Overview

The Davis-Stirling Act is the foundation of California HOA law. Found primarily in Civil Code 4000–6150, it governs nearly every major aspect of life in a California HOA, including elections, board meetings, fines, records requests, architectural approvals, assessments, dispute resolution, and enforcement of the governing documents. Whether you are dealing with a bad HOA board, unexplained or unfair fines, secret meetings, denied architectural plans, selective enforcement, election irregularities, or refused access to records, the Davis-Stirling Act, along with other applicable California laws, supplies the legal framework that controls the dispute.

Many homeowners make the mistake of thinking that the Davis-Stirling Act exists only to protect HOA boards, while others assume that it is actually homeowner-centric, designed to primarily spell out homeowner rights. Neither assumption is correct. The Davis-Stirling Act gives HOA boards significant authority to govern common interest developments (i.e., HOAs), but it also imposes numerous procedural safeguards, transparency requirements, and statutory limits that HOA boards must follow. Understanding where those lines are drawn is critical because many disputes between homeowners and HOAs ultimately come down to whether the HOA board exceeded the authority the law actually gives it.

One of the biggest problems homeowners face, apart from the inherent power differential between them and the HOA, is that the Davis-Stirling Act is spread across dozens of statutory sections covering entirely different subjects. Election rules appear in one part of the statute. Open meeting requirements appear in another. Records requests, fines, architectural approvals, assessments, Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR), and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) all operate under different statutory schemes with different procedures, deadlines, and enforcement mechanisms, and all are spread out throughout the Davis-Stirling Act. As a result, homeowners often know that something “feels wrong” but have no idea where to start looking or which statutes actually apply to the problem they’re facing.

This Fact Sheet serves as a practical, homeowner-facing primer on the Davis-Stirling Act. It is not, however, intended to serve as a complete description of California HOA laws, nor is it intended to address every permutation and nuance. Those are addressed in prior Fact Sheets and articles, as well as in future ones that I’ll eventually write. Rather than turning this into a sprawling legal treatise, therefore, I focused on the parts of the Davis-Stirling Act that generate the most common real-world conflict between homeowners and HOAs. I also explain how these different statutory sections fit together so homeowners can better identify what rules apply, what rights they possess, and what legal limitations constrain their HOA boards. [In short, because the Davis-Stirling Act touches virtually every aspect of HOA life, and could thus fill volumes, this Fact Sheet also serves as a starting point for a much broader series of more focused Fact Sheets that I’ll eventually write addressing specific HOA issues in greater depth and nuance. When taken together, my library of Fact Sheets provide a much deeper roadmap for homeowners trying to understand how California HOA law operates in the real world.]

Key Points

The Davis-Stirling Act is not one single rule. It is a comprehensive statutory framework governing nearly every major aspect of HOA life in California, including elections, board meetings, records access, fines, architectural approvals, assessments, reserve funding, dispute resolution, and enforcement of the governing documents. Because these statutes are spread across multiple sections of the Civil Code, many homeowners do not realize how interconnected these rights and obligations actually are. The following key points break down the core categories of the Davis-Stirling Act that most frequently shape the most common real-world disputes between homeowners and HOA boards, and explain the legal principles that homeowners must understand to recognize abuse, assert their rights, and force HOA compliance with California law.

• The Davis-Stirling Act governs every major aspect of HOA life in California. The Davis-Stirling Act can be found in Civil Code 4000 through 6150, and it supplies the core statutory framework for California HOAs. It governs how HOA boards conduct meetings, how homeowners vote, how HOAs adopt and enforce rules, how members inspect records, how HOAs impose discipline, how HOAs collect assessments, and how homeowners and HOAs resolve disputes.
• The Davis-Stirling Act gives HOA boards significant authority, but it also imposes strict legal limits on how that authority may be exercised. California HOAs possess real legal power. They collect assessments, enforce governing documents, maintain common areas, adopt operating rules, conduct elections, approve or deny architectural applications, impose discipline, and pursue collections. But for all that, HOAs do not exercise unlimited authority, and it’s not even close. Every HOA board action must trace back to the governing documents, the Davis-Stirling Act, another controlling statute, or some combination of those sources. Otherwise, they cannot act.
  • HOA Directors cannot simply do whatever they want because they are the board. The title “director” does not create legal authority by itself. HOA board members must, at all times, act within the powers granted by the governing documents (i.e., CC&Rs, Articles, Bylaws, valid operating rules) and controlling laws. When an HOA board makes up unwritten standards, enforces rules that do not exist, ignores required procedures, or claims authority that no governing document or statute grants, its action lacks legal authority and will likely be deemed unenforceable by a courts.
  • Start thinking in terms of HOA authority when a dispute arises. Most HOA disputes come down to whether the HOA exceeded the authority granted to it by California law or the governing documents. Homeowners, however, often focus only on whether an HOA board decision seems unfair. That matters, but the more important issue is authority. Ask yourself what document or statute gives the HOA power to act, whether the board followed the required procedure, whether the action conflicts with a higher legal authority, and whether the decision meets the applicable reasonableness, good-faith, or due-process standards required under the Davis-Stirling Act. Thinking in terms of that framework turns a vague complaint into a focused legal analysis.
• The Davis-Stirling Act and other laws override an HOA’s governing documents. HOA governing documents matter, but they do not sit above the law. CC&Rs, Bylaws, rules, architectural guidelines, election rules, and collection policies all operate within limits imposed by federal, state, and local law. When an HOA governing document directly conflicts with controlling law, the law controls. [If you’re interested in reading more about the hierarchy between an HOA’s governing documents and the law, read my Fact Sheet “California HOA Governing Documents: What Controls?”]
  • HOA governing documents exist within a strict legal hierarchy. Civil Code 4205 establishes the hierarchy that controls conflicts among governing documents and the law. Federal, state, and local laws sit above the HOA’s governing documents. Below the law, the CC&Rs carry the greatest weight, followed by the Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, and then operating rules. Homeowners who understand this hierarchy can quickly spot when an HOA board tries to enforce a lower-level rule that conflicts with a higher-level document. For example, an HOA cannot enforce a rule that blocks a homeowner from installing solar panels, building an ADU, or planting drought-resistant landscaping. [I’ve written extensively on each of these three subjects. For example, check out the following: (a) “Can a California HOA Stop You from Installing Solar Panels?”; (b) “Can My California HOA Legally Block an ADU?”  or “Can California HOAs Block ADUs? What the Law Says About HOA Restrictions on ADU Construction”; and (c) “Drought-Resistant Landscaping & California HOAs: Your Legal Rights Explained.”]
  • Bad HOAs often try to ignore the proper hierarchy by passing rules that conflict higher documents. A frequent tactic of Bad HOAs is to abuse rulemaking authority by trying to accomplish through rules what they cannot accomplish through a formal CC&R amendment. That approach fails. Operating rules and architectural guidelines fill in details, but they cannot change the bargain recorded in the CC&Rs. If an HOA board wants to alter rights or restrictions explicitly contained in the CC&Rs, it must follow the applicable amendment process rather than passing a lower-level rule and pretending the hierarchy does not exist.
• The Open Meeting Act requires HOA boards to conduct HOA business openly and transparently. The Open Meeting Act, found in Civil Code 4900 through 4955, controls how boards conduct HOA meetings. The Open Meeting Act requires notice, agendas, open attendance rights, and minutes for open meetings. It also restricts what HOA boards can discuss or decide outside properly noticed meetings. These rules matter because HOA boards make decisions about money, maintenance, rules, contracts, discipline, litigation, and enforcement, and homeowners have the right to monitor that process unless a lawful executive-session exception applies. [If you’d like to gain a general understanding about how the Open Meeting Act works, ready my Fact Sheet, “California HOA Open Meeting Act: Homeowner Rights and Board Obligations.”]
  • HOA boards cannot conduct HOA business through secret meetings, email chains, or informal gatherings involving a quorum of directors. Civil Code 4090 treats a gathering of a quorum of directors as a board meeting when those directors hear, discuss, or deliberate on HOA business. Labels do not matter. A “planning session,” “town hall,” “workshop,” “informal meeting,” or email chain still violates the law if a quorum uses it to conduct HOA business outside the Open Meeting Act. The HOA board cannot avoid notice, agendas, member attendance, or minutes by changing the name of the meeting. [I discuss this particular issue in in a few of my Fact Sheets, including “When Is a California HOA Town Hall Meeting Subject to the Open Meeting Act?” and “Can a California HOA Hold Secret Meetings Without Notice or Minutes?”]
  • Homeowners have the right to attend and participate in all open board meetings. Open board meetings belong to the members as much as they belong to the directors, and so homeowners do not need board permission to attend or observe those meetings. In addition to attending and observing, homeowners also have the right to participate in open board meetings. Civil Code 4925 requires HOAs to permit members a portion of time to speak on issues related to the HOA, and Civil Code 4930 makes it clear that when it comes to the open forum section of the meeting, homeowners are not limited solely to items listed on the meeting’s agenda. The agenda limits what the HOA board can discuss or act on, not what homeowners can say. The Davis-Stirling Act does permit HOA boards to impose reasonable time limits and enforce basic rules against genuinely disruptive conduct, but they cannot cut off a homeowner because the speaker criticizes the board, raises an uncomfortable issue, or discusses a matter not listed on the agenda. [For a deeper discussion of homeowner speech rights during the open forum section of a board meeting, read my Fact Sheet, “Can a California HOA Stop You from Speaking at a Board Meeting?”]
  • The topics that HOA directors may discuss during executive session are explicitly limited by the Davis-Stirling Act. Civil Code 4935 allows HOA boards to meet privately to discuss six topics: (a) litigation; (b) formation of contracts with third parties; (c) member discipline; (d) personnel matters; (e) meetings with members regarding assessment payment plans; and (f) whether to foreclose on a homeowner. That’s it. Despite the fact that HOA attorneys who ought to know better routinely advise their HOA clients that they may discuss various other matters during executive session, neither Civil Code 4935 nor any case law supports that position. The statute’s explicit limitations do not, however, prevent bad HOAs from frequently abusing executive session by discussing and deciding on rule changes, finances, maintenance issues, vendor preferences, or director disagreements. [You can read more about the limitations of executive session meetings, how bad HOA boards violate the law’s restrictions, and what homeowners can do about it by reading my Fact Sheet, “California HOA Executive Session Rules.”]
• The Davis-Stirling Act gives homeowners broad rights to inspect HOA records and financial documents. Records requests create one of the strongest practical tools homeowners have under the Davis-Stirling Act to hold their HOAs accountable. Civil Code 5200 and related provisions allow homeowners to inspect and copy a broad range of HOA records, including documents that reveal how the HOA spends money, takes care of the common areas, conducts meetings, handles elections, manages reserves, and enforces rules. Homeowners should treat records access as the first move in any HOA disputes because documents often expose what the HOA board does not want homeowners to see. [I’ve written a number of articles and Fact Sheets about the scope of homeowner rights under Civil Code 5200. If you’d like to learn about the power of that statute, you should start with my comprehensive Fact Sheet, “Can I See My California HOA’s Records? A Homeowner’s Guide to Civil Code 5200.” Sam and I also discussed the subject during several episodes of our podcast, HOA HELL, including “Your HOA’s Paper Trail: How to Use Civil Code § 5200 to Get Every Document You Need.”]
  • Civil Code 5200 grants homeowners access to a wide array of HOA-related documents. A proper records demand can reach bank statements, ledgers, invoices, contracts, board meeting minutes, annual disclosures, reserve materials, election rules, and other records tied to HOA operations. The HOA board does not get to decide that the documents are “internal” simply because production would prove inconvenient or embarrassing. If the statute covers the record and no narrow exception applies, the HOA must produce it. [In my Fact Sheet, “What HOA Documents Am I Legally Entitled to See in California?,” I identify over 20 separate categories of documents homeowners are entitled to copy, and I provide the specific statutory basis for each category.]
  • With only one exception, HOA members do not need to provide a reason to view HOA records. With one exception, Civil Code 5200 does not require homeowners to show fraud, mismanagement, selective enforcement, or HOA board misconduct before receiving the HOA records to which they’re entitled. Membership in the HOA gives the homeowner the right to inspect those records. And the HOA must provide the requested HOA records within statutorily mandated timeframes. For example, Civil Code 5210(b)(1) imposes a five business day deadline for HOAs to produce the membership list. Civil Code 5210(b)(2) requires HOAs to turn over current fiscal year financial records within 10 business days, and Civil Code 5210(a) provides a 30 calendar day limit to turn over all other records. [You can read all about the timelines contained in Civil Code 5200 by reading my Fact Sheet, “How Long Does My California HOA Have to Respond to a Records Request?”]
  • You must provide a “proper” purpose to receive the HOA’s membership list. Unless a homeowner has opted out of disclosing their name, address, phone number, or email address (which everyone can do under Civil Code 5220), HOA members have the right to that information. But unlike all other HOA-related documents, which require no “proper” purpose, Civil Code 5225 requires members to state their membership-related purpose when demanding a copy of the membership list, and HOAs may deny the request if they reasonably believe that the purpose of the request is not related to “the member’s interest as a member.” [You can read more about your right to receive your HOA’s membership list, as well as your right to opt out of providing your information to others, in my Fact Sheet “Can My California HOA Deny Me the Membership List?”]
  • The HOA has limited rights to withhold or redact HOA records that you’ve properly demanded. Even though a homeowners’ right to demand HOA-related records is broad, there are documents that the HOA can either withhold entirely, or redact in part. Civil Code 5215 establishes the limits to that authority. HOAs can only withhold or redact executive session minutes, documents protected by the attorney-client privilege, records relating to member collection and discipline matters, or other documents explicitly protected by another statute. [If you’d like to learn more about the limits and exceptions to the HOA’s power to withhold or redact documents that you’ve demanded, read my Fact Sheet “Can My HOA Withhold or Black Out Documents?”]
  • HOA boards that improperly withhold records face steep statutory penalties and attorneys’ fee exposure. Civil Code 5235 authorizes homeowners to enforce records rights in court, seek statutory penalties of up to $500 per category of document refused, and recover attorneys’ fees and costs when they prevail. When judges properly enforce Civil Code 5200, that fee-shifting component of the statute, coupled with the penalties, which can amount to thousands of dollars, completely shifts the leverage from the HOA to the homeowner. [You can learn more about this issue by reading my Fact Sheet, “What Do I Do If My California HOA Refuses to Give Me Records?”]
• California HOA elections are governed by detailed statutory procedures designed to ensure fairness and transparency. Civil Code 5100 through 5145 regulates covered California HOA elections and member votes. These rules control voting procedures (including the use of electronic voting technology), inspectors of election requirements, ballot secrecy, candidate access, election materials, campaign fairness, and challenges to unlawful election conduct. The importance of HOA elections in ensuring that HOAs are managed properly is evident in the specificity in which elections are addressed under the Davis-Stirling Act. [I provide a thorough summary of the Davis-Stirling Act’s election rules in my Fact Sheet, “California HOA Election Rules and Homeowner Rights.” If you’re interested in learning about California’s recent electronic voting laws, you should watch the HOA HELL podcast episode, “Electronic Voting in California HOAs.”]
  • All California HOA elections governed by the Davis-Stirling Act must be conducted by secret ballot. Civil Code 5100 covers far more than director elections. It also reaches member votes on subjects such as recalls, assessments requiring member approval, governing document amendments, and exclusive-use common area grants. The secret-ballot process is inherent and vital to all of those member elections because protecting voter privacy greatly reduces board intimidation.
  • Independent inspectors of election must oversee all aspects of the election process. Civil Code 5110 requires all HOAs, regardless of size, to select either one or three independent inspectors to control the election process, receive ballots, verify voter eligibility, preserve ballot secrecy, count ballots in public view, and retain election materials for one year. The inspector’s independence protects the membership from board-controlled elections.
  • HOAs cannot manipulate election rules to favor incumbents or suppress challengers. Fairness is ingrained in the Davis-Stirling Act’s election laws. That doesn’t stop bad HOAs from attempting to illegally manipulate elections to serve their own ends. Such election misconduct often appears through delayed nomination notices, improper candidate disqualifications, unequal access to HOA media, refusal to provide membership lists, misuse of HOA resources, or last-minute rule changes. These tactics keep entrenched directors in power by making challenges harder. Civil Code 5105 and related election provisions exist to prevent those games. A homeowner who wants a fair election should watch timing, notices, candidate qualifications, access rights, and ballot-handling procedures from the beginning. [You can watch a 90-second short from the HOA HELL podcast called “HOA Boards Cannot Use HOA Resources to Campaign.”]
  • Homeowners may challenge unlawful elections in court. Civil Code 5145 gives homeowners a path to challenge election violations. Courts can order compliance, invalidate unlawful results, require corrected election procedures, impose statutory penalties, and award attorneys’ fees and costs when the homeowner prevails. Election challenges become far stronger when homeowners build the record early instead of waiting until the HOA board certifies questionable results. Even so, homeowners who wish to challenge the results of an election have one year to file an action with the court. Start by preserving (or demanding a preservation of) ballots, envelopes, notices, inspector communications, and election records immediately after spotting a problem. [Sam and I covered this issue in depth in an episode of our HOA HELL podcast, “California HOA Election Rules: How to Challenge Rigged or Illegal HOA Elections.”]
• HOA boards must follow strict procedural requirements before disciplining homeowners. The Davis-Stirling Act does not allow HOA boards to punish homeowners first and justify the punishment later. Last year’s AB 130 modified Civil Code 5850 and Civil Code 5855 to impose even stricter procedural requirements before an HOA board could impose fines, suspend privileges, or take disciplinary action. [For example, AB 130 placed a $100 per violation cap on all fines that didn’t involve significant or imminent threats to health or safety, and it banned interest and late fees on unpaid fines.] Civil Code 5850 also requires HOAs to adopt and distribute a monetary fine schedule before imposing fines otherwise the fines are illegal.
  • HOA boards cannot legally impose fines or suspend privileges without first providing at least 10 days’ written notice and an opportunity for a hearing. Civil Code 5855 requires the HOA to send written notice at least 10 days before the hearing. That notice must identify the alleged violation, provide the date, time, and location of the hearing, and give the homeowner the opportunity to appear before the board to respond. In the homeowner’s sole discretion, the hearing must occur in executive session, although most HOAs automatically hold such hearings in executive session even without a specific request by the homeowner.  After the hearing, the HOA board must provide written notice of its decision within 14 days. If the HOA skips notice, skips the hearing, conducts a rubber-stamp hearing, or misses the post-hearing notice deadline, the discipline fails. [I wrote a brief Fact Sheet, “What to Do If You Receive a California HOA Violation Letter: Homeowner Rights Explained,” in which I summarized what homeowners should do if they received a violation letter.]
  • AB 130 changed California HOA discipline in ways every homeowner needs to understand. AB 130 did more than cap HOA fines at $100. It created new procedural issues that affect hearings, cure rights, financial commitments to cure violations, IDR after unresolved hearings, and written hearing agreements that become judicially enforceable if both sides sign them. Bad HOA boards are already exploiting unprepared homeowners who walk into hearings without understanding how the new procedures affect their rights. A homeowner facing discipline now needs to think about the violation notice, the fine schedule, the $100 cap, the health-and-safety exception, cure documentation, the hearing record, and the post-hearing decision letter. [I’ve written extensively about AB 130, including its many faults. If you’re interested in taking a deeper dive into that subject, read my Fact Sheet “California HOA Fines After AB 130: $100 Limit, Repeat Violations, and Predictions Coming True.” That Fact Sheet also provides a number of links to other related Fact Sheets, so it’s an excellent place to start your research.]
• Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR) and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) play a major role in California HOA disputes. The Davis-Stirling Act gives homeowners two distinct dispute-resolution tools when they find themselves at odds with their HOAs. Civil Code 5900 through 5915 governs IDR, which creates an informal internal meet-and-confer process between the homeowner and the HOA. Civil Code 5925 through 5965 governs ADR, which in the context of California HOA disputes, means mediation, a step that is required in certain types of disputes before the parties can file a lawsuit.
  • HOAs must participate in IDR when properly requested by a homeowner. Both Civil Code 5910(c) and 5915(b)(2) state that IDR is mandatory for the HOA when the homeowner properly invokes it. The reverse is not true, no matter what a board, manager, or even the governing documents say. IDR gives the homeowner a no-cost statutory tool to force the HOA board to meet, explain its position, and create a record before the dispute escalates. IDR works best when the homeowner uses it with a clear objective, a written record, and a defined request for relief. Under Civil Code 5915(b)(4), both sides must work in good faith to select a location or method for the IDR (e.g., in person or Zoom), and both Civil Code 5910 and 5915 give homeowners the right to bring an attorney with them (at their own expense). [I’ve written a number of Fact Sheets about the IDR process, including “What Is IDR in a California HOA? Does It Stop Fines, Lawsuits, or Enforcement?,” and “How to Prepare for IDR With Your California HOA and What to Expect When You Get There.”]
  • Civil Code 5930 requires pre-litigation ADR in qualifying enforcement actions before the dispute proceeds to court. In the context of HOA disputes and Civil Code 5930, ADR means mediation. And mediation is just a fancy word for “settlement talks.” Mediation is, therefore, non-binding settlement discussions between the parties a “neutral” (often a retired judge). There are no witnesses, no rules of evidence to follow, no testimony, and no judge or jury to decide anything. Either side is free to walk out if the other party is uninterested in attempted to reach a reasonable settlement, and nothing that’s offered or said at mediation can be used in a subsequent lawsuit. Civil Code 5930 requires ADR before enforcement actions seeking declaratory, injunctive, or writ relief, or in action seeking one or more of those remedies in conjunction with money damages of $12,500 (i.e., the small claims maximum). [To learn more about the ADR requirements in HOA disputes, read my Fact Sheet “California HOA Mediation: When ADR Is Mandatory Under Civil Code 5930.”]
• HOA architectural authority is broad, but it is not unlimited. HOA control over architectural improvements is at the heart of some of the most common disputes between homeowners and HOAs. Most California HOAs require approval before visible exterior changes may be made, including paint, windows, landscaping, fences, patio covers, solar panels, ADUs, and other improvements. But architectural control does not give HOA boards personal taste authority over a homeowner’s property. Civil Code 4765 requires fair, reasonable, and good-faith decisions based on published standards. Other statutes in California also play an important role by sharply limiting HOA power over protected improvements. [For a good summary of an HOA’s rights to exert architectural control over homeowner property improvements, read my Fact Sheet “California HOA Architectural Approvals: What Civil Code 4765 Really Requires.”]
  • Architectural decisions must be reasonable, made in good faith, and based on standards found in the governing documents. Civil Code 4765 requires HOA boards and architectural committees to evaluate applications under standards contained in the governing documents. A proper denial identifies the specific rule, guideline, or CC&R provision the homeowner’s proposal violates. A denial that says only “not harmonious,” “not consistent with community character,” or “not aesthetically pleasing” fails unless the HOA ties that conclusion to a clear, published legal or governing document-based standard. Bad HOA boards frequently deny applications by inventing requirements after submission, demanding materials that no rule requires, changing interpretations mid-process, or approving similar projects for favored owners while denying others. Civil Code 4765 does not allow that sort of moving-target review. Homeowners should demand the written standard, the written reasons for denial, the version of the guidelines the HOA applied, the names of the decisionmakers, and comparable approvals showing how the HOA treated similar requests. [If this aspect of architectural control interests you, I suggest that you read both of the following Fact Sheets: “California HOA Architectural Guidelines: What Boards Can and Can’t Control” and “Denied by Your California HOA? How to Challenge or Appeal Architectural Decisions.”]
  • California law limits HOA authority in areas such as ADUs, solar panels, drought-resistant landscaping, EV charging stations, and other public policy-related issues. The Legislature has created specific protections in areas where HOAs have a long history of overreach. HOAs cannot use architectural control to defeat statutory rights involving ADUs, solar energy systems, drought-resistant landscaping, electric vehicle charging stations, satellite dishes, clotheslines, flags, and other protected uses. An HOA retains authority to impose lawful, reasonable restrictions when the statute allows them, but it cannot use aesthetics, delay, or invented standards to block improvements that California law protects. [I addressed several of these important limits to HOA power in the following Fact Sheets: “Drought-Resistant Landscaping & California HOAs: Your Legal Rights Explained”; “Can California HOAs Block ADUs? What the Law Says About HOA Restrictions on ADU Construction”; “Can My California HOA Legally Block an ADU?”; “Can a California HOA Stop You from Installing Solar Panels?”; “Can a California HOA Deny Solar Panels on a Condo Roof?”; and “Can My California HOA Stop Me From Installing an EV Charging Station?”]
• The Davis-Stirling Act gives HOA boards powerful collection and enforcement rights, including liens and foreclosure remedies. Assessments fund the HOA’s operations, maintenance obligations, insurance, reserves, common area responsibilities, and long-term repair obligations. Civil Code 5600 requires HOAs to levy assessments sufficient to perform their obligations under the governing documents and the law. That gives HOA boards serious financial power. The Davis-Stirling Act also regulates assessment increases, special assessments, collection notices, liens, foreclosure procedures, and homeowner protections, which means the board must follow the law when it collects money from members.
  • HOA members cannot withhold assessments no matter how illegal. Withholding assessments is one of the most dangerous mistakes a homeowner can make in an HOA dispute. Even when the HOA board violates the law, the homeowner’s assessment obligation continues unless a court order or binding agreement provides relief. A homeowner who stops paying assessments gives the HOA board a collection path involving late charges, collection costs, lien rights, attorney involvement, and foreclosure exposure. Challenge the HOA board’s misconduct directly, but do not create a separate assessment-default problem. In short, pay all assessments first; then challenge their legality. [The withholding of assessments is #1 on the list of the five biggest mistakes HOA members make in disputes with their HOAs. To read about that and the other four, check out my Fact Sheet “The 5 Biggest Mistakes Homeowners Make When Fighting Their California HOAs.”]
  • The Davis-Stirling Act strictly regulates how HOAs impose assessments, collect delinquent amounts, and pursue enforcement remedies. HOA boards must follow statutory limits when increasing regular assessments or imposing special assessments. Civil Code 5605 restricts assessment increases that exceed statutory thresholds without member approval, and Civil Code 5615 requires proper notice before assessment increases become due. Collection statutes also impose notice and procedural requirements before liens and foreclosure remedies proceed. These rules preserve the HOA’s collection power while forcing the HOA board to use that power lawfully. [If you’d like to take a deeper dive into an HOA’s assessment powers, read both of these Fact Sheets: “When Can a California HOA Raise Assessments Without a Vote?” and “California HOA Special Assessments: What They Are, When They’re Legal, and How Homeowners Can Challenge Them.”]
• Reserve studies show whether your HOA is planning for future repairs or setting homeowners up for special assessments. Civil Code 5550 requires California HOAs to review the major components that the HOA must repair, replace, restore, or maintain and evaluate the reserve funding needed to handle those obligations. At least once every three years, the HOA must conduct a reasonably competent and diligent visual inspection of the accessible areas of those major components, and the HOA must review the reserve study annually. Roofs, balconies, plumbing systems, elevators, asphalt, structural components, decks, stairways, and other expensive components eventually fail, and the money to repair or replace them has to come from somewhere. A properly prepared reserve study helps homeowners evaluate whether the HOA board is planning responsibly or pushing today’s costs onto tomorrow’s homeowners. One of the most important figures in the reserve study and annual reserve disclosures is the percent-funded number, which helps homeowners understand whether the HOA has set aside enough money to meet future repair and replacement obligations. When HOA boards underfund reserves, omit major components, extend useful-life estimates without evidence, lowball replacement costs, hide deferred maintenance, or fraudulently manipulate the percent-funded figure, they distort the HOA’s financial condition and set homeowners up for devastating special assessments, loans, deferred repairs, and insurance disasters. [To learn what you need to know about reserve study requirements and how bad HOAs try to manipulate reserve studies, read my Fact Sheets “California HOA Reserve Study Requirements: How Often They’re Required and What Must Be Included” and “How California HOAs Manipulate Reserve Studies and What Homeowners Can Do to Protect Themselves.”]
  • Balcony inspections under the Balcony Law affect reserve planning and future special assessments. Civil Code 5551 requires qualifying California HOAs to inspect exterior elevated elements, including balconies, decks, stairways, walkways, and railings supported by wood, at least once every nine years (with the initial inspection to have been completed no later than January 1, 2025). This inspection requirement does not sit apart from reserve planning. It directly affects reserve planning because the inspection can reveal expensive structural repairs that the HOA should have anticipated, funded, and disclosed. If an HOA failed to complete required inspections, failed to include balcony-related components in the reserve study, or ignored known deterioration until repair costs exploded, homeowners should treat that as a serious financial red flag. Bad HOA boards often try to label those costs as sudden emergencies, but predictable deterioration does not become a legitimate emergency simply because the board failed to plan for it. [I addressed a serious error by a so-called “thought leader” in HOA law  concerning the balcony law, and at the same time summarized its important aspects in my Fact Sheet, “California HOA Balcony Law: Correcting Misinformation About SB 326.”]
• Mandatory financial and policy disclosures give homeowners the information they need to evaluate how their HOA is being run. Civil Code 5300 and Civil Code 5310 require California HOAs to distribute annual financial and policy disclosures to homeowners, including the annual budget report and annual policy statement. These disclosures include operating budget information, reserve summaries, reserve funding plans, insurance information, anticipated special assessments, outstanding loans, assessment collection policies, discipline policies, fine schedules, dispute resolution procedures, architectural procedures, notice procedures, and the right to receive board meeting minutes. These documents are not optional paperwork. They give homeowners the baseline information needed to evaluate whether the HOA is budgeting properly, maintaining adequate insurance, funding reserves responsibly, disclosing collection and enforcement policies, and following the procedures it later attempts to enforce. When an HOA board skips, delays, or waters down these disclosures, homeowners lose visibility into the HOA’s finances, enforcement structure, and governance procedures. [If you’d like to get a handle on your HOA’s myriad of disclosure obligations, read “California HOA Financial Transparency” and “Mandatory Annual Disclosures that CA HOAs Must Make to Members.”]
• If your HOA board violates the Davis-Stirling Act, call the HOA attorneys at MBK Chapman. California homeowners do not need to accept illegal fines, secret meetings, stonewalled records requests, manipulated elections, unlawful architectural denials, or assessment abuse. The Davis-Stirling Act gives homeowners powerful rights, but those rights only matter when homeowners use them correctly and force HOA boards to comply. If your HOA board ignores the law, hides information, abuses its authority, or punishes you for asserting your rights, call the HOA attorneys at MBK Chapman. We’re California’s foremost experts in homeowner-side HOA law for a good reason.

Bad HOAs count on homeowners getting lost in the maze of Civil Code sections, governing documents, meeting rules, election procedures, records deadlines, and dispute-resolution requirements that govern California HOAs. That confusion is how boards turn procedure into power. Once homeowners understand the major parts of the Davis-Stirling Act, they can identify the correct legal issue, demand the right records, preserve the right evidence, avoid dangerous mistakes, and decide whether the next move should be IDR, ADR, litigation, or a call to experienced HOA attorneys. The Davis-Stirling Act does not make HOA boards all-powerful. Rather, it gives homeowners the tools to challenge bad HOA conduct, but only when they know where to look and how to act.

FAQs

About Michael Kushner

Michael Kushner is a California attorney with over 30 years of experience representing homeowners in disputes with their HOAs. He is widely regarded as California’s leading homeowner-side HOA attorney, and has built one of the state’s most prominent law practices dedicated to holding HOAs accountable under the Davis-Stirling Act and California law.

In addition to his law firm’s work, Michael is a recognized lecturer, author, and the host of the hit HOA HELL podcast, where he provides homeowners living in HOA-governed communities with clear, practical strategies for dealing with bad HOAs. He’s also the author of the best-selling book, HOA HELL | California Homeowners’ Definitive Guide to Beating Bad HOAs, which has become a go-to resource for both homeowners seeking real-world solutions to their HOA disputes, as well as those good HOA board members who are interested in doing a good job.

About MBK Chapman Fact Sheets

Homeowners searching for answers online will often come across articles that appear authoritative, but are actually written as search-engine marketing content rather than by an experienced HOA lawyer. These pieces tend to prioritize keyword density over clarity, accuracy, or legal context, which often leaves homeowners more confused than informed.

At MBK Chapman, our Fact Sheets are part of our HOA Law Library and are written by Michael Kushner, an HOA lawyer with decades of hands-on experience representing California homeowners. In fact, Michael Kushner is the HOA lawyer who pioneered the systems and strategies used by some of California’s most successful homeowner-side HOA law firms.

Each Fact Sheet is deliberately concise, statute-based, and designed as a quick-reference guide to help homeowners understand key HOA laws and enforcement rules at a glance.

AND DON’T FORGET TO TUNE INTO MY PODCAST, HOA HELL

YOU CAN ALSO ORDER MY GROUNDBREAKING BOOK

HOA HELL | California Homeowners’ Definitive Guide to Beating Bad HOAs

Amazon  |  Barnes & Noble