The ultimate resource for condominium conversions and condo law
The following has been reprinted from the Davis-Stirling.com Newsletter, a publication of ADAMS & KESSLER LLP. New election law with regard to owning pets in a condominium.===================================
QUESTION:
Our CC&Rs prohibit pets. We are fearful that the new election law may affect our restriction.
ANSWER:
Your fears are well founded. By requiring all associations to adopt election rules, the legislature inadvertently voided all pet prohibitions in California.
Any governing documents amended after January 1, 2001 must allow pets. Civ.Code '1360.5(e) Election rules are part of an association's Rules & Regulations. Civ.Code '1357.120(a)(7) Rules & Regulations are defined as governing documents. Civ.Code '1360.5(d) Therefore adoption of election rules immediately voids pet prohibitions and allows owners to have birds, cats, dogs, and aquatic animals kept in aquariums. Civ.Code '1360.5(a)&(b)
Your board cannot preserve your pet restriction by refusing to adopt election rules since all associations "shall" adopt election rules. Civ.Code '1363.03(a) Therefore, the legislature has intentionally or unintentionally voided your pet restrictions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Associations with pet prohibitions should immediately amend their CC&Rs to limit the number, size and breeds of pets allowed. If they do not, owners can bring Pit Bulls, Dobermans, Rottweilers, etc. onto the property and there is nothing boards can do to stop it.
Moreover, if owners adopt pets before new restrictions are enacted, the pets are automatically grandfathered and associations cannot force their removal. Civ.Code '1360.5(c) Therefore, boards should move quickly to amend their governing documents.
If you need help drafting and recording pet restrictions, contact Natalie Reynolds.
- Adrian J. Adams, Esq.
posted by SFResidence.com @ 7:11 AM
2 Comments:
Civil Code 1357.120, re Applicability and Limitations, says that 1357.130 and 1357.140 are applicable to an operating rule involving procedures for elections (a)(7), but are not applicable to a rule change required by law (b)(4).
So, what if a rule change for election procedures is required by law?
Is this question related to pet prohibitions and election rules?
If so, election rules are mandated by statute, which means the board was not required to go through a 30 day waiting period when they implemented election rules last year, and the membership could not veto them.
This does not impact my analysis regarding pet prohibitions.
Adrian Adams
Post a Comment
<< Home