Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Bozeman to study shifting HOA-managed parks to city maintenance district | City | bozemandailychronicle.com

Bozeman to study shifting HOA-managed parks to city maintenance district | City | bozemandailychronicle.com: "In the past, Mayor Carson Taylor has said a parks district could equalize a system where HOA members pay both HOA fees for parks and the city taxes that fund the parks department. It could also help the city pay for maintenance in the new TOP-bond parks, given that the measure didn’t include any funding for that.

According to a study by the Trust for Public Land, Billings and Missoula have already adopted parks maintenance districts. Missoula’s, the study says, levies a property tax assessment costing a typical homeowner roughly $20 a year."

-----------

So Mayor Taylor is looking to relieve HOA residents of double taxation for parks. I assume the tradeoff is that everybody gets to use the HOA formerly-private parks?

3 comments:

IC_deLight said...

No problem!
Likely the park space was imposed as an "open space" mandate by the city at the time of development. The HOA is then "needed" to maintain the park space so that the developer can obtain approval from local government for the development.

Once the park is transferred to the city, is there any reason to have an HOA?

If the HOA no longer has (or never had) an obligation to maintain the park, can the residents expect lower assessments, a distribution of reserves, or termination of the HOA?

robert @ colorado hoa . com said...

IC_deLight said…If the HOA no longer has (or never had) an obligation to maintain the park, can the residents expect lower assessments, a distribution of reserves, or termination of the HOA?

In Colorado, the answer is "no".

the definition of a common-interest community ... includes communities with mandatory membership associations empowered to enforce the servitudes whether or not there is common property ... A ‘common-interest community’ is a real estate development or neighborhood in which individually owned lots or units are burdened by a servitude that imposes an obligation that cannot be avoided by nonuse or withdrawl ... To pay dues or assessments to an association that provides services or facilities to the common property or to the individually owned property, or that enforces other servitudes burdening the property in the development or neighborhood.” (Hiwan Homeowners Association v Knotts. Jefferson County Colorado District Court case # 2008 CV 1662. Aug. 06, 2008. Upheld by the Court of Appeals on July 09, 2009)

In a decision issued Wednesday, Judge Berryhill provided great [sic] case law for communities in Colorado. The decision makes it clear that a community which, by its declaration, requires owners to pay for the 'maintenance' of real estate described in the declaration other than their own property is a common interest community and thus subject to CCIOA [the so-called “Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act” of 1991]. In the Hiwan Homeowners Association v. Knotts case, the community's declaration provided that the assessments were paid to the association. The association's purpose was 'maintenance of the association.' Judge Berryhill found this sufficient to satisfy the requirements of CCIOA even though the association owned no common elements.” (“Jefferson County District Court defines Common Interest Community” Aug. 08, 2008. Emphasis added).

The Colorado Court of appeals issued a ruling that essentially said that CCIOA does not require ownership of real property by the homeowners association. Rather, by the terms of CCIOA, if the owners in the homeowners association were bound to pay assessments, and the assessments were used in part to pay for enforcement of the restrictive covenants or provide services to the members, that was sufficient to make the community subject to CCIOA.” (“When Your Community Doesn't Own Anything, Is It Subject to CCIOA?” Aug. 16, 2013)

Deborah Goonan said...

IC_deLight, the obvious answer to your question...

"Once the park is transferred to the city, is there any reason to have an HOA?"

Is NO.

If and when most HOAs shed responsibility for private roads, storm water management, recreaation facilities, and the like to either public entities or private landowners or business investors, collective ownership of these assets and their corresponding liabilities will no longer be necessary evil.

I'm quite sure that each HOA member currently pays more than $20 per year to maintain their parks now. Perhaps some HOAs have just allowed their parks to be neglected.