ACTION
FOR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONSACTION
FOR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS
Homeowners associations often are reluctant to take what they characterize as "political" positions. Thus, they remain silent on issues that are of great legitimate concern to the majority of their resident members.
Non-profit groups should distinguish between the support of candidates, which is political, and the support of issues. Taking a stand on an issue affecting residents is a responsible activity for civic organizations.
Click here for information about the homeowners association coalition, Clear the Air - No Jets
An Editorial by Tristan Krogius -attorney
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS: DERELICTION OF DUTY?
Contacts by homeowners coalitions with many homeowners associations under the proposed El Toro commercial airport flight paths suggest that directors of some associations are derelict in their fiduciary responsibility to their membership.
This charge involves the failure by some Boards to disseminate information concerning the likely impact of such an airport on the quality of life and property values of the membership, even when help is solicited by their own members. And they further refuse to send out information on programs designed to combat the airport proposal.
A primary fiduciary responsibility of any homeowner Board is the preservation of property values. For such an organization, lying under the proposed flight path of a major airport, not to take an active role in disseminating the bad news, on the grounds that it is “political,” is an absurdity--particularly when the government’s own data clearly show the extent of losses in value.
The airport question is a “property values” and “quality of life” issue--not an inappropriate “political” issue. Moreover, by terming it a “political” issue, the directors are, in fact, unwittingly engaging in politics to the detriment of their member homeowners. Worse yet, the political stance such Boards are taking is the not-so-subtle politics of the developers and their management-company allies in trying to hold down opposition to the airport. It’s a “don’t gimme no bad news” philosophy designed to enhance home sales. The possibility of being under the flight path is generally believed to be a mandatory disclosure item to potential home purchasers.
It is true, of course, that the Board of a mandatory homeowners association, which makes contributions of homeowner funds directly to a group opposing the airport, may be exceeding its authority under its by-laws. However, this must not be confused with a homeowner organization using any or all communications media to actively oppose a development that adversely affects its constituency. And it does not preclude associations from setting up a voluntary subscription plan to benefit the airport opposition.
In order to gage opposition to the airport, a number of homeowner associations have conducted surveys of their members. These include Niguel Shores, Three Arch Bay, Monarch Bay Terrace and Villas at Monarch Beach, and all have documented overwhelming opposition to the airport. And it is noted, too, that the city councils of virtually all south county cities are also in opposition.
What action should individual homeowners take when they find that their Board is either apathetic or deliberately preventing information flow? First, attend the next Board meeting and request that they become active on the issue and pass a resolution opposing the airport. If necessary, get them to survey their membership.
If the Board refuses on “political” grounds, then they need to know that, indeed, it is not a political issue and that the board has a fiduciary responsibility to the homeowners. You can explain that the Capistrano Unified School Board, and Saddleback Valley Community College District , have actively opposed the airport on the non-political grounds that children’s learning is impaired by being under such flight paths.
The next step is to determine what advice the management organization may be giving the Board and then expose it, if erroneous.
The final step is to arouse the community, unseat the Board and, if appropriate, find a new management company that places the interest of homeowners above its allegiance to developers.
Homeowner associations will be helped if you place the airport issue in proper perspective. Few issues in our lifetime--and in those of our heirs--will equal the negative impact brought on us by a 24-hour airport at El Toro, equivalent in size to San Francisco International. Look at it as putting a highway through the middle of our community. Then ask the question: if it were a highway instead of a flight path, would it still be an inappropriate “political” decision to oppose it?
The Website Editor writes:-
Litigation has become necessary to oppose a flawed reuse plan for El Toro. If residents understand that a nearby airport will reduce their property values, they should be willing tosupport fundraising efforts aimed at fighting such as a possibility. Many homeowners association already are working to raise money to support the Taxpayers for Responsible Planning legal defense fund.
Don't be silent on these important issues.
See what other associaitons are saying. The first attached letter was sent to the County by a large homeowner group after review by the association's attorney. The Board of Directors first polled the residents to establish that the position taken against the airport reflected the position of the community as a whole.
The second attached letter was sent by a civic association,
comprised of 17 homeowners groups. They backed up their position with a
financial contribution to Taxpayers for Responsible Planning.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
RE: REUSE, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ISSUES CONCERNING THE EL TORO MARINE CORPS AIR STATION
WHEREAS, the Declaration of Establishment of Protective Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for Niguel Shores (hereinafter the “CC&R’s”) provides that the Association was created for the purpose of providing efficient preservation of the value, desirability and attractiveness of Niguel Shores;
WHEREAS, the suggested flight patterns associated with the proposed international airport at the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station have the potential of adversely impacting the value and desirability of the Common Area and the Niguel Shores development as a whole as a result of increased aircraft noise, air pollution, potential for aircraft related accidents and reduced property values to the detriment of the Association and the detriment of the common good and the general welfare of its membership;
WHEREAS, the Association recently circulated a questionnaire among its membership concerning the proposed airport, and of the Two Hundred Forty-Four (244) responses, Two Hundred Thirty-Three (233) opposed an airport use of El Toro, while Eleven (11) favored an airport use; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Board of Directors has determined that it is in the best interest of the Association and its membership as a whole to adopt a position in opposition to an airport use in connection with the reuse, planning, and development issues affecting the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station.
Certificate of Association Secretary
I certify that I am the Secretary of the Niguel Shores Community Association and that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Board of Directors at its regular meeting held July 2, 1997.
___________________________________________ Robert Converse, Secretary
October 30, 1996
This association is made up of the 17 below-listed-dues-paying homeowner associations of Monarch Beach and we have been alive since cityhood began in late 1988.
The purpose of the civic association is to keep our members informed on regional issues that may affect the member associations, to represent their interests before public agencies, and to support or oppose issues that have direct bearing on the well-being of our members (after due majority vote by our member board).
We have opposed the construction of a commercial airport at El Toro and have contributed to TRP to support that opposition. Our Board voted unanimously for two such contributions in 1995 and again on September 23, 1996, for the present year. It is currently our keystone issue.
We have also declared our opposition in writing to both the County of Orange and the city of Dana Point. We will continue to do so whenever the occasion requires it.
Please be advised that Cathy Valenzia is the chairperson of our Board committee in opposition to the airport.
The member homeowner associations are as follows: Antigua, Cape Cove, Corniche sur Mer, Emerald Ridge, Estates at Monarch Beach, Marquesas, Monarch Bay, Monarch Bay Terrace, Monarch Bay Villas, Monarch Beach Master Association, Niguel Beach Terrace, Regatta, Ritz Cove, Sea Terrace Apartments, Tennis Club Villas, and Villas at Monarch Beach. A listing of our directors is enclosed for your convenience.
(Officers are noted.)
Sincerely,
JIM DAVY
|
|
|