SB 1135 Signed Into Law

SB 1135, just signed into law by Governor Ritter has established a new requirement mandating that covenant violation hearings be adjudicated by an "impartial decision maker".  This law modifies most association's covenant enforcement policies limiting who may participate in enforcement hearings.  Existing Board members are not disqualified from being impartial  decisions  m akers  so long as they do not have an interest in the outcome of the hearing.  Disqualifying situations may include  situations in which a board member is a neighbor, has a personal history with the person in subject to enforcement.  Both positive and negative  history would disqualify the Director.
 
To be an impartial decision maker, the board members should not have any interest, either personally or financially with the outcome of the violation hearing.  Board members having the above conflicts should abstain from the proceedings. We can assist in making any modifications that may be required to bring a covenant enforcement policy into compliance with the new law.
Written By:E. Theresa Zalewski On May 12, 2008 6:38 PM

This appears to be a good law because many HOA's have been running amok with power. The homeowner was only allowed mediation, not binding. Adjudication assures an even-handed approach

Written By:Lucius Day On May 31, 2008 10:23 AM

It seems to me to be the epitome of disingenuousness to entertain, even for a moment, the notion a board member could or should be regarded as able to make a disinterested or impartial decision in such a case. Board members, by definition, are members of the prosecution. They are committed to aggressive enforcement. This would be like homicide detectives sitting on a murder jury.
There is no possible way in which a board member does not have an interest in the outcome of the hearing.

Written By:Jim F. On August 22, 2008 10:12 AM

While it is arguable that all board members have some interest or leaning in covenant violation hearings, the new law focuses on the more extreme cases of impartiality--those having one or more of a variety of relationships with the alleged violator that is more likely to affect his decision in a hearing. The previous poster is correct in his concern that board members, who typically have a duty to enforce covenants, are taking on an additional role when they make a judgment at a hearing after their HOA has pursued an alleged violator. It is important to consider that impartiality as it relates to ocvenant hearings is often a matter of degree. And guaranteeing a completely impartial hearing should be balanced against the burden of obtaining such a high standard of adjudication. This middle ground the new law takes allows boards to function as a hearing body without having to create an independent body or hire an arbitrator to hold these hearings.

Post A Comment / Question






Remember personal info?