All Publications Archives

Codes of Conduct for Association Volunteers

Emily A. Long, Esq.

Coachella Valley Office Managing Shareholder

858.527.0111
Email
Practices: Community Association Counsel | Civil Litigation

Share this article:

Generally, board members of common interest developments are volunteers dedicating their time, skills and energy to serve the communities within which they live. Indeed, without these director volunteers, community associations would be unable to properly function. Similarly, committee members are volunteers who work on specific projects within a community. Often, committee work is a valuable first experience which can entice a member to become more involved and to eventually run for the board. However, there is a steep learning curve upon entering the world of association governance.

In order to help board and committee members understand the association’s expectations for service, codes of conduct can be particularly helpful. Not only do codes of conduct codify association expectations, they can also serve to educate board and committee members and help minimize association liability. Boards might therefore consider adopting codes of conduct that cover the following topics, among others:

- - - Prohibiting the acceptance of any gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan, or any other item of monetary value by a board or committee member from a person who is seeking to obtain a contractual or other business or financial relationship with the association.
    - Clarifying that board and committee members may not engage in any writing, publishing, or speech that defames any other member of the board, committee, employee, or resident of the community.
    - Establishing that board and committee members may not knowingly misrepresent facts to the residents for the sole purpose of advancing a personal cause or influencing the residents.
    - Prohibiting board members from discussing sensitive and confidential matters discussed in executive session, outside of executive session, or with anyone who is not on the board (with the exception of management and association counsel).
    - Prohibiting board or committee members from seeking to have a contract implemented that has not been duly approved by the board.
    - Prohibiting board or committee member interference with an association contractor performing work.
    - Clarifying that board and committee members may not harass, threaten, or attempt through any means to control, instill fear or discriminate against any member of the Association, management company, service provider, or community resident.
    - Preventing interference by board and committee members with the system of management established by the board as a whole and the management company.
    - Reminding board members that they must operate as a board and do not have any individual authority unless it is specifically granted to them in writing by the board or the Association’s governing documents.

Often, codes of conduct may be adopted as rules of procedure by way of approval by the board at an open session meeting, rather than by following the rulemaking procedures spelled out in Civil Code section 4360. However, we encourage you to first speak with your association’s legal counsel to review your association’s governing documents and discuss your community’s particular needs prior to adopting such rules.

Enforceability of these codes of conduct is another important issue to consider when preparing draft rules. It is recommended that any code of conduct specifically list the consequences for a violation of the code of conduct. Reasonable penalties for violation might include: public or private censure by the board, removal of an officer title, and/or removal from committee service by the board. It is unlikely that violation of a code of conduct may result in unilateral removal of a board member by the board, but speak with your association counsel on this issue.

Is My Mic On? Concerns Surrounding Recording Board Meetings

Rhonda R. Goldblatt, Esq.

Senior Attorney

858.527.0111
Email
Practice: Community Association Counsel

Share this article:

Is My Mic On? Concerns Surrounding Recording Board Meetings

Association members may try to record board meetings. Such recording may even be surreptitious. However, there are concerns surrounding permitting the recording of board meetings of which boards and management should be aware.

First, recordings may serve as evidence in subsequent litigation. Association members who try to record board meetings may do so in order to compile such evidence to support their claim. Associations should think twice about fueling a member lawsuit for obvious reasons. A single stray remark may end up exposing an association to liability.

Second, those present at the meeting may be uncomfortable being recorded. A recording device may have a chilling effect on directors and management who are trying to conduct association business without worrying about the specter of potential future litigation.

The Davis-Stirling Act does not require board meetings to be recorded. California Penal Code section 632 in fact prohibits recording a confidential conversation without the consent of all parties. Subsection (a) of the statute provides in part:

A person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, uses an electronic amplifying or recording device to eavesdrop upon or record the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) per violation, or imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

Boards may want to consider including a statement on meeting agendas that recording the meeting – via audio or video – is prohibited. Boards can also consider stating at the beginning of a meeting that recording is prohibited (and noting that statement in the meeting minutes). Doing so will help create a documentary record that any recording is nonconsensual per Section 632. This is important because under subsection (d) of the statute, evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping upon or recording a confidential communication in violation of Section 632 is not admissible in a lawsuit.

Finally, it is worth pointing out that Section 632 does not apply to the use of hearing aids and similar devices for “persons afflicted with impaired hearing” for the purpose of overcoming the impairment to permit hearing sounds ordinarily audible to the human ear. This caveat essentially brings those with impaired hearing to equity, by allowing them to hear what others do.

For additional advice on this subject, please reach out to your friendly community association counsel.

Ensuring a Smooth Transition: Best Practices for Changing Management Companies

Jillian M. Wright, Esq.

Shareholder

858.527.0111
Email
Practice: Community Association Counsel

Share this article:

Ensuring a Smooth Transition: Best Practices for Changing Management Companies

*Article originally published in CAI-SD Community Insider Magazine, Summer 2025

Switching community management companies is a major undertaking for any community association. A smooth transition requires careful planning, forethought, clear communication, and attention to legal and operational details. Without proper preparation, a change in management can disrupt financial operations, delay maintenance, and create confusion among the association’s homeowners and vendors.

To ease the management transition, associations should focus on five key areas: (1) strategically timing the transition; (2) communicating with the outgoing management company; (3) preparing for the transition; (4) ensuring proper records transfer; and (5) notifying homeowners of necessary updates.

Timing the Transition Strategically

Management contracts often have termination clauses and required notice periods that must be adhered to before the association can terminate their current management company. A termination outside of the delineated termination provisions or notice periods may be invalid, subject to monetary penalties, and/or subject to legal action by the management company. If the board has concerns regarding a potential breach of contract or would like to transition to new management, we recommend consulting with the association’s legal counsel prior to taking any action.

Note that the timing of management transitioning can significantly impact the association’s operations, so the board should endeavor to schedule the transition at a time that minimizes disruption and aligns with the association’s financial and operational cycles. For example, transitioning towards the end of an association’s fiscal year may jeopardize the timely mailing of the association’s annual board report, annual policy statement…etc. Changing management companies during significant maintenance projects, elections, or community-wide events may also unnecessarily complicate the transition, create delays, and lead to potential unwanted liabilities for the association.

Communicating With The Outgoing Management Company

Once the board has executed a contract with its new management company and reviewed the parameters of termination for its outgoing management company, the next step is to formally provide notice of termination for the latter. This should be done professionally and in writing, either by the new management company or the association’s legal counsel, following the termination terms outlined in the contract (e.g., to whom the letter should be addressed and delivered). The notice of termination should include, but is not limited to: (1) the effective date of termination; (2) instructions for record transfer; (3) a request for clarification of homeowner assessment payment procedures; (4) a request for a summarization on any outstanding/urgent association matters; (5) the new management company’s contact information; (6) and a transition checklist compiled by the board, new management, and/or the association’s legal counsel to help ensure all association records and homeowner/vendor data are transferred in a timely manner.

Maintaining a cooperative relationship with the outgoing management company can facilitate a smoother transition. If possible, the board should request a transition meeting to ensure open communication and address the foregoing.

Preparing For the Transition

It is important to establish clear responsibilities for both the outgoing and new management companies. A good place to start would be for the board to review its outgoing management contract to confirm the parameters of the outgoing management’s transition assistance in the event of its termination.

Simultaneously, the board should collaborate with its new management company to outline a transition plan that ensures continuity of service (e.g., when/how to relay the transition to new management to the association’s members and financial/vendor representatives, any changes in homeowner assessment payment procedures, association information portals, methods of communications with new management…etc.) Such information is crucial to avoid disruption to the association’s daily operations and any confusion for homeowners and the association’s vendors.

Oftentimes, a board member familiar with the day-to-day operations of the association may be designated to assist the new management company with the transition process.

Ensuring Proper Transfer of Records

Once terminated, the outgoing management company has a duty to transfer the association’s records to the association’s new management company. All association records, information, and property must be released in a timely manner to new management and any refusal to cooperate constitutes a breach of outgoing management company’s professional code of conduct and may subject outgoing management to legal action. While the board can assist the new management company in verifying whether all necessary records were transferred from outgoing management to new management, the onus is on new management to highlight any missing records/information. As missing or incomplete records can create significant operational challenges, it is highly recommended for boards to take an active role in overseeing any transition of management.

The following critical records, whether past, current, and/or proposed, should be transferred:

the association’s governing documents, including any amendments;
all financial records (e.g., annual budget reports, reserve studies, operating budget, annual/interim financial statements, bank statements/information and check registers, state and federal tax returns, reserve account balances/payments);
all insurance policies;
all routine and in-progress vendor contracts and insurance/warranty records;
all employees contracts, contact information, and records,
all board agendas and meeting minutes;
all election materials;
miscellaneous items (e.g., passwords to all digital properties/accounts, membership list, homeowner assessment account histories and enforcement records, architectural records, litigation files, keys.) See Civil Code sections 5200 et. seq for a list of all association records.

Having complete records will help the association function smoothly as boards change and memories fade.

Notifying Homeowners of Necessary Updates

Homeowners should be informed well in advance of the transition to new management to ensure proper communication channels and timely payment of the association’s regular and special assessments.

The new management company should send a notice to homeowners including clear instructions on how to update any automatic assessment payments and mailing addresses for regular/overnight payments. The notice should clarify whether the new management company will field general inquiries and billing questions from homeowners regarding the management transition prior to their official start date.

Frequent communication with homeowners is key, so it is a good idea for the association to send multiple email reminders and update the association newsletter or community bulletin boards to reinforce the changes. The board’s goal is to minimize confusion and ensure homeowners understand their role in assisting with a successful transition.

Thoughtful execution of these five integral steps will minimize disruptions and ease the potentially complex management transition process.

Avoiding Conflict: Unique Issues in Senior Housing Communities

Emily A. Long, Esq.

Coachella Valley Office Managing Shareholder

858.527.0111
Email
Practices: Community Association Counsel | Civil Litigation

Share this article:

Avoiding Conflict: Unique Issues in Senior Housing Communities

*Article originally published in CA-CV HOA Living Magazine, September 2025

If you’re a resident of the Coachella Valley—or someone who comes here to work or play—you know about the demographic makeup of our communities. Older adults from across the country (and the world) choose to come to our beautiful valley to live out their retired lives, in search of a warmer climate and a high quality of life. The Coachella Valley’s economy and social fabric rely upon these older adults and their investments throughout the desert cities.

As verified by the U.S. Census Bureau, the population of the Coachella Valley is older in comparison with the rest of Riverside County. As of 2023, 19.4% of the Coachella Valley’s residents are individuals aged 65 and older. By contrast, throughout all of Riverside County, only 15.7% of residents are aged 65 years and older.

In addition to having a generally older population, we also have a large number of senior housing communities in the Coachella Valley. Senior housing communities must satisfy both federal and state laws on senior housing in suggestions for preserving open communication with older residents before a conflict escalates into a full-blown dispute.

At the outset, senior housing communities are unique from other types of housing because they often offer camaraderie and fellowship to seniors, along with services in addition to housing. Some senior housing communities in the Coachella Valley provide recreational opportunities, extra amenities, on-site services (e.g., beauty salon, library, private space rental, restaurants), as well as association-sanctioned committees, interest groups, and social events.

It is not uncommon for individuals working in senior communities to develop deeper relationships with residents; sometimes even forming close friendships. Such relationships can be extremely valuable to all involved. Unfortunately, these relationships can also open an association and its board members to possible liability if the association doesn’t closely follow the requirements in the law or governing documents. The likelihood of conflict can increase if there is a preexisting relationship, as feelings may be hurt when the association exercises its enforcement powers as required under applicable law.

Below are a few helpful tips to prevent conflicts from growing into bigger problems.

COMMUNICATION PREFERENCES

All people—no matter their age— appreciate direct and clear communication. However, with rapid advances in technology in recent years, some older members may not have the same technological skills that younger members have. This can make it harder for older residents to communicate effectively with the association electronically.

Younger members may consent to “electronic delivery” of association notices and competently open and review all correspondence. However, many senior members of Coachella Valley communities prefer the telephone, even if they list an email as their preferred delivery address.

As a general practice, if the association sends a notice through a member’s preferred delivery method but receives a phone call in response, taking the time to return that call goes a long way. Confirming by phone that the owner received and reviewed the order to protect their “senior housing” status. This federal status legally allows a senior housing community to require residents to be of a certain age without facing claims of age discrimination.

This article does not discuss the legal requirements of senior housing communities—the literature on that topic is vast. Rather, it touches on ways to reduce conflict and provides practical correspondence shows courtesy and helps build trust. While telephone communication is not legally recognized notice, it is an appreciated courtesy.

Similarly, if an owner calls the management office to file a complaint, management should redirect the owner to submit the complaint in writing— either dropped off, mailed, or emailed. Taking the time to explain why written documentation is required may be new to that resident. Delivering this message by phone and making a note in the owner’s file will likely make the owner feel acknowledged and reduce the chance of escalation.

NOTICES

Association notices are generally provided by either “general” or “individual delivery.” General delivery is often the default under the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act. Civil Code § 4045 outlines several methods of general notice, including:

Including the notice in a billing statement, newsletter, or other document (Cal. Civ. Code § 4045(a)(2));
Posting in a prominent, designated location (Cal. Civ. Code § 4045(a)(3));
Posting on the association’s website (Cal. Civ. Code § 4045(a)(5)); or
Providing by “individual delivery” if requested (Cal. Civ. Code § 4045(a)(1)).

Rule changes, board or member meeting notices, and most election notices must generally be provided by general delivery unless governing documents state otherwise.

Notices requiring “individual delivery” are less common. Each year, associations must solicit members’ preferred delivery method(s). A member may now designate up to two mailing addresses or two emails for individual notices.

Flexibility is important in senior communities. For example, an owner may initially request email delivery but later ask for paper notices instead. It is typically best to honor the request, even if not worded formally. Similarly, if an owner requests a mailed copy of a notice after receiving an email blast, sending the copy and following up for clarification is often the most practical solution.

IF ASSESSMENTS GO UNPAID

If assessments that were once paid on time stop being paid consistently, it may be worth making a phone call. Before calling, the association should consult its collections provider to ensure compliance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Older residents may be more likely to experience life or health changes that impact timely payments, and a proactive, compassionate approach can help.

CONTACTING THE PROFESSIONALS

If the board or management becomes aware that a resident poses a health or safety risk to themselves or others, the association should immediately contact the appropriate authorities and encourage residents to do the same. Dialing 9-1-1 in emergencies is always the right step. Associations should also assist with preparing a police report if requested, while keeping information confidential for privacy reasons.

Additionally, Riverside County’s Office on Aging connects seniors and families with support systems. Association representatives may contact the Office if an owner needs additional assistance. The Office oversees more than 27 programs and services that promote dignity, well-being, and independence for older adults and adults with disabilities. Since management staff are not trained social workers or medical professionals, it is important to reach out to the proper resources when needed.

No matter the age of the resident, people appreciate being heard and acknowledged. Managing communities to foster mutual respect and concern benefits both staff and residents. Hopefully, these small tips will help bring peace to your community.

What to Do When Quorum Cannot be Met for the Annual Meeting

Victoria R. Minor, Esq.

Attorney

858.527.0111
Email
Practices: Community Association Counsel

Share this article:

What to Do When Quorum Cannot be Met for the Annual Meeting

Corporations, including many community associations, are required under Corp. Code § 7510 to hold annual meetings of the membership. If the association fails to hold a regular meeting within sixty (60) days of the date designated in its governing documents, any member may bring legal action to compel the association to do so. This puts the association at risk if meetings are not held due to a lack of quorum, which is an unfortunate reality in many community associations today, where obtaining member participation at annual meetings can be difficult. It is important to note that this obligation to hold an annual meeting exists even when an association decides to conduct its director election by acclamation. This article explores the association’s options in navigating this challenge and how it can protect itself from potential liability.

Documenting Efforts to Hold the Meeting

If an annual meeting cannot proceed due to insufficient member participation, the association should thoroughly document its good-faith efforts to meet the quorum. Some of these efforts may include:

• Issuing and mailing ballots
• Sending notices, beyond those required by law, reminding members of the upcoming meeting
• Door-to-door outreach encouraging membership attendance at the meeting
• Posting signs in the common areas of the community
• Adjourning and attempting to reconvene the meeting (discussed more thoroughly below)

To help insulate the association from a potential lawsuit, the association should send a notice to the membership summarizing the association’s efforts to hold an annual meeting if it is unable to meet due to a lack of quorum.

If no members object, the matter may end there. However, in anticipation of potential objections, the association may consider filing a petition in the Superior Court under Corp. Code § 7515. An association should seek advice from its community association legal counsel to understand the circumstances when it may be advisable to file such a petition.

Reduced Quorum and Adjourning a Meeting

An association might make more than one attempt to hold its annual meeting by adjourning its meeting to another date. This may allow for a lower threshold of participation for quorum to be achieved.

Corp. Code § 7512(d) and Civil Code section 5115(b)(6) and (d)(2) provide that in the absence of a quorum (as required by an association’s governing documents), an association may adjourn a proceeding to a date at least twenty (20) days after the adjourned meeting at which time the quorum will be twenty percent (20%) of the association’s members, unless the governing documents provide for a lower amount. Keep in mind, the association is required under Civ. Code § 5115(d)(3) to provide members with notice of the reconvened meeting no less than fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the reconvened meeting, and the notice must state that the reduced quorum will apply.

Petitioning the Court Under Corporations Code Section 7515

Corp. Code § 7515 provides relief when it is “impractical or unduly difficult” to conduct a member meeting, or otherwise obtain the members’ consent, in the manner prescribed by the association’s governing documents. In this instance, the association can petition the Superior Court for an order that the meeting be called “in such a manner as the court finds fair and equitable under the circumstances.” Section 7515(c) authorizes the court to grant a wide range of relief, including an order dispensing with the quorum requirement altogether or the number/percentage of votes needed for approval.

Amending Bylaws to Reduce Quorum Requirements

If member participation is an ongoing issue for the association, the association may want to consider a more long-term solution, such as amending its bylaws to reduce quorum thresholds permanently. However, such action requires membership approval, which can be difficult to obtain if voter participation is low. As such, the association may end up in the same position of trying to solicit enough ballots to establish a quorum. However, again, the association may consider filing a Section 7515 petition to lower the quorum and approval requirements for amending the bylaws in Superior Court, because conducting the meeting is “unduly difficult”.

In order to prevail, the association will need clear evidence demonstrating that lowering the bylaws amendment approval requirement is “fair and equitable under the circumstances,” and that obtaining the members’ approval is “unduly difficult.” This may require the association to send out ballots for the bylaws amendment and do its best to solicit votes. The association could then provide evidence to the court showing how few responses it received, and therefore, that court intervention is needed.

Conclusion

Low voter turnout and lack of member engagement can make holding required member meetings nearly impossible for some associations. However, by documenting diligent efforts, regularly informing the membership, adjourning and attempting to reconvene a meeting, and utilizing legal remedies, such as a Section 7515 petition, associations can both comply with their legal obligations and protect themselves from legal challenges.

DISCLAIMER: The contents provided herein are the suggestions and opinions of Epsten, APC on general legal issues involving California community associations and common interest developments. This content is for educational purposes only, is not intended for commercial use and may not be relied upon in addressing any specific legal issues. Specific policies and procedures that your association, management company and/or law firm have developed may differ and may fully satisfy all applicable laws. Copyright 2025 by EPSTEN, APC, unless otherwise indicated. These materials may not be reproduced or distributed without express permission of Epsten, APC. (Published and/or Last Updated on 8.11.2025)

Best Practices for Community Association Managers and Board Members Using GenAI

Gabriel P. Huerta, Esq.

Attorney at Law

858.527.0111
Email
Practices: Civil Litigation & Appeals

Share this article:

AI has become so prevalent that even the state’s legislature codified “Generative Artificial Intelligence System” (“GenAI” for short) last year. Section 22757.1 of the California Business and Professions Code defines GenAI as “an artificial intelligence that can emulate synthetic content like text, images, audio, or video.” There are over 17 widely used software applications that utilize GenAI as a tool, each available to consumers for free or at an affordable rate. Although a convenient time-saver, particularly for non-sensitive and non-substantive tasks, managers and board members of community associations should exercise the utmost discretion when using GenAI to ensure that fiduciary duties are maintained, especially the duties of confidentiality and care.

First is the duty of confidentiality. In part, this duty requires managers and board members to Protect Personally Identifiable Information (“PII” for short) from becoming compromised. Software applications that utilize GenAI are able to retain data and metadata, meaning each GenAI tool can readily transmit whatever is input. For example, uploading an owner’s vehicle registration document containing a resident’s name, address, birthdate, and driver’s license into ChatGPT would be enough for a third party to identify that resident. If that information were extracted from Open AI’s database, whether through an inadvertent or intentional data breach, or if Open AI were to change its terms of service and sell uploaded information to third-party services, either scenario could be determined to be a breach of confidentiality on the part of the party that uploaded the data. This could, in turn, lead to violations of regulations and laws, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act. That is why it is currently still a best practice to never share PII with vendors that offer GenAI. Taking the time to educate team members on what constitutes PII and how to avoid sharing it helps an association demonstrate its compliance with federal and state privacy laws.

In practice, you may want to use only the vendors that post clear privacy policies. Try to avoid “copy and pasting” an email or document into a GenAI prompt, and if you have to, redact all PII, including the metadata, before uploading. Alternatively, try to use generic prompts if you need to ask GenAI for help, like “draft a concise letter to the Association’s Board President about X” or “provide three different ways to say to Resident A that they violate a rule about Y.” Literally type “Resident A” when you enter the prompt; you will then have to Find & Replace the owner’s actual name in place of “Resident A” before you send the letter. You can also tailor follow-ups to initial prompts, such as “revise the second paragraph in simpler terms,” to engage with GenAI and not merely copy its initial output.

Second is the duty of care, which requires, in part, fiduciaries to use reasonable effort to make informed, competent decisions and to act in good faith. In this context, reasonable effort would mean that outputs of GenAI usage are verified for accuracy before taking subsequent steps involving decision-making, such as posting notices to members, tenants, and guests. A manager or board member can demonstrate competency with GenAI by taking the time to understand its capabilities, limitations, and appropriate use. For instance, substantive tasks such as amending a governing document would require complex decision-making, which is more suitable for the association’s legal counsel to handle, rather than GenAI. Reviewing the substance of the final product created by GenAI is crucial before it is distributed to board members, management employees, or anyone else.

Acting in good faith requires diligence and transparency, which is especially important when work product is assisted by GenAI. Diligence can be demonstrated by disclosing how GenAI was utilized and the steps taken afterward. Regardless of how trustworthy GenAI may be, it would be wise to treat its output as a first draft and easily track how a human verified it for accuracy. To demonstrate transparency, managers and board members should implement internal policies that track all daily operations assisted by GenAI, regardless of how small or mundane a task may seem. Peers can hold each other accountable whenever they spot the use of GenAI without disclosure; doing so ensures compliance, especially if they are ever asked to disclose such information in a Section 5200 document request.

In summary, all fiduciaries should utilize GenAI with privacy and care in mind. Otherwise, absent-minded use of GenAI may expose the manager, the board, or the entire community association to fines, liability, or disciplinary action. Please feel free to reach out to your association’s legal counsel for any questions regarding best practices on using GenAI. Consulting with a certified information privacy professional would also be beneficial. A little caution goes a long way in safeguarding the data and integrity of our community associations.

List of widely used software applications in alphabetical order that utilize GenAI, followed by the company that developed it, the year it was first available, and noteworthy tidbits:

ChatGPT, Open AI, 2022, referred as a Chatbot like Alexa, and used as customer service on websites;
Claude, Anthropic, 2023, inspired by Claude E. Shannon to employ a constitutional approach to AI;
CoCounsel, Thomas Reuters, 2023, caused sanctions for submitting briefs with hallucinated citations;
Copilot, Microsoft, 2023, integrated with various Office software applications;
DeepSeek, High-Flyer, 2023, known for its training data;
Flux AI, Black Forest Labs, 2024, became leader in AI-image generation;
Gemini, Google, 2023, suspended in the past for posting historically inaccurate and offensive images;
GPT-4, Open AI, 2023, passed the Uniform Bar Exam, scoring in the 90th percentile among test takers;
Hippocratic, Munjal Shah, 2023, recognized as a leader in Generative AI for healthcare;
LLaMa, Meta, 2023, designed to be a base model for running a “local ChatGPT” on a PC;
Midjourney, Midjourney, Inc., 2022, utilized Discord App to create award-winning AI-generated images;
Operator, Open AI, 2025, designed as an AI agent that can automate online tasks like a person would;
Perplexity, Aravind Srinivas, 2022, designed as a conversational LLM-powered answer engine;
Protégé, LexisNexis, 2024, personalized AI-legal assistant with generative and agentic AI capabilities;
Speechify, Tyler Weitzman, 2022, originated as a text-to-speech platform and now an AI voice generator;
Veo, Google Deepmind, 2024, released as a multimodal video generative model.

2025 HOA Disclosure Workshop: Lending, Insurance & Disclosure Risks

Kieran J. Purcell, Esq., Managing Shareholder for Epsten, APC, participated on a webinar hosted by Keystone Pacific Property Management, diving into how HOA operations affect lending, insurance, and disclosure requirements. This panel breaks down key risks that can lead to loan denials, project ineligibility, and compliance issues, especially with new 2025 standards on the way.

The Grass Isn’t Greener on the Other Side of AB 1572: How to Handle California’s Nonfunctional Turf Removal Mandate

Jillian M. Wright, Esq.

Senior Attorney

858.527.0111
Email
Practice: Community Association Counsel

Share this article:

In response to California’s persistent drought conditions, Assembly Bill 1572 (AB 1572) became law on January 1, 2024, placing new water conservation mandates on common interest developments (CIDs). Most notably, the bill prohibits the use of potable water to irrigate nonfunctional turf in common areas and requires CIDs to either convert those areas to drought-tolerant landscaping or transition to non-potable water sources. As legal counsel to numerous associations in Southern California, I’ve seen firsthand the confusion and urgency this law has introduced.

This article offers guidance to boards of directors navigating AB 1572’s requirements and outlines best practices to ensure legal compliance while maintaining aesthetic and functional community standards.

Understanding the Law

AB 1572 amends Section 10608.12 of the Water Code and adds Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 10608.14) to Part 2.55 of Division 6 to the Water Code. This law prohibits the use of potable water to irrigate nonfunctional turf in CIDs beginning January 1, 2029.

AB 1572 defines nonfunctional turf as lawn areas not used for recreation or community purposes—typically decorative grass in medians, parkways, and buffer zones. The law explicitly targets turf watered with potable water in these settings and compels CIDs to eliminate or retrofit such areas. Turf that is fenced or barricaded to permanently prohibit human access for recreation or assembly is nonfunctional turf.

Importantly, the law does not ban turf entirely. Functional turf—such as lawns used for gatherings, sports, or playgrounds—remains permissible. Additionally, associations may still maintain turf irrigated with recycled or non-potable water. The key lies in how the space is used and the water source.

Additionally, CIDs with more than 5,000 square feet of irrigated common area must certify to the State Water Resources Control Board commencing June 30, 2031, and every three years thereafter through 2040, that their property is in compliance with these requirements.

Both the applicable public water agency and local government are authorized to enforce these new requirements, and CIDs that do not comply with the requirements of this new law can be subject to civil liabilities and penalties.

First Steps for Boards

1. 1. Inventory Turf Areas
    Begin by conducting a thorough assessment of all turf areas in the common areas. Work with landscape contractors or a landscape architect to identify which portions qualify as nonfunctional under AB 1572. This process should include mapping out irrigation systems and determining the source of water (potable vs. recycled).
  2. Review Your Governing Documents
    Before implementing any landscape changes, review your governing documents, including the CC&Rs and landscape guidelines. Some associations require member approval for major landscape modifications, while others delegate this authority to the board. Legal counsel should review whether proposed turf removal projects could be construed as a capital improvement or a material alteration requiring a vote of the membership.
  3. Prioritize Communication
    Clear communication with the membership is vital. Boards should proactively educate homeowners about the reasons behind the turf changes, the mandates of AB 1572, and how these efforts align with broader water conservation goals. Transparency will reduce resistance and build community support. To soften the blow, it may help to remind owners that water rates are increasing throughout the state; reducing potable water usage will eventually mean lower operating costs.

Legal and Financial Considerations

1. 1. Budgeting and Special Assessments
    Turf removal and landscape or irrigation conversion are not inexpensive. Boards must evaluate whether existing reserve funds can cover these costs or if a special assessment is necessary. Consider phasing the work over several fiscal years to ease financial strain. Engage legal counsel when considering special assessments or borrowing from reserves to ensure compliance with Civil Code §§ 5600 and 5510.
  2. Vendor Contracts
    Review existing landscaping contracts to determine if turf removal or irrigation modifications are covered services. If not, seek competitive bids and ensure new vendor agreements include warranties, insurance provisions, and performance benchmarks. Legal review of any significant contract is strongly recommended.
  3. Local Incentives
    Some municipalities and water districts offer turf replacement rebates or grants to encourage compliance with water conservation laws. Boards should consult with their legal or management team to research available programs and submit applications where appropriate. These rebates can significantly offset costs.
  4. Resident Safety

If your association converts spaces to recycled water, consider your local municipality’s recycled water rules and regulations. The association would also be required to post signs that read “RECYCLED WATER – DO NOT DRINK” and display the international “Do Not Drink” symbol or an alternative accepted by the State Water Board (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 22).

Conclusion

AB 1572 presents both a challenge and an opportunity. While compliance may require upfront investment and some aesthetic adjustments, the long-term benefits—reduced water bills, improved drought resilience, and regulatory compliance—far outweigh the initial hurdles. Boards that approach this transition thoughtfully, with strong communication, legal guidance, and financial planning, can turn this mandate into a meaningful step toward sustainability and stewardship.

As always, consult with association legal counsel before taking action, particularly when modifying common area landscaping or seeking member contributions for these projects.

AB 130 Effective Immediately: Association Fines Capped at $100

Jacquelyn E. Quinn, Esq.

Senior Attorney

858.527.0111
Email
Practices: Community Association Counsel | Commercial CID

Share this article:

California Assembly Bill 130, enacted on June 30, 2025, was revised at the very last minute this week to include amendments to Civil Code Sections 714.3, 5850 and 5855, which address association fines and enforcement procedures. The changes were added just days before the bill was signed into law without any committee hearings or opportunity for feedback. Leaving those most impacted by it, associations, with bad law and more questions than answers.

Most notably, AB 130 caps fines for many governing document violations at $100 per violation. The major takeaways regarding changes to permissible fines include:

- - Fines for violations are now capped at $100 per violation or a lesser amount adopted by fine schedule. As of June 30, 2025, associations are prohibited from imposing fines over $100 unless the exception discussed below applies.
  - The exception to the $100 fine cap is for violations that may result in an adverse health or safety impact on the common area or another association member’s property. To invoke this exception, a board must make a written finding at an open board meeting specifying the adverse health or safety impact of such violation. One way a board may satisfy this requirement is by making a finding in an open meeting a specific violation is adverse to health or safety on a violation by violation basis. Alternatively, an association could amend its rules to provide a general category of violations are adverse to health or safety (i.e., speeding, glass at the pool, off leash dogs in common areas) and therefore, subject to fines in excess of $100 without having to re-vote on the same violations over and over again.
  - Board shall not impose discipline on a member when the member cures the violation prior to the hearing and, in situations where curing the violation would take longer than the notice period before the hearing, when the member provides “financial commitment” to cure the violation. AB 130 does not define or provide an example of what a “financial commitment” is, but one option may be to impose a fine and hold it in abeyance subject to the member curing the violation by a reasonable deadline.
  - No late charges or interest may be charged for a fine.
  - Fines Imposed Prior to June 30, 2025, are not impacted. While AB 130 alters how associations may impose fines going forward, it does not invalidate previously imposed fines.

The new language of the statute also modifies part of the enforcement process, including:

- - If the board and owner are not in agreement following a hearing, the owner may request IDR. This is not a change to current law since an owner could always request IDR regarding an association dispute.
  - If the board and owner reach an agreement after the hearing, the board must prepare a written resolution to be signed by the board and the owner. The resolution will be judicially enforceable.
  - Written notice of a Board’s decision to impose disciplinary action is now due within 14 days of the hearing. Previously, notice within 15 days was required.

In summary, associations must immediately comply with AB 130, including generally no longer imposing fines in amounts more than $100 after June 30, 2025, unless a written finding is made by the Board at an open meeting the violation will have an adverse health or safety impact. AB 130 also does not necessarily require an association to suspend any enforcement actions until it amends its rules or fine policy, but boards will need to review and revise these policies to bring them into compliance with AB 130 before they are distributed with their annual policy statement. Associations should consult with their community association legal counsel regarding how to best integrate and comply with the new requirements of AB 130 for their specific community.

What do we do when Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is at the door?

Morad Fakhimi, Esq.

Of Counsel

858.527.0111
Email
Practice: Community Association Counsel

Share this article:

Immigration enforcement operations in the common interest development context can give rise to certain liability issues of which community associations should be aware. Situations may arise where community associations and association managers would need to grapple with questions about the rights and obligations of all involved when it comes to requests by ICE for homeowners’ documents or information, and requests or demands by ICE to enter and search non-public areas belonging to an association.

As a starting point, it should be noted that there is no general legal obligation in the United States to provide information to law enforcement officers. The Fourth Amendment protects the people from unreasonable searches and seizures, and requires government agents to secure judicial permission, in the form of a warrant, before conducting searches and seizures. Initially, it is important to distinguish between the two types of warrants that may be presented in this context. ICE is empowered to issue its own “administrative” arrest warrants for individuals facing deportation. Administrative warrants, however, do not authorize agents to enter onto and search private property. On the other hand, a search warrant, signed by a judge, does authorize agents to enter and search private property and to seize the types of evidence described in the warrant. In any event, because the Fourth Amendment only protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, the United States Supreme Court has recognized several exceptions to the warrant requirement. For present purposes, only three of those exceptions have any relevance: (1) the exigent circumstances doctrine, (2) consent searches, and (3) the plain view doctrine.

As to consent searches, if ICE agents contact an association manager or a community association and request homeowner or resident records or information, or if they ask for permission to enter non-pubic areas of a community, there are two legally available options. The first option is to consent. An association manager or an association representative can, of course, simply consent and voluntarily hand over documents or information, or open the gates and invite the agents onto the non-public parts of the property to conduct their investigation or enforcement operations. Having consented, the association could not later claim that it was the victim of an unreasonable search or seizure. The second option is to withhold consent and to inform the officers that a judicial search warrant is necessary. The second option is, by far, the better approach to protecting the interests of the association because: (1) as mentioned, there is no general obligation to give law enforcement any information, or to allow access to non-public areas absent a judicial search warrant, subpoena, or other court order to do so, and (2) voluntarily handing over homeowner documents and information, or permitting agents to enter non-public areas could needlessly expose the association to potential liability.

Suing the federal government involves several complications (i.e., the sovereign immunity doctrine, and the requirements and exceptions of the Federal Tort Claims Act). Because it is possible that a homeowner or resident, or their property, may be injured or damaged as a result of the voluntary information disclosure or the consent to law enforcement’s entry into the non-public areas of the association, an unfortunate situation may arise due to the fact that it is also possible under a variety of circumstances that the government would be shielded from liability (which would be the case if the liability were be based on discretionary government functions, or intentional torts such as wrongful arrest, malicious prosecution, libel, assault, or battery). This would leave the association as the most readily accessible party to be sued. Thus, when asked to consent to searches of non-public areas, or to voluntarily hand over association documents or records, the safest course of action for the association is to politely decline and to state that such disclosures or searches of non-public areas require a judicial search warrant, subpoena, or other court order.

The United States Supreme Court has also recognized that certain exigent circumstances could render an otherwise unreasonable warrantless search or seizure reasonable under the circumstances. That is, if an agent or officer were to make forcible entry onto private property to search for and seize documents or evidence (or persons), that doing so could be justified by certain types of emergencies (such as threats to life and limb, or the risk of evidence being destroyed). The Supreme Court has also recognized a “plain view” exception to the warrant requirement that might justify forcible entry onto private property to search for and seize evidence if the evidence (and its contraband nature) were plainly visible from an outside vantage point. The upshot of the both the exigent circumstances and plain view doctrines, for present purposes, is that if ICE agents (or any law enforcement officers) seem intent making a warrantless forcible entry into non-public areas, and/or seizing association documents or records, it is important to stand aside and avoid even the perception of actively blocking, obstructing, or impeding them because doing so would subject someone to criminal charges. While withholding consent is a constitutional right – actively obstructing, impeding, or interfering with the activities of law enforcement is a criminal offense.

If you have any questions, or need advice, regarding ICE searches or requests for homeowner records or documents, please reach out to your association’s legal counsel.