to not keep finding them and try to collect the fine, that the answer is to solve the problem and make them comply.
14:03:01:06 – 14:03:31:13
Matthew
So last point, an association whose primary obligation is to bring about compliance and in doing that, maintaining relative harmony within the community. An association who imposes fines for violations and in the imposition of those fines, gains compliance, you are not seeing necessarily illegal or I’ll put you on the spot, even a moral obligation of the board to go after collecting those fines aggressively.
14:03:31:13 – 14:03:35:17
Matthew
If they’re getting compliance, they can. But they say they don’t have.
14:03:35:17 – 14:03:52:18
Steve
But no, I mean, if you file like a small claims action or something, I mean, we’ve seen countless times where a client is insisted that we go to try to collect that fine that and it’s never received favorably by a judge. Why are you here? What are you doing? Fortunately, I mean, how it was years ago. You know, fines, unsecured debt.
14:03:52:18 – 14:04:08:19
Steve
Right. It’s not like assessments that we secure through liens. So when a property would change hands, right? A homeowner goes to sell their property or even refinance, all they were concerned about is paying off any secured debt. Are there any delinquent assessments that are owed? Right. Well, there are fines on the property. Well that’s unsecured. We don’t care about that.
14:04:08:21 – 14:04:29:22
Steve
But in the modern lending climate, we’re seeing lenders now say we want any debt obligation paid whatsoever. So putting that all together board levy the fine. If the homeowner doesn’t pay the fine, the answer is to not enforce collection of the fine through whatever means. It’s probably going to be unproductive. Leave it on the account. Chances are it’s going to get paid if the property refines or sells.
14:04:30:00 – 14:04:31:02
Steve
Got it.
14:04:31:04 – 14:04:41:09
Matthew
Well, Steve, thank you so much. This is, an important topic and a big one and, very current. So, really appreciate you being part of this and, providing all the insight and.
14:04:41:09 – 14:04:46:23
Steve
Yeah, absolutely. Thank you for, thank you for having me. You guys always do a great job for this. And, and yeah, there’s always a lot of fun.
14:04:47:01 – 14:05:09:21
Matthew
But we do appreciate Steve and his legal expertise in addressing this, this legislation in California. I hope that you found this episode to be helpful. And if you did, I would encourage you to, like, subscribe to the uncommon area, tell other people about the uncommon area. We’d love to be able to help other board members and managers in the industry.
Other Resources
Check out some of our other helpful episodes:
https://www.actionlife.com/can-hoas-take-away-free-speech-ep-69/
https://www.actionlife.com/sb326-your-hoas-structural-wake-up-call-ep-68/
https://www.actionlife.com/electronic-voting-in-2025-ep-65/
The post Understanding AB 130: New Rules for HOA Fines | Ep.71 appeared first on Action Property Management.
47 min
July 22, 2025HOA Insurance Is Skyrocketing—Now What? | Ep. 70

What Every HOA Board Needs to Know About Rising Insurance Costs
Introduction
If you’re on an HOA board and haven’t reviewed your insurance policy lately, now’s the time. In this recent episode of The Uncommon Area, host Matthew Holbrook sat down with Cory Neubauer, insurance expert at NEXTIER Insurance Services and host of the Next Level Living podcast, to unpack what’s really going on in the insurance world—and why many HOAs are being hit with staggering premium increases.
Why Are Insurance Premiums Skyrocketing?
Corey breaks it down into two major drivers:
Inflation and Reconstruction Costs: The cost to rebuild properties after a total loss has surged. Material, labor, and supply chain issues mean it’s more expensive than ever to restore a damaged or destroyed property.
Increased Catastrophic Losses: Fires, floods, and other extreme weather events are more frequent and severe. Insurance carriers, especially those with national or global portfolios, are spreading this risk across the board, affecting all policyholders.
The result? HOAs in high-risk regions—especially in fire-prone parts of California—are seeing 5x or even 10x increases in premiums.
The Admitted vs. Non-Admitted Dilemma
One of the more eye-opening parts of the discussion centers on admitted vs. non-admitted carriers. Admitted carriers are tightly regulated and may be unable to raise rates fast enough to match actual risk—so many are simply pulling out of markets like California. HOAs are increasingly forced to turn to non-admitted carriers, which offer fewer restrictions but at a much higher cost.
Deductibles, Risk Transfer, and the Per-Unit Trap
Raising deductibles is often seen as a go-to cost-control measure, but it doesn’t always make a meaningful difference. As Corey explains, moving from a $10K to $50K deductible on a multimillion-dollar property might only reduce premiums by a few percentage points. Some insurers now require per-unit deductibles, which can significantly impact communities with hundreds of homes.
The Communication Gap
One of the biggest pitfalls? Boards not communicating early and often. Corey advises boards to get quotes early—at least 120 days before renewal—and to work directly with brokers and management companies. Delaying communication can lead to resident frustration, especially when a sudden increase results in special assessments or dramatic dues hikes.
Risk Management Is Now Strategic
Gone are the days of treating insurance as a checkbox line item. Today, it’s a strategic consideration:
Understand your risk profile. Are you in a high-fire-risk area? Have you had recent claims?
Work with brokers who specialize in HOAs. Not all insurance providers understand the nuances of community associations.
Avoid unnecessary claims. Insurers want to see proactive, well-maintained properties.
Plan for spikes. Cory’s litmus test: If your insurance line item increased 5x overnight, would your budget survive?
Why This Matters for Homeowners
This isn’t just a board issue. Rising premiums and limited coverage affect everyone—especially when it comes to mortgage qualification. HOAs that can’t maintain full insurance may become ineligible for FHA loans, limiting who can buy in the community and depressing home values.
Final Thoughts
This episode of The Uncommon Area isn’t just informative—it’s a wake-up call. Insurance isn’t a fixed cost anymore. It’s a volatile, high-impact budget item that boards must approach with foresight, communication, and expert support.
As Cory says, the market is shifting. The best thing an HOA board can do? Stay educated, stay proactive, and start planning—before your next renewal hits.
Other Resources
Check out some of our other helpful episodes:
https://www.actionlife.com/can-hoas-take-away-free-speech-ep-69/
https://www.actionlife.com/sb326-your-hoas-structural-wake-up-call-ep-68/
https://www.actionlife.com/electronic-voting-in-2025-ep-65/
The post HOA Insurance Is Skyrocketing—Now What? | Ep. 70 appeared first on Action Property Management.
33 min
May 08, 2025Can HOAs Take Away Free Speech? | Ep. 69

Do Homeowners Give Up Free Speech Rights in an HOA?
You might not like your neighbor’s sign—but in a free society, people have the right to speak their minds. So, what happens when that society exists inside the walls of a homeowners association (HOA)? Can an HOA prohibit someone from expressing their opinion on a sign, a flag, or even a social media post?
Welcome to The Uncommon Area, where we’re reimagining HOA leadership and empowering board members and managers with the tools to create communities where people truly love where they live.
In a recent episode, host Matthew Holbrook sat down with attorney Sarah Paas of the Tinley Law Group to tackle a fundamental and sometimes controversial question:
Do homeowners give up any of their constitutional rights to free speech when they move into an HOA?
Constitutional Rights vs. Private Governance
As Sarah explains, “What people don’t realize is that the U.S. Constitution and even state constitutions—that only prohibits state actors, so governments, from censoring speech. It doesn’t do anything in respect or in regard to the homeowners association because the HOA is actually a private actor.”
In simpler terms: the First Amendment protects citizens from government censorship, not from restrictions imposed by private entities like HOAs. But that doesn’t mean residents are entirely without protections.
What About the Law?
California, for example, has gone further than many other states to protect non-commercial speech within HOA communities. “A homeowners association… cannot just outright blanket prohibit all non-commercial signs, especially political signs during the time of elections,” Sarah says.
The law allows HOAs to establish reasonable rules about where signs can be placed, how big they can be, and how long they can stay up. But they can’t say “no signs allowed, period”—especially when it comes to political or other non-commercial expressions.
Commercial vs. Non-Commercial Speech
It’s also important to understand the distinction between commercial and non-commercial speech. As Sarah clarifies: “Commercial speech is any type of speech that is designed with the intent to profit… and it is often less protected under the law.”
That means advertising your business, renting your unit, or putting up a “for sale” sign may be subject to tighter restrictions than expressing support for a political candidate or social cause.
Inspirational Takeaway
Perhaps the most inspiring takeaway from this episode is the reminder that even in the governed space of an HOA, core democratic values still have a place.
Sarah sums it up well:
“We live in a free society where people have the right to freely speak their minds, and the association cannot do anything to prohibit the expression of free speech.”
It’s a balancing act: HOAs exist to protect property values and maintain community standards, but they also need to respect residents’ rights—especially when it comes to expressing personal beliefs and opinions.
Final Thoughts
If you’re a board member, manager, or resident navigating this terrain, it’s crucial to understand where the law draws the line—and how your community can uphold it in a fair, respectful way. Protecting free speech doesn’t mean allowing chaos; it means creating guidelines that make room for expression while preserving harmony.
Resources
Read Sarah’s article on Homeowners’ Speech
Watch related episodes:
https://www.actionlife.com/can-communication-kill-conflict-ep-66/
https://www.actionlife.com/do-homebuyers-see-hoas-as-a-strikeout-or-home-run-ep-56/
https://www.actionlife.com/how-hoas-can-prevent-homeowners-from-getting-financing/
https://www.actionlife.com/a-jerk-or-lawbreaker-ep-34/
Read Transcript

Sarah Paas (00:00)
You might not like the sign. You know, really, we live in a free society where people have the right to freely speak their minds, and the association cannot do anything to prohibit the expression of free speech.
Matthew Holbrook (00:14)
Welcome to The Uncommon Area, where we’re dedicated to reimagining HOAs. We provide board members and managers with the resources to create uncommon communities where residents love their HOA and truly love where they live.
Welcome to The Uncommon Area. I am Matthew Holbrook, and I am joined in this episode by Sarah Paas of the Tinnelly Law Group. Sarah and I discuss the question:
Do homeowners give up any of their constitutional rights to free speech when they move into a homeowners association?
I think Sarah provides a lot of really helpful insight, so I hope you check out the rest of this episode.
Sarah, thank you so much for joining us. We’re going to be talking about one primary question that’ll take us a lot of directions, and I’ll just start off by asking it as provocatively as I can:
Do homeowners give up some of their constitutional rights to free speech when they buy a home in an HOA?
So maybe just starting with that question—how would you respond?
Sarah Paas (01:16)
That’s a great question, and I think it’s a source of confusion for a lot of residents that we encounter in the HOA world. A lot of people think, “Well, I have the right to freely speak under the Constitution.”
What people don’t realize is that the U.S. Constitution—and even state constitutions—only prohibit state actors (i.e., governments) from censoring speech. It doesn’t apply to HOAs, which are private actors. So technically, you do not have First Amendment rights in an HOA because it is private property.
However, many states—especially California—have created statutes that mirror constitutional protections to ensure HOAs don’t censor speech just because they don’t like the message.
Matthew Holbrook (02:20)
So a key principle is: while a homeowners association may function like a quasi-government, it’s still a private entity, and the laws apply more in a private than public context. Do I have that right?
Sarah Paas (02:45)
Yes, exactly. Even though HOAs function like mini-governments or cities, they are private entities.
Matthew Holbrook (02:59)
So within that, the association actually has some rights in how it governs speech on private property. Let’s get more specific—what does that mean in terms of signage or flags on a homeowner’s property? Can a homeowner post whatever political sign they want?
Sarah Paas (03:34)
Before we dive in, it’s important to distinguish between commercial and non-commercial signage.
Commercial speech (e.g., ads, selling or leasing a unit) has always had less protection under the law.
Non-commercial speech (e.g., political signs) enjoys more protections.
So, for non-commercial signs, like political signs during elections, California law does not allow an HOA to completely prohibit them. The law can limit the size and location, but not outright ban them.
Matthew Holbrook (04:42)
Okay, so commercial signage—could an association completely ban that?
Sarah Paas (04:49)
In California, an HOA can regulate commercial signs more strictly. They can limit the size, placement, and duration. But they cannot completely ban signs related to selling property because homeowners have a constitutional right to sell their property.
Matthew Holbrook (05:58)
That includes “For Sale” or “For Rent” signs?
Sarah Paas (06:00)
Yes. That’s considered an inalienable right. But signage promoting a business could be prohibited.
Matthew Holbrook (06:17)
What about security signs—like “This home is protected by XYZ Security”?
Sarah Paas (06:26)
That’s a gray area. It can be seen as a form of advertising, which may make it commercial in nature. Still, HOAs could apply reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on these signs, like limiting the size or where they’re posted.
Matthew Holbrook (07:12)
So practically speaking, the HOA might allow them but regulate how and where they’re used.
Sarah Paas (08:10)
Exactly. Reasonable restrictions—like location and size—are likely to be upheld, but banning them outright would be harder to justify.
Matthew Holbrook (08:29)
That’s helpful. Now on to non-commercial signage—are political signs, religious signs, and other personal messages treated differently?
Sarah Paas (09:33)
Generally, they’re all treated the same under non-commercial speech protections.
There is a subset of California law that addresses religious symbols specifically, but most non-commercial signs are treated equally under the law. The key issue is content-neutral regulation—focusing on size and placement, not message.
Matthew Holbrook (10:27)
So content can’t be regulated, but size and placement can?
Sarah Paas (10:44)
Exactly. Focus on the time, place, and manner, not the content.
Matthew Holbrook (11:05)
What if a homeowner tears down a neighbor’s political sign and gets caught? Does the HOA need to get involved?
Sarah Paas (11:31)
The association should remind both parties that political signage is protected.
Tampering with or stealing signs may be a civil or criminal issue, better handled by local authorities. Ideally, the HOA should refer the parties to a neighbor-to-neighbor dispute resolution process and remain neutral.
Matthew Holbrook (12:54)
What if there’s no signage policy in the community? Does that mean anything goes?
Sarah Paas (13:09)
No. Even if the governing documents are outdated or silent, California’s Civil Code (2004 update) still applies. It gives examples of what’s protected. Still, it’s best practice for an HOA to adopt a policy to ensure uniform enforcement.
Matthew Holbrook (14:19)
What about flags—are they handled differently?
Sarah Paas (14:24)
Flags, banners, posters, and signs fall under the same rules—but with different size limits.
However, U.S. flags have special protections in California. Civil Code §4705 allows homeowners to display the U.S. flag regardless of size, whether on a post or in a window.
Matthew Holbrook (15:19)
Does that only apply to the red, white, and blue American flag? What about POW flags or “Don’t Tread on Me”?
Sarah Paas (15:52)
The statute applies only to the traditional U.S. flag. Other flags—even patriotic ones—are considered non-commercial speech and subject to regular sign restrictions.
Also, it only protects actual flags, not images or emblems.
Matthew Holbrook (16:39)
Can the association limit where or how the U.S. flag is displayed?
Sarah Paas (16:49)
Yes, they can limit the height and location of the flagpole using architectural guidelines, especially if noise is a concern.
Matthew Holbrook (17:21)
Can they completely ban non-U.S. flags?
Sarah Paas (17:43)
No. They can regulate size and placement, but not prohibit non-commercial flags outright.
Matthew Holbrook (18:02)
And if someone flies a commercial flag (e.g., advertising a business), that gets treated differently?
Sarah Paas (18:16)
Yes. That would fall under commercial signage, which can be more strictly limited.
Matthew Holbrook (18:28)
Can an association restrict signs or flags with profanity or offensive content?
Sarah Paas (18:41)
Yes, if the content threatens public safety or incites violence. But that’s a gray area. The law doesn’t define exactly what qualifies, so the board should consult with legal counsel.
Matthew Holbrook (19:28)
Is profanity alone enough?
Sarah Paas (19:39)
It depends on the specific language. If local city or county ordinances prohibit that language, the HOA has stronger grounds to require its removal.
Matthew Holbrook (20:17)
So referencing local ordinances can help the association’s case?
Sarah Paas (20:24)
Yes, absolutely.
Matthew Holbrook (20:31)
What about painting a message on a garage door or other architectural surface?
Sarah Paas (21:06)
California law is clear: non-commercial speech protections do not apply to painting on architectural surfaces. That falls under the HOA’s architectural guidelines, which can regulate design and aesthetics.
Matthew Holbrook (21:51)
Got it. Is there anything else we didn’t cover?
Sarah Paas (22:00)
I’d just emphasize that CC&Rs are often outdated. Even if they prohibit non-commercial signage, state law overrides them. It’s best for HOAs to adopt updated signage policies—your attorney can help draft one—so the association is proactive rather than reactive.
Matthew Holbrook (22:36)
Great. Thank you so much for being part of this episode. That was super helpful and I really appreciate your insights.
Sarah Paas (22:43)
Thanks so much for having me. I appreciate it.
Matthew Holbrook (22:45)
If you found this episode helpful, we encourage you to rate, review, and share it with a friend. That helps more people discover The Uncommon Area and benefit from our content.
The post Can HOAs Take Away Free Speech? | Ep. 69 appeared first on Action Property Management.
25 min
April 24, 2025SB326: Your HOA’s Structural Wake-Up Call | Ep. 68

The Latest on the Balcony Bill
In this episode of The Uncommon Area, host Matthew Holbrook is joined by Action Property Management’s Regional Director Ryan Darby and VP of Community Management Tad Black to discuss the wide-reaching implications of SB 326 (The Balcony Bill). While most HOAs know about the inspection deadline, few realize the financial domino effect a report can cause.
Episode Overview:
SB 326 requires HOA communities with wood-based elevated structures (like balconies) to undergo inspections every 9 years. The initial deadline is January 1, 2025. However, it’s not just about compliance anymore—it’s about lending, insurance, and protecting homeowner property values.
Topics Covered:
What counts as a compliant SB 326 inspection
The “stoplight” grading system: Red, Yellow, Green
How ambiguous reporting can stop real estate transactions
Lenders demanding repair scopes—even for non-inspected balconies
Why associations may unknowingly be placed on the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac blacklist
What it means for refinancing, selling, and new buyers
The ripple effect on insurance underwriting and premium hikes
Proactive steps boards and managers should take now
Key Takeaway:
A completed inspection is not enough. HOAs must anticipate lender and insurer requests by securing repair scopes and documenting intent to address findings—even for non-critical items.
“You don’t want to find out you’re on the blacklist when a homeowner’s sale falls through. By then, it’s too late.”
Boards and managers, now is the time to revisit your SB 326 report and take action. Delaying may not only stop sales—it could impact your community’s reputation and financial stability.
Watch related episodes:
Are HOA Repair Projects Doomed for Failure?
Common Budget Failures
Reserve Studies Pt. 1
Reserve Studies Pt. 2
The post SB326: Your HOA’s Structural Wake-Up Call | Ep. 68 appeared first on Action Property Management.
23 min
April 10, 2025HOA Elections EXPOSED: Behind the Scenes with a Ballot Expert | Ep. 67
”We don’t just show up and count ballots. We ensure the entire process—from start to finish—meets legal requirements and maintains community trust.
– Lisa Schwartz



In this episode of The Uncommon Area, host Matthew Holbrook is joined by Lisa Schwartz, founder of The Ballot Box, a firm that has specialized in HOA elections for over 18 years. Together, they unpack the often misunderstood world of community elections—from legal requirements and ballot security to the rise of electronic voting. Lisa outlines common mistakes associations make, how third-party oversight can prevent manipulation, and what managers and boards should consider before, during, and after election season.
Key Takeaways
Lisa’s Beginning
Lisa entered the election world after working in HOA management and developer services.
A change in California law created a niche opportunity—one that led her to start The Ballot Box with her husband.
She’s since built a business focused solely on HOA elections, handling everything from notices to tabulation.
Why Third-Party Oversight Matters
Associations often hire election services when there’s potential conflict—like contentious board races or controversial assessments.
Hiring an independent inspector helps eliminate accusations of ballot tampering or procedural bias.
The Ballot Box acts as a neutral, disinterested party, insulating managers and boards from accusations of favoritism or misconduct.
Common Election Pitfalls
Access Issues: Incumbent board members getting access to blank ballots or member contact lists, while challengers do not.
Privacy Violations: Counting ballots off-site or without homeowner visibility, which is illegal in many states.
Tampering Risks: Lack of secure systems can allow for ballot duplication or voter impersonation.
How The Ballot Box Prevents Fraud
Unique Identifiers: Each voting unit receives a ballot package with a unique code printed on return materials—not on the ballot itself.
Double Envelope System: Keeps votes anonymous. The outer envelope verifies eligibility, while the inner envelope contains the secret ballot.
Ballot Design: Custom colors, sizes, and printing make duplication nearly impossible.
Strict Replacement Policy: No mass distribution of blank ballots—only individual replacements mailed directly to homeowners.
Electronic Voting & Transparency
Electronic voting is gaining traction, but many communities—especially with older populations—are hesitant to adopt it.
Some HOAs don’t even collect email addresses due to privacy concerns.
The Ballot Box supports virtual tabulations and often shares real-time vote counts via screen share on Zoom, offering more transparency than in-person meetings.
Tabulation Process and Logistics
Contrary to popular belief, counting votes is fast—it’s opening and sorting the ballots that takes time.
Ballots are designed to avoid folding, speeding up processing.
Votes are sorted manually and counted via Excel for quick totals.
A numbering system ensures accuracy, matching the number of ballots to the number of return envelopes received.
The Role of the Inspector of Elections
In some cases, inspectors are only brought in at the end to count ballots—without oversight of earlier steps like notices or candidate solicitation.
Lisa emphasizes that inspectors carry full legal responsibility for the election, so oversight from the start is crucial.
Her company often steps in early to review processes, even if they’re not directly executing them.
Cumulative Voting
Common in HOA elections, cumulative voting allows members to allocate their votes however they choose (e.g., all to one candidate or split among several).
Lisa explains that the timing of this declaration matters—it must be known in advance if ballots are mailed.
What Every HOA Should Know
Lisa advises managers and board members to ensure anyone overseeing elections has no vested interest in the outcome.
Even unpaid volunteers should be vetted for neutrality.
States like California place strict legal responsibility on inspectors, making professionalism and oversight essential.
This episode offers a rare behind-the-scenes look into the highly structured, occasionally dramatic world of HOA elections. Whether you’re a board member, community manager, or simply a curious homeowner, this conversation provides valuable insight into what fair and transparent elections should look like.
Subscribe to The Uncommon Area for more episodes that help HOA leaders think differently.
Resources
The Ballot Box
Watch related episodes:
Electronic Voting in 2025
Board Member Blunders: These Mistakes Can Wreck Your HOA
Board Communication by Email
The post HOA Elections EXPOSED: Behind the Scenes with a Ballot Expert | Ep. 67 appeared first on Action Property Management.
31 min
March 24, 2025Can Communication Kill Conflict? | Ep. 66


Clear, consistent communication is essential for successful HOA management. In this episode of The Uncommon Area, Matthew Holbrook and industry expert Julie Adamen discuss how proactive communication reduces homeowner frustration and increases engagement. They explore best practices such as using multiple communication channels, incorporating visuals, leveraging experts, and maintaining a positive tone. Whether through emails, newsletters, video updates, or in-person meetings, transparency is key to building trust and preventing conflict. Tune in to learn how HOAs can improve relationships with their residents through better communication strategies.
Key Points
Communication is the foundation of a well-run HOA and directly impacts resident satisfaction.
Common homeowner frustrations—high dues, unclear spending, and lack of transparency—can be mitigated through effective communication.
Frequency and consistency matter; messages should be delivered multiple times and in various formats.
HOAs should utilize different communication methods, including email, newsletters, video updates, social media, and town halls.
Engaging experts, using visual aids (graphs, pie charts), and providing real-world comparisons help residents understand HOA decisions.
Personalization and positive reinforcement (e.g., highlighting well-maintained homes) create a sense of community and trust.
Resources
Read Julie’s article here
Adamen, Inc.
Synthesia.io
Watch related episodes:
Stop Telling Boring Stories
Board Member Blunders: These Mistakes Can Wreck Your HOA
The Evolution of HOAs
The post Can Communication Kill Conflict? | Ep. 66 appeared first on Action Property Management.
35 min
January 30, 2025Electronic Voting in 2025 | Ep. 65


Electronic voting is coming to California homeowners associations! Starting January 1, 2025, HOAs will have the option to conduct elections through electronic voting, offering a modern alternative to traditional mail-in ballots. But what does this mean for board members and managers?
Join Matthew Holbrook and Dennis Burke, attorney at Fiore Racobs & Powers, as they dive into the specifics of this legislative change. From updating election rules to navigating the new technical requirements, we break down what you need to know to prepare your HOA for this shift. Plus, we discuss how California’s approach compares to other states and the potential benefits (and challenges) of electronic voting.
Topics Covered
Key steps to enable electronic voting in your HOA
New notice and rule amendment requirements
Ensuring secure, anonymous, and accurate voting
What board members and managers need to consider
Resources
Learn more about Dennis
Watch related episodes:
The Evolution of HOAs
The Industry Is Changing . . . How Will You Manage?
The post Electronic Voting in 2025 | Ep. 65 appeared first on Action Property Management.
14 min
November 20, 2024Board Member Blunders: These Mistakes Can Wreck Your HOA | Ep. 64


In this episode of The Uncommon Area, Matthew Holbrook and guest Kate Kilanowski from Cagle Pugh dive into the common mistakes made by HOA board members and how to avoid them. Whether it’s navigating governing documents, managing communication, or finding the right balance between short-term and long-term decision-making, this episode is packed with insights to help HOA boards function more effectively.
Key Topics
Missteps with CC&Rs and bylaws
The importance of email etiquette and communication
Striking the right balance between legal obligations and community relationships
The pitfalls of not properly funding reserves
Building trust and functioning as a team within the board
Recorded live at Hotel Swexan with a dynamic audience, this episode also features practical advice for creating a forward-thinking HOA and strategies for engaging with homeowners effectively.
Resources
About Kate Kilanowski
Connect with Kate on LinkedIn
Check out our related episode: Are HOAs a Scam?
The post Board Member Blunders: These Mistakes Can Wreck Your HOA | Ep. 64 appeared first on Action Property Management.
43 min
November 20, 2024 The Evolution of HOAs: What’s Changed and Where Are We Going? | Ep. 63



This episode tackles the evolving nature of the HOA industry, recorded with a live audience at the Marconi Museum in Tustin, CA.
Host Matthew Holbrook sits down with Steve Tinnelly from the Tinnelly Law Group to discuss the evolving landscape of HOAs in the U.S. With years of expertise, they explore how recent legislative trends, safety concerns, and community expectations are reshaping HOA governance, management practices, and homeowner experiences.
Key topics
– Governmental shifts toward regulating HOAs as quasi-government entities
– Increasing requirements for board members and implications of safety regulations
– The impact of electronic voting and modern tech on HOA elections and engagement
– How board member responsibilities are evolving and what this means for community relations
– Managing conflicts, improving communication, and fostering a positive community culture
Resources
About Steve Tinnelly
Connect with Steve on LinkedIn
Check out our related episode: Are HOAs a Scam?
The post The Evolution of HOAs: What’s Changed and Where Are We Going? | Ep. 63 appeared first on Action Property Management.
52 min
October 15, 2024Are HOAs a Scam? | Ep. 62


In this eye-opening episode of The Uncommon Area, we tackle one of the most frequently asked questions in the world of property management: Are HOAs a Scam? Joining host Matthew is attorney Jeff Bowmont, who brings over 25 years of experience working with HOAs to this lively discussion. Recorded live at The Skybox in San Diego, in front of a group of HOA board members, this episode sheds light on the complex role that Homeowners Associations (HOAs) play in modern communities.
Key Topics
Are HOAs delivering value? The hosts explore the idea of value for assessments, how HOAs manage assets, and whether homeowners receive what they pay for.
Common misconceptions: Many homeowners feel frustrated with HOAs, but much of this stems from a lack of understanding and education about the association’s role.
The importance of communication: Successful HOAs are transparent and prioritize educating their members. Boards that actively engage and communicate with homeowners often achieve better results and satisfaction.
Real-world stories: Jeff shares powerful examples of how HOAs and their management affect homeowners, from rules about water bottles on driveways to the impact of reserve funds on long-term financial health.
Humanity in decision-making: A central theme in this episode is the need for compassion in HOA governance. Boards are encouraged to consider the human element, rather than strictly following the “rules” without thought for individual circumstances.
The role of reserves: Properly managing an HOA’s reserve funds is critical, yet poorly run associations often find themselves in difficult financial situations, leading to special assessments or higher fees for future homeowners.
Individual board member preferences: How do personal agendas impact the broader community? The hosts talk about managing conflicts of interest and ensuring that the board serves the community as a whole.
The code of conduct: Jeff explains why having a code of conduct is essential for board members and how it fosters professionalism and trust within the community.
Takeaways
HOAs are not inherently a scam, but success depends heavily on how they are managed. Boards that emphasize transparency, communication, and education can deliver immense value to their communities, while poorly managed associations may leave homeowners feeling dissatisfied and undervalued.

Resources
Connect with Jeff on LinkedIn
Beaumont Tashjian
The post Are HOAs a Scam? | Ep. 62 appeared first on Action Property Management.
35 min

About The Uncommon Area

From the publisher's feed

Podcast series with Action Property Management CEO Matthew Holbrook. Where experts unpack your HOA, one topic at a time.

Share The Uncommon Area

Sign up to save your podcasts

The Uncommon Area

The Uncommon Area episodes

About The Uncommon Area