California Legislative Action Committee’s Day at the Capitol Event
Each year, Team HMC and other members of Community Association Institute (CAI) gather in Sacramento to educate legislators on current issues affecting California’s 55,000 community associations. During this two-day event, April 8-9, we will attend briefings with CAI’s lobbyist to learn what new changes are on the horizon before descending upon the State Capitol building and making our way through the halls, meeting with our state legislators and their representatives to make (y)our voices heard. If you are an active HOA Board Member and would like to attend this event, please let us know by emailing email@example.com.
These visits serve multiple purposes; educating legislators, seeking support for or against specific bills making their way through the system as well as showing our appreciation for past support of our positions on major issues impacting community associations in California.
Two early priorities will be to support SB434 authored by Senator Bob Archuleta and to oppose SB323 authored by Senator Bob Wieckokski. SB434 is a CLAC-sponsored bill which would add language to the Davis Stirling Act regulating how community association records are transferred from one manager to another when a change occurs. CAI is co-sponsoring the bill with CACM’s support to ensure a professional process when an association elects to change management companies.
SB323 by Senator Bob Wieckokski is the reintroduction of SB1265 which thankfully, failed last year. The only change in this version is a requirement for an association to hold an election at least once every 4 years. Otherwise it’s identical to last year’s failed SB1265 and would prohibit a Board from disqualifying a member involved in litigation with the HOA or who owes past-due assessments from being a candidate for the Board of Directors. It would allow the election ballots and ballot envelopes with a members mailing address and signature to be photocopied by any member, raising concerns about privacy, identify theft and potential fraud. Further, it would change the burden of proof to require an Association be able to prove that any mistakes that may have occurred in the election process were unintentional and did not impact the outcome. Overall, we believe the bill is poorly conceived and will put additional financial burden on the associations it is meant to serve.
If you would like more information on either of these bills or to learn how to get involved in CAI’s CLAC, please email us: firstname.lastname@example.org.