CALIFORNIA HOA RECALL: HOW HOMEOWNERS CAN REMOVE THE BOARD
OVERVIEW
In California, few tools are as decisive, and as underused, as the HOA recall. When a homeowners association board stops following the law, ignores the membership, or simply refuses to act in the community’s best interest, the Davis-Stirling Act gives homeowners a direct and powerful remedy: remove them from office.
Under the Davis–Stirling Act and the California Corporations Code, the recall process is designed to be accessible. In most HOAs, it takes signatures from only 5% of the membership to trigger a mandatory special election. That low threshold exists to give homeowners a practical way to hold their board accountable without waiting for the next regular election cycle.
But initiating a recall is not as simple as circulating a petition and counting signatures. The process has strict statutory requirements for how the petition is written, how signatures are gathered and verified, and how the election itself is conducted. A single procedural misstep can give the board a pretext to reject the petition or derail the election altogether.
This article explains exactly how HOA recall petitions work in California, from the legal thresholds, to the strategic decisions that can determine whether your recall effort succeeds. It also addresses the most common tactics boards use to resist removal, and how to protect your rights at every stage of the process. By understanding the law and planning your approach, you can use the recall as it was intended: to restore accountability and integrity to your HOA’s leadership.
For a quick-reference guide, see my Fact Sheet: “HOA Recalls in California: How Homeowners Can Remove Their HOA Board.” You can also access several other Fact Sheets on this topic by searching the Fact Sheets under the Libraries tab on the firm’s website.
WHY RECALLING THE ENTIRE BOARD IS RECOMMENDED
When initiating a recall, California homeowners have the option to target one or more individual directors or to recall the entire board. While it might seem logical to focus only on the directors causing the most problems, in most situations it is strategically better to recall all directors at once.
The primary reason is cumulative voting, which is the default method of voting in the majority of California HOAs. If your HOA does not have cumulative voting, then this recommendation doesn’t apply. But if your HOA is like most of the ones in California, then this is a big deal. Under cumulative voting, members are allowed to “stack” all of their votes on a single candidate.
This makes a difference because under Corporations Code section 7222(b)(1), in a recall where cumulative voting is in effect, no director may be removed if the votes cast against removal would be enough to elect the director if voted cumulatively at an election where all the members entitled to vote were voted. This is an extremely high bar to meet.
When the entire board is up for recall, however, the cumulative voting rules do not come into play. Instead, the threshold vote will depend on the size of your HOA.
- Associations with less members 50 members. In associations with fewer than 50 members, the recall will be approved if a majority of the members entitled to vote decide to remove the board (i.e., they approve the recall). For example, if your association has 30 members, then you would need at least 16 members to vote in favor of the recall. This means that if only a mere quorum showed up to vote (i.e., if only 16 members voted), just one “no” vote would be enough to prevent the recall because at least 16 members have to vote in favor of the recall for it to pass.
- Associations with 50 or more members. If the HOA has more than 50 members, then the recall will be successful if a majority of a quorum voted to remove the board. For example, if your association has 60 members, then 31 would constitute quorum. If only 31 people showed up to vote in the recall, you could remove the board with the vote of just 16—the same number as the example above in the smaller association because 16 represents a majority of the quorum (which was 31).
In most cases, therefore, removing the entire board as opposed to select members is far easier and more often successful. Even if your real target is just one or two board members, you should seek to remove the entire board and then campaign in favor of reelecting the remaining good ones, plus the one or two you nominate to replace the bad directors.
[Note: This particular issue is so badly addressed in both the Corporations Code and in the Davis-Stirling Act, that there is actually a difference of opinion amongst experts and courts as to how to interpret or reconcile the language. This, therefore, serves as another reason why you want to avoid cumulative voting by seeking the recall of the entire board instead of one or more (but not all) the directors.]
CALIFORNIA HOA RECALLS: UNDERSTANDING THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK
In California, the right to recall HOA board members is not a vague concept or a loosely defined “community power.” It is a statutory right rooted in two bodies of law: the Davis–Stirling Act and the California Corporations Code. Both sets of statutes apply, and the applicable sections of both must be understood to execute a valid recall.
The Davis-Stirling Act and HOA Recall Elections
Under Civil Code section 5100(a)(1), any HOA election to remove directors must be conducted by secret ballot and comply with the same procedural safeguards that apply to regular board elections. This includes:
- Double-envelope system to ensure ballot security.
- Independent inspector(s) of election to oversee the process.
- Notices and nomination periods consistent with statutory timelines.
There’s a lot of confusion, however, regarding the election timeline associated with recall petitions because it’s not the same as with regular elections. While the Davis–Stirling Act controls the how of the voting process, the when is driven by the California Corporations Code. If cumulative voting applies in the recall election, once a valid recall petition is received, the board has 20 days to provide notice of the recall election meeting, and that meeting must be held not less than 35 nor more than 150 days after receipt of the recall petition. If cumulative voting does not apply, the meeting must be held not less than 120 nor more than 150 days after receipt. In either case, Civil Code section 5115 still applies, requiring that ballots be mailed or delivered to all members at least 30 days before the voting deadline.
[Special Rule for HOAs Who Have Adopted Electronic Voting. The deadline is a bit different if your HOA has adopted electronic voting under the new law that went into effect on January 1, 2025. In HOAs who have adopted electronic voting, the meeting date is set 150 days after receipt of the recall petition. Likewise, in HOAs with electronic voting, ballots must be sent at least 15 days before the voting deadline rather than the 30 days required for paper ballots. But since most HOAs have not yet adopted electronic voting, I focused on the rules applicable to HOAs still relying on paper ballots.]
So, the Davis–Stirling Act’s normal pre-election planning windows do not apply here. Rather, the recall must be scheduled within that timeframe contained in the Corporations Code while still meeting the Davis-Stirling Act’s minimum 30-day ballot period.
Failure to follow these steps can invalidate the recall election entirely, and in some cases expose the HOA to statutory penalties and attorney’s fees.
The Corporations Code and HOA Recall Elections
The Corporations Code governs the initiation of the recall process. Sections 7510 and 7511 set the procedural requirements for calling a special membership meeting to vote on board removal. Key requirements include:
The key provisions are sections 7510 and 7511, which require:
- Threshold signatures. For most HOAs, signatures from 5% of the total membership are required to trigger a recall. For stock cooperatives, the threshold is 10%.
- Delivery. The petition must be delivered to the board, a director, or the association’s managing agent, either in person or by certified mail.
- Timeline. The board must comply with the 20-day notice requirement and set the meeting date in accordance with the applicable 35–150 or 120–150 day range described above.
- Verification. The association may verify that each signature belongs to an owner of record and that only one signature per unit is counted.
The interplay between these two statutes is critical. Many boards, and even some attorneys, make the mistake of focusing solely on Davis–Stirling’s election rules, without realizing that the initiation of the recall is also controlled by corporate law. This misunderstanding can lead to defective procedures and costly disputes.
HOW RECALL PETITIONS WORK IN CALIFORNIA
A recall petition is the legal document that forces the board to schedule a recall election. It is not an informal letter of complaint. The petition must be drafted and executed in compliance with both the Corporations Code and the Davis–Stirling Act, or the board can refuse to act on it.
For most HOAs, the number of signatures required is 5% of the total voting power of the association. This is calculated based on the total number of members entitled to vote, not on the number of households that participate in meetings or recent elections. If calculating 5% produces a fraction, the number is rounded up. If your HOA is a stock cooperative, the threshold is 10%. Stock cooperatives are far less common in California than on the East Coast, but the higher requirement is mandatory if your governing documents classify the development as such.
Only owners of record may sign a recall petition. Co-owners on the same title count as one signature toward the threshold, no matter how many sign. Tenants, non-owner spouses, and other residents who are not on title are not eligible to sign. If one person owns multiple units, they may sign once for each unit owned, and each signature counts separately.
A recurring issue in recall disputes involves “pocket deeds,” where a current titleholder has signed over ownership to another person but the deed has not yet been recorded with the county. In most circumstances, a transfer of real property between the grantor and grantee is legally valid even without recordation. For purposes of the Davis–Stirling Act, however, an unrecorded deed is not effective to establish membership rights. This means that the grantee on an unrecorded pocket deed is not recognized as an “owner of record” and cannot sign a recall petition. If a board challenges such a signature, it will be disqualified when the membership roster is compared against recorded title. When collecting signatures, it is critical to confirm that each signer’s ownership is reflected in the county recorder’s recorders, especially where a transfer has recently occurred or is in progress, because otherwise you risk falling short of the 5% requirement if those signatures are disqualified.
A valid recall petition must clearly identify the director or directors to be recalled, or state that the entire board is subject to recall. It must demand a special election to vote on removal of those directors and include the printed names, property addresses, and original signatures of the signing members. The Corporations Code requires only a clear statement of purpose and the required member information. Any extra language creates opportunities for the board to argue the petition is ambiguous or defective, so avoid narratives or personal attacks.
Every signature must be original. Photocopies, scanned images, typed names, and e-signatures do not meet the requirement. Best practice is to use blue ink to distinguish original signatures from black-and-white copies. Petition pages may be photocopied for circulation, but the final submission must contain the original signed pages.
The petition must be delivered either in person or by certified mail to the board, a director, or the HOA’s managing agent. Certified mail provides a paper trail. Personal delivery should be documented with a written acknowledgment signed and dated by the recipient. I also recommend sending the Petition via email as well.
HOW RECALL ELECTIONS WORK
Once the board receives a valid recall petition and meets the 20-day notice requirement under the Corporations Code, the process shifts to preparing for and conducting the election itself. At this stage, the election must still comply with all of the director election-related procedures required under the Davis–Stirling Act.
The recall election ballot must present two separate questions to the membership:
- Whether to remove the director(s) named in the petition, or in the case of a full-board recall, whether to remove the entire board.
- If the recall passes, who should be elected to fill the vacant seats.
Both questions are essential. If the ballot asks only about removal and does not address replacements, and the recall succeeds, the board may have the authority under the bylaws to appoint new directors itself—potentially reinstating the same individuals or their allies. To prevent that, the replacement election should occur in the same meeting and on the same ballot.
Ballots must follow the double-envelope system required by Civil Code section 5115, and voting must be by secret ballot. An independent inspector of elections must oversee the count. The inspector is also responsible for maintaining the ballots mailed in, verifying eligible voters, verifying the quorum, conducting the count, and announcing the results within 15 days of the election.
Keep in mind that once you cast your vote, you cannot revoke or change your vote. Likewise, errors such as failing to sign the inner envelope will result in the ballot being disqualified, so organizers should communicate these rules clearly to supporters to avoid losing valuable votes on technicalities.
If the recall passes and enough valid votes are cast for replacements, the newly elected directors are considered elected once the results are certified. However, under Corporations Code section 7220(b), the prior directors continue to serve until their successors have been “elected and qualified.” The timing of qualification, and therefore when the new directors actually take office, may depend on the governing documents. If the recall passes but replacement votes are insufficient to fill all seats, the board may be able to appoint directors to the remaining vacancies, depending on the bylaws—another reason to ensure members complete both parts of the ballot.
COMMON WAYS THAT BOARDS TRY TO INTERFERE WITH RECALL ELECTIONS
Bad HOA boards—i.e., boards that want to avoid being removed at all costs—will often exploit any weakness in the process, and in many cases, their interference is calculated and deliberate. Understanding the most common tactics will help you prepare for them and avoid costly setbacks.
- Questioning signature validity without cause. Boards may compare petition signatures to past ballots, meeting sign-in sheets, or other documents and claim they “don’t match.” Legally, the correct process is to verify directly with the signer, not to reject signatures based on subjective comparisons.
- Challenging the petition language. Some boards will argue that the petition is “ambiguous” or “defective” because of minor word choices, formatting, or a lack of superfluous details. Don’t allow them to get away with that.
- Delaying the process. Boards may slow-walk the 20-day notice requirement or set the meeting date outside the statutory 35–150 or 120–150 day window. Don’t allow them to get away with that.
- Resignations to void the recall. A targeted director may resign before the election so the board can appoint a replacement, potentially nullifying the petition and requiring petitioners to start over. Unfortunately, there’s nothing that you can do to prevent this from happening…once. But if it happens again, you’ll have strong grounds to challenge the replacement as a mere pretext to avoid an otherwise valid recall attempt, and courts don’t look kindly on that sort of gamesmanship.
- Ballot manipulation. Some boards issue ballots that only ask whether to remove directors, without including the replacement election on the same ballot. If the removal passes but replacements aren’t elected immediately, the board can fill vacancies with its own allies. Inspect the ballots immediately, and if your board attempts to pull this, challenge it in writing.
- Restricting access to member contact information. By refusing to provide mailing addresses or email lists, boards make it harder for petitioners to campaign, collect enough signatures, or inform owners of the facts before voting. Under Civil Code section 5200, you have a right to that information. Insist on receiving it.
Anticipating these tactics, and structuring your petition and election campaign to block them, can be the difference between a successful recall and one that fails on a technicality.
CONCLUDING THOUGHT
A recall is one of the most powerful tools California homeowners have to hold their HOA boards accountable, but only if it’s done properly. The statutory requirements under both the Davis–Stirling Act and the Corporations Code are detailed and unforgiving, and boards that want to resist removal will often exploit any mistake to derail the process.
Success starts with a clear strategy. In most cases, recalling the entire board is more effective than targeting individual directors because most California HOAs have cumulative voting. From there, the process must be executed with precision: the petition must be drafted properly, signatures must be collected only from eligible owners of record, and delivery must be documented beyond dispute. Once the petition is in, the timelines for noticing and holding the meeting and mailing the ballots must be followed exactly, with special attention to whether cumulative voting or electronic voting applies in your association.
If done right, a recall can restore transparency, compliance, and accountability to your HOA. If done wrong, it can waste months of effort and embolden the very board you were trying to remove. By understanding the legal framework, anticipating the tactics boards use to resist, and following the process step by step, homeowners can use the recall process to bring meaningful change to their communities.