Delegates take an axe to Contract Law & Prop. Owners’ Assoc. Act

Yesterday morning, the House Transportation Committee’s Sub-Committee: 2 (comprised of Chairman Bill Carrico and Dels. Tom Rust, William Fralin, Manoli Loupassi, Jeion Ward, Dave Marsden, and Paul Nichols) killed H.B. 1027, a bill that would have allowed a property owners’ association whose declaration or rules restricts the parking of commercial vehicles within that development to petition its local governing body to promulgate restrictions of such vehicles on the public roads within its boundaries.

Unfortunately, subcommittee votes are not officially recorded for public disclosure, but from the accounts of those present, the vote against this bill was nearly unanimous, with perhaps one Delegate supporting it. Those Delegates who voted against this narrowly drawn, carefully crafted bill have taken an axe to Virginia Contract Law and the Virginia Property Owners’ Association Act. Make no mistake, we WILL hold them accountable for this in the next election – regardless of party — by supporting any viable challengers they may have, either in a primary or the general election.

When an individual makes the conscious decision to live in a place governed by a property owners’ association, that individual does so freely of his or her own choice and thereby agrees to abide by the declaration, bylaws, rules and covenants in place for that particular community. Prior to becoming a resident, every individual has the legal right to review what restrictions are in place that they must abide by and then must sign an agreement that they will adhere to those restrictions. If after reviewing the rules for a community that individual does not believe that he or she can adhere to them, that individual may, within a set timeframe, walk away from any initial agreement that they have made to enter into residency, either via purchase or lease. If at any time after becoming a resident an individual believes that he or she can no longer adhere to the restrictions in place, that person is always free to leave to find a new place to live where such restrictions do not exist.

One of the core responsibilities of government is the enforcement of contracts and other legally binding agreements between its citizens. Typically, this is done via the civil justice system. With House Bill 1027, one aspect of these particular contracts pertaining to property owners’ associations could have been enforced short of going to court.

VDOT, utility and taxi companies all voiced strong opposition to H.B. 1027 based upon it being a matter of convenience to allow their employees to take their work vehicles home. They are wrong. This is NOT simply a matter of convenience. This is a matter of enforcing contracts, something that these businesses rely upon the state for every day with every transaction that they enter into.

How would a taxi company react if after a passenger called for a ride, was brought to his destination and, upon arrival, decided that he did not want to abide by the agreement he had entered into and refused to pay? One of the first things the taxi company would do is seek help from a governmental entity – most likely the police in this instance – to see that this contract is enforced. Or what about an electric or phone company whose customer after having received monthly service changed his mind and decided to breach the agreement to pay for the service that was received? Of course that company would pursue state sanctioned legal enforcement at some point in time.

Now imagine that the taxi, electric or phone company came to the state in such a matter for purposes of enforcement and the state replied that this was none of its business and to deal with it on their own. That is precisely what those Delegates who voted to kill H.B. 1027 said to property owners’ associations all across the Commonwealth. If such associations do not have the right to have their rules legally enforced, then the General Assembly may as well just repeal Virginia’s Property Owners’ Association Act altogether. Go ahead and just tear up contract law if the General Assembly will not vote to uphold legal agreements made between citizens of Virginia.

H.B. 1027 is very narrowly targeted. Only property owners’ associations whose rules specifically restrict the parking of commercial vehicles within their boundaries may petition their local governing bodies to have these restrictions put in place. At that point, residents of those communities then have the right to participate in a notice and comment rulemaking process with those governing bodies where they may make know their support or opposition to the proposals.

This bill was narrow in scope, provided for resident input via the local governing body, and is fundamental for both the enforcement of legal agreements and the entire rationale for having a Property Owners’ Association Act. The members of this committee who voted to kill this bill obviously value convenience over the Rule of Law.  We’re putting them on notice now — we will make sure that even without a publicly recorded vote on this, they WILL be held publicly accountable for this.