CAI-NJ Sept.2018(w)(1)

UCIOA

By David Ramsey, Esq., BECKER IT’S BACK... KIND OF...

© iStockphoto.com

T hose with a long memory and who are over 40 years old, may recall that from the mid-1990s through most of the first decade of the new mil- lennium the NJ Legislative Action Committee (LAC) made efforts to adopt the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act (UCIOA). That effort resulted in a proposed statute that was over 100 pages long. The intent was to replace New Jersey’s patchwork legislation concerning community associ- ations with one tome that provided enabling legislation for the formation of community associations and to deal with all of the various issues relating to transition, alternative dis- pute resolution, bidding of contracts and so forth. Despite long and often tedious negotiations with numerous interest groups – such as mortgage lenders, builders, dissident homeowners, lake communities and others - that each had a stake in the community association world, there was always one interest group or another that continued to complain to legislators that the legislation wasn’t to their complete satisfaction. It was difficult for legislators and their staffs to comprehend all that was in UCIOA. Despite that, during one legislative

CONT I NU E S ON PAGE 48 session, the UCIOA bill was overwhelmingly approved in the New Jersey Assembly, but the Senate failed to vote on it. Finally, after almost fifteen years of struggle, the LAC decided to abandon the effort, so it could turn its attention to individual matters that had a better chance of success. Approximately two years ago, the New Jersey Law Revision Commission approached the LAC and proposed that a new UCIOA bill be pursued in the legislature. Although almost 10 years had passed since the prior effort, the memory of the countless hours devoted by numerous LAC members remained fresh in mind. The LAC proposed that rather than an omnibus bill that attempted to address every issue that commonly arises in community associa- tions, the effort should be directed towards a slimmed down version of the Act that would provide basic provi- sions concerning the formation of common interest commu- nities, the required information in the formation documents, and other essential basics. This would be a much more accessible version of UCIOA, and it would be easier for legislators to recognize its benefits. If that were successful, the LAC would then approach the contentious issues, such

46

S E P T E M B E R , 2 0 1 8