The following condominium is fictitious and is offered for demonstration purposes only. The problem and subsequent solution are based on a real situation.

Harbour Point Condominiums were built in 1985. Of the 56 units in the community, only 2 are occupied by original owners, neither of which serves on the current Board of Directors. More than 20% of the owners have been there less than 5 years and 15% of the units are renter-occupied. While the grounds are in fairly good shape, several items are now ready for repair or replacement. The current Board meets 4 times per year, with one of those meetings being the Annual Homeowners Meeting, where the general election to the Board is also held.

At its last meeting, the Board voted on paving the common parking area. The original parking lot is showing severe signs of its 20-year age. The Board obtained three estimates and the Board has decided to award the $50,000 contract to a local paver. While the Board has $75,000 available in the Association's "Safety Net" Fund, they have decided to assess the unit owners for the cost of the paving as there is also an upcoming plan to repair the aging roofs within the complex. The property manager gets the job of sending out the notice that each unit is being assessed $900 to cover the cost of the paving.

Almost immediately, the phone at the property manager's office is ringing. More than two dozen calls have come in to complain about the $900 assessment. Complaints range from curiosity to anger. Several callers even indicated that the Management Company was stealing money from them and probably getting a payoff from the paving contractor.

The property Management Company has spent several hours explaining the reason for the assessment and has also had to explain that the "Safety Net" Fund is not being used for this repair as it will be needed for the next improvement. Frustrated by the volume of calls and the irate attitude of the callers, the property manager calls the President of the Board and asks, "What is going on here? Don't these people want new paving? Why are they so mad?"

The concerned Board President gets the other Board members together via phone to discuss the situation. Several Board members concur that many of their fellow association members had complained to them about the sorry condition of the parking lot. That is why the topic came up under "New Business" at a Board meeting almost a year ago to begin with. That is why we interviewed several contractors before accepting bids. That is why we voted to get the work done.

One Board member commented, "If this $900 assessment is being met with such resistance, how are they going to handle the news that the new roof they need will cost each of them almost twice as much, even with dipping into the "Safety Net" Fund? I don't want to be around to find out." He resigned from the Board immediately.

Does this situation sound familiar? Everyone meant well. The homeowners wanted fresh pavement on their parking lot. The Board practiced due diligence and got competitive bids for the job before awarding the contract. The contractor sharpened his pencil and gave a low bid to get the work. The Management Company did exactly what the Board asked it to do and took the heat of the anger from the misinformed homeowners. How can this problem be fixed? Click Here