|
PET PROHIBITIONS DEEMED VOID
BY LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL
In a December 2006
newsletter, I
concluded that election rules mandated by the newly enacted
Civil Code §1363.03 voided pet prohibitions throughout the state. The
Office of Legislative Counsel for the State of California has adopted the
same position.
 Background. Earlier this year, an owner living in a
community that prohibited pets brought a dog into the complex.
Reportedly, the board received an opinion from legal counsel that its pet
prohibition had been voided by the adoption of election rules. The board
disagreed with their attorney and changed law firms. The association then undertook disciplinary action against the pet-owner. The owner
contacted Senator Kuehl, who asked the Office of
Legislative Counsel for an opinion on the matter.
Opinion of Legislative Counsel. The Office of Legislative Counsel
reviewed the underlying statutes affecting pets. It reviewed
Civil
Code §1360.5 and
concluded that the Legislature's
broad intent was to give all owners the right to have pets. Counsel then
reviewed
Civil Code
§1363.03, a law enacted last year that requires homeowner associations to adopt election
rules. The Office of Legislative Counsel further concluded that election rules mandated by the
Legislature had the effect of modified governing documents as defined
by Civil
Code §1360.5(e), thereby voiding pet prohibitions throughout the state.
The opinion
letter concluded with:
. . . it is our opinion that, under
Section 1360.5 of the Civil Code, the adoption of a rule by a common
interest development to comply with the election requirements of Section
1363.03 of the Civil Code renders unenforceable a provision of the governing
documents of that development that prohibits the keeping of at least one
pet.
RECOMMENDATION. Although the opinion of Legislative Counsel does not have the force of an
Appellate Court decision, it will certainly be taken into account when judges
rule on pet disputes. In my opinion, judges will likely conclude that associations
must
now allow pets. Accordingly, boards should seriously consider amending their CC&Rs to limit
the number, size and breeds of pets in their developments. If they do not, pet
ownership in their associations could be unrestricted.
Sincerely
yours,
Adrian Adams, Esq.
Adams Kessler PLC
UPDATE ON WORKFORCE CRACKDOWN. New
regulations that require employers to fire workers
with unverified social security numbers have been
delayed. Originally scheduled to go into effect
September 14, the regulations have been delayed by a
California Court until at least October 1. |
Directory |
Job Market
HOA Store |
Elections
——
Reprinting
Articles
You
may reprint articles in your newsletter provided you include the
following:
Reprinted
from the Davis-Stirling.com
Newsletter by Adams Kessler
——
Find out about
Election Rules
——
Copyright
Adams Kessler
A Professional Law Corporation
Our website & newsletter are not
affiliated with or sponsored by any governmental agency.
This
newsletter is for advertising & informational use only and does
not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client
relationship. Readers should not act on information without
first consulting legal counsel.
——
Offices |
