We grow as our services grow and develop. You may soon be served by one or more of the following people who recently joined the Cagan Service Family:

 

Nick Marinescu, Property Manager

Narcis Oros, Property Manager

Razvan Tudor, Property Manager

 

John Wilson, Assistant Property Manager

 

Suzy Briggs, Bookkeeper

Denee Easterling, Bookkeeper

Angelina Helms, Bookeeper

Jeffery Helms, Bookkeeper

Maria Rodriguez, Bookkeeper

 

Our Chief Operating Officer, Michael Daniels and all of us want to hear from you and share with you new ways we can be of service to your communities.

Contact:
Michael@cagan.com
847-324-8934

Link

The Palm legislation passed the Illinois House of Representatives due to strong lobbying efforts. However, it is the opinion of the Community Association Institute as well as many property management professionals that the Palm legislation will put undue burdens on community association boards as they try to conduct business.

Below is a description of the general effects as provided by the Community Association Institute of Illinois:

• SB 2664 would prohibit condominium associations from including special assessments, charge-backs, and limit a condominium association's ability to collect late fees, attorney's fees or court costs from third-party purchasers following a foreclosure. While these fees and costs may be collected, the total amount that can be collected may never exceed nine months of regular assessments. The end result in most cases would have associations receiving less repayment than under the current statutory scheme. Less repayment means more fees for unit owners.

• SB2664 is incomplete legislation that impacts condominium associations by creating a new scheme for collecting under super lien rights, but is does nothing to impact townhome, homeowner or master associations. This bill would create a double standard forcing condos to play by one set of rules while all other community associations play by another.

• SB 2664 is being passed without any recognition or understanding of its impact upon community associations and the overwhelming majority of owners who pay their assessments in a timely fashion. This bill seeks to protect a very small group of people: attorneys who represent buyers at real estate closing. This bill is a detriment to all of our communities and could ultimately result in difficult decisions for boards in determining how to allocate their already limited resources, and would likely lead to increased assessments for the balance of the owners. The interests of community associations and the owners that live in those community associations have been completely ignored in SB 2664.

• Finally, SB 2664 reduces the days an association (or its management company) has to respond to a request from a purchaser for information from 30 days to 14 days, if the association is managed. If the association is self-managed it has 21 days. This reduced time-frame creates an unnecessary burden on community association managers and homeowners that are already required to reply to purchaser requests in a timely fashion.    

Here is the basis for the change in day-to-day community association board operations:

Since 1994, a quorum of the community association board has been required to "conduct" business. Since that time, "conduct" meant to vote. The appellate court recently clarified the 1994 law. The word "conduct" now means to consider information and then render a decision. Therefore, boards can't meet in private to discuss association business. This includes email discussions. Email discussions between Board members must be limited to participation by less than a quorum of the Board. You may email documents to the full Board but the Board may not discuss them via email.

 

The effect of this is the need for lots of Board meetings. One way to deal with this is to establish a teleconference system which is allowed as long as all unit owners have access to it and can listen in on the Board meeting. Three standard exceptions still apply to the open meeting requirement:

• A board can discuss litigation outside the presence of unit owners. However, the board must confirm any litigious action during an open board meeting.

• Hiring and firing of association employees can be discussed outside of board meetings. A more liberal interpretation of this held by some attorneys is that it includes independent contractors.

• The financial delinquencies of unit owners can be discussed in closed session because it protects the privacy of those unit owners.

Reminders that may help save time:

Meeting Notice
A proper meeting notice has two elements which must be satisfied at least 48 hours before the scheduled meeting.

• A notice must be posted in a common/public area of the building.

• A notice must be snail mailed or hand delivered to each unit owner. Taping on doors is not proper. It must be slide under the door. Email is not an alternative option to satisfy this requirement.

Contract Engagement
A Board can adopt a resolution to allow their management company to engage in a contract under $XX.XX without board approval. Keep in mind that if the expense was already approved in the budget no additional approval is needed.

Collections
A Board can adopt a resolution to allow their management company to send delinquent owners to collections after 60 days.

There is much debate going on regarding the practicalities of SB 2664. One purpose of the bill is to provide more community transparency. However, many believe there will be many changes and revisions. At this time, community associations must abide by it. If you have questions regarding correct procedures, check with your Cagan Property Manager. As SB 2664 evolves through practice and change, we will try and provide the best available guidance and direction. 

The City Council of Chicago's Finance Committee approved an ordinance that will make trash tracking through dumpster identification a state-of-the-art reality. The ordinance requires dumpsters to either use a bar code, wireless transmitter or some other form of technology that makes it possible to individually identify them. The idea is to confirm that annual fees and fines for over-flowing dumpsters are promptly paid on a per dumpster basis.

 

This concept was first explored about five years ago when Mayor Richard Daley first suggested that businesses and condominium associations buy annual permits for use of their over-sized garbage containers. Needless to say, those affected wanted the idea trashed. Today, fees range from $51 dollars annually for a container under one cubic yard and $656 annually for an over-sized dumpster with a capacity of 10 cubic yards. In addition to the dumpster fees, the new ordinance also allows City Hall to levy an additional technology surcharge to pay for administering the system. That could mean an additional 10% of the dumpster fee.

 

Alderman Leslie Hairston of the 5th ward says there are already several City mandates burdening cash strapped condominium associations. She claims it is not fair to target them again and not other types of organizations. However, the Finance Council Chairman, Edward Burke of the 14th ward was in favor of imposing the technology surcharge as well as maintaining the dumpster fees. Streets and Sanitation Commissioner, Charles Williams says the technology upgrade will help in collecting all of the fees the City is entitled to collect and make it easier to issue tickets for over-flowing dumpsters.

 

This may be a good time to analyze dumpster needs and strategy for your community association. Dumpster size and capacity may make a bigger difference when budgeting for trash services. Building janitors may need to monitor dumpsters diligently to avoid costly overflows.

 

Trashing technology will probably not be an option...and dumpster thieves may also want to think twice going forward because you will be found and fined! Take heed and don't be a victim of the dumpster detectives.