Attention Bremer Way Residents: The proposed restatement of our Declaration and Bylaws significantly shifts power away from homeowners and into the hands of the Board of Directors. These changes are not in the best interest of Bremer Way residents because they strip away long-standing homeowner flexibilities, expose individual unit owners to unfair financial liabilities--such as paying for interior damage caused by building roof leaks or automatic acceleration of an entire year's dues for a single late payment--and grant the Board broad authority to create new rules and assess legal fees without resident oversight. Please review the key areas of concern below and make sure to submit an explicit "NO" ballot to protect your rights as a homeowner.
What the
Proposed Document Says:
Section 9.1 states that any interior damage to a unit caused by ice dams,
snowpack, or water intrusion from the building exterior is the unit owner's
obligation to repair, unless covered by the Association's insurance policy.
Section 10.3 adds that the Association is not responsible for interior damage
not covered by its master policy, even if caused by water seeping through the
roof or exterior walls.
Why It
Is a Concern: Under
standard common interest community standards, if a building's shared roof or
exterior wall fails and leaks water into a unit, the Association repairs the
common element and the resulting structural/drywall damage. This new clause
shifts the financial burden of exterior roof/wall failure repairs directly onto
the affected homeowner.
What the
Proposed Document Says:
If a resident is more than 30 days late on a single monthly assessment
installment, the Board can give 10 days' written notice and declare the entire
remaining balance of the annual assessment immediately due and payable.
Why It
Is a Concern: In the
1986 Declaration, late fees applied to the past-due amount. Under the new
language, a resident who misses a single monthly payment due to an oversight or
temporary cash-flow issue can suddenly be demanded to pay the remaining 11
months of dues instantly, leading directly to potential foreclosure action.
What the
Proposed Document Says:
Section 7.27 introduces subjective conduct rules prohibiting "aggressive
gestures," "unwelcome emails," or making "any false
statement about another Owner, Occupant, or the Association's property manager
for the purpose of lowering their perception in the community."
Why It
Is a Concern: While
intended to maintain civility, terms like "unwelcome email" or
statements that "lower perception" are highly subjective. In the
hands of a Board inclined toward selective enforcement, these vague definitions
can easily be weaponized to penalize residents who send critical emails about
management decisions or voice strong opposition at meetings.
What the
Proposed Document Says:
Board members, management, or public safety personnel can enter any unit or
limited common element at any time without notice in an emergency, and
with "reasonable advance notice" for routine inspection or
maintenance.
Why It
Is a Concern: While
emergency entry is standard, Section 7.17 also grants broad entry authority to
correct any condition "reasonably believed" to present loss, or to
inspect for conditions an owner has failed to maintain. The document lacks a
clear definition of what constitutes a valid "emergency" or a minimum
notice period (e.g., 24 or 48 hours) for non-emergencies.
What the
Proposed Document Says:
Section 8.4(d) stipulates that all payments received from an owner will
automatically be applied to the oldest assessment or charge on the account,
regardless of how the owner directs the payment.
Why It
Is a Concern: If the
Board assesses a disputed fine or legal fee against your account, any payment
you make for your regular monthly maintenance dues will automatically be
redirected to pay off the fine/fee first. This immediately puts your regular
dues into default, triggering late charges, interest, and potential acceleration.
What the
Proposed Document Says:
The Board has the power to restrict how many proxies any individual owner may
hold at a meeting, but explicitly exempts the Association Secretary from any
proxy limits.
Why It
Is a Concern: This
allows the Board to limit resident organizers from collecting proxies from
neighbors who cannot attend a meeting, while allowing the Board/Secretary to
gather unlimited proxies to pass their own initiatives.