42 USC 1983
The proposed California bill, AB 572[i] (brought to my attention by Marjorie Murray of CCHAL) faces a constitutionality challenge if past and enforced by the courts. This bill attempts to aid the state in its affordable-housing program by providing reduced CID assessments to owners in the program: 5% limit increase on affordable housing units while others can be as high as a 20% increase. This amendment also removes the CID covenant of equal assessments for all owners.
HOAs (CIDs) are private contractual organizations protected by the Constitution prohibiting interference in contracts.[i] If a case is upheld by a court it can be argued that the law violates 42 USC 1983, Civil action for deprivation of rights – contract interference and “the equal protection of the laws” that favors owners in affordable housing.
“Every person who, under color of any statute [court decision], ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage . . . subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law . . . .“
I would argue this position to the California House committee prior to its public meeting to give the committee time to consider its impact.
References
[ii] See Art. I, Section 10, paragraph 1: “No state shall . . . pass any law . . . impairing the obligations of contracts.”
HOA Constitutional Government 
As a CID owner, I strongly support the language that every CID PPRIVATE LOT has it’s own Director THERE BY REDUCING THEIMPOWERED BOAR OF DIRECTORS AND WHO THEY HIRE TO only BE A COMMON AREA BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND ONLY HAVE COMMON AREA SUB-COMMITTEE’S!!!. My Association restated the purpose of the Association is to manage “the Common Area” . . . it does no longer explicity state the management of the Private Lots, NOR does itcollect dues/reserves to manage the Private Lots. Unforunately the for-Profit Managers and their rubber stamps and their lopsided Lawyers do not feel this applies to them. Lets see this language Legislated without paid for profit attorneys as the only meas of adoption. Also, WHY is the California Secretary of State not overseeing HOA/CID Elections? The Attorneys Gerneral have not and dont. Perhaps Ms M/CCHAL can pursue this dream Legislation. AND add a Budget ot all Legislative Bills for the State to enforce OWNERS Rights. Most of us do not earn Judges wages to hire Davis-Stirling Lawyers.
https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail Virus-free.www.avast.com https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>