Legislature(2021 - 2022)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/09/2022 01:30 PM Senate LABOR & COMMERCE
Note: the audio
and video
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB143 | |
| SB173 | |
| SB151 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 173 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 143 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 151 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 143-COMMON INTEREST COMMUNITIES; LIENS
1:32:28 PM
ACTING CHAIR STEVENS announced the consideration of SENATE BILL
NO. 143 "An Act relating to horizontal property regimes and
common interest communities; and relating to mortgages, deeds of
trust, and other property liens."
1:32:40 PM
SENATOR JOSHUA REVAK, speaking as sponsor, introduced SB 143 by
reading the sponsor statement.
[Original punctuation provided.]
In 1986, the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act
(UCIOA) made major revisions to Alaska statutes
governing Homeowners Associations (HOA's) and
Condominium Owner's Association (COA's) in Alaska.
However, two issues were not fixed by UCIOA when it
passed and remain problematic for HOA's/COA's and the
members of these communities to this day. SB 143
addresses these two issues and ensures that all
associations, regardless of when they were formed,
receive the same treatment.
The first change SB 143 makes is to the process by
which HOA's/COA's make amendments to their governing
documents. As statutes currently stand, the process of
amending an HOA's/COA's charter is so onerous that
many associations are forced to continue operating
with long-outdated rules. Unless a statutory change is
made, these associations may be forced to operate
under outdated and archaic standards forever.
Unfortunately, this problem affects mostly older and
often lower-income properties; the very properties
that most need the protections provided by UCIOA. SB
143 does not eliminate the current amendment process,
but instead provides a more reasonable alternative for
associations who are unable to complete the process
currently laid out.
Secondly, when a home in an HOA/COA is abandoned, or
the owners stop paying their regular dues, the HOA/COA
(and thereby all the individuals who pay their dues)
bear the cost of maintaining the property until the
house is foreclosed upon. UCIOA grants all HOA's/COA's
"super-priority lien status," which allows them to
collect six months of outstanding HOA/COA dues from a
bank holding a first lien on the property. However, in
practice, the statute has been interpreted to not
grant super-priority lien status to HOA's/COA's
created before 1986 and UCIOA. SB 143 rectifies this
decades old problem for pre-1986 associations and
clarifies what is already in the statute to assure
that pre-1986 HOA's/COA's will receive their super-
priority lien just like their post-1986 counterparts.
SB 143 will serve to benefit homeowners associations,
condominium associations, common interest ownership
communities, and the homeowners within those
communities by providing an alternative to the
overburdensome charter amendment process currently
laid out in statute and assuring that even pre-1986
HOA's/COA's are compensated for the costs they incur
to maintain homes that are not paying dues. SB 143
will directly benefit all dues-paying homeowners in
HOA's/COA's and grant all HOA's/COA's, regardless of
when they were formed, the same flexibility and rights
SENATOR REVAK thanked the chair for hearing the bill and advised
that his staff was available to walk through the sectional
analysis.
1:36:01 PM
SENATOR GRAY-JACKSON asked for further explanation of
lienholders and notices.
SENATOR REVAK explained that lienholders typically are banks and
several dozen banks could hold liens in a single homeowner's
association. Lienholders must be given notice and agree to any
change an association proposes to its bylaws. For example, an
association cannot update the amount it holds in escrow to pay
for utilities unless every bank that holds a lien in that
homeowners association agrees. In older associations that have
not gone through the onerous task of updating the bylaws, that
escrow amount may not come close to covering the actual cost of
the utilities. Responding to a further question, he clarified
that the bill does have to do with bylaws. The 1986 Uniform
Common Interest Ownership Act (UCIOA) that changed Alaska
statutes governing Alaska homeowners associations and
condominium owner association is being interpreted to not apply
to associations formed pre-1986 so they do not have the same
opportunities as newer associations.
SENATOR GRAY-JACKSON noted that he talked about bylaws but he
also mentioned utilities.
ACTING CHAIR STEVENS suggested Ms. Torkelson respond.
1:38:38 PM
EMMA TORKELSON, Staff, Senator Josh Revak, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, explained that the reference to
utilities was an example of an association that wanted to change
an outdated rule in the bylaws.
ACTING CHAIR STEVENS asked Ms. Torkelson to present the
sectional analysis.
1:39:33 PM
MS. TORKELSON presented the sectional analysis for SB 143. It
read as follows:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Section 1 Amends AS 34.07 by adding a new section
which lays out an alternative method for Common
Interest communities formed before Uniform Common
Interest Ownership Act of 1986 (UCIOA) to obtain
lienholder approval of proposed changes to their
governing documents.
She noted that Section 3 inserts this same language in AS 34.08
so it affects associations formed post 1986. She continued:
Under this section, pre-UCIOA communities who choose
to use this alternative "shall send to a lienholder a
dated written notice and a copy of the proposed
amendment by certified mail, return receipt
requested[.]" If the association complies with the
written notice requirements and the lienholder does
not respond within 60 days of the postmark date of the
notice, "the lienholder is considered to have approved
the proposed amendment."
MS. TORKELSON clarified that this is not a repeal but an
alternative method in case the lienholder does not respond to
the written notice.
1:41:17 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE offered that this does not sidestep what the
homeowners want to do; it provides an alternative to the
lienholder approval requirement.
MS. TORKELSON agreed this only provides an alternative to the
written consent requirement for lienholders. It does not change
any requirement to get approval from the property owners in the
association.
SENATOR REVAK added that his office initially heard that
lienholders did not want to commit to proposed changes to bylaws
on homeowner associations in general, and particularly in
writing.
1:43:40 PM
MS. TORKELSON continued the sectional analysis:
Section 2 Amends AS 34.08 to clarify that
communities formed before UCIOA are granted super-
priority lien status in the same way that their post-
UCIOA counterparts are currently granted by AS
34.08.470(b).
She restated that the existing statute granted super-priority
lien status to all HOAs but it was interpreted to only include
those formed post UCIOA, which passed in 1986. She noted that a
list of 250 HOAs that are affected was in the bill packets.
Section 3 Inserts the same language as in Section 1
to AS 34.08 by to provide an alternative method for
Common Interest Communities formed after 1986 to
obtain lienholder approval of proposed changes to
their governing documents. Under this section, post-
UCIOA communities who choose to use this alternative
"shall send to a lienholder a dated written notice and
a copy of the proposed amendment by certified mail,
return receipt requested[.]" If the association
complies with the written notice requirements and the
lienholder does not respond within 60 days of the
postmark date of the notice, "the lienholder is
considered to have approved the proposed amendment."
1:45:23 PM
VICE CHAIR STEVENS turned to invited testimony.
1:45:56 PM
SARAH BADTEN, Counsel, Birch Horton Bittner and Cherot,
Anchorage, Alaska, stated that she has been practicing community
association law for about 15 years, helping homeowner and
condominium associations interpret and enforce their governing
documents. She has been approached by many associations that
have been affected by the issues SB 143 addresses.
She recounted that in Alaska, properties in condominium and
homeowner associations that were built before the Uniform Common
Interest Ownership Act (UCIOA) was adopted in 1986 are treated
differently than property in associations built post-1986.
Homeowners in pre-1986 communities are not able to change their
declaration. Responding to the earlier committee discussion, she
explained that the bylaws refer to how associations run their
business. What the bill addresses are the recorded covenants on
the property, which are also called the declaration or
restrictive covenants. It is those documents that older
communities cannot amend because lienholders must approve in
writing any change to the declaration. Associations have two
choices if the lienholders don't all respond; either they
continue to operate under the old standards or they operate in
non-compliance with the declaration. She stressed that she would
not advise operating in non-compliance.
MS. BADTEN stated that SB 143 resolves this problem by providing
a process for notification to lienholders about any change to
the declaration and an opportunity to respond. However, if the
lienholders are silent, the association may proceed to make the
change.
MS. BADTEN also voiced support for the provision that clarifies
that older associations have super-priority lien status just
like associations created after 1986. Some banks currently are
refusing to pay older associations any of the outstanding dues
on properties that have been foreclosed, arguing that it would
invalidate the declaration. SB 143 makes it clear that the same
rules relating to lienholder status apply to both pre- and post-
1986 associations. She pointed out that older associations need
this protection the most. Those buildings are more likely to be
in need of repair and the homeowners are less likely to have the
resources to pay additional assessments to offset unpaid dues.
SB 143 will help these pre-1986 properties be able to provide
the maintenance services the association is contractually
required to provide under its declaration. This provides equal
standing for both pre- and post-1986 properties.
1:50:45 PM
SENATOR GRAY-JACKSON offered her understanding that changes to
covenants need to be approved by the lienholders.
MS. BADTEN clarified that the lienholder approval needs to be in
writing.
SENATOR GRAY-JACKSON noted that her homeowner association (HOA)
was not on the list.
MS. BADTEN explained that the list is not comprehensive; it only
includes those condominium and homeowner associations that have
the word "association" in the name.
VICE CHAIR STEVENS observed that the list could be longer than
the 250 identified in the material in the bill packets.
MS. BADTEN agreed.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he understands the problem and he has no
issues with the bill.
1:53:32 PM
SUSAN JENSEN, Operations Manager, Bayshore Owners Association
Inc. (Bayshore), Anchorage, Alaska, concurred with Sarah
Badten's testimony in support of SB 143. She stated that
Bayshore was founded in 1974 and is comprised of 454 private
homes so the association has to deal with at least that many
banks. She related that Bayshore has wanted to amend its
declaration a number of times through the years but was never
able to do so because of the requirement to get written approval
from all lienholders. For example, the outdated requirements in
Bayshore's declaration limit the reserve to $20,000 despite
infrastructure upgrades that would cost far more than that.
Bayshore also lost the opportunity about 10 years ago for a
$100,000 improvement that would have made it safer for children
to walk to school using the association's green belts. The
declaration did not allow it. Further, the association often
loses out on dues and fees owed to it on properties that are
awaiting sale or in foreclosure by the bank. In some instances
the unpaid dues and fees amounted to $11,000 on individual
properties. This debt is passed along to the innocent dues
paying property owners. She urged the committee to pass SB 143
to protect older associations.
ACTING CHAIR STEVENS listed the individuals available to answer
questions.
SENATOR MICCICHE summarized that SB 143 addresses the
restriction that prevents older associations from changing their
declaration by giving lienholders the opportunity to respond in
writing to a proposed change within 60 days. If the responses
are not forthcoming, the wishes of the members of the HOA will
be honored.
MS. JENSEN answered yes and added that the members of the
association are thrilled that the bill was put forward.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he wanted it to be clear that SB 143 is
about honoring the rights of the individual homeowners. He
referenced the list of 248 associations and noted that just
seven were in non-compliance. He asked what the typical reason
is for being out of compliance.
1:59:50 PM
MS. BADTEN answered that associations that are not
professionally managed may not file their biannual report to the
state timely and will be out of compliance until the report is
filed.
2:00:56 PM
VICE CHAIR STEVENS asked Ms. Neseth if she had any comments.
2:01:11 PM
PHOEBE E. NESETH, Esq., Director, Government and Public Affairs,
Community Associations Institute stated that she submitted a
letter that addresses how other states have incorporated
provisions similar to those in SB 143.
2:01:55 PM
ACTING CHAIR STEVENS opened public testimony on SB 143.
2:02:23 PM
JASON HENNINGS, Chapter President, Community Associations
Institute of Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of
SB 143. He stated that he had managed community associations for
about 10 years in both Anchorage and Wasilla. He has experience
with both pre- and post-1986 HOAs and has found the collection
methods fairly easy for those formed after 1986. This helps the
capital reserves in an association over the long term. By
contrast, there are past collections issues with older HOAs and
the reserves can be inadequate to replace a roof or do other
maintenance. He agreed with previous testimony that associations
in less affluent areas are more likely to be affected. He
stressed how difficult it is for older associations that are
unable to change their declarations because the banks don't
respond.
2:04:01 PM
VICE CHAIR STEVENS found no further public testimony or
questions from the committee and solicited the will of the
committee.
2:04:11 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE moved to report SB 143, work order 32-LS0211\I,
from committee with individual recommendations and attached zero
fiscal note(s).
VICE CHAIR STEVENS found no objection and SB 143 was reported
from the Senate Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 143 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HCRA 3/8/2022 8:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 143 |
| SB 143 Sectional Analysis version I.pdf |
HCRA 3/3/2022 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/8/2022 8:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 143 |
| SB 143 Statement of Zero Fiscal Impact.pdf |
HCRA 3/3/2022 8:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 143 |
| SB 143 Support Document 1 - Sarah Badten.PDF |
HCRA 3/3/2022 8:00:00 AM HL&C 3/14/2022 3:15:00 PM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 143 |
| SB 143 Support Document 2 - Pre-1986 Home-Condominium Owners Associations.pdf |
HCRA 3/3/2022 8:00:00 AM HL&C 3/14/2022 3:15:00 PM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 143 |
| SB 143 Support Document 3 - Post-1986 Home-Condominium Owners Associations.pdf |
HCRA 3/3/2022 8:00:00 AM HL&C 3/14/2022 3:15:00 PM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 143 |
| SB 143 Letters of Support Received as of 2.9.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/14/2022 3:15:00 PM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 143 |
| SB 173 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 2/24/2022 9:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB 173 Sectional Analaysis version I.pdf |
SFIN 2/24/2022 9:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB 173 Fiscal Note 242 - DOH.pdf |
SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB 173 Fiscal Note 2252 - DOH.pdf |
SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB 173 Fiscal Note 2360 - DCCED.pdf |
SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB 173 Written Testimony Received as of 1.31.22.pdf |
SFIN 2/24/2022 9:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB 151 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HL&C 4/13/2022 3:15:00 PM SFIN 2/24/2022 9:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 151 |
| SB 151 Fiscal Note 3119 - DCCED.pdf |
HL&C 4/13/2022 3:15:00 PM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 151 |
| SB 151 Supporting Document - 2021 Audit Summary.pdf |
HL&C 4/13/2022 3:15:00 PM SFIN 2/24/2022 9:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 151 |
| SB 151 Supporting Document - 2021 Complete Audit.pdf |
HL&C 4/13/2022 3:15:00 PM SFIN 2/24/2022 9:00:00 AM SL&C 2/9/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 151 |