360 Degree Perspective on Dealing With Excessive Noise

February 25, 2021

One of the most common complaints within condominium and community associations is excessive noise. The scenario usually plays out in a way similar to the following hypothetical. The association property manager or the board receives numerous complaints from a frustrated resident about excessive noise. The complaints range in variety from loud music, parties, banging and thumping from children, musical instruments, to elevated speaking voices. Regardless of the source of noise, complaints of this nature often involve four categories of people: 1) the complaining owner; 2) the alleged offender(s); 3) the property manager; and 4) the board of directors. This article provides a three hundred and sixty degree look at the rights, responsibilities and techniques available to help resolve a noise complaint from all perspectives.


Complaining Owner


If you have endured frequent noise disruption of any kind from a neighbor you understand the maddening impact it can have. Excessive noise disrupts sleep, interferes with an individual's psychological and physiological wellbeing, and destroys the peace and enjoyment derived while being home. Living in a condominium or community association environment often means living in close proximity to other people. Some noise will inevitably transmit between units, but too much noise is problematic. Unfortunately, noise complaints are subjective in nature since each of us has a different threshold for noise tolerance; therein lies the problem.


A complaining owner has a few available options for addressing excessive noise. Because noise complaints are subjective, when appropriate it is helpful to replicate the noise for the alleged offender. If the complaining owner feels safe and comfortable speaking directly with the alleged offender, the complaining owner may wish to invite the alleged offender into his or her unit to hear the noise. The noise may be replicated by blasting the stereo, increasing the volume on the television set, having a fake conversation with elevated voices, pretending to have children run across the floor, etc. The purpose of this exercise is to enable the alleged offender to experience firsthand what the excessive noise sounds like. Often times we are unable to fully appreciate the level of one’s suffering until we experience it ourselves. Note, it is important for both parties to have a neutral third party join them during this exercise.  The ideal neutral third party is an uninvolved neighbor. Having the presence of a third party offers a second “ear” and presents more objectivity when evaluating the noise level. As a reminder, since the parties will be entering each other’s units, it is imperative they are comfortable with this arrangement and proper consent is provided.


If the complaining owner is unwilling to speak with the alleged offender for fear of retaliation or some other reason, he or she may contact the board or association property manager to file a complaint. Noise complaints should be filed in written form with as much detail as possible. Important information includes the date and time, location of the noise and a description of it including its frequency. Capturing the noise with a recording device is also helpful as it supports the complaint and may be shared with the alleged offender, board or both. Complaining owners may also invite another person or two into the unit to observe the excessive noise, if possible. Some associations allow complaints to be submitted by email while others require the completion of a specific complaint form. Be sure to review your association rules and regulations about lodging complaints to ensure proper compliance.


Alleged Offender


On occasion individuals have a heightened sensitivity to noise or an unreasonable expectation about the level and extent of noise transmission within a condominium or community association. This may lead to frequent complaints about excessive noise from a particular unit that may become disruptive to the alleged offender. One example that comes to mind is a family of four with two children under the age of five that reside in a three bedroom condominium unit on the thirty-third floor of a high-rise building. Directly below them resides an elderly couple in their seventies. Two weeks after the family moves in, the elderly couple begins lodging regular noise complaints with management. The complaints allege excessive noise at early hours each day (between 6 and 8 am) caused by the pitter-patter of children running and playing on the hardwood floors. The family receives a written warning notice from management about the allegations of excessive noise with instructions to cease such behavior or face fines.  What should they do?


If a conversation alone is insufficient to end ongoing noise complaints, an alleged offender may try the noise replication technique described above. If the alleged offender has good reason to believe the noise falls within “reasonably acceptable levels” then recreating it for the complaining owner to experience may bring complaints to an end.


In the event a neighbor-to-neighbor conversation is not feasible the alleged offender may consider encouraging board members to visit the complaining owner’s unit, with proper consent, to experience the noise. The complaining owner may be inclined to grant a board member access to the unit to prove the truthfulness of his or her complaints. This may help resolve the complaints if the board member or members perceive the noise levels as reasonable.


In certain situations, if neighboring units vehemently disagree about the reasonableness of noise transmitting between units, an acoustic engineer may be hired to measure the sound transmission. The cost for hiring the engineer may be paid for by the complaining owner, the alleged offender or split equally between both parties. Acoustic engineering firms use a sound-level meter to measure various noises. The engineers then compare the reading to a standardized guide to identify where the sound falls on the scale of sound. The sound scale has a broad range from tiny subtle vibrations, to indoor speaking voices all the way to airplane or spaceship engines. It can prove helpful in establishing a more “objective” measurement of sound to assist in resolving a noise complaint between owners.


If all else fails unit owners have a legal right to the quiet use and enjoyment of their property. This includes a right to live within their unit in a reasonable manner without ongoing disruption or interference from neighbors. Notably, ongoing disruption and interference could present itself in the form of repeat unfounded complaints. If none of the above strategies bring resolution to the noise complaint, an alleged offender may consider consulting with a licensed attorney that focuses in the condominium and community association industry.


Property Manager


Addressing noise complaints for a property manager can be very challenging. As previously mentioned, they are subjective in nature which makes them difficult to outright declare a “violation.” Managers may find it beneficial to bring the parties together in some forum to discuss the ongoing noise. Doing this opens up lines of communication between the parties that may not have previously existed. It also forces the parties to face one another, which may soften the anger between them and may develop deeper understanding and empathy for one another. Managers are caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand they have an obligation to the Association to enforce the rules and regulations. On the other hand, they have an obligation to use their discretion to fully investigate whether alleged conduct constitutes a violation before action is taken. The ultimate decision of whether a violation exists should always be made by the board members and not the property manager.


An overeager board sometimes places undue pressure on a property manager to declare excessive noise a violation and to take immediate action. Managers should be careful and thoughtful in such situations before proceeding. Taking action against an alleged offender to appease an overeager board may result in liability for the association if a court rules that no violation occurred. The best course of action for a property manager is to consult with association legal counsel before sending any violation notices and before taking action of any kind. Rule enforcement requires interpreting association governing documents and applying rules to a specific set of facts. This type of analysis is best left to lawyers to perform. It also insulates the manager from any personal or professional liability.


Board Members


A condominium or community association board also has a difficult task when reviewing owner complaints of excessive noise. The board has a fiduciary responsibility to address all owner complaints with diligence. This means boards must reasonably investigate alleged violations until satisfied that one exists or does not exist. A mistake often made by boards is to immediately assume a violation exists whenever a complaint is lodged. This can and should be avoided by gathering necessary information and evidence before deciding whether further action is needed. Boards are well within their rights to request copies of any evidence supporting the allegations such as video recordings, audio recordings, pictures, witness statements, witness testimony, etc.


Further, boards may wish to experience or hear the alleged excessive noise firsthand if feasible. This involves coordinating a duplication of the noise with the cooperation of both parties. Often this helps board members decide whether the noise in question rises to the level of “unreasonable” such that a violation exists. Of course, boards must exercise caution and vigilance when entering units and should always ensure consent is provided and owners are accepting of this exercise.


If a violation exists based upon all of the evidence gathered by the board, it has an obligation to send a violation notice to the offending owner. Oftentimes a warning notice giving the owner an opportunity to stop the offending behavior is appropriate before levying fines. Sometimes offending owners are unaware they are creating noise that disrupts other owners and a simple warning notice resolves the nuisance.


If the offending conduct continues, boards should closely follow the violation enforcement protocol set forth in their rules and regulations. This usually involves a formal violation notice that includes an opportunity to be heard and the potential imposition of a fine. A second violation notice with escalating fines is usually the next step in the enforcement process. If necessary, a final violation notice followed by the commencement of legal action may occur. The board’s objective when deploying rule enforcement tactics is to halt the disruptive behavior. The objective should not be to raise additional funds for the association. Nor is it to punish a particular owner or resident because the board has a specific dislike for that individual. To the extent feasible, personal feelings and opinions should not factor into board rule enforcement decisions. While discussions about potential rule violations may occur in private outside the presence of unit owners, votes on any and all such decisions must be made during open board meetings, as required by law.


Rule enforcement in general is a difficult but necessary task boards must carry out on behalf of their association. It can cause animosity, anger fellow unit owners and neighbors and cause discord within the community. Alternatively, it also curbs disruptive behavior, protects the safety and wellbeing of association members, and helps ensure the association remains an enjoyable and safe place to live.


For more information and helpful tips on Association topics visit www.shifrinlegal.com.


Shifrin Legal

Illinois Community Associations Should Prepare for New Assessment Collection Policy Requirements

By Michael Shifrin • July 9, 2026
Illinois condominium and common interest community associations should begin preparing now for a significant change to assessment collection procedures. Senate Bill 3527 has passed both houses of the Illinois General Assembly and was sent to the Governor on June 18, 2026. If signed or otherwise allowed to become law, the bill is expected to take effect on January 1, 2027. The bill does not eliminate an association’s right to collect assessments. In fact, assessments remain the financial lifeblood of every condominium, townhome, and homeowners association. What the bill does is require associations to adopt and follow a written collection policy before taking legal action to collect unpaid common expenses. This is an important change because many associations currently rely on informal collection practices, management company procedures, attorney recommendations, or past custom. Under the new law, that will not be enough. Associations will need a clear written policy adopted by the Board that explains when assessments are due, when an account becomes delinquent, what charges may be added, when payment plans are available, when accounts are referred to counsel, how payments are applied, and what legal remedies may be pursued. Associations Covered by the Bill SB3527 applies to both: Condominium associations governed by the Illinois Condominium Property Act; and Common interest community associations governed by the Illinois Common Interest Community Association Act. This means the new requirements will apply broadly to Illinois condominium associations, townhome associations, and homeowners associations that are subject to either of these statutes. The Central Requirement: Adopt and Follow a Written Collection Policy The most important provision of SB3527 is that an association may not take legal action to collect unpaid common expenses unless it has adopted and follows a written policy governing the collection of unpaid assessments. This requirement applies even if the association’s declaration, bylaws, rules, or other governing documents say something different. In other words, the statute will control over inconsistent provisions in the governing documents. For boards, the practical takeaway is simple: before January 1, 2027, every covered association should adopt a formal written assessment collection policy and make sure that management, the Board, and legal counsel follow it consistently. What the Collection Policy Must Include The new law requires the collection policy to address at least seven subjects. First , the policy must state the date on which assessments and common expenses must be paid and when an account is considered delinquent. For example, the policy should state whether assessments are due on the first day of the month and whether they are considered delinquent after the 10th, 15th, or another specific date. Second , the policy must identify any late fees and interest the association is entitled to impose on a delinquent owner’s account. Associations should confirm that the amount of any late fee or interest charge is authorized by the declaration, bylaws, rules, or applicable law. Third , the policy must identify any returned-check or returned-payment charges the association is entitled to impose. This should include returned checks, rejected ACH payments, credit card chargebacks, or other failed payments, if the association intends to charge for them. Fourth , the policy must explain the circumstances, if any, under which an owner is entitled to enter into a payment plan and the minimum terms of that payment plan. The new law does not appear to require every association to offer payment plans in every situation. However, if payment plans are available, the policy must explain when they are available and what minimum terms apply. Fifth , the policy must state the amount or length of time before a delinquent account is referred to an attorney for legal action. Associations should avoid vague standards and instead use an objective trigger, such as a specific number of days delinquent or a balance equal to a certain number of months of assessments. Sixth , the policy must explain how payments may be applied to a delinquent owner’s account. For example, the policy should state whether payments are applied first to the oldest outstanding charges, attorneys’ fees, costs, late fees, interest, regular assessments, special assessments, or some other order of priority. Seventh , the policy must identify the legal remedies available to the association under its governing documents and Illinois law. These remedies may include demand letters, liens, lawsuits, eviction or possession actions where authorized, foreclosure, money judgments, post-judgment collection, recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs, and other remedies available under the applicable statute and governing documents. The New Law Also Affects Resale Disclosures SB3527 also adds the association’s collection policy to the resale disclosure materials that must be provided in connection with the sale of a unit. For condominium associations, the policy will become part of the Section 22.1 disclosure package. For common interest community associations, the policy will become part of the resale disclosure materials required under Section 1-35 of the Common Interest Community Association Act. This means associations and management companies should update their resale disclosure checklists and closing procedures before the law takes effect. What Boards Should Do Before January 1, 2027 Every association should take the following steps before the anticipated January 1, 2027 effective date. First, review the association’s declaration, bylaws, rules, management agreement, existing collection practices, and attorney referral procedures. Second, confirm the amount of any late fees, interest, returned-payment charges, attorneys’ fees, and collection costs that may be imposed. Third, adopt a written collection policy at a properly noticed open Board meeting, if you don’t have one already. Fourth, provide the policy to management, accounting staff, and legal counsel so that collection activity is handled consistently. Fifth, update owner account statements, delinquency notices, attorney referral procedures, and resale disclosure packets. Sixth, consider distributing the policy to all owners so that expectations are clear before disputes arise. Seventh, review the policy annually and update it when the law, governing documents, management practices, or collection procedures change. Why This Matters Assessment collection is one of – if not the most - important Board fiduciary responsibilities. Associations rely on assessments to pay insurance, utilities, maintenance, repairs, reserves, management fees, and other common expenses. When one owner does not pay, the financial burden shifts to the rest of the community. At the same time, collection procedures should be predictable, transparent, and consistently applied. SB3527 is designed to make sure associations have written rules in place before pursuing legal remedies. A well-drafted collection policy will help associations protect their cash flow, treat owners consistently, reduce disputes, and preserve the ability to take legal action when necessary. Associations should not wait until a delinquency arises in 2027 to review their collection policy. Boards should work with legal counsel and management now to adopt a compliant collection policy before the new law takes effect. Contact Shifrin Legal today at MJS@shifrinlegal.com or by phone at (312) 470-2276 to have your collection policy reviewed and, if necessary, updated to comply with this new law.

Holiday Gifts, Vendor Appreciation and Condominium/Community Associations in Illinois: What is (and is Not) Legal

By Michael Shifrin • December 16, 2025
December 2025 Every year, condominium and homeowner association boards ask the same question: “Are we allowed to give holiday or appreciation gifts to our vendors or employees—or is that illegal?” The short answer in Illinois is this: modest, transparent gift-giving by private community associations is not illegal, and in many cases is perfectly appropriate when handled correctly. This article explains where the confusion comes from, what Illinois law actually says, and how boards can approach gift-giving in a responsible and defensible way. Why This Question Comes Up So Often Concerns about gift-giving usually arise when a board approves holiday gifts for vendors or staff, owners contribute to a “thank-you” or appreciation fund, someone circulates an article discussing public-sector ethics laws, a board member worries about fiduciary duties or misuse of funds. Most of the time, the concern is rooted in a misapplication of government ethics rules to private condominium/community associations. Condominium/Community Associations Are Private, Not Public Entities In Illinois, condominium/community associations are private, not-for-profit corporations governed by the Illinois Condominium Property Act, the Common Interest Community Association Act and the Not-For-Profit Corporation Act and funded by unit owner assessments, not taxpayer dollars. As a result, condominium/community associations are not subject to state ethics statutes governing public officials, gift bans applicable to government employees or rules restricting the use of public funds. Those laws apply to government bodies, not to private associations managing private property. Is There Any Illinois Law That Prohibits Holiday Gifts? No, there is no provision in the Illinois Condominium Property Act, the Common Interest Community Association Act or the Illinois Not-For-Profit Corporation Act that prohibits a condominium/community association from giving modest holiday or appreciation gifts to: Vendors Contractors On-site employees (such as janitors, engineers, or door staff) So long as the board acts within its authority and fiduciary obligations, gift-giving is not illegal. The Fiduciary Duty Analysis (What Really Matters) Illinois courts evaluate board decisions under the business judgment rule. Boards must: Act in good faith Act within their authority Make reasonable decisions in the best interests of the association Avoid self-dealing or personal enrichment A modest, transparent gift to vendors or staff—especially when: Approved at an open board meeting Properly documented Not directed to board members themselves will almost always satisfy this standard. Owner-Funded “Thank You” Collections Are Even Clearer Many associations collect voluntary owner contributions specifically designated as: “Holiday funds” “Thank you funds” “Vendor appreciation funds” When funds are: Voluntarily contributed by owners Clearly earmarked for appreciation purposes Distributed pursuant to board approval the board is simply administering owner-directed funds—not misusing assessments. This approach is common, transparent, and legally defensible. What About USPS Mail Carriers and Delivery Drivers? Some confusion arises because certain service providers, such as U.S. Postal Service employees, are subject to internal employer rules about what they may personally accept as gifts. That is: A matter of federal employment policy The responsibility of the individual recipient—not the association It does not make the association’s act of offering a modest holiday gift illegal under Illinois law. Best Practices for Associations While gift-giving is lawful, boards should follow best practices: ✔ Keep gifts modest and reasonable ✔ Avoid gifts to board members ✔ Approve distributions at an open board meeting ✔ Clearly document the source and purpose of funds ✔ Use voluntary owner contributions when possible ✔ Treat vendors consistently and fairly Transparency is the board’s strongest protection. The Bottom Line In Illinois, there is nothing illegal about a condominium/community association showing appreciation to its vendors and employees through modest holiday gifts—particularly when the process is transparent, reasonable, and properly approved. Confusion often stems from applying public-sector rules to private associations, where they simply do not belong. As with most governance issues, clarity, documentation, and common sense go a long way.

Association Legal Counsel: Finding The Right Representation

By Michael Shifrin • December 26, 2024
When faced with legal challenges, finding the right law firm to represent you is crucial. While larger firms often boast of having extensive resources and a wide range of services, smaller law firms offer distinct advantages that can significantly benefit their clients. Here are some of the key benefits of working with a smaller law firm: 1. Personalized Attention One of the most significant advantages of smaller law firms is the level of personalized attention they can provide. Clients are more likely to work directly with experienced attorneys rather than being passed off to junior associates. This hands-on approach ensures that your case is handled with the utmost care and attention to detail. 2. Strong Attorney-Client Relationships Smaller firms prioritize building strong relationships with their clients. This close-knit relationship fosters better communication and understanding, leading to more effective legal representation. Clients feel more comfortable discussing sensitive issues and trust that their attorney truly has their best interests at heart. 3. Cost-Effective Services Large law firms tend to have higher overhead costs, which are often passed on to clients in the form of higher fees. Smaller firms, with lower operating expenses, can offer more competitive pricing for their services. This makes quality legal representation more accessible to community associations operating on fixed budgets. 4. Flexibility and Agility Smaller law firms are generally more flexible and can adapt quickly to the unique needs of their clients. They are not bound by the same bureaucratic processes that often characterize larger firms, allowing them to respond more swiftly and creatively to legal issues. 5. Specialized Expertise While large firms may offer a broad range of services, smaller firms often focus on specific areas of law. This specialization means that attorneys at smaller firms are highly knowledgeable and experienced in their chosen fields, providing clients with expert representation. 6. Community Focus Smaller law firms are often deeply rooted in their local communities. This local focus enables them to understand the nuances of regional legal issues and offer insights that larger, multi-state firms may lack. Additionally, supporting a local firm helps bolster the community's economy. 7. Transparent and Accessible Clients of smaller law firms often experience better transparency and accessibility. With fewer clients to manage, attorneys can dedicate more time to explaining legal processes, keeping clients informed, and answering questions promptly. This level of transparency builds trust and confidence in the legal process. In conclusion, while larger law firms have their merits, the advantages of working with a smaller law firm should not be underestimated and can make the difference for your community association. From personalized attention and strong relationships to cost-effective services and specialized expertise, smaller firms offer a unique and highly beneficial legal experience that is unmatchable. Partnering with a smaller law firm offers the type of support and dedication necessary to guide your board through numerous legal challenges. The Advantages of a Monthly Retainer Program In addition to the benefits of working with a smaller law firm, opting for a monthly retainer program can provide significant advantages compared to the traditional hourly billing model. Here are some of the key benefits: 1. Predictable Costs One of the primary advantages of a monthly retainer program is cost predictability. Clients know exactly how much they will be paying each month, which helps with budgeting and financial planning. This eliminates the uncertainty and potential financial strain associated with hourly billing. 2. Consistent Legal Support A monthly retainer ensures that clients have consistent access to legal support whenever they need it. This ongoing relationship means that legal issues can be addressed promptly, without the delay of negotiating fees or waiting for availability. Clients can rely on their attorney to be available for regular consultations and urgent matters alike. 3. Stronger Relationship with Your Attorney With a retainer program, clients and attorneys develop a deeper, more collaborative relationship. This ongoing engagement allows the attorney to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the client's needs, business operations, and long-term goals. As a result, the attorney can provide more tailored and proactive advice. Counsel becomes an ad-hoc board member and joins the community leadership team. 4. Proactive Legal Strategy Rather than addressing legal issues as they arise, a retainer program enables a more proactive approach to legal strategy. Attorneys can work on preventing potential problems before they occur, advising on best practices, and ensuring compliance with relevant laws and regulations. This proactive support can save clients time, money, and stress in the long run. 5. Priority Access and Faster Response Times Clients on a retainer plan often receive priority access to their attorney's time and resources. This can result in faster response times and quicker resolutions to legal matters. Knowing that they are a priority client gives peace of mind and confidence in their legal representation. 6. Comprehensive Legal Coverage A retainer agreement typically covers a broad range of legal services, from routine consultations and document reviews to more complex matters. This comprehensive coverage ensures that clients receive the legal support they need, without worrying about additional costs for each service provided. 7. Cost-Effective in the Long Term While a monthly retainer may seem like a larger upfront commitment compared to hourly billing, it can be more cost-effective in the long term. Clients avoid unexpected, high hourly fees for urgent or complex issues. The predictable, monthly cost of a retainer can lead to overall savings, especially for clients who require frequent legal assistance. In summary, joining a monthly retainer program with a smaller law firm offers numerous benefits, including predictable costs, consistent legal support, and a stronger, more proactive attorney-client relationship. For clients seeking dedicated, high-quality legal representation, a retainer program provides the peace of mind and comprehensive coverage necessary to navigate legal challenges effectively.

Understanding the Impact of the Snow Removal Act on Condominium Associations in Illinois, December 2023

By Michael Shifrin • December 11, 2023
The arrival of winter in Illinois brings the inevitable challenge of snow and ice removal, particularly for condominium associations responsible for maintaining common areas. The Snow Removal Service Liability Act (815 ILCS 675 et al. ), enacted to address liabilities associated with snow and ice removal, significantly affects condominium associations in the state. The Snow Removal Service Liability Act (SRSLA) in Illinois, established to encourage the clearing of snow and ice from properties, outlines crucial provisions regarding liability for snow removal contractors and the responsibilities of property owners or those responsible for property maintenance. The Snow Removal Service Liability Act (SRSLA) in Illinois, established to encourage the clearing of snow and ice from properties, outlines crucial provisions regarding liability for snow removal contractors and the responsibilities of property owners or those responsible for property maintenance. The SRSLA offers protection to condominium associations when they hire professional snow removal services. It shields associations from liabilities for personal injuries or property damage resulting from snow or ice removal on their premises, so long as they contract with licensed and insured snow removal services. This act recognizes that snow and ice removal are essential for public safety during winter but also understands the potential risks and liabilities involved. It provides a level of legal protection to condominium associations that engage qualified professionals for these services. Despite the protections provided by the SRSLA, condominium associations in Illinois should exercise diligence when hiring snow removal contractors. Ensuring that contractors are licensed, insured, and experienced in snow removal is crucial. Additionally, associations should clearly outline contractor responsibilities and limitations on liability between the parties in their contracts with snow removal services to mitigate potential issues. Associations should also establish clear protocols and timelines for snow removal to maintain the safety of residents and visitors. Regular inspections of common areas should be conducted to identify and address any hazardous snow or ice accumulations promptly. The Snow Removal Service Liability Act in Illinois serves as a protective measure for condominium associations when hiring professional snow removal services. By understanding the provisions of this act, acting prudently in contracting snow removal services, and having snow removal contracts reviewed by legal counsel, condominium associations can fulfill their obligations to maintain safe premises while minimizing potential liabilities associated with winter weather conditions. Condominium associations must stay updated with local laws and regulations, including the SRSLA, to ensure compliance and effective snow and ice removal practices, ultimately fostering a safer environment for all residents and visitors during the winter months in Illinois.

Virtual Annual Elections: The Wave of the Future

By Michael Shifrin • April 13, 2023
For as long as I have practiced law, management companies and boards developed a strong comfort level and preference for in-person annual elections. Elections occurred inside condominium association lobbies, party rooms, downstairs laundry rooms, even outside on common element yards and gazebos. The notice requirements for annual elections, the documents needed to carry them out (i.e. proxies, ballots, candidate nomination forms, etc.) and the general process for conducting them was second nature. That is until the pandemic descended upon the world in early 2020 and threw in-person elections and gatherings of any kind out the window.

Board Meetings vs. Membership Meetings: Is There a Difference?

By Michael Shifrin • February 26, 2023
Many association unit owners and board members believe board meetings and membership meetings are the same. That an annual election is a...

Owner Forums: Beginning of Board Meetings, End of Board Meetings or Not At All?

By Michael Shifrin • December 9, 2022
I am often asked by board members and property managers to attend open board meetings for condominium and community association clients...

Association Contracts: Underestimated & Often Overlooked

By Michael Shifrin • August 11, 2022
Many condominium and community association boards use the same group of vendors year after year after year. The same landscape company...

Top 10 Misunderstandings About Condominium and Community Associations

June 2, 2022
1. My Association Pays for Everything Many people believe one of the biggest reasons to purchase property within a condominium or community association is because the association pays for all maintenance. That all roof work, landscaping, plumbing or electrical issues, painting, foundation repair, carpet replacement and driveway re-pavement is covered by the payment of one’s monthly assessment. This belief is incorrect. The scope and extent of maintenance covered by an association is set forth in the association’s declaration and bylaws. It varies from association to association and does not cover every single maintenance related malfunction. Be sure to carefully review your governing documents to fully understand what is your responsibility and that of your Association. 2. I Don’t Have to Pay Assessments in Certain Situations Another common misconception is that in certain situations owners are not obligated to pay monthly assessments. Some owners believe they have the right to withhold the payment of assessments if they dispute the way in which the board is spending association funds or if they abandon the unit altogether. Others believe they may withhold the payment of assessments to protest a particular board decision they disagree with. These are all incorrect. Owners may never withhold the payment of assessments under any circumstance. In fact, Section 18(o) of the Illinois Condominium Property Act specifically prohibits the board from forbearing the payment of assessments by any unit owner. Assessments are the oxygen all Associations require to function. 3. I Can Lease My Unit Whenever I Choose Some owners believe associations cannot control who they allow to live in their unit after all it is “their” property. That they have an absolute right to lease their unit to whomever they choose for however long they desire. This is a fallacy. Most associations have leasing controls in place to regulate the leasing of units within the association, usually in the Declaration but sometimes in the Rules and Regulations. Such restrictions usually dictate the number of units that may be leased at the same time, the length of each lease permitted, the order in which owners may lease, and may even outline eligibility requirements before leasing. It is critically important to review the governing documents to understand leasing within your association. 4. Board Meetings Permit Unregulated Owner Participation Certain association members believe open board meetings are intended to allow free owner participation throughout the meeting. Owners of this mindset view board meetings as open forum townhall style meeting in which they may interrupt, blurt out questions and receive immediate answers. This is wrong. Applicable law requires association board meetings to be open to unit owners to increase transparency. The purpose is to allow owners to observe the board in action while discussing important association topics and while making board decisions. Owners do not, however, have an absolute right to interrupt or to participate in board meetings. That said, most condominium association boards designate a specific time during which owners may ask questions and make comments. Section 1-40(b)(5) of the Illinois Common Interest Community Association Act requires boards to reserve a portion of their meeting for comments by the members; however, the duration and meeting order for the member comment period is solely decided by the board. 5. My Proxy is My Ballot Many owners operate under the misbelief that completing their proxy and mailing it in or delivering it to another owner serves as their actual vote. Technically this is incorrect. A proxy is not a ballot and a ballot is not a proxy. A proxy is a document that legally authorizes an agent to act on behalf of another party. It permits the person that completed the proxy to vote without being physically present at the meeting. Individuals that attend annual meetings with proxies should receive association issued ballots in exchange for each valid and properly issued proxy in their possession. They may then cast ballots at the annual election on behalf of those owners that provided them with their proxies. 6. The Board Cannot Levy a Special Assessment Without Membership Approval Tensions tend to run high whenever the phrase “special assessment” is mentioned in open board meetings or included in association newsletters and flyers. Some owners believe boards may not levy a special assessment of any kind without securing majority or supermajority approval. This is wrong. The purpose of the special assessment determines whether membership approval is required. A special assessment levied to raise funds to add or alter common element property requires two-thirds approval of all unit owners. For example, raising funds via special assessment to build a swimming pool requires advance membership approval. However, a special assessment levied for purposes of addressing deferred common element maintenance (e.g. replacing the boilers or tuckpointing the façade) does not require membership approval. Members do, however, have petition rights to overturn a special assessment as outlined in applicable law. 7. The Board Cannot Force me to Participate in a Tax Appeal Some condominium association unit owners believe the board cannot force them to participate in an association wide tax appeal. Upon receiving their share of the legal fee they dispute it on grounds they never voted to participate in the appeal. This is incorrect for condominium association members. Section 10(c) of the Illinois Condominium Property Act specifically authorizes the board, upon vote of two-thirds of the board members, to seek relief from any taxes and to charge and collect all expenses incurred as a common expense. 8. The Association Carries Property Insurance to Protect the Inside of my Unit Many condominium unit owners believe they do not need to purchase property insurance to protect the inside of their units because the association carries the necessary insurance. This is false. The Illinois Condominium Property Act requires condominium associations to carry property insurance that protects the common elements and the bare walls, floors and ceilings of the units. However, it does not require the association to insure improvements and betterments installed by the unit owners. Improvements and betterments refer to decorating, fixtures, furnishings, installed or added to the unit, electrical fixtures, appliances, air conditioning, heating equipment, water heaters, and built-in cabinets. Owners must secure proper insurance to protect these interior portions of property. 9. The Condominium Association Cannot Force me to Sell My Unit Understandably, many condominium association unit owners believe under no circumstances can they be forced to sell their unit. The decision to sell their unit is theirs and theirs alone to make. This is inaccurate. Section 15 of the Illinois Condominium Property Act requires owners to fully cooperate in executing documents to sell their unit if at least seventy-five percent of unit owners affirmatively vote at a unit owner meeting to sell the property, unless a greater percentage is required by the governing documents or unless the local municipal ordinance requires a higher percentage such as in Chicago. Unit owners may, however, vote against selling the property and receive from the proceeds of the sale an amount equivalent to the greater of: 1) the value of the unit as determined by a fair appraisal; or 2) the outstanding balance of any bona fide debt secured by the owner’s interest in the unit. 10. Board Members Receive Compensation to Serve on the Board Some association members believe board members are handsomely compensated for serving on the board of directors, which is why they choose to serve on the board. This is untrue almost all the time. Most association bylaws specifically prohibit board members from receiving compensation for serving on the board. However, as with other sections of the bylaws, this may be amended by membership approval as set forth in the association bylaws. While rarely done, permitting board member compensation may be used as an effective tool to promote board member participation in an otherwise apathetic association. For more information and tips on Association topics visit www.shifrinlegal.com . Shifrin Legal

Should Board Members Live Onsite?

March 7, 2022
Do you believe board members that live onsite in their unit or home make better board members? Do they care more about the property and the people than board members that live offsite? This debate has been ongoing for as long as I have been practicing law in the condo and community association arena (approximately 15 years now, eek). While arguments can be made both ways, the Illinois General Assembly recently enacted a new law addressing this hot button issue. As of January 1, 2022, any condominium declaration being recorded for the first time or any amendment to the condominium instruments adopted by a board of managers, may provide that a majority of the board of managers, or such lesser number as may be specified in the declaration, must be comprised of unit owners occupying their unit as their primary residence. The declaration may not, however, require that more than a majority of the board be comprised of unit owners who occupy their unit as their principal residence. Condominium association boards may now require a majority of the board members to live onsite. In practice, this likely has minimal impact on many condominium associations throughout Illinois since most boards already consist of a majority of board members that live onsite. However, perhaps this is a small step taken by the Illinois General Assembly to inch a bit closer to the day when condominium association boards may adopt policies requiring owners to live onsite to serve on the board of managers. It is undeniable that onsite owner board members have a better grasp on the pulse of the community for which they serve. This personal insight results from walking the property - or portions of it - each morning before heading out for the day and again at night upon returning home. On weekends and weeknights some board members walk the property for exercise and to gather knowledge concerning the condition of the property. Unplanned conversations about association issues and concerns inevitably occur between board members and unit owners while enjoying and using the property in which they live. While offsite owner board members may have a similar desire to inspect the property and familiarize themselves with pressing Association issues, they are unable due to the everyday demands of life. Making a special trip to the community in which they own a unit may prove inconvenient or unnecessary. Offsite owners used to visit the property to attend any open board meetings or informal board workshops held onsite (limited of course to the 6 exceptions for which boards may meet in private). However, with the recent pandemic and advancements in technology, offsite owners are beginning to attend open board meetings remotely. As such, they do not have the same luxury of walking the property day and night as do onsite owners. One idea boards may wish to consider is to capitalize on the benefits of technology to enable offsite owners to more actively participate in association business. For example, boards may invite offsite owners to participate in an onsite landscape walk thru using Facetime. This allows that board member to be present “virtually” during and throughout the landscape walk thru on association property, to take notes and ask questions of the association vendor that come to mind. Another idea is for offsite owners to participate in closed session board meetings remotely over zoom to meaningfully participate despite not being physically present. The idea being to take advantage of technology and all that it offers to increase board member participation for offsite owners. As technology continues enhancing and improving boards will find new and creative ways to allow for board member participation. However, the impact of board members that live onsite cannot be understated. For more association articles and topics to enjoy visit www.shifrinlegal.com .