We’ve written before about how the Fair Housing Act applies to common interest communities. Unfortunately, there are some (maybe many) homeowners associations and condominium associations that still don’t understand the importance of this federal law and its state counterpart, the Colorado Fair Housing Act, or if they understand, they don’t believe it applies to them. Here is a recent story of a condominium association in Hawaii that found out otherwise. Continue Reading Fair Housing Revisited
November 2007
Community Association Legal Audit (Part 1 of 2)
By Suzanne M. Leff on
Community association board members fill tough roles that require a great deal of attention to association business. We understand that, as board member volunteers, you need guidance from professionals to facilitate informed decision-making, allowing you to uphold your fiduciary duties to the association that you serve. To assist you in evaluating the legal priorities for your community, we have created this Legal Audit checklist.
Place a check mark in the box beside each statement that applies to your community association.
My community association has . . .
? adopted the seven mandatory Senate Bill 05-100 policies.
Senate Bill 05-100 requires all associations to adopt seven different responsible governance policies concerning (1) the adoption and amendment of policies, (2) board member conflicting interest transactions, (3) covenant enforcement and fines, (4) collection of delinquent assessments, (5) conduct of meetings, (6) inspection and copying of records and (7) reserve fund investments.
? adopted the Senate Bill 06-89 dispute resolution policy.
Senate Bill 06-89 requires all associations to adopt a policy concerning disputes between owners and the association.
? updated Senate Bill 05-100 policies to conform to Senate Bill 06-89 requirements.
Senate Bill 06-89 modified some of the terms of Senate Bill 05-100, creating recommended changes to the responsible governance policies.
Continue Reading Community Association Legal Audit (Part 1 of 2)
What Would John Wayne Do
By Lawrence B. Leff on
Posted in Off the Top
In reviewing the law regarding construction of restrictive covenants, I ran across a case I read a couple of years ago. As I was leisurely re-reading this case I was struck by the appellate court’s interpretation of the covenants dealing with the heart of the lawsuit. No, not the validity of the developer unilaterally modifying the restrictive covenants after the sale of lots or tracts. It was how the court concluded that sheep could be maintained on the property when under the original 1984 covenants they were specifically prohibited.