Cohousing-L Mailing List: Right of first refusal and exemption for Mortgagee in possession

[David Michael (david]

We have a right of first refusal and a 28 day period for the HoA (Springhill 
Cohousing Community Ltd) to nominate a buyer.
However, we have a clause in our Lease (CC&R) that means a mortgage 
company/Bank who  re-possesses (forecloses) on a house is exempt from many of 
the conditions i.e. first refusal and having to pay 0.5% purchase price. We had 
the Lease (CC&R and bylaws) checked by a number of banks before agreeing it in 
2001. The 0.5% payment has been a  really useful and painless  income stream 
over the last 20 years.

David Michael
Springhill Cohousing Community (England)
david [at] ic.org
> 
> Thank you for this email, Del.   What was the VA?s demand?   ?change language 
> in our bylaws that restricted the percentage  of units in our community that 
> could be rentals at any one time.?   Meaning?   
> 
> I am hoping to learn as much as possible so as to wisely choose my next move 
> around CoHo.  
> Respectfully, Peter Hewitt
> 
>> On Dec 11, 2023, at 8:48?AM, DEL HOLLAND via Cohousing-L <cohousing-l [at] 
>> cohousing.org> wrote:
>> 
>> As we were building and selling units, we were on a parallel track trying to 
>> arrange things with Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, FHA and the VA, so that buyers 
>> here would be eligible to get 30 year, fixed rate mortgages.  The VA 
>> insisted that we must change language in our bylaws that restricted the 
>> percentage of units in our community that could be rentals at any one time.  
>> Our original intent was to allow some rental for special circumstances, for 
>> instance a sabbatical, but we wanted the community to be filled with people 
>> who were committed to cohousing, so we put a max of 10% rental clause in our 
>> bylaws.  At first, I thought the VA?s demand was unreasonable, but when seen 
>> from their perspective; if we had 9% of community rented and a unit went 
>> into foreclosure, they might want to be able to rent it while they sought a 
>> buyer, I was more understanding.  
>> When we changed the bylaw language, we got VA loan eligibility.
>> 
>> Del Holland
>> Prairie Hill cohousing, EcoVillage
>> Iowa City, IA
>>> Today's Topics:
>>> 
>>> 1. Right of First Refusal (Melanie Mindlin)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Message: 1
>>> Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:22:32 -0800
>>> From: Melanie Mindlin <sassetta [at] mind.net>
>>> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
>>> Subject: [C-L]_ Right of First Refusal
>>> Message-ID: <2B6F2D63-E9CF-49C7-BC98-95B8127C342F [at] mind.net>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain;   charset=utf-8
>>> 
>>> Our community had a Right of First Refusal in our founding CC&R?s. A few 
>>> years after move-in, maybe around 2010, one member tried to refinance his 
>>> home and reported that he couldn?t get it approved because they didn?t like 
>>> this clause. As a result, we all agreed to remove it.
>>> 
>>> I have felt considerable regret about this, and wonder if anyone else has 
>>> experienced push back from mortgage companies about a Right of First 
>>> Refusal. Are you aware of legal language that would be less problematic 
>>> than others?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Melanie Mindlin
>>> Ashland Cohousing
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
>>> http://L.cohousing.org/info
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------
>>> 
>>> End of Cohousing-L Digest, Vol 239, Issue 6
>>> *******************************************
>> 
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
>> http://L.cohousing.org/info
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 19:55:10 +0000
> From: vicky wason <vlwason [at] hotmail.com>
> To: "cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org" <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_ bylaws: active/inactive status
> Message-ID:
>       <SJ2PR20MB5922EE29487CCC2CEA1452A8B18FA [at] 
> SJ2PR20MB5922.namprd20.prod.outlook.com>
>       
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I live at Wasatch Commons in Salt Lake City, Utah in the USA.
> 
> We expect 2 hours for each adult (18years) who lives in the community.
> 
> So for our family,  we have two 20-somthings living with us. So, our 
> household records 8 hours of community work each month. Often mom does the 
> majority of the hours ?. During the summer dad mows the lawns and that covers 
> a lot of the hours. We have suggested work to do, but you define what you 
> consider work.
> 
> People can choose to pay $20/hour instead of doing the work. Or if they 
> forget to post their hours they are charged.
> 
> We don't bank hours.
> 
> We had an elder who couldn't figure out the system of recording, and we just 
> let that go. We could see her sweeping the path, and she had contributed for 
> years before we had the system.
> 
> We expect people to talk openly if they need a month off and tell the one who 
> does the data collection and record keeping. We give lots of e-mail reminders 
> to report hours.
> 
> We just had a meeting where it was proposed to raise the number of hours and 
> raise the $20 to something higher.
> 
> BTW, this elder's 2-bedroom house will be going on the market soon. They 
> needed to move to assisted living. See our classified at 
> www.cohousing.org<http://www.cohousing.org>
> And as an example that we allow people to choose what kind of work, when this 
> elder needed more and more assistance, people who were giving that help, 
> counted that as their "work."
> 
> Best,
> 
> Vicky Wason
> long time resident of Wasatch Commons.
> www.wasatchcommons.com<http://www.wasatchcommons.com>
> https://www.facebook.com/wasatchcommonscohousing
> https://www.instagram.com/wasatchcommonscohousing/
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Cohousing-L <cohousing-l-bounces+vlwason=hotmail.com [at] 
> cohousing.org> on behalf of Bree Kalb <breekalb [at] gmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 11:19 AM
> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_ bylaws: active/inactive status
> 
> Pacifica Co Housing, Carrboro NC
> It?s not in our bylaws but one of our first community decisions was
> 1) Every household is required to contribute 4 hours of community labor a
> month.
> 2) If a household does more than 4 hours in a particular month, they can
> either bank the excess hours or donate those hours to another household
> 3) If a household does less than 4 hours they have two months to catch up.
> After that $12 dollars per hour unworked is added to their monthly dues.
> (Later on we agreed that the dollar amount increases by $1 every two years)
> 
> Some households happily chose to pay rather than work; that money helps pay
> for some tasks that no one can easily do.
> 
> It?s common for those of us who work a lot to donate our excess hours to
> households where someone is ill or has other reasons they can?t contribute.
> 
> Bree Kalb
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 8:35 AM lienjud--- via Cohousing-L <
> cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org> wrote:
> 
>> Seeking input from other communities as we are revising our bylaws:
>> we have this clause in our bylaws and are wondering how other communities
>> address non- participation due to illness, travel, aging etc. do you have
>> something like this in your bylaws and how has it worked out? thanks.
>> Judith Lienhard, Cascadia Commons, Portland Oregon
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
>> http://L.cohousing.org/info
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> http://L.cohousing.org/info
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 11:50:14 -0500
> From: Sharon Villines <sharon [at] sharonvillines.com>
> To: Cohousing-L <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
> Subject: [C-L]_ Work Expectations [ was bylaws: active/inactive status
> Message-ID: <2EF433C1-B9A7-4605-8174-781847809869 [at] sharonvillines.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;     charset=utf-8
> 
>> On Dec 11, 2023, at 2:55?PM, vicky wason <vlwason [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I live at Wasatch Commons in Salt Lake City, Utah in the USA.
>> 
>> We expect 2 hours for each adult (18years) who lives in the community.
> 
> How does the community get by with such low expectations? I think we would 
> consider this uninvolved.
> 
> Sharon
> ----
> Sharon Villines
> Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC
> http://www.takomavillage.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 12:51:54 -0500
> From: Main Email <zabaldo [at] earthlink.net>
> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_ Right of First Refusal
> Message-ID: <AC7AEE51-42B0-4D46-A564-CE351874A7A1 [at] earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> Ditto Peter?s question: what demand did you meet of the VA that caused them 
> to approve VA mortgages for you?
> Very interested in this.
> 
> Ann Zabaldo
> Washington DC
> Sent from my iPhone
> All tiipos ... curtesy of Siri  :-)
> 
>> On Dec 12, 2023, at 11:18?AM, Peter Hewitt <pvvhewitt [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> ?Thank you for this email, Del.   What was the VA?s demand?   ?change 
>> language in our bylaws that restricted the percentage  of units in our 
>> community that could be rentals at any one time.?   Meaning?   
>> 
>> I am hoping to learn as much as possible so as to wisely choose my next move 
>> around CoHo.  
>> Respectfully, Peter Hewitt
>> 
>>> On Dec 11, 2023, at 8:48?AM, DEL HOLLAND via Cohousing-L <cohousing-l [at] 
>>> cohousing.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> As we were building and selling units, we were on a parallel track trying 
>>> to arrange things with Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, FHA and the VA, so that 
>>> buyers here would be eligible to get 30 year, fixed rate mortgages.  The VA 
>>> insisted that we must change language in our bylaws that restricted the 
>>> percentage of units in our community that could be rentals at any one time. 
>>>  Our original intent was to allow some rental for special circumstances, 
>>> for instance a sabbatical, but we wanted the community to be filled with 
>>> people who were committed to cohousing, so we put a max of 10% rental 
>>> clause in our bylaws.  At first, I thought the VA?s demand was 
>>> unreasonable, but when seen from their perspective; if we had 9% of 
>>> community rented and a unit went into foreclosure, they might want to be 
>>> able to rent it while they sought a buyer, I was more understanding.  
>>> When we changed the bylaw language, we got VA loan eligibility.
>>> 
>>> Del Holland
>>> Prairie Hill cohousing, EcoVillage
>>> Iowa City, IA
>>>> Today's Topics:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Right of First Refusal (Melanie Mindlin)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 
>>>> Message: 1
>>>> Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 09:22:32 -0800
>>>> From: Melanie Mindlin <sassetta [at] mind.net>
>>>> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
>>>> Subject: [C-L]_ Right of First Refusal
>>>> Message-ID: <2B6F2D63-E9CF-49C7-BC98-95B8127C342F [at] mind.net>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=utf-8
>>>> 
>>>> Our community had a Right of First Refusal in our founding CC&R?s. A few 
>>>> years after move-in, maybe around 2010, one member tried to refinance his 
>>>> home and reported that he couldn?t get it approved because they didn?t 
>>>> like this clause. As a result, we all agreed to remove it.
>>>> 
>>>> I have felt considerable regret about this, and wonder if anyone else has 
>>>> experienced push back from mortgage companies about a Right of First 
>>>> Refusal. Are you aware of legal language that would be less problematic 
>>>> than others?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Melanie Mindlin
>>>> Ashland Cohousing
>>>> 
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> 
>>>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>>> 
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
>>>> http://L.cohousing.org/info
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> 
>>>> End of Cohousing-L Digest, Vol 239, Issue 6
>>>> *******************************************
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
>>> http://L.cohousing.org/info
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
>> http://L.cohousing.org/info
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 14:48:45 -0800
> From: <lewbowers155 [at] gmail.com>
> To: <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
> Cc: <lewbowers155 [at] gmail.com>
> Subject: [C-L]_ Right of First Refusal
> Message-ID: <000c01da2d4d$60aa5bc0$21ff1340$@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;     charset="us-ascii"
> 
> At PDX Commons we utilize our Right of First Refusal (ROFR) in every sale.
> We maintain an active "Waiting Pool" made up of households who are
> interested in cohousing, have likely had a tour of our facility, and have
> paid $50 to join the pool. When a unit owner declares that their unit is
> available for sale at a given price, the community first decides whether
> they want to buy the unit. The standard answer is NO, we do not have the
> money. But the ROFR also gives the community the right to assign that right
> to any member of our Wait Pool. This means that any wait pool member can
> make an offer on the unit for about 30 days BEFORE the unit can be marketed
> to the world. We also encourage any member selling to give priority first to
> any existing member who wishes to move within the community and second to
> any wait pool offer. However, the seller can sell to whomever they wish.
> 
> 
> 
> Of the 8 units which have been up for sale since we moved in 7 years ago, we
> have sold 7 of them through this ROFR process. It works. The units are sold
> directly by the seller, no real estate agent is involved, thus saving the
> commission. We have a Resale Group which works with the owner to help market
> the unit to the Wait Pool and runs the community process. We also require
> all prospective owners - whether from the Wait Pool or not - to attend an
> orientation to the community where we go over issues such as expected
> participation, governance, meal agreement and other community agreements.
> 
> 
> 
> The beauty of this process is that it gives the community legal standing to
> explain the "social contract" necessary to live successfully in our
> community. This ROFR does potentially extend the time necessary for the
> owner to market the unit to the general population, but our track record has
> shown that our process gets the seller a buyer committed to cohousing and a
> reasonable price. It balances the sellers property rights with the
> communities legitimate rights to find have buyers who are both knowledgeable
> and interested in joining a cohousing community. 
> 
> 
> 
> We have modelled this system on the one created by Tacoma Park Cohousing in
> Washington DC. They have used a similar model for 20 years. Lew Bowers PDX
> Commons
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> http://L.cohousing.org/info
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of Cohousing-L Digest, Vol 239, Issue 8
> *******************************************