By David Swedelson, Partner at Swedelson Gottlieb, Community Association Attorneys
Federal legislators are still trying to pass new law that would allow HAM radio antenas to be installed at homeowners associations despite any restrictions on same in an association’s CC&Rs. We addressed this in a blog post in September of 2014; follow this link. Although that bill failed, Representative Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) has reintroduced the same bill, now designated as H.R. 1301.
Community Associations Institute (CAI) has again issued a call to action to its members across the country claiming that “if a HAM radio ‘reasonable accommodation’ standard becomes federal law, community associations face the real prospect of having limited or even no say on the installation of towers and large, fixed antennas used in HAM radio broadcasting.”
The Los Angeles Times reports that 
On February 6, the Orange County Regional Chapter of Community Associations Institute honored SwedelsonGottlieb’s Associate Attorney Cyrus Koochek with its Rising Star award. The award is given to new members of the chapter in recognition of the member’s volunteer service and commitment to the chapter’s goals. Cyrus served on the chapter’s programs committee in 2014 and looks forward to continued success with the chapter this year.
He is finally here, and we could not be happier. Brian Moreno, already a seasoned community association attorney, has decided to move on from the firm he worked with for the last six years and bring his experience, skills and excellent reputation to SwedelsonGottlieb. Brian enhances the firm’s team of lawyers and will certainly benefit the firm’s clients. Brian could have joined any of the other community association law firms, yet he chose SwedelsonGottlieb. That says a lot about Brian and SwedelsonGottlieb.
There was not a lot of new legislation in 2014 impacting California Community Associations, and what changes there were seemed to be focused on dealing with the drought. There were also changes to the law relating to solar energy systems, the ability of residents to grow fruits and vegetables in their backyards, to bring their attorney to an IDR meeting, and defining responsibility for the repair and/or replacement of exclusive use common area.
Since the inception of the Davis-Stirling Act in 1985, there has been confusion regarding owner vs. association responsibility for the repair or replacement of exclusive use common area. AB 968, legislation sponsored by the 
AB 1738 is new law that amends Civil Code Sections 5910 and 5915 and makes two major changes to the requirements of internal dispute resolution (IDR) meetings held between an association’s board and its members. We opposed the adoption of AB 1738 (like just about everyone else who works with California HOAs) and discussed the reasons why in our 
Under Civil Code Section 714, a California community association can restrict its members’ installation and use of solar energy systems so long as the restrictions do not significantly increase the cost of the system or significantly decrease its efficiency or specified performance. “Significantly” used to be defined (through 12/31/14) as increasing the costs of the system by 20% (or $2,000 for photovoltaic systems) or decreasing the efficiency of the system by 20%.
Most associations have provided transfer disclosures/documents to an escrow at some point when an owner is selling his or her unit/home or property in a community association to a prospective purchaser. This task is usually completed by the association’s managing agent. Sections 4528 and 4530 of the Civil Code govern the requirements for complying with an Association’s escrow disclosure requirements. AB 2430, which amends Civil Code Sections 4528 and 4530 and is effective as of January 1, 2015, now provides some helpful points of clarification and one major affirmation of California case law.