How to disband an hoa > HOA Forum

Unanswered

Active Topics

Forums

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions

Subject: How to disband an hoa

Prev Next

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Author

Messages

KevinH
(Texas)

Posts:53

05/15/2006 5:15 AM
I guess I am confused how 2 non-board members are running/heavily influencing the current board. 1) If they want to control the board, they should run to be on the board. If not, they need to sit back and let the board handle the jobs they are entrusted with. Control-mongers generally maintain such control by limiting information. They are not out to share knowledge, they want to limit and control it, and thus control the HOA for whatever agenda they have in mind. 2) I think empowerment may be the solution here. The existing board needs to feel empowered to handle the functions of their jobs. I found myself empowered after going to speak with 2 lawyers (on my own dollar) about how to dissolve the HOA and other related concerns. I came back ready to steam roll through anyone that tried to withold information, as our management company (of one) appeared to be doing. We have since turned things around drastically for the better. We are on a much better path now. 3) Would you say you have less than 10% member participation? (about 23 homeowners) If you have more, than I would work on the homeowners before addressing the 2 control-mongers. Let the majority speak and find out what they want. Unfortunately, if the homeowners are extremely apathetic towards the HOA, it won't be easy and may even be futile, but you should at least try and say you gave it your best. HOAs can flourish if they have a strong sense of community among the homeowners. If it is full of individuals that want to be left alone and every attempt to stir their sense of community fails, then it may be a lost cause.

If you cannot see the forest for the trees, back up and get a better view. Don't start to clear a path while still blind.

SharonD
(California)

Posts:39

06/07/2006 8:35 PM
The two are running it because they have convinced the board of directors that due to all the upcoming changes ONLY THEY can run the boad. No onein the HOA ia aware they quit....The board members don't want the jobs but don't quite either. Recently we had a special meeting where we were to discuss who was going to volenteer for treasurer...I said I would do it. At the meeting however, one of the board members brought in his neighbor, whom the board then voted he become a direcotr at large and then voted him for treasurer......We have maybe 40 members who feel the board is worth salvaging.....This board talks about community etc etc but it is a wasted group of people who get togther for free booze and snacks...seriously!

SharonD
(California)

Posts:39

06/07/2006 8:37 PM
This is bull*...All the controls are still with the city. HOA's cannot guarabtee good neighbors etc Our HOA discriminates who they go after...pople here have * all over...when I complains as board member the expresident say: go to the city!!!!

SharonD
(California)

Posts:39

06/07/2006 8:46 PM
1 233 2 7 3 yes the two women who ran it (as a couple for 8 years) then quit but are still running it Most everyone I spoke to says the same: get rid of the baord.....but no one is willing to do anything

SharonD
(California)

Posts:39

06/07/2006 8:49 PM
because we have 3 women eho say everythig I am sharing is WRONG. I live on the block where the islands are and know for a fact they are not being maintained. If I say it is day: these women say it is night....The residents are stupid and "allow it" because they say: it's only $100 a year...this isn't a gated community...and dues have been doubled, People are weak and not interested in fighting

SwanB
(Washington)

Posts:194

06/08/2006 6:06 AM
An HOA can also be disbanded by the Secretary of State of your particular state. You can go online to your Secretary of State's website and read through the rules for Associations or Nonprofits or however they are listed. In WA State the particular rules are titled the RCWs and then the section covering Associations falls under the number 24. I ran a search and found the exact RCW covering the 'disbanding' of an HOA in WA: RCW 24.03.302 Administrative dissolution-Grounds-Notice-Reinstatement-Fee set by rule-Corporate name-Survival of actions. There are stipulations for an administrative dissolution by the Secretary of State and it may not apply to your situation but it is a place to look.

hoatalk

Posts:487

06/08/2006 6:16 AM
SharonD: Your post above was edited to remove foul language, which is not allowed here. Please click the Posting Rules link at the top of this page and review it. An excerpt is below. "This is a positive place for community association leaders to share ideas and learn....please keep it clean, positive and friendly." Thank You, HOATalk

HOATalk.com, A free service of Community123.com Provider of Upscale Community Websites CLICK HERE to get a FREE trial community website *See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal

BradP
(Kansas)

Posts:1742

06/08/2006 11:51 AM
Sharon: Sounds like you have three options: 1) move 2) disassociate yourself from the HOA and save yourself the grief. 3) Get together with your neighbors and get determined to make a difference. I am puzzled how two women who are not on the board can rule the HOA? Get together with the other board members and convince them to follow your lead. I would think if you want to be president you should be. I would also check into the $100 for a meeting and $200-$700 for christmas decorations. Sounds like someone is doing something that isn't up to par. We spent nothing on meetings, it is a meeting not a social gathering. Best of luck to you, but if you are strong and persistent and can get some people behind you, you can succeed.

BrianB
(California)

Posts:1741

06/08/2006 3:24 PM
Swan B (and others): the instructions provide by the Secretary of State apply to the dissolution of an HOA as a business, commerce agency, or not for profit organization. They must indeed be followed to be successful. However, they are not ALL the rules that need to be followed... the common areas must still be dealt with, and the Sec of State has no provisions for that, in most cases, except to mention it as a saleable asset. And many common areas are not saleable... the city has blocked that option in perpetuity.

KevinH
(Texas)

Posts:53

04/02/2007 1:16 AM
As stated by BrianB: "the instructions provide by the Secretary of State apply to the dissolution of an HOA... However... the common areas must still be dealt with, and the Sec of State has no provisions for that... many common areas are not saleable... the city has blocked that option in perpetuity." Yes, this is the primary reason we have not yet dissolved our HOA, however... I heave heard there may still be an option that does NOT require the sale of the property. In a nutshell, you establish a credible management company to handle all basic issues with this property and offer that to the city. The money to pay that company still comes from the homeowners, but generally is still less, since they would not have all the overhead related to HOA-specific functions. I have heard others have successully used this method to then go ahead and dissolve the HOA entity, but would like more details of what to be careful of when doing something like this. My first thoughts are, exactly how is the mgmt company paid? Would it still be direct payments from homeowners? Or handled by the City via taxes on those homeowners for the equivalent amount?? Also: What if the mgmt company decides to inflate the cost without just cause (actual expenses haven't changed to match new amount taxed/charged)? I am curious if anyone here has done this before and what kind of issues were dealt with in the process (during and after). Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks, Kevin

If you cannot see the forest for the trees, back up and get a better view. Don't start to clear a path while still blind.

BradD2
(Florida)

Posts:418

04/02/2007 3:42 AM
Sharon, what state?

RogerB
(Colorado)

Posts:3701

04/02/2007 8:15 AM
Kevin, as you said "the common areas must still be dealt with". That is the key question which must be resolved prior to dissolution of an association. The Secretary of State only gets involved when the association incorporates or terminates the corporation. Yes, a HOA can dissolve the corporation (if ever incorporated). But that does not dissolve the HOA nor the homeowners' responsibilities under the Declaration of CC&Rs. So until such time as the homeowners have no responsibility for common areas I think the HOA must remain intact.

Roger Borcherding Official HOATalk.com Sponsor DARCO Property Management (Colorado) (303) 925-0150 *See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal

KevinH
(Texas)

Posts:53

04/03/2007 8:36 PM
That is my point however: How to ensure the common areas are dealt with after the HOA (corporation) is dissolved. Since the common property will likely have little value to the city, they generally will not want to accept the responsibility of maintaining it. This means someone has to and since the homeowners were the ones responsible while the HOA existed, they remain responsible afterwards. If the common property isn't tended to on a regular basis, the city would come in, have the property mowed, then assess a large fine (several times more than what we would have paid within the HOA) on each of the homeowners that were part of the former HOA for failure to maintain that common property. Not a good idea. Again, my understanding, is that even with dissolving the HOA, it may be possible to assign a mgmt company that works directly with the city to maintain the property. That company gets paid by the either additional taxes on those specific homeowners or by direct payments to the company by each homeowner. Yes, the CC&Rs still stand and could be addressed by the mgmt company (or any homeowner for that matter) provided they are willing to pay the initial legal fees and take the issue to JP court. I've discussed this with 2 lawyers on my own dime to try to understand the dynamics of this system. From what I have seen and understand, if the homeowners are apathetic and the potential of an HOA cannot be achieved, dissolution should seriously be considered. Even with common areas, this may still be possible, but it's not as straightfoward and simple as we would all like. At the moment, I am still working on trying to find the good within an HOA. However the apathy of the homeowners can wear your spirit down quickly.

If you cannot see the forest for the trees, back up and get a better view. Don't start to clear a path while still blind.

RogerB
(Colorado)

Posts:3701

04/04/2007 7:49 AM
Kevin, IMO the good of an HOA comes from better maintenance of properties AT LESS COST than the senerio you mentioned. Some HOA can dissolve but many can not because their CC&Rs are for pertetuity. What may be required is court action to place the association in receivership. The judge assigns a receiver and your assessments significantly increase. And what do you think will happen to the selling price

Roger Borcherding Official HOATalk.com Sponsor DARCO Property Management (Colorado) (303) 925-0150 *See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal

RogerB
(Colorado)

Posts:3701

04/04/2007 7:50 AM
Correction- pertetuity = perpetuity

Roger Borcherding Official HOATalk.com Sponsor DARCO Property Management (Colorado) (303) 925-0150 *See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal

KevinH
(Texas)

Posts:53

04/04/2007 9:09 AM
I am confused why you say maintenance at LESS COST than the scneario I discussed. How so? The basic deed restrictions on homes will remain, but they generally do not prevent an association from disbanding. I'm not sure why you say the assessments will significantly increase and the that the association may have to be placed in receivership. The management of the HOA brings with it more overhead than the focus on JUST the management of the common areas. The concept of an HOA is relatively new and does not exist everywhere. Many neighborhoods thrive without one. It boils down to the homeowners in that neighborhood and how much they care about the neighborhood. As stated, the deed restrictions remain intact and can be enforced by any homeowner(s) if they choose. My aggravation with HOAs is more about the social mess they often create. I see little point to any association where the well being of the neighborhood is lost among all the politics and backstabbing of a few homeowners. In many aspects, they pull apart a community more than bring them together. The average homeowner didn't create that fire, yet are held financially responsible for taming it. One possible method may be to remove the social mess and leave a mgmt company in place to focus on the management of the common areas (lawncare and utility bills essentially). Granted, ideally this should cost less. Reality may take a different spin on it however. Ultimately, there is no easy answer, but there are options. Dissolution is one of them. It comes with good and bad, but may be the best answer for some neighborhoods. Yes, there is also the choice to change the HOA for the better. For some that can be an uphill battle. For others, it may be a challenege worth taking on. I'm in the latter stage at the moment. Dissolution is currently on standby.

If you cannot see the forest for the trees, back up and get a better view. Don't start to clear a path while still blind.

PaulM
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:1347

04/04/2007 10:36 AM
KevinH: I appreciate your posts which contain 'clear thinking'; I am enjoying the read. I, too, do not hold to the fact that maintenance of an HOA comes out to 'less cost' per homeowner. Not true in most instances. Because we are also paying for common area/s which we would not have otherwise. Plus, in our community we own nothing but the unit and only what it sits on. However, we are paying high price for maintenance of surrounding ground plus electricity, streets, etc. I have posted this before, but it bears repeating. It is time for communities to come together and seek a type of overseer at gvt. level who will be our advocate against: 'double taxation', Board members w/personal agendas, power mongers, Attorneys looking to line their pockets, etc. HOA problems are the same everywhere, they are repeated constantly on this site, over and over again, in every state. We get nothing--and the municipality gets our tax dollars, gives nothing in return and the developer sells his homes in Bulk and leaves us with rules. When will things change for the buyers' benefit?

KevinH
(Texas)

Posts:53

04/04/2007 12:43 PM
Thanks. I'm just trying to make sense of it all. I think you may be hitting a good point. Perhaps we need to push for new legislation that protects homeowners in existing CAM-based communities and places a greater restriction on developers when designing new communities. For example: What if they were to PREVENT developers from incorporating common areas in their design that have little to no resale value of their own? Any property established as a common area, should be adequate enough to be usable for other development, such as a park (city property) or even other homes (private property), etc. If the city looks at the common areas and says, hell no, we wouldn't even be able to do anything with that property, then they shouldn't authorize the zoning plans and property lines. They should be able to tell whether a piece of property will be of any value or use to someone, other than the proprietary plans of the developer. At least give the future home owners a chance to decide whether they want to keep the common areas or not. If the property has little to no resale value, then the homeowners have hardly any choice but to keep it. That seems unfair. In our HOA, we have these 9 little taxable strips of land, that we cannot resell or bargain with the city on. We have no leverage whatsoever. Why did the developer lay it out this way? They could just have easily included parts of those strips in the property lines of adjacent neighbors from the start. The approval must have happened at the city level when the developer proposed his design plans. So in a way, the CITY allowed this happen and now we as homeowners must pay for the maintenance, property tax, utilities, and management of that property (of which my house is not adjacent to). In addition, our developer had gone bankrupt just after the first phase of development (our phase). Phases 2 and 3 were supposed to be part of the HOA, but due to the bankruptcy, were never added. So instead of 200-300 homeowners helping to cover this expense, it is only 100 homes. I realize why the city won't take it. Basically we are introducing a new cost that the city must somehow absorb. Responsibility for that property was long-removed from the city's budget over 20+ years ago and they're not just going to tack it back willingly. Fine. But in our case, no one would buy those small strips of property. Perhaps we should advertise them on eBay and see what happens. Knowing our luck, we have all sorts of advertisement signs strewn up and down those strips of property because the people that bought it hoped to get low cost advertising space for it. ;-)

If you cannot see the forest for the trees, back up and get a better view. Don't start to clear a path while still blind.

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > How to disband an hoa