Peace for Seabridge Community. Say NO to Patrol One!
0 have signed. Let’s get to 100!
The undersigned members of Seabridge Village Homeowners Association representing 5% or more of the Association hereby petition that the Board of Directors set the earliest reasonable date for a special membership meeting for the purpose of immediate suspension of a contract between the Seabridge Village HOA and Partol One Services and revision of parking rule.
REASON: To VETO a newly revised amendment to parking rule and immediate suspension of Partol One contract.
1. Owners of Seabridge Village are not satisfied with the new amendment to a parking rule that was adopted by the Board of Members on December 20th 2017 and request to veto the regulations.
2. Owners of Seabridge Village respectfully request, effective immediately, return to old parking enforcement guidelines, in effect prior to December 31, 2017, and handle complaints individually on case-by-case basis.
3. Owners of Seabridge Village disagree to pay Patrole One a monthly fee of about $420 to $900 per months for violation of Seabridge Owner’s privacy and unreasonable towing authority.
4. Owners of Seabridge Village are concerned that the new regulations violate the Federal Housing Act and California Fair Employment and Housing Act that prohibit discrimination based on familial status. Some units have one or two residents, and imposing the same requirements on the units with large families constitutes discrimination under the federal and state fair housing laws. Violation of Federal Housing Act and California Fair Employment and Housing Act may subject the HOA to a potential law suit that would be costly to the HOA and owners.
5. Owners of Seabridge Village concerned that due to driveway configuration, some units are treated unfairly because other units can park a total of four cars (one in the garage, one in the driveway, and two in the common area) while some units are only allowed and able to park three cars.
6. Owners of Seabridge Village are concerned that the regulations are unreasonable under applicable California case law that requires all regulations and restrictions in condominium developments to be reasonable. California Supreme Court ruled that unreasonable restrictions are unenforceable. The restriction on two cars in the common area is unreasonable when the driveway does not accommodate a car and the common area has abundant parking.
7. Owners of Seabridge Village respectfully request to have a seal competitive bidding prior to hiring any parking enforcement/ security contractors. (Not only two (2) companies as was done in the case with Partol One)
8. Owners of Seabridge Village respectfully request the HOA Board Members solicit a consulting company advice about a parking situation if such exists.
9. Owners of Seabridge Village respectfully request the HOA Board Members to inquire opinions of the homeowners of Seabridge Village about any possible parking rule changes and seek their advice.
10. Owners of Seabridge Village respectfully request the HOA Board Members to require a majority of resident approval vote prior to community-wide changes for parking rule .
(please sign your name on the top line and print your name on the second line-name must be legible.)
(Please print clearly your house number and street name- apartment number - address must be legible.)
Today: Katia is counting on you
Katia oconnor needs your help with “owners: Peace for Seabridge Community. Say NO to Patrol One!”. Join Katia and 46 supporters today.