Why dues went up, and what this page is for
Dues are $659.52 a month. They rose 20% on January 1, 2026, from $549.60 — an extra $109.92 every month. That came after a special assessment in 2025 and an emergency assessment in 2023. If your first reaction was that this cannot be legal, you are in good company. It is the most common thing owners here say about the board, and it is a fair thing to feel.
It is also, on everything we have been able to check, not what the documents show. You are owed the reasons rather than a reassurance, so here they are, with the work behind each in the sections that follow.
- The increase was allowed. Civil Code § 5605(b) lets a board raise regular assessments up to 20% a year without a vote of the members. It says so “notwithstanding more restrictive limitations placed on the board by the governing documents,” so the 10% in our CC&Rs has not governed since that language went into the law. On the documents we hold, the board met the conditions the statute sets, and we have found nothing suggesting the increase was unlawful.
- The increase was needed. In 2021 the association budgeted more for reserves than its own study asked; by 2023 it was budgeting about a quarter of the requirement, and reserves that stood at $676,116 at the end of 2020 were $230,164 three years later. The difference did not go away. It accumulated, and at the last disclosure it stood at $1,353,177.
- It is still not enough. On the report’s own projections the reserve fund goes negative, and the board says it anticipates a special assessment on top.
- So the question is where the money goes, and when. The law asks the board to publish a funding plan with dates and amounts, and to say how large an anticipated special assessment would be and when it would start. Neither has been published. That is the thing to ask for, and this page says how.
Nobody is asking you to like a 20% increase. But “we pay too much, so something must be illegal” sends owners off to wait for a lawyer to prove what the documents do not show, when the useful move is to ask the board for the two things it has not published. Every figure here comes from a document the association put out, and each is sourced where it appears.
Source for the monthly figure: an owner's September 2026 assessment statement, billing date August 17, 2026, showing $659.52 due September 10; and the Income Statement for the month ending April 30, 2026, whose $126,627.84 of assessment income across 192 units is $659.52 per unit to the cent. The October 23, 2025 minutes quoted below record the increase as 20%, so the 2025 figure is $659.52 ÷ 1.20 = $549.60.
The 10% in the CC&Rs, and why 20% governs
The version most often repeated is that the CC&Rs cap increases at 10%, so 20% is illegal. The cap is real, and it no longer governs — which is not obvious from reading it, so here is where it comes from and what overrode it.
Where the 10% comes from. It is in the CC&Rs, Declaration J, in the restatement recorded December 21, 1977:
“(a) From and after January 1, 1978, the maximum annual assessment may be increased each year by not more than ten percent (10%) above the maximum assessment for the previous year without a vote of the membership.”
The Bylaws go further still. Bylaws Art. VI § 1(b) requires every annual budget, and every special assessment, to be approved by a “majority of the owners” at a special meeting called for the purpose. Read literally, no board here could adopt any budget at all. Nobody argues the board should be held to that clause, and the reason is the same reason the 10% does not hold.
Why it no longer governs. Civil Code § 5605(b) sets two hard limits on what a board may do without a membership vote. In any fiscal year, the board may not:
- impose a regular assessment more than 20 percent greater than the regular assessment for the preceding fiscal year, or
- impose special assessments that in the aggregate exceed 5 percent of the association’s budgeted gross expenses for that fiscal year.
To go beyond either limit, the board must put it to the members and obtain the approval of a majority of a quorum, by secret ballot. And the subdivision opens with the words that decide the question: it applies “notwithstanding more restrictive limitations placed on the board by the governing documents.” That phrase is aimed at exactly a clause like Declaration J(a). Civil Code § 4205(a) states the general rule: “To the extent of any conflict between the governing documents and the law, the law shall prevail.” So the operative ceiling is 20%, and the 10% is a piece of 1977 that the CC&Rs page now marks as superseded.
The board has said so itself. The letter announcing the October 2023 increase is signed “Jamacha Greens HOA Board of Directors” and dated August 31, 2023. It paraphrased the statute for owners: “notwithstanding (i.e., regardless of) more restrictive limitations in the governing documents, the Board can impose a regular assessment increase up to 20% per fiscal year.” That is the same reading as this page’s, three years earlier and from the other side of the table.
Two conditions attach, and the record shows both were met. Civil Code § 5605(a) allows an annual increase only where the board’s annual budget report carried seven of the items Civil Code § 5300(b) lists. They are the operating budget, the summary of reserves, the statement on deferred repairs, the statement on anticipated special assessments, the mechanism for funding reserves, the method used to calculate them, and the statement of outstanding loans. § 5300(a) requires that report to go out 30 to 90 days before the fiscal year ends. The FY2026 Annual Budget Report carries a statement under each of those seven heads. It is dated November 1, 2025 — sixty days before the year ended, inside the window.
Source: CC&Rs, Declaration J — the restatement recorded December 21, 1977, whose cap runs "from and after January 1, 1978", quoted above; Bylaws Art. VI § 1(b); Civil Code §§ 4205(a), 5300, 5605(a) and (b), read on leginfo; Assessment Increase notice, Jamacha Greens HOA Board of Directors, August 31, 2023, quoted above; FY2026 Annual Budget Report and Annual Policy Statement, November 1, 2025, items I.1 through I.3.
What would actually be improper
It helps to know where the line is, because most of what owners are angry about sits on the lawful side of it. Without a member vote, a board may not:
- raise the regular assessment more than 20% over the preceding fiscal year. The 2026 increase was 20% exactly: $549.60 × 1.20 = $659.52.
- levy special assessments totaling more than 5% of budgeted gross expenses in a year. The 2025 special assessment was $63,313.92, which is 5% of the $1,266,278.40 budgeted for that year, to the cent.
- call an assessment an “emergency” without the written findings Civil Code § 5610 requires. The 2023 emergency assessment came with a signed resolution of findings, set out below.
- raise assessments at all without the annual budget report described above.
On each of those, the documents we hold show the board inside the line. What they do not show is a plan with dates on it, and the rest of this page is about that.
What the board adopted
From the October 23, 2025 regular session minutes:
“The Board reviewed the 2026 draft budget as presented. Upon a motion made, seconded and unanimously carried the Board approved the 2026 draft budget with a 20% increase to the monthly dues amount.”
Twenty percent sits precisely at the statutory ceiling — the most a board can adopt without asking the membership — and it is a reasonable thing for members to want explained. The explanation is in the reserve report the board sent out with the budget, and it is the next section.
Separately, the association imposed a special assessment for insurance premiums during 2025: $329.76 per unit, due between April 1 and October 1, 2025, totaling $63,313.92 across 192 units. It appears on the income statement as account 06330, and in the reserve disclosure as an assessment “already scheduled to be imposed.” The notice states its own basis: the assessment “is 5% of the Associations annual budgeted expenses and is in accordance with Civil code Section 5605(b).” Like the 20% dues increase, it was set at exactly the statutory ceiling. The notice also gives the cause, with figures: the Board budgeted $350,000 for insurance in 2024-2025 and was billed $544,752, nearly $200,000 more in a single year. The August 2024 income statement bears that out, with insurance running $123,450.78 over budget in that month alone.
Source: Regular Session Minutes, October 23, 2025; Special Assessment Notice, Pernicano Realty & Management, February 13, 2025; Income Statement for the month ending August 31, 2024.
Why the increase was as large as it was
The first instinct on seeing 20% is to ask why it could not have been smaller. The reserve study answers that, and the answer is that for years it already was.
The study calculates the annual funding requirement at $165,904 — what it would take each year to keep the components on schedule as they wear out. For FY2025 the association budgeted $82,982.40. That is 50.0% of the requirement: $82,982.40 ÷ $165,904 = 0.50018. Out of a $1,266,278.40 budget, reserves took 6.6% of what owners paid.
It was not always half. The Association’s own annual budget reports, held back to FY2021, print the reserve allocation each budget adopted beside the annual requirement of the study distributed with it:
| Fiscal year | Reserve allocation budgeted | Study’s annual requirement | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | $162,252 | $156,259 (study of September 21, 2020) | 103.8% |
| 2023 | $41,400 | $154,586 (study of September 6, 2023) | 26.8% |
| 2024 | $99,000 | $154,586 | 64.0% |
| 2025 | $82,982.40 | $159,366 (study of July 3, 2024) | 52.1% |
| 2026 | $225,058.08 | $165,904 (study of June 30, 2025) | 135.7% |
The FY2022 and FY2023 reports are not held; the 2023 allocation is the prior-year column of the FY2024 budget. And the fund itself, at each study:
| Study | Percent funded | Cash projected at year end | Fully funded would be |
|---|---|---|---|
| September 21, 2020 | 45.3% | $676,116 | $1,492,033 |
| September 6, 2023 | 14.5% | $230,164 | $1,584,976 |
| July 3, 2024 | 16.6% | $288,872 | $1,744,053 |
| June 30, 2025 | 28.7% | $543,587 | $1,896,764 |
Each of the last three reports also recommended special assessments the study said the fund needed: $790,000 across 2024–2028 in the FY2024 report, $580,000 across 2025–2028 in the FY2025 report, $570,000 across 2026–2029 in the FY2026 report. The one special assessment actually imposed in those years was the 5% insurance assessment of February 2025, $63,313.92 in all.
Source: FY2021 Annual Budget Report and Policy Statement, November 24, 2020 (budget p. 6, Reserve Study Executive Summary p. 7); FY2024 report, November 28, 2023 (budget p. 5, summary p. 6, disclosure p. 8); FY2025 report, November 25, 2024 (budget pp. 5–6, summary p. 7, disclosure p. 9); FY2026 report as cited below. All four reserve studies by Sonnenberg & Company, CPAs. The shares are our division of one printed figure by the other.
Half-funding a roof does not make the other half go away. It waits, and the study prices the waiting at 3% a year, its own inflation assumption. $1,353,177, or $7,048 per unit, is the accumulated result — not one bad year, but the sum of many.
The FY2026 budget puts $225,058.08 into reserves out of $1,519,534.08 — 14.8% of what an owner now pays, against 6.6% before. That is what the extra $109.92 a month is mostly buying.
Source: FY2026 Annual Budget Report — "2026 Budget – 20% Increase", line 09910 Reserves and budget totals; Reserve Study Summary and the Assessment and Reserve Funding Disclosure Summary dated December 31, 2025, prepared by Sonnenberg & Company, CPAs.
What dues were before this
A figure is easier to judge with the one before it beside it. The record now reaches back to 2021, from the Association’s own annual budget reports, and has one gap left:
| Effective | Monthly assessment | Change |
|---|---|---|
| Fiscal year 2021 | $290.00 | “no increase in the monthly assessment rate will be imposed at this time” |
| Until 30 September 2023 | $350.00 | +$60.00 over 2021, or 20.7%, in a step or steps the record does not date |
| 1 October 2023 | $382.00 | +$32.00, or 9.14% |
| 1 January 2024 | $458.00 | +$76.00, or 19.9% |
| 1 January 2025 | $549.60 | +$91.60, or 20% |
| 1 January 2026 | $659.52 | +$109.92, or 20% |
$659.52 against $290.00 is an increase of 127.4% — $659.52 ÷ $290.00 = 2.274 — in five years, and against $350.00 it is 88.4% in a little over three. That is the number behind the anger, and it is real. What the sections above say is that the years at $290.00 and $350.00 are where the shortfall was built. Three consecutive Januaries at the 20% ceiling did the rest: $382.00 × 1.20 is $458.40, adopted as $458.00; $458.00 × 1.20 = $549.60; $549.60 × 1.20 = $659.52.
The remaining gap is between 2021 and 2023. The FY2022 and FY2023 annual budget reports are not among the documents the Association has made available, so whether the $60.00 came in one step or two is not recorded here. If you kept either notice, send it to us.
The October 2023 increase was well under the ceiling — 9.14% against the 20% § 5605(b) allows. It was approved, on the Association’s own account, at an emergency meeting on 16 August 2023; what Civil Code § 4923 asks of an emergency meeting is set out on the timeline.
Source: FY2021 Annual Budget Report and Policy Statement, November 24, 2020, p. 2 — "The regular assessment per ownership interest is $290.00"; Assessment Increase notice, Jamacha Greens HOA Board of Directors, August 31, 2023, giving "Old Amount $350.00" and "New Amount $382.00" effective October 1, 2023; FY2024 Annual Budget Report, November 28, 2023, p. 1 — "As of January 1, 2024 the new assessments will be $458.00"; FY2025 Annual Budget Report, November 25, 2024, p. 1 — "As of January 1, 2025 the new assessments will be $549.60". The $659.52 figure is sourced in the sections above.
Whose job it is to set dues high enough
Civil Code § 5605(b) caps what a board may charge. Civil Code § 5600(a) sets the floor. Except as provided in § 5605, it says, “the association shall levy regular and special assessments sufficient to perform its obligations under the governing documents and this act.”
Charging enough is not discretionary, and it is not a popularity question. The duty runs to the association. Three further provisions attach dates and figures to it:
- Civil Code § 5550(a) — the board “shall review this study, or cause it to be reviewed, annually and shall consider and implement necessary adjustments to the board’s analysis of the reserve account requirements as a result of that review.”
- Civil Code § 5560(a) — the reserve funding plan “shall include a schedule of the date and amount of any change in regular or special assessments that would be needed to sufficiently fund the reserve funding plan.” Under § 5560(b) it is adopted by the board at an open meeting.
- Corporations Code § 7231(a) — a director must act “in good faith, in a manner such director believes to be in the best interests of the corporation and with such care, including reasonable inquiry, as an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances.”
Our FY2026 report carries a section headed Summary of the Board Adopted Reserve Funding Plan. It reads, in full:
“The recommended funding plan from the Association Reserve Study states that ‘Based on the method of calculation, (see #7 on the attached study).’ The Board has chosen to increase regular assessments in FY 2023. The Reserve Study and recommendations will be reviewed annually.”
That is the plan as published. It carries no schedule of dates and amounts.
The same report also states, accurately, that “the law does not require the Association to fund reserves in accordance with these calculations.” That is true — § 5550 requires a plan, not any particular funding level. It is also exactly why a plan with dates in it is the thing to ask for. A board that publishes a schedule can be measured against it. Where there is none, nobody can measure — not the members, and not the board itself.
Source: FY2026 Annual Budget Report and Annual Policy Statement, November 1, 2025, item 2(b); Assessment and Reserve Funding Disclosure Summary, December 31, 2025.
Where the money is going
The FY2026 Annual Budget Report discloses that the association’s reserves are 28.7% funded. Against a fully funded requirement of $1,896,764, the accumulated balance is $543,587 — a shortfall of $1,353,177, which across 192 units works out to $7,048 per unit.
The report does not leave that figure to interpretation. It prints the scale it is being measured against:
“Industry Standard Measure of Funding Strength: 0% - 30% = WEAK At this level of funding, Special Assessments and deferred maintenance are likely.”
And in the disclosure required by Civil Code § 5300(b)(5), the board confirms it:
“As of the date of this letter, the Board of Directors does anticipate that a special assessment will be required to repair, replace, or restore any major components or to provide adequate reserves. This also covers the heavy increases we have had with HOA insurance coverage as well as making sure the HOA has the funds to properly complete the SB326 balcony maintenance and to help rejuvenate the HOA grounds with additional landscaping renovations, building maintenance and paving of the private driveways/roads.”
So a special assessment is anticipated on top of the 20% increase, and the board names what it is for: insurance, the balcony repairs required by SB 326, landscaping, building maintenance and repaving.
What that disclosure is required to say next, and does not. § 5300(b)(5) continues: “If so, the statement shall also set out the estimated amount, commencement date, and duration of the assessment.” The statement above gives none of the three. That is not an accusation of wrongdoing. It is the precise place where “when, and how much” is a question the law already expects the board to answer, which is why it sits at the top of the list of things to ask for.
The five-year projection, and what it assumes
The reserve disclosure projects the fund over the next five budget years. It prints two projections, not one, against the amount the fund is supposed to hold:
| End of year | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Required in the reserve fund | $1,313,744 | $1,220,592 | $1,179,970 | $1,258,139 | $1,381,131 |
| On assessments already approved | −$114,430 | −$290,428 | −$416,232 | −$425,502 | −$392,124 |
| percent funded | −8.7% | −23.8% | −35.3% | −33.8% | −28.4% |
| On the study’s recommended plan | $42,177 | $40,559 | $110,377 | $323,385 | $470,284 |
| percent funded | 3.2% | 3.3% | 9.4% | 25.7% | 34.1% |
Source: FY2026 Annual Budget Report, Assessment and Reserve Funding Disclosure Summary dated December 31, 2025, item (7) — the disclosure required by Civil Code § 5570. Prepared by Sonnenberg & Company, CPAs from a Level III reserve study update.
Both rows start far below today’s 28.7%, and that is not an error. The fund does not fall because money leaves the association. It falls because the work arrives. The study’s component table puts paved surfaces at one to two years of remaining life against a $497,550 replacement cost — on its own, close to the entire $543,587 in the fund — and shows roofing, painting, and fencing components at one year remaining as well. A reserve percentage measures how much of the coming work is already paid for, and here most of the coming work is coming soon.
Neither projection is the budget the board adopted. The first, by its own qualifier, takes “into account only assessments already approved and other known revenues”: the allocation underneath it is the study’s $85,471, the FY2025 figure of $82,982.40 escalated by the study’s 3% inflation assumption and nothing more. The second assumes the study’s recommended plan — the allocation raised 20% a year from FY2026 through FY2031, and $570,000 of special assessments across FY2026–2029, at $61.85 per unit per month. On that plan reserves reach 34.1% funded at the end of year five, which clears the report’s “Fair” threshold of 31% at the very bottom of the band. The study says so: “Reserves could reach the Fair level of funding beginning FY 2030 and could reach the Strong level of funding beginning FY 2037.”
Against both, what the board actually adopted:
| Reserve allocation | Per year | Per unit per month |
|---|---|---|
| FY2025, actual | $82,982.40 | $36 |
| Study Option 2 — current funding +3% (the first projection above) | $85,471 | $37 |
| Study Option 3 — recommended (the second projection above) | $99,578 | $43 |
| Study Option 1 — full annual requirement | $170,882 | $74 |
| FY2026 adopted budget, line 09910 | $225,058.08 | $97.68 |
Source: FY2026 Annual Budget Report — "2026 Budget – 20% Increase", line 09910 Reserves, and "Reserve Funding Options for the Fiscal Year Ending 2026".
The 20% increase raises $253,255.68. Of that, $142,075.68 — 56% — goes to reserves, lifting the allocation to more than twice what the study recommends and above even the full annual requirement.
Substitute it into the first projection and year one ends at roughly $25,157 instead of −$114,430: −$114,430 + ($225,058.08 − $85,471) = $25,157.08. That is our arithmetic rather than the report’s, and it omits the extra interest a larger balance earns, so if anything it is low. It also comes to about 1.9% funded. The increase moves the first year from a deficit to something near break-even, and no further. Past year one the report offers nothing to work from, because it never models the allocation the board chose.
Where the reserves are held
The reviewed financial statements for December 31, 2025 say the accumulated replacement funds “are held in separate accounts and are generally not available for operating purposes.” Management’s balance sheet for the same date bears that out. It shows $330,115.92 of cash in the reserve account, and a further $209,538.20 recorded as owed to the reserve fund by the operating fund.
That loan has since been repaid. The fund balance sheet as of January 31, 2026 carries no “Loan from Reserves” line at all, and reserves of $579,789.96 are held entirely in cash. One month accounts for all of it: $330,115.92 of reserve cash at year end, plus $40,135.84 of reserve funding and interest recorded in January, plus the $209,538.20 loan, comes to $579,789.96 to the cent. The whole sum came back in a single month, well inside the year Civil Code § 5515 allows.
Interfund borrowing is lawful, and this one is closed. The one thing not visible is the written finding § 5515 asks the board to record in its minutes when it borrows — the reasons, and when and how the money comes back. No minutes we hold carry one, and the agenda for the April 30, 2026 regular session lists “Reserve Transfer” under the financial report, so those minutes are the place to look.
The insurance line, and the property deductible
Insurance is the largest line in the budget, and the reports show it becoming so:
| Fiscal year | Insurance budgeted (line 07280) | Of total budget |
|---|---|---|
| 2021 | $30,000 | 4.5% of $668,160 |
| 2023 | $273,240 | 33.9% of $806,400 |
| 2024 | $350,004 | 33.2% of $1,055,232 |
| 2025 | $544,752 | 43.0% of $1,266,278.40 |
| 2026 | $599,220 | 39.4% of $1,519,534.08 |
The annual insurance disclosure that Civil Code § 5300(b)(9) requires is in each report, and it carries a figure that belongs to every owner rather than to the Association:
| Policy year | Property insurer | Building limit | Deductible |
|---|---|---|---|
| July 2020 – July 2021 | Farmers Insurance Group | $33,207,821 | $10,000 |
| August 2023 – August 2024 | Accelerant Specialty | $48,668,254 | $50,000 per unit |
| August 2024 – August 2025 | Accelerant Specialty | $48,934,000 | $50,000 per unit |
| August 2025 – August 2026 | Sierra Specialty | $50,402,020 | $50,000 per unit |
| August 2026 – August 2027 | Sierra Specialty | $51,914,081 | $50,000 per claim |
The disclosure’s own words on what that means: “Even if a loss is covered, you may nevertheless be responsible for paying all or a portion of any deductible that applies. Association members should consult with their individual insurance broker or agent for appropriate additional coverage.”
For the policy year that began August 1, 2026, the deductible no longer applies unit by unit. The 2025–26 certificate carried a per-unit deductible endorsement: $50,000 per unit, up to a maximum of 5% of the building limit, which it worked out as $50,402,020 × 5% = $2,520,101. The 2026–27 certificate, dated August 17, 2026, says instead: “The Property Deductible is per claim, not per unit; Maximum Applicable Deductible is $50,000.” The building limit rose by $1,512,061, from $50,402,020 to $51,914,081, which is 3.0%. Across 192 units that is $270,385.84 a unit.
Both certificates call the building coverage “Single-Entity”. The 2025–26 one defines it as “including Unit Interiors, but excluding betterments and improvements”. The 2026–27 one says it “covers the building’s structure, and the original built-in fixtures inside individual units, but it excludes any owner upgrades or renovations.” Either way, anything you have added or upgraded inside your unit is yours to insure.
Source: the budget tables and § 5300(b)(9) insurance disclosures of the FY2021 (p. 10, Kirk Miller Insurance Agency), FY2024 (p. 9), FY2025 (p. 10) and FY2026 Annual Budget Reports (the last three by Click2Bind Insurance Services); Certificates of Liability Insurance dated September 2, 2025 and August 17, 2026, Click2Bind, and their ACORD 101 remarks schedules. The per-unit figure is our division of the building limit by 192. The 2023 budget figure is the prior-year column of the FY2024 report. The percentages are our division of the line by the total.
What to ask for: where, and when
The gap is real even on this budget. The study’s own recommended plan reaches only the bottom of “Fair” after five years, and it gets there with $570,000 of special assessments alongside a rising allocation. The board has front-loaded the allocation instead, which is the better half of that trade — but it has not published what the special assessment it anticipates would be, or when. Three questions follow, and the first two are things the law already asks the board to write down:
- Will the reserve funding plan be published with dates and amounts, in the form Civil Code § 5560(a) describes — “a schedule of the date and amount of any change in regular or special assessments”? The one in the FY2026 report has neither.
- How large is the anticipated special assessment, and when does it start? Civil Code § 5300(b)(5) asks for its “estimated amount, commencement date, and duration” in the same disclosure that anticipates it. The study’s own plan penciled in $61.85 per unit per month across FY2026–2029, against an allocation less than half the one the board adopted; the report does not recalculate it.
- When is the next on-site inspection? The current study is a “Level III: Update with no On-Site Inspection.” Civil Code § 5550(a) requires a visual inspection of the accessible major components at least once every three years. The Reserve Study Executive Summary dates the last on-site inspection to December 31, 2023; item 2(f) of the Annual Policy Statement, six pages earlier in the same package, says August 2023. On either date, one falls due during 2026.
Ask in the room first. Civil Code § 4925(b) provides that the board “shall permit any member to speak at any meeting of the association or the board,” executive session aside, and a question about the plan is exactly what open forum is for. Ask in writing second: a request under Civil Code § 5200 starts a clock, and there is a template letter for it. Either way, a board that answers with a schedule has given the community something it can hold the board to — which is more than any lawsuit would.
How an owner checks whether it is well spent
This is the other question a 20% increase raises, and it is answerable. The law already builds the paper trail.
Civil Code § 5500 requires the board, every month, to review a current reconciliation of the operating accounts and of the reserve accounts, the year’s actual revenues and expenses against the budget, the latest statements from the financial institutions holding both accounts, an income and expense statement, and “the check register, monthly general ledger, and delinquent assessment receivable reports.” Those documents therefore exist, monthly, whether or not anyone asks to see them.
Civil Code § 5200 and the sections that follow let you inspect them, and with one exception you never have to say why. How to ask, and how long the association has to answer, is on the association records page.
Our bylaws ask for more than the statute does. Civil Code § 5305 requires a review of the financial statement where gross income exceeds $75,000 — and a review, in the accountant’s own words, is “substantially less in scope than an audit” and expressly declines to give an opinion. Bylaws Art. IV § 4 calls for “an independent certified audit,” delivered to each member within thirty days.
What checking actually looks like
Most of the time, checking a claim against the statements finds the money where the association said it went, and that result is worth publishing just as plainly. Here is the method on a case where the two did not match.
On April 6, 2026 the association emailed owners about bulk items dumped in the common areas. It put haul-away at “approximately $200-$400” about every two weeks and said the association is “currently over budget due to the frequency of these cleanups.”
The income statements for the same period say which lines moved. At March 31, 2026 refuse removal (account 08150) stood at $12,994.60 against a budget of $12,999.00 — $4.40 under. Abatement and refurbishment (08190) stood at $6,094.84 against $1,500.00 — $4,594.84 over. In April refuse came in $134.80 under budget and abatement recorded no spend at all.
Dumping in the common areas is a real problem and worth reporting. The budget claim attached to it was simply checkable: name the account, read the line, cite the statement. It is not an accusation, and the answer here is closer to “wrong line” than to anything else.
Source: Association email, April 6, 2026; Income Statements for the months ending March 31 and April 30, 2026; Reviewed Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2025.
Does the board have to get three bids?
It is the most common thing owners say about how the association spends money, and no rule here requires it. The Davis-Stirling Act sets no bidding requirement on a board. Neither do our governing documents: the word “bid” appears twice in all five, both times in the same CC&Rs sentence, and it is about the Association’s power to bid at a foreclosure sale — a different thing entirely.
What governs instead is Corporations Code § 7231(a). A director must act “in good faith, in a manner such director believes to be in the best interests of the corporation and with such care, including reasonable inquiry, as an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would use under similar circumstances.” That is a standard, not a count. Comparing prices is one way to show reasonable inquiry; three is not a magic number, and one careful comparison can meet it where three careless ones would not.
And on the record we hold, this board mostly behaves as though the rule existed. The ten sets of regular session minutes on the owner portal cover January to October 2025. In seven of those ten meetings the board put off at least one decision to get another bid — 16 January, 20 February, 20 March, 17 April, 17 July, 21 August and 23 October. On 21 August it approved one restoration proposal “only if the Restoration RX bid that arrives by next Tuesday and is not lower in price.” On 20 March it held a fencing proposal “until we hear from Vinyl Pro Fencing & Bear Fencing.”
The minutes the managing agent produced in October 2026 carry on the same way. On 20 November 2025 the board tabled a balcony proposal from WoodMark Construction until “they have 2 more proposals”, and said it “will get 1 more proposal” for the South Pool iron fencing — and said so again on 15 January 2026. On 20 August 2026 it tabled the seal coat for an additional bid and the balcony bids until every company “will provide per-balcony pricing.”
The clearest run of it is one building. 965 Jamacha Road needed repair inside and out — the minutes never say why — and letting it took three meetings:
| Meeting | What the minutes record |
|---|---|
| January 16, 2025 | A bid presented for the exterior and interior; the board “decided to wait until an additional bid is received before making a final decision” |
| February 20, 2025 | Reviewed the bid from CPI; “determined to wait for the final proposal” |
| March 20, 2025 | Reviewed bids “from CPI & 1M Restoration” and approved 1M Restoration |
| May 22, 2025 | Reviewed “the completed building repairs for 965 Jamacha Rd. done by 1M Restoration” |
Two months of the board declining to decide until a second price arrived, then the job awarded away from the contractor that had been doing the association’s work. An owner watching only the first two months saw a repair going nowhere. The minutes say what it was going nowhere for.
What this does not establish. These minutes begin in January 2025. They say nothing about how work was let in 2015, or 2020, or 2024, and nothing here should be read backward into those years. Minutes are the one record an owner can always reach back for: Civil Code § 5210(a)(2) makes minutes of member and board meetings “subject to inspection permanently”, where most records stop at the current fiscal year and the two before it. An owner who wants the longer answer can ask for it.
Sources: Regular Session Minutes of January 16, February 20, March 20, April 17, May 22, July 17, August 21 and October 23, 2025, from the managing agent's owner portal, and of November 20, 2025, January 15 and August 20, 2026, produced by the managing agent on request; the five transcribed governing documents, searched for any bidding requirement — the only occurrence of "bid" is in the CC&Rs Declaration, in the assessment-lien passage, giving the Association power to bid at a foreclosure sale; Corporations Code § 7231 and Civil Code § 5210, read on leginfo September 16, 2026.
If something does not add up
- Ask for the record. A written request under Civil Code § 5200 starts a clock, and there is a template letter for it.
- Ask in the room. Civil Code § 4925(b) guarantees any member the chance to speak at a board meeting, executive session aside. What else the Open Meeting Act requires.
- Use internal dispute resolution. IDR is free, and the association must take part.
- Change who writes the budget. Elections and removal is the route with the largest effect on everything above.
Never simply withhold payment
This is the single most important practical point on this page.
Withholding assessments — even ones you believe are invalid — lets the association send your account to collections, add costs and attorney’s fees, record a lien, and ultimately pursue foreclosure. It is the fastest way to turn a governance dispute into a threat to your home.
Civil Code § 5658 is the alternative. Pay the disputed amount in full under protest, reserving the right to contest it. That:
- removes the delinquency, and with it the lien and foreclosure exposure;
- keeps the dispute available to you in small claims court; and
- under our own Election Rules § 2.1.2(a), keeps you eligible to run for the board.
The payment must be identified as made under protest, in writing, at the time of payment. There is a template letter for it.
How to pay, and what each way costs
Payments run through Property Pay, First Citizens Bank’s portal at propertypay.firstcitizens.com. Registering needs three identifiers — a management ID, an association ID and a property account number — which management supplies in the welcome packet or on request. First Citizens’ setup help line is 866-800-4656, option 3.
The three ways of paying do not cost the same. In the words of the letter the managing agent sends a new owner: “If you choose to use a credit card they charge a 2.95% fee, but ACH through a checking or savings account is free so long as an automatic payment is set up. If a one time payment is made, there is a fee of $2.25.”
So an automatic ACH payment is the only one that costs nothing. 2.95% of $659.52 is $19.46 a month, which is $233.52 over a year — about a third of an extra month’s assessment, for paying by card.
Choose “account balance”, not a payment schedule
This is the setting worth getting right, and the managing agent’s own accounts receivable department is the one recommending it: “We encourage owners to choose account balance as opposed to a payment schedule. Account balance will auto deduct whatever is due at the beginning of the month.”
The reason is at the top of this page. Dues rose from $549.60 to $659.52 on January 1, 2026. Account balance pays whatever the Association bills. A payment schedule is a fixed amount you have to remember to update yourself — one set at $549.60 would have kept paying $549.60 into January, leaving $109.92 of each month’s assessment unpaid, and the $5 late charge and 6% interest below attach to an assessment that is short exactly as they do to one that is missing.
Source: letter on payment options and Auto-Pay from Pernicano Realty & Management's accounts receivable to a new owner, March 11, 2026, quoted above; the $549.60 and $659.52 figures are sourced in the opening section of this page.
What being late actually costs
Assessments are due on the 10th of each month and become delinquent if not paid on or before the 25th. After that the Association adds a $5 late charge, plus interest at 6% a year on the delinquent sum. Both figures come from Bylaws Art. VI § 1(a), written in 1971, and both are still being applied: a September 2026 assessment statement shows $659.52 due September 10 and $664.52 if received after September 25 — a difference of exactly $5.
That charge is a small fraction of what the law would allow. Civil Code § 5650(b)(2) permits a late charge of up to 10% of the delinquent assessment, or $10, whichever is greater. 10% of $659.52 is $65.95, so $65.95 is the ceiling here. At $5 the Association charges 0.76% of the assessment — roughly a thirteenth of what it could lawfully charge.
The delinquency date lines up with the statute as well. Civil Code § 5650(b) makes an assessment delinquent 15 days after it becomes due, and 15 days after the 10th is the 25th — the date the Bylaws have carried since 1971.
One date does not line up. The Bylaws run interest “from the date of delinquency”, the 25th. Civil Code § 5650(b)(3) permits interest only “commencing 30 days after the assessment becomes due” — for a payment due on the 10th, that is the 10th of the following month, about fifteen days later — and under Civil Code § 4205(a) the later date governs. The 6% rate itself sits well under the 12% ceiling the same paragraph sets. The statement we have shows the $5 and no interest line at all, so this is a gap between the Bylaws and the law rather than a charge anyone has been shown to have paid. If interest does appear on your account, the date it runs from is worth checking.
Source: Bylaws Art. VI § 1(a) — installments due on the 10th, delinquent after the 25th, a $5 late charge and 6% interest calculated from the date of delinquency; Rules and Regulations page 5 — the same two dates; an owner's September 2026 assessment statement, showing $659.52 due September 10 and $664.52 if received after September 25. Civil Code §§ 4205, 5650.
Fees cannot exceed cost
Civil Code § 5600(b) prohibits an association from imposing an assessment or fee that exceeds the amount necessary to defray the costs for which it is levied. Move-in fees, key or sticker charges, and administrative fees are all subject to this rule.
Emergency assessments are narrow
Boards sometimes label a project an “emergency” to bypass a membership vote. Civil Code § 5610 defines that term narrowly. An emergency assessment requires an extraordinary expense that is one of:
- required by a court order;
- necessary to repair or maintain the development where a threat to personal safety is discovered; or
- necessary to repair or maintain the development that could not reasonably have been foreseen when the budget was prepared.
For category (3), before the assessment is imposed or collected the board must pass a resolution containing written findings — why the extraordinary expense was necessary, and why it was not or could not reasonably have been foreseen in the budgeting process — and that resolution must be distributed to the members with the notice of assessment. Deferred maintenance that has been visible in a reserve study for years is a difficult fit for “could not reasonably have been foreseen.”
This has happened here
On September 25, 2023 the association notified owners of an emergency special assessment “for the annual HOA master policy insurance coverage”: $104,907.13, divided evenly across the 192 units at $546.39 per unit, due November 1, 2023, with an optional six-month grace period before late fees.
The board did pass the resolution § 5610(c) calls for. It is filed with the notice in the same disclosure packet — three pages headed “Resolution and Findings Supporting Emergency Special Assessment Pursuant to Civil Code Section 5610,” signed by the President and the Secretary and dated September 21, 2023, four days before the notice went out.
Its findings meet the obvious objection. An annual premium is budgeted every year, which would sit awkwardly against “could not reasonably have been foreseen.” But the resolution turns on the increase: it records that “the Association was unaware that insurance prices would dramatically increase in 2023” and “only recently became aware of its insurance carrier’s decision to only renew its master and liability insurance policies at an increased rate.”
The 2025 assessment was not an emergency assessment at all. Its notice states plainly that it is the 5% permitted by Civil Code § 5605(b), ordinary board authority needing no § 5610 finding, and nothing about it requires explaining.
One narrow question remains on the 2023 assessment: whether the resolution was distributed to the members with the notice, as § 5610(c) requires. Our copy reached us inside a disclosure packet ordered under Civil Code § 4525 in February 2026, which shows the resolution was passed and filed — not what was mailed in September 2023. A records request is the way to settle it.
Source: Special Assessments (Required Civil Code Sec. 4525), pages 2–5 — the notice of September 25, 2023 and the Resolution and Findings dated September 21, 2023; Civil Code §§ 5605, 5610.
Last reviewed September 16, 2026