Latest news with #HOAs
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
She faced $500 daily HOA fines for an unapproved door in her home. A new state law saved her
Jinah Kim's HOA said she couldn't fix a doorway inside her condo. She did it anyway. She figured it was fine. After all, the doorway was completely inside her home, separating an office and dining room. But when the complex's manager peeked into her place through the open garage door one day in March and saw the renovation, she received a notice the next day. The privacy intrusion was shocking, but the cost of noncompliance was even worse: a single $100 fine at first, then up to $500 per day — $3,500 per week — starting July 10 until she changed the doorway back. But on July 1, when Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 130 into law, her HOA nightmare vanished with the stroke of a pen, and her fee for defiance was capped at $100. "It's a game changer," Kim said. "For years, HOAs have been able to bend entire communities to their will on a whim. This stops that." Industry experts and HOA lobbyists were taken by surprise in June when Newsom pushed AB 130 through the state Legislature and signed it into law — not because it passed, but because it included a last-minute update redefining HOA law in California. The overall goal of the bill is to expedite housing by easing California Environmental Quality Act regulations for many projects, but it also amends the Davis-Stirling Act, the framework that governs homeowners associations. The biggest change? HOA fines are now capped at $100 per violation unless there are health or safety impacts. Want to paint your house neon green? $100. Erect a giant Halloween skeleton on your front lawn year-round? $100. The bill also bans interest and late fees on violations and prohibits HOAs from disciplining homeowners as long as they address violations before the hearing. It allows homeowners to request internal dispute resolution if they don't agree with the board's findings at hearings. It's a massive win for disgruntled homeowners, who have long claimed that California HOAs are too aggressive, stringent and overbearing. It's a startling blow for HOAs, which were left blindsided by the changes. Dyanne Peters, an attorney with Tinnelly Law Group who practices HOA law, said her firm was tracking the legislation, but in a different bill. The HOA language was originally part of Senate Bill 681, a housing bill authored by state Sen. Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward). Peters said HOA lobbyists were making headway negotiating the bill and coming to a mutual agreement, but on June 27, the HOA language from SB 681 was added into AB 130 and passed three days later, leaving the HOA industry reeling. "As an industry, this came as a shock," she said. "Everyone is scrambling to get a handle on the changes." Peters said no one likes paying fines, but noted that fines aren't a money-making tool for HOAs. Instead, they're used as deterrents for actions that disrupt communities. For example, if a neighborhood doesn't allow homes to be used as short-term rentals such as Airbnbs, but a homeowner shirking the rules only has to pay $100 one time, they'll probably just pay the fine and keep renting out their home. Or if a resident wants to build a huge fence but doesn't want to deal with the architectural approval process, they'll just eat the $100 and build whatever they want. "It's frustrating because these new rules are handcuffing homeowners associations," Peters said. "It takes away the ability for HOAs to govern their own communities. Clients are calling us asking, 'What's the point?'" However, the bill added a lifeline for HOAs by specifying that fines can be greater than $100 if they "result in an adverse health or safety impact on the common area or another association member's property." Peters said associations should go through their current rules and see which could be health or safety violations, and then adopt resolutions that specify in writing that certain actions, such as speeding or having aggressive pets, have health or safety impacts and therefore qualify for fines greater than $100. Luke Carlson, an attorney who represents homeowners in HOA disputes, called the bill a "long-overdue course correction." "AB 130 is more than a law — it's a signal that Sacramento is finally starting to hear the voices of homeowners who've suffered in silence for too long," said Carlson, who authored the book "Bad HOA: The Homeowner's Guide to Going to War and Reclaiming Your Power." Carlson said HOAs in Southern California are uniquely aggressive because of soaring home prices. Property values are high — and so are the stakes for maintaining a problem-free community that keeps those values high. But he said when an association is bad, it tends to feed off its own power, making arbitrary decisions or giving out preferential treatment until someone pushes back. "Everyone agrees bad HOAs are a bad thing, and it takes legislative reform to stop them," he said. HOA horror stories abound in California, the state with the most HOAs (more than 50,000) and the most homes within HOAs (4.68 million) in the country — roughly a million more than Florida, the state with the second most. More than a third of Californians live in HOA communities, and nearly two-thirds of homeowners are a part of HOAs, according to the California Assn. of Homeowners Assns. In San Ramon in Contra Costa County, a woman was fined for replacing her lawn with drought-tolerant plants. In Oakland, HOAs are installing surveillance cameras to track cars and sharing the data with police. Last year, a Times investigation dove into allegations of grand theft and money laundering inside a Santa Monica co-op. Kim, a resident of Shadow Ridge in Oak Park in Ventura County, wanted to remove a blockage in the doorway between her office and dining room. The previous owner had filled the top of the entry with drywall to cover up plumbing pipes, but Kim grew tired of ducking to get under it. The HOA denied her initial request to fix it since the work required briefly shutting off shared water and rerouting pipes. But Kim had her contractor do it anyway. It was an hourlong fix. A few months later, the complex's general manager spotted the unauthorized renovation. The next day, she received four violation letters: one for the door, one for installing an EV charger in her garage, one for having her dog off-leash and one for an unpermitted rug on her balcony. "It's a door within my home that no one else sees and no one else is affected by," Kim said. "It felt like accidentally tapping someone in the hallway and getting the death penalty." She resolved the dog and rug violations and is appealing the EV charger one. But she refused to change the doorway back. On June 27, Kim received a letter saying that since the renovation rerouted shared plumbing lines, she'd have to pay to fill the doorway back in, plus pay $100. If she didn't resolve the issue by July 10, she'd get slapped with fines of up to $500 for every day it wasn't fixed. But after AB 130 went into law, the deadline came and went. She hasn't heard a peep from her HOA, which didn't respond to a request for comment. "It was a big relief. Having a daily $500 fine hanging over my head was a huge source of anxiety," Kim said. She acknowledged that the new blanket of rules will probably allow homeowners to get away with things they shouldn't. But for now, she's just happy to stop banging her head on drywall every time she walks through her dining room. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times. Solve the daily Crossword
Los Angeles Times
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
She faced $500 daily HOA fines for an unapproved door in her home. A new state law saved her
Jinah Kim's HOA said she couldn't fix a doorway inside her condo. She did it anyway. She figured it was fine. After all, the doorway was completely inside her home, separating an office and dining room. But when the complex's manager peeked into her place through the open garage door one day in March and saw the renovation, she received a notice the next day. The privacy intrusion was shocking, but the cost of noncompliance was even worse: a single $100 fine at first, then up to $500 per day — $3,500 per week — starting July 10 until she changed the doorway back. But on July 1, when Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 130 into law, her HOA nightmare vanished with the stroke of a pen, and her fee for defiance was capped at $100. 'It's a game changer,' Kim said. 'For years, HOAs have been able to bend entire communities to their will on a whim. This stops that.' Industry experts and HOA lobbyists were taken by surprise in June when Newsom pushed AB 130 through the state Legislature and signed it into law — not because it passed, but because it included a last-minute update redefining HOA law in California. The overall goal of the bill is to expedite housing by easing California Environmental Quality Act regulations for many projects, but it also amends the Davis-Stirling Act, the framework that governs homeowners associations. The biggest change? HOA fines are now capped at $100 per violation unless there are health or safety impacts. Want to paint your house neon green? $100. Erect a giant Halloween skeleton on your front lawn year-round? $100. The bill also bans interest and late fees on violations and prohibits HOAs from disciplining homeowners as long as they address violations before the hearing. It allows homeowners to request internal dispute resolution if they don't agree with the board's findings at hearings. It's a massive win for disgruntled homeowners, who have long claimed that California HOAs are too aggressive, stringent and overbearing. It's a startling blow for HOAs, which were left blindsided by the changes. Dyanne Peters, an attorney with Tinnelly Law Group who practices HOA law, said her firm was tracking the legislation, but in a different bill. The HOA language was originally part of Senate Bill 681, a housing bill authored by state Sen. Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward). Peters said HOA lobbyists were making headway negotiating the bill and coming to a mutual agreement, but on June 27, the HOA language from SB 681 was added into AB 130 and passed three days later, leaving the HOA industry reeling. 'As an industry, this came as a shock,' she said. 'Everyone is scrambling to get a handle on the changes.' Peters said no one likes paying fines, but noted that fines aren't a money-making tool for HOAs. Instead, they're used as deterrents for actions that disrupt communities. For example, if a neighborhood doesn't allow homes to be used as short-term rentals such as Airbnbs, but a homeowner shirking the rules only has to pay $100 one time, they'll probably just pay the fine and keep renting out their home. Or if a resident wants to build a huge fence but doesn't want to deal with the architectural approval process, they'll just eat the $100 and build whatever they want. 'It's frustrating because these new rules are handcuffing homeowners associations,' Peters said. 'It takes away the ability for HOAs to govern their own communities. Clients are calling us asking, 'What's the point?'' However, the bill added a lifeline for HOAs by specifying that fines can be greater than $100 if they 'result in an adverse health or safety impact on the common area or another association member's property.' Peters said associations should go through their current rules and see which could be health or safety violations, and then adopt resolutions that specify in writing that certain actions, such as speeding or having aggressive pets, have health or safety impacts and therefore qualify for fines greater than $100. Luke Carlson, an attorney who represents homeowners in HOA disputes, called the bill a 'long-overdue course correction.' 'AB 130 is more than a law — it's a signal that Sacramento is finally starting to hear the voices of homeowners who've suffered in silence for too long,' said Carlson, who authored the book 'Bad HOA: The Homeowner's Guide to Going to War and Reclaiming Your Power.' Carlson said HOAs in Southern California are uniquely aggressive because of soaring home prices. Property values are high — and so are the stakes for maintaining a problem-free community that keeps those values high. But he said when an association is bad, it tends to feed off its own power, making arbitrary decisions or giving out preferential treatment until someone pushes back. 'Everyone agrees bad HOAs are a bad thing, and it takes legislative reform to stop them,' he said. HOA horror stories abound in California, the state with the most HOAs (more than 50,000) and the most homes within HOAs (4.68 million) in the country — roughly a million more than Florida, the state with the second most. More than a third of Californians live in HOA communities, and nearly two-thirds of homeowners are a part of HOAs, according to the California Assn. of Homeowners Assns. In San Ramon in Contra Costa County, a woman was fined for replacing her lawn with drought-tolerant plants. In Oakland, HOAs are installing surveillance cameras to track cars and sharing the data with police. Last year, a Times investigation dove into allegations of grand theft and money laundering inside a Santa Monica co-op. Kim, a resident of Shadow Ridge in Oak Park in Ventura County, wanted to remove a blockage in the doorway between her office and dining room. The previous owner had filled the top of the entry with drywall to cover up plumbing pipes, but Kim grew tired of ducking to get under it. The HOA denied her initial request to fix it since the work required briefly shutting off shared water and rerouting pipes. But Kim had her contractor do it anyway. It was an hourlong fix. A few months later, the complex's general manager spotted the unauthorized renovation. The next day, she received four violation letters: one for the door, one for installing an EV charger in her garage, one for having her dog off-leash and one for an unpermitted rug on her balcony. 'It's a door within my home that no one else sees and no one else is affected by,' Kim said. 'It felt like accidentally tapping someone in the hallway and getting the death penalty.' She resolved the dog and rug violations and is appealing the EV charger one. But she refused to change the doorway back. On June 27, Kim received a letter saying that since the renovation rerouted shared plumbing lines, she'd have to pay to fill the doorway back in, plus pay $100. If she didn't resolve the issue by July 10, she'd get slapped with fines of up to $500 for every day it wasn't fixed. But after AB 130 went into law, the deadline came and went. She hasn't heard a peep from her HOA, which didn't respond to a request for comment. 'It was a big relief. Having a daily $500 fine hanging over my head was a huge source of anxiety,' Kim said. She acknowledged that the new blanket of rules will probably allow homeowners to get away with things they shouldn't. But for now, she's just happy to stop banging her head on drywall every time she walks through her dining room.
Yahoo
19-06-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Is it legal to park in front of someone else's house in Georgia? What to know to prevent a tow
In neighborhoods across Georgia, it's a common frustration to return home to find an unfamiliar car parked right in front of your house. It's frustrating, especially if it happens often or blocks your view, but is it actually illegal? Usually, no. In most cases, it is not illegal to park on a public street in front of someone else's house in Georgia. According to Georgia law, streets are considered public rights of way, meaning any licensed driver can legally park there, unless specific laws or signs prohibit it. However, according to state Code 40-6-202, it's unlawful for drivers to stop, stand or park a car — attended or otherwise — on a street in a residential area if there's a more practical place to park off the road. Georgia Code 40-6-202 outlines where parking is explicitly prohibited. Drivers are not allowed to stop, stand, or park: On the roadway side of a vehicle that's already parked on the street On sidewalks, crosswalks, or within intersections Between a safety zone and a curb, or within 30 feet of a curb opposite a safety zone Alongside any street excavation that obstructs traffic On bridges, railroad tracks, or controlled-access highways In the area between roads on a divided highway Where signs prohibit parking or stopping In front of a public or private driveway Some neighborhoods governed by Homeowners Associations (HOAs) may have rules that restrict street parking altogether, and violations can lead to fines or other consequences, even if the street is technically public. If your neighbor is hosting a party and their guests are parked in front of your house, there's likely not much you can do, as long as no one is blocking your driveway or violating posted signs or traffic laws. It's legal and permitted on most public streets. If parking on the street is prohibited in a neighborhood or area, the penalty is usually a fine. However, some cities may also enforce towing or booting, according to the Macon Telegraph. Vanessa Countryman is the Trending Topics Reporter for the the Deep South Connect Team Georgia. Email her at Vcountryman@ This article originally appeared on Savannah Morning News: Parking laws in GA: Is it legal to park in front of someone else's house?
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Fed up homeowner takes legal action after HOA demands solar panel removal two years after installation: 'Check your state laws'
One Illinois homeowner considered drastic action when their homeowners association demanded that they remove the expensive and useful solar panels they had already installed. They posted about their experience in an anti-HOA subreddit. "My HOA in IL is requiring that I remove my solar panels that have been installed for 2 years from the street side of my house," the frustrated homeowner explained. "They say I can put them on the side roof like other neighbors have… But I have a gable roof not a hip roof and they could not figure out why I don't have a side roof." Though this demand is nonsensical, it's also not surprising. Many HOAs are against solar panels, or at least against visible ones. Despite the money they save homeowners and the way they protect the planet by generating clean energy, many associations restrict or prohibit solar panel installation. That's a pity because solar panels really are the best way to generate cost-effective and non-polluting energy for your home long-term. They pay for themselves over time in energy savings and can even be used to make your home independent from the grid. It's simple to get access to those benefits; to get the best deal possible, a great first step is to check out EnergySage's free online marketplace to find vetted providers near you and compare quotes. EnergySage can also help to navigate tax credits of around $10,000, depending on the size of the project. Those tax credits may only last through 2025, depending on what Congress does with the "Big Beautiful Bill" under consideration, so it's worth exploring sooner rather than later if you're considering panels of your own. The original poster wanted to hang on to their solar benefits and was willing to fight a legal battle to keep them. "I am trying to contact a lawyer right now," they commented. "You will want to check state laws and your hoa bylaws, master deed, and use and building restrictions for the neighborhood. If none of these mention that you can't have the panels then you can," advised a commenter. "I don't think an HOA can legally make you remove solar panels; check your state laws," another user agreed. Should homeowners associations be able to determine what you grow in your garden? Yes Only if it impacts your neighbors Depends on what you're growing Heck no Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for easy tips to save more and waste less, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
16 new vetoes boost Lombardo total to 49; HOA limits, price fixing bill rejected
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed 16 more bills on Monday, including two that would have reined in powers wielded by HOAs — homeowners associations. He also vetoed a price-fixing bill. The Republican governor has now vetoed 49 bills passed by the Democrat-controlled Nevada Legislature, which adjourned in the early morning hours of Tuesday, June 3. Lombardo has 10 days after adjournment (excluding Sundays) to veto bills. Lombardo set a record after the 2023 legislative session, vetoing 75 bills. Veto messages reflected Republican principles — smaller government and pro-business laws — as Lombardo his decisions. Here's a closer look at some of the vetoes issued on Monday: PRICE FIXING: One of the vetoed bills, Assembly Bill 44 (AB44), was singled out as 'a striking case of government overreach.' AB44 would have granted the Nevada Attorney General the authority to investigate and prosecute pricing decisions involving an 'essential good or service,' a definition that Lombardo said threatened to cripple a wide range of businesses. Notably, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, who presented the bill to lawmakers, is a Democratic candidate seeking to challenge Lombardo in 2026. When prices go up, whether it's eggs, gasoline or electricity, there is often a public outcry for government action. But Lombardo attacked the language of AB44 as subjective and a threat to free markets. JUNE 4: Lombardo vetoes 33 bills in days following Nevada Legislature, 229 signed HOA POWERS: Two bills that Lombardo vetoed involved HOAs. AB185 would have required HOAs to allow in-home daycare businesses to operate inside communities. Democrats who sponsored the bill said community rules were preventing more child care businesses from setting up. In his veto message on AB185, Lombardo said: 'It is important to note that people choose to live in HOA communities with the clear understanding that certain activities are governed by agreed-upon rules designed to protect the consistency of the neighborhood. AB 185 undermines that mutual understanding by allowing some owners to bypass long-standing community standards through legislative action.' Senate Bill 121 (SB121) was also rejected, with Lombardo stating that the choice to buy within an HOA community comes with responsibilities to maintain community standards. The bill would have limited landscaping and parking restrictions. It also would have given homeowners at least three years after purchase to bring landscaping up to community standards. The same bill would have prohibited fines for some oil stains. CAMPAIGN FUNDS: AB79 would have toughened restrictions on how campaign funds could be used and required reporting on how that money is spent. But Lombardo said he was vetoing it for other reasons. 'Though ensuring transparency in elections is an important goal, AB 79 contains provisions, some vague, that would make political involvement less feasible for many and lack sufficial judicial oversight,' according to his veto message. He said the bill needed to do a better job of defining what constitutes a 'spent' or 'unspent' contribution. PROTECTING PROSTITUTES: AB209 would have set up protections for sex workers meant to encourage them to report violent crimes. It hinged on the prostitute asking for medical attention. But Lombardo said the wording of the bill could create a loophole that gives them immunity for more than is intended. A sex worker could actually use a request for medical attention to invoke immunity. Further, AB209 undermines law enforcement and assumes police aren't trustworthy. ICE ACCESS IN SCHOOLS: Lawmakers sought to keep immigration enforcement out of schools, but Lombardo vetoed AB217. The bill would have prohibited school employees, public schools or school districts from allowing access for ICE agents. Lombard called it well-intentioned, but attacked it as an overreach on a number of levels, even saying the bill would make school grounds into 'sanctuary zones' 24 hours a day. SUMMARY EVICTIONS: AB283 would have changed the summary eviction process, requiring landlords to file the initial court complaint. Similar attempts during the 2023 legislative session were vetoed, and Lombardo held firm with a veto on Monday. He called it 'lopsided, red-tape laden' and predicted disastrous consequences on Nevada's housing market if it were to become law. EXECUTIONS IN NEVADA: SB350 would have extended the time frame for executing a prisoner who was sentenced to death from the current 90 days to a full year. The bill sponsor argued that 90 days wasn't enough time to properly challenge court rulings. 'Since rather than promoting fairness or finality, SB 350 threatens to undermine the very foundation of justice by creating endless delays that retraumatize victims' families and erode public confidence in our legal system, I cannot support it,' Lombardo said in his veto message. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
