BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  1


          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
          AB 1927 (Knight)
          As Amended  April 20, 2010
          Majority vote 

           HOUSING             9-0         JUDICIARY           9-0         
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Torres, Arambula,         |Ayes:|Feuer, Tran, Brownley,    |
          |     |Bradford, Eng, Gilmore,   |     |Evans, Hagman, Knight,    |
          |     |Knight, Saldana,          |     |Huffman, Monning, Nava    |
          |     |Torlakson, Tran           |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Seeks to prohibit no-rental policies in common  
          interest developments (CID) unless two-thirds of CID association  
          members approve a no-rental policy through a written ballot.   
          Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Makes legislative findings and declarations that, among other  
            things, the rights of common interest development owners to  
            rent or lease their property should be protected by the State,  
            and that owners of units within a CID should, through the  
            exercise of a democratic decision-making process, determine  
            what is best for their communities. 

          2)Provides that a governing document of a CID that is amended,  
            adopted, or recorded on or after January 1, 2011, shall not  
            prohibit the rental or lease of a separate interest in the  
            CID, unless that prohibition is approved by a vote of the  
            owners of separate interests with voting power in the CID.

          3)Requires that, notwithstanding any conflict with the governing  
            documents, a vote to establish any prohibition on renting of a  
            separate interest shall be by means of a written ballot and,  
            unless the governing documents in effect as of February 17,  
            2010, require a different percentage, shall be approved by not  
            less than two-thirds of the voting power of the owners of  
            separate interests in the CID.

          4)Requires the owner of a separate interest to provide to a  
            prospective purchaser a statement describing any provision  
            contained in the governing documents that prohibits the rental  
            or lease of all or any of the separate interests in the CID,  








                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  2


            as well as the applicability of such a provision.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   None

           COMMENTS  :   

          Background:  There are over 41,000 CIDs in the state that range  
          in size from three to 27,000 units. CIDs make up over four  
          million total housing units which represents approximately one  
          quarter of the state's housing stock.  CIDs include  
          condominiums, community apartment projects, and housing  
          cooperatives and planned unit developments.  They are  
          characterized by a separate ownership of dwelling space coupled  
          with an undivided interest in a common property, restricted by  
          covenants and conditions that limit the use of common area, and  
          the separate ownership interests and the management of common  
          property and enforcement of restrictions by a homeowners'  
          association (HOA).  CIDs are governed by the Davis-Stirling Act  
          as well as the governing documents of the association including  
          bylaws, declaration, and operating rules.  CIDs are governed by  
          volunteer boards of directors who are elected by the members of  
          the HOA and are responsible for interpreting the governing  
          documents and state law. Except when CIDs are first developed,  
          no state agency provides ongoing oversight of these communities.  
           

          In order to amend the governing documents, a HOA must follow the  
          procedure outlined in the governing documents or if the  
          governing documents are silent, the process provided in state  
          law.  State law and most governing documents require that a  
          majority of members vote to approve an amendment to the  
          governing documents.    

          Some CIDs have restrictions on rentals which take a variety of  
          forms including:  limiting the total number of rentals in a CID  
          to a set percentage, requiring a minimum amount of time for  
          leases, prohibiting rental of a unit until the unit has been  
          owner-occupied for at least a year or prohibiting renting or  
          leasing outright.  Additionally, in some cases HOAs adopt rules  
          which do not flatly deny rentals but require owners renting  
          their separate interest to follow specific policies.  For  
          example, a HOA may require owners who rent their separate  
          interest to include a clause in their lease agreement requiring  
          renters to abide by the rules of the HOA as a condition of  








                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  3


          residence.         

          Purposes of the bill:  According to the author, this bill is  
          intended to protect the property right of a CID owner to rent  
          their unit if such a right existed for them at the time they  
          purchased the unit.  An owner of a property whose rights to rent  
          that property were not restricted when the unit was purchased  
          should not have the rights abridged during their term of  
          ownership, without express permission.  According to the sponsor  
          of the bill, preservation of the right to rent one's home is  
          particularly important to individual homeowners in the current  
          stressful real estate market.  A prohibition on rentals in an  
          association could create a hardship for a homeowner who must  
          move because of a change in employment, and the owner cannot  
          sell so he/she must rent the unit. 

          Related legislation:  In 2008, AB 2259 (Mullin) would have  
          prohibited a CID from restricting the right of an owner to rent  
          or lease his/her separate interest if the owner had that right  
          at the time of purchase, unless the owner waives the right to  
          lease or rent.  AB 2259 was vetoed by the Governor.  The veto  
          message is below: 
           
              This bill would allow a homeowner in a common interest  
             development (CID) to retain the right to rent or lease his or  
             her unit, if the right existed at the time of ownership  
             unless the owner relinquishes those rights in writing.
              
             The supporters of this bill stress that the bill will protect  
             the property rights of the owners of property within a CID  
             governed by a home owner association (HOA) by preserving the  
             conditions under which the property was purchased.  This view  
             stresses that these conditions are essentially a contract  
             between the buyer and the HOA.  However, the converse of this  
             argument is that owners have their property rights limited  
             when they are prevented from renting or leasing their  
             property when they are restricted by this law and the  
             subsequent actions taken by HOAs.
              
             This bill alters the basic tenets under which CIDs and HOAs  
             are formed and operated.  While my support of property rights  
             is unwavering, the CID creates a unique community model that  
             is unlike the standard single family home in a traditional  
             neighborhood.  Property owners and residents that purchase  








                                                                  AB 1927
                                                                  Page  4


             and live in a CID governed by an HOA have agreed to live  
             under a common set of rules and guidelines governed by a  
             democratic process.  It is best, as current law allows, for  
             the owner-members of the HOA to determine what is best for  
             their communities.


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Lisa Engel / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085  




                                                                FN: 0004048