15:33:38:07 - 15:33:42:22 Unknown it's very hard for a member to just kind of, you know, 15:33:43:01 - 15:34:00:11 Unknown brush off the rules. If, you know, all of a sudden they feel accountable to their neighbors because they know their neighbors, because they like their neighbors. So having that kind of friendship and community in a homeowner's association really humanizes the place. And that really cuts down on the violations. 15:34:00:13 - 15:34:19:18 Unknown Welcome to the uncommon area where we're dedicated to reimagining HOS. We provide board members and managers with the resources to create uncommon communities where residents love their home and truly love where they live. 15:34:19:20 - 15:34:52:12 Unknown Welcome to the uncommon area. I am Matthew Holbrook, and in this episode, I am joined by attorney Maria Cao. And we dive into revisiting the topic around Assembly Bill 130 here in California. This is the bill that puts limitations on an association's ability to impose fines for violations. We we did an episode on this back in July of 2025, when the bill was first passed. 15:34:52:12 - 15:35:06:23 Unknown And now that the dust has settled a bit and we have an opportunity to kind of see how it's playing out, Maria and I revisit this topic and break it down in a few different ways that hopefully are relevant and helpful for you. 15:35:06:23 - 15:35:19:06 Unknown Well, Maria, thank you so much for joining us in the in common area. Glad to have you here. I'm happy to be here. Thank you for having me. Yeah. This should be a fun conversation. We are going to dive into talking about AB 130. 15:35:19:07 - 15:35:29:08 Unknown An AB 130 kind of was launched onto the scene a little bit by surprise back in July of 2025. 15:35:29:10 - 15:35:56:04 Unknown Maybe we can start with just kind of give us a little bit of background on what is AB 130 and why are we talking about it? Sure. AB 130 Assembly Bill 130 was part of a emergency budget bill last summer. And if you actually go to AB 130, you're not going to see the relevant statute immediately because it is slammed among hundreds and hundreds of pages. 15:35:56:06 - 15:36:23:18 Unknown And so what it really boils down to is an amendment to Civil Code 5855 and 5850, which for us homeowners associations, we understand that to mean our enforcement rights. Okay. Just out of curiosity, before we get into this, I don't know if you would know. How does that come to the attention of the industry? So here you have this clause buried into hundreds of pages of of other law. 15:36:23:19 - 15:36:48:07 Unknown How does anybody first notice that and say, oh no, we have to address this. Well, I don't know how how you track your bills, but most people don't track their bills at all. And so we do have trade organizations that we follow and that lobby for homeowners associations, you know, legal issues that they're interested in. And this kind of just popped up through a surprise bill. 15:36:48:07 - 15:37:12:13 Unknown And, you know, you can go onto the California Legislature website and mark certain topics and certain bills you wanted to follow. So if you were, you know, a real legal nerd, you could definitely get that on your radar through that. But for the most part, we all just kind of found out through our attorneys. And when I found out, I just rang the alarm for all of my community managers and board members. 15:37:12:14 - 15:37:43:20 Unknown Yeah, kind of caught by surprise. And so what did the bill actually do? What has it addresses violations and fines and enforcement options. What were the real ramifications? Sure. Previously, the there was no indication in the law as to how much you could find in that particular statute. But with the amendment, it limited finds that were non health and safety concerns down to $100. 15:37:43:20 - 15:38:07:18 Unknown But it also included some more vague language around what could be a health or safety concern where you could find above $100. And it also reduce the time period for you to send the notice of the violation outcome letter from 15 days to 14 days, which I guess kind of makes more sense because it's a more, you know, weekly even approach. 15:38:07:18 - 15:38:35:21 Unknown And it also included a couple of other technical requirements around the notices. But the big deal there is the the limitation of $100. And you said apart from health and safety considerations. So I know that becomes a big part of the discussion. But the bottom line is, is essentially what it does is it limits boards from imposing fines greater than $100 theoretically in most cases. 15:38:35:23 - 15:39:00:11 Unknown And so we run into problems as managers and board members that oftentimes $100 is not a deterrent. And so I guess where I would want to go with this discussion. And just to be clear, we did an episode on this very topic back in July of last year. But that was that was when everything was very fresh and very new. 15:39:00:11 - 15:39:25:10 Unknown And so kind of the intention here on this episode is to to kind of reassess and relook at the results of what this bill did based on now being 9 or 10 months later. So, but yeah, I wanted to talk about the limitation or the lack of impact that the $100 has and, and how do boards think about that? 15:39:25:10 - 15:40:05:12 Unknown And then how does this health and safety consideration come in? So first of all, if a board is facing a situation with a homeowner who's in violation and they're just saying, yeah, go ahead, find me $100, it's worth it to me. How is a board to think about that? Well, it's not going to be viewed kindly by the board of directors because we all live in a homeowner's association, because we like the consistency, we like the esthetics, we like that there are rules because it keeps our property values up and it keeps everything looking nice. 15:40:05:13 - 15:40:32:00 Unknown If you have a member saying something like, well, yeah, just find me the $100, because it's either more profitable to me to spend the $100 fine, or the $100 is worth it to me to keep violating the rules, you know, really harms the idea of the homeowner's association and the community that we're trying to build. Yeah, it does, but still, the board could be facing situations that are exactly like that. 15:40:32:00 - 15:40:55:15 Unknown And the homeowner is saying, you know, I think where this comes up maybe often is short term rentals. And they put their home on Airbnb and they're getting income from renting out their home and short term rentals. And maybe the association has rules against that. And the homeowner says, yeah, fine, I'll pay the $100 because I'm making more money. 15:40:55:19 - 15:41:41:00 Unknown Otherwise, does the board have any any type of recourse, or is there any other approach that they could take? So the board has a couple of other tools in its toolbox that it can employ. Interestingly enough, this Civil Code amendment did not restrict the association's right to levy any kind of reimbursement or special assessments, and there are a lot of carries out there that allow for associations to levy a special individual assessment or reimbursement assessment, a special assessment for the cost of enforcement to the extent the violation creates other types of damage for the association, like if there are extra management fees and having to deal with that particular violation if there's actual damage to 15:41:41:00 - 15:42:04:00 Unknown the common area, like maybe they broke a gate or they have increased trash or whatever, all of a sudden we have to be very good about receipts and record keeping because in that violation hearing, we can levy reimbursement assessments, special assessments, special individual assessments in amounts above $100. And one of those line items could be your attorney's fees for enforcement. 15:42:04:00 - 15:42:23:10 Unknown And all of a sudden, that's a lot more than $100. It's it might be several thousand dollars for that round of violations. So if a board calls you and says, hey, Maria, we've got this, this home that's in continual violation, they're paying their fine, but that's not an incentive for them to stop being in violation. 15:42:23:10 - 15:42:25:01 Unknown What are some of the options that 15:42:25:05 - 15:42:29:08 Unknown what are you going to do as their attorney that might help with that enforcement? 15:42:29:11 - 15:42:29:15 Unknown Well, 15:42:29:15 - 15:42:35:17 Unknown even before the homeowner starts violating the rules, I'm going to help the boards develop a very. 15:42:35:21 - 15:42:58:11 Unknown developed fine and enforcement policy. Because what we're going to want to do is we're going to want to be very clear around how we define a violation, because it's also possible with that $100 to layer on the fines, depending on what we are defining violation because people say, well, is the violation only one day is the violation. 15:42:58:13 - 15:43:37:10 Unknown You know, a breach of multiple areas of your governing documents is the violation, you know, more than one incident across the same conduct. And the answer to that is it can be, but it really has to be embraced in your fine and enforcement policy. So, you know, to the extent there are also findings where particular categories of violation could be a health or safety issue, again, those are going to be beyond the $100, and those notices of violations are going to start looking like a pretty long, long laundry list of receipts of potential fines and potential damages for which you can recover in excess of $100. 15:43:37:12 - 15:43:39:06 Unknown So how do you define 15:43:39:06 - 15:44:00:04 Unknown the frequency of a violation fine for an ongoing violation. So you kind of alluded to that just now. But let's take just for the sake of this discussion, take the short term rentals as an example. Somebody rents it out, rents out their home for eight days. Can that be eight violations? Eight different days. 15:44:00:04 - 15:44:25:10 Unknown Is it eight days of is eight days because it's one contract? Is that one violation. Is it per month that how does that all get sorted out. It could be per day. And so it really just depends on how you are tinkering with that definition in your fine and enforcement policy. And I'd probably also invite my board members to investigate their other areas of regulation. 15:44:25:10 - 15:44:49:19 Unknown So you identified rentals as a very problematic violation that we deal with. There's nothing to say that we can't require all members to submit, you know, their leases for our deposit before they lease out to any particular member. And there's no nothing to restrict a homeowner's association from banning short term rentals. So maybe if you wanted to regulate it that way. 15:44:49:19 - 15:45:20:13 Unknown And can we create some I hate to say bureaucracy because people hate bureaucracy, but bureaucracy exists for a reason, and that might help board members anticipate some of those challenges that may come up because they'll be aware and they'll be able to have the right conversation with that member prior to them being a problem. So what I'm hearing from you is that setting that fine and enforcement policy in writing and distributing it to the homeowners, they have to have a 30 day review period on that, right? 15:45:20:14 - 15:45:44:18 Unknown Then that becomes a really important part of defining what a violation is on a per occurrence basis. And so you could set up for specific types of violations that every day in violation is a new fine, right. And theoretically, over the course of a month, then you could be talking about $3,000 of fines in a month if each of those days is a separate violation. 15:45:44:19 - 15:46:07:05 Unknown Am I saying that right? I think that's right. And I think it just becomes really challenging because, you know, I'm sure to be efficient. We all have the stock notices that we sent out. But, you know, if you have a higher value violation that may not that may not work anymore. You may have to involve your attorney for some of that stuff because we're talking about higher dollar signs. 15:46:07:08 - 15:46:31:17 Unknown You know, you will have to have a higher than standard notice when you say higher than standard notice. What does that mean? So in my practice I've reviewed a lot of the, you know, form notices of violation hearings. And some of these forms might just say like, you know, hey, role in your trash bins and doesn't site to anything, which is fine and then point to some kind of fine. 15:46:31:19 - 15:46:54:16 Unknown But if we're talking about a higher value violation, like a short term rental, like you're talking about. I think, you know, you have to have a very good notice of violation. You have to cite to the proper carries, you have to site to your fine and enforcement policy. You have to lay out the potential fines. You have to lay out the potential assessments that may be levied, and they just have to be documented. 15:46:54:16 - 15:47:18:00 Unknown Well, because the new civil code provision is very specific in what you have to put in that outgoing notice before you can put those charges on the homeowners account. Now, if you do that all properly, and again, going back to this scenario where you have detailed out in your finite enforcement policy that every day is a separate violation, you send out the right notice. 15:47:18:03 - 15:47:41:03 Unknown Do you need to renew every single day or can a notice be sufficient? Then here in California, you have to invite to a hearing before you can impose the fine. But can you add up the days at that, at that hearing, even based on you've gone through your your normal notice? Let's say you send a first notice, a second notice, a hearing notice, but you're not sending one every single day. 15:47:41:05 - 15:48:02:17 Unknown How do you add up those days? So my recommendation is to set the hearing far enough out so that the member has an opportunity to comply. You know, if you are not going to be levying any kind of assessments, you don't have to include this opportunity to cure that's included in that civil code provision. If you do levy some kind of assessment, you do. 15:48:02:17 - 15:48:24:17 Unknown But either way, I think it's still great practice to set the hearing out far enough in advance to get the homeowner to comply and tell them in the notice that if you send us evidence that you've fixed the problem and you're not going to do whatever it is we're asking you to do, or you're going to do the thing we're asking you to do, then we're going to take the hearing off calendar. 15:48:24:17 - 15:48:41:15 Unknown And I think that's a great practice. All right. So let's walk through a scenario that I know a lot of board members worry about. Let's say it's a single family home community, and you've got a homeowner who just is not maintaining their front yard. They never mow the lawn. They don't pull the weeds. The yard looks like it's a mess. 15:48:41:16 - 15:49:10:02 Unknown You send them a first notice, you send them a second notice, you send them a hearing notice the day before the hearing. They mow their lawn. They pull all the weeds. They make their yard look nice. They've cured. Now, in that case, as I understand it, the board cannot impose a fine. Am I understand that correctly? No. I mean, because you're not leaving an assessment, but also, I don't think you could leave you find either because they fixed it without having to go to the hearing. 15:49:10:02 - 15:49:32:23 Unknown So there's no fine to be imposed in that situation. Then the homeowner, the day after the the hearing, they stop maintaining their yard again and two months later you're back in exactly the same situation and the homeowner mows their lawn and pulls the weeds right before the hearing. Every single time. But yet, for 50 out of 52 weeks a year, their yard looks like a mess. 15:49:33:02 - 15:49:54:19 Unknown Or maybe we're calling them to hearing every single month. Then it's looking good every day, right? Well, once a month. But the the point is that whether it be on the short term rentals or whatever it is, these ongoing issues, theoretically a homeowner could just claim that they have cured and they never incur a fine. That's true. I mean, any other options for a board? 15:49:55:00 - 15:50:17:17 Unknown Well, I mean, the option could be that you ask the member to if you are going to consider levying some kind of assessment, if this board did incur some kind of enforcement costs, then one cure option could be that you ask them to put up the money before the hearing, and that's part of the cure. So walk me through how does that work? 15:50:17:17 - 15:50:39:20 Unknown So in the outgoing notice, maybe you say something like, you know, you have to mow your lawn and provide, you know, evidence that you did that or what, you know, whatever it is. And by the way, the associations already incurred X amount of dollars and extra management time and attorney's fees. And you know what? Maybe you had to send a vendor out to do something. 15:50:39:22 - 15:50:54:12 Unknown And so to make this right, you know, we're asking for you to reimburse us of this much money in advance of the hearing. So now I'm just brainstorming with you, and we could be going off the deep end, but. 15:50:54:14 - 15:51:40:11 Unknown As a management company, I get asked often by prospective clients, do you charge for noncompliance for sending violation notices? What do you say? And we say no. Okay. So we generally don't. Okay. But I'm curious that I wonder if it might be in the association's best interests that if a hearing notice had to be sent, if the management company imposed a relatively high level of a charge to send out a hearing notice, and then the association could use that cost to add to what might be charged to the homeowner, and then a cure doesn't matter at that point. 15:51:40:12 - 15:52:14:19 Unknown Yeah, I mean, that's an interesting idea. And I am not giving up anyone's trade secrets here, but I've definitely encountered other companies that do charge for notices and conducting hearings and that kind of stuff. And it's in there, you know, schedule of additional costs. And it is a cost that's incurred to the, the association. And so, you know, it wouldn't be beyond the realm of reason to include that in the notice of hearing, because that's a charge. 15:52:14:20 - 15:52:36:10 Unknown I mean, it's an out of pocket charge and it's not a fine. So it would be in the assessment category. Yeah, I can say from our perspective, we generally look at that as something that we would cover as part of our base fee and set it with that perspective. However, I'm as I'm listening to you, I'm thinking some of that might not be in the best interest of the association. 15:52:36:14 - 15:52:59:12 Unknown Yeah, and maybe there's a way to design that in such a way that the association is not necessarily out any money, but that it gives them some teeth for how to gain compliance. Put put some. Yeah. Put, put something real to be able to put pressure on a homeowner for compliance. Yeah. I mean to be clear, we don't really have any case law interpreting 5850 and 5855. 15:52:59:12 - 15:53:27:17 Unknown And so we are not taking this and creating a totally new idea by charging back members. Because I always tell this as an example. It's like, you know, a few years ago I got like a $20 ticket from the cops because I didn't have one of those holsters that held my cell phone on my dashboard or whatever. When that thing first came out and when I got the ticket in the mail. 15:53:27:17 - 15:53:53:08 Unknown The ticket itself is $20. But then below the $20, I had five separate line items of charges for like admin fee, court costs, whatever, whatever, whatever, whatever cost. And then that $20 ticket ended up costing me $131 or something like that. So we're not we're not introducing a new idea here. I mean, courts treat homeowners associations like quasi municipalities. 15:53:53:08 - 15:53:55:21 Unknown And so we're just taking the same 15:53:55:21 - 15:54:23:08 Unknown ideas from government and governing ourselves appropriately. So if we had to litigate this and I had to defend this in Superior Court, it wouldn't be a new idea for the judge. Interesting. So on the health and safety aspect, I have heard at least early on, when this first came out, some attorneys were making the case that you could potentially argue almost any violation to fit health and safety. 15:54:23:08 - 15:54:50:00 Unknown And as long as you detail that out in your enforcement policy ahead of time, that you're positioned to impose whatever finds that you want to impose on those if they meet these health and safety standards, has that evolved in any way, or how would you see associations in viewing many of their violations under that umbrella? Well, I guess I would do it differently. 15:54:50:00 - 15:55:09:15 Unknown I mean, I don't disagree with the concept that you can make almost anything a health or safety violation, but I kind of disagree in outlining all of the potential violations. That could be a health or safety issue, and you're finding enforcement policy because there's no way you're going to be able to anticipate the whole universe of what that could mean. 15:55:09:15 - 15:55:30:21 Unknown So I hate telling this story, but it's a it's a very good example of why you can't have a rule for exactly everything, why a general nuisance provision might exist in your can. I litigated a hoarder case some some years back in the city of Tustin. And, you know, I think the owner had some mental health issues or something like that. 15:55:30:21 - 15:55:57:04 Unknown But the thing that strikes me is, you know, he did have an attorney and, you know, he would use the common area dumpster to relieve himself frequently and often. And his attorney couldn't just agree with me and say that was inappropriate under the rules. He had to tell me, well, there isn't a specific rule that says he can't do that in the dumpster, right? 15:55:57:04 - 15:56:15:10 Unknown So that's where my philosophy is a little bit different. I think in my fine and enforcement policy, I would say, you know, if the board makes findings that there's a health or safety issue in the minutes in the violation hearing whatever, then the fine could be in excess of $100 and that'll be included in the outgoing. Notice that that's a possibility. 15:56:15:12 - 15:56:28:07 Unknown Does that need to be detailed in that first violation notice, or could that be that can't be held off until the the hearing notice? No, I think the whole point of the outgoing 15:56:28:08 - 15:56:28:16 Unknown notice 15:56:28:16 - 15:56:42:08 Unknown is so that the member has some kind of idea of what the maximum penalty could be against them, and they can make a decision for themselves as to whether they care enough about the hearing to attend. 15:56:42:08 - 15:56:47:00 Unknown And maybe if they just want to pay the fine, they'll just pay the fine instead of going to the hearing. 15:56:47:05 - 15:57:12:06 Unknown So an issue like a homeowner who regularly has weekend parties that are really loud and go until 3 a.m. and keep all the neighbors awake. Two questions on this one that's keeping people from sleeping. Can that be argued in your mind as a health and safety issue for the neighbors? 15:57:12:08 - 15:57:34:23 Unknown A number two. How do you address whether that has been cured or not? Because by the time they come to a hearing, it's not 3 a.m. there's no party happening at that moment. I know this is where we don't really have any cases to show how you would cure a problem like that, where it's just a one time situation that came and went on the health or safety issue. 15:57:35:00 - 15:58:00:11 Unknown I mean, I think I would it would be hard for me to defend a decision where the members lost sleep and that was the health or safety issue. If the police were called to the party, maybe that could be a potential issue that would be in that health or safety category. But as far as far as the party goes, I mean, it's really going to have to depend on the circumstances and the facts. 15:58:00:12 - 15:58:34:14 Unknown Does it change if that party happens every weekend? Does the frequency have an impact at all in your mind? Not really. I think I would just want to know what's going on at the party. Like if we're talking about a little kids birthday party, then I would be very cautious around proceeding heavier. But if we're talking about a party where, you know, there might be drug paraphernalia, there may be, you know, people that are unknown to the community that appear to be dangerous, then maybe I would treat it differently. 15:58:34:15 - 15:58:59:15 Unknown Yeah. I'm thinking more just in terms of volume and noise. That is keeping the whole neighborhood awake over and over again and thinking through how is it how does a board address that, especially when it's when it's happening, it happening at a high frequency. But again, if you invite them to a hearing and say this needs to be cured, it's by definition going to be cured when they come to the hearing. 15:58:59:16 - 15:59:27:18 Unknown Yeah. And so they're kind of feels like there's no enforcement teeth at all for the association. What you might be saying is that the homeowners may have to rely on other enforcement means outside of the association. That's possible. I mean, I would invite my board members to think creatively about every problem, especially with a problem like that. I mean, I would also kind of want to know how that property is configured. 15:59:27:19 - 15:59:51:11 Unknown Is it possible that we can shut off access? Is it possible that we install security guards? Is it, you know, does the place have a lobby? Can we, you know, cut, you know, really clamp down on who comes in and who doesn't come in, just stuff like that we can control so far back says is another enforcement means for some associations. 15:59:51:11 - 16:00:20:22 Unknown So that's an important element. Is there anything else like that that are additional enforcement options that an association has beyond fines. Oh yeah I mean associations can cut off amenities. They could say, look, you don't have access to the clubhouse anymore. You don't have access to the pool anymore, you know, things like that. So could I, in taking this party example, let's say a homeowner has multiple late night parties that are very loud. 16:00:20:22 - 16:00:38:04 Unknown It's a noise nuisance in the community. Association sends notice one notice to invites them to a hearing. They show up. At the hearing, the homeowner says it's cured. It's not happening at this moment. So the board says, okay, we can't do a fine, but maybe we'll levy 16:00:38:07 - 16:00:40:09 Unknown some enforcement costs back on you 16:00:40:10 - 16:00:46:00 Unknown enforcement costs and cut off access to the pool for the next 60 days. 16:00:46:02 - 16:01:06:10 Unknown That would be an appropriate response, I think so, and the enforcement costs could be if there's a late night party, then maybe that means that the association needs to have an on call patrol service that homeowners know. If this party happens, you can call the police, but also call the on call patrol. They come out, they impose a a charge on the association. 16:01:06:10 - 16:01:26:06 Unknown The association can then pass that on to the homeowner. Yeah. Yes. And that would be something that in that maybe in that first notice when it when the when the party first happens the association says look if this happens any further we're going to have to call a patrol service and the costs for that will be imposed. Yeah. 16:01:26:10 - 16:01:33:22 Unknown And you can put them on notice. You can get an estimate. You can say, look, this is what it's going to cost for this guy to stand in your hallway for I don't know how many hours. 16:01:34:01 - 16:01:43:17 Unknown Yeah. Or or they may the board may need to consult with an attorney to just think through what are the various different options that we have to address this creatively. 16:01:43:17 - 16:02:09:18 Unknown And the cost of that time with the attorney might be chargeable. I mean, my first reaction to board members is never to go rush to court because it's very expensive. You don't really know if you're going to get the right outcome. Judges don't like homeowners associations for the most part. And so, you know, I, I really just try to help them and use what they got. 16:02:09:19 - 16:02:18:19 Unknown It could be the real estate with how their property is configured. It could be their governing documents. It could be, you know, things we know about the individual member, 16:02:18:21 - 16:02:19:01 Unknown For 16:02:19:05 - 16:02:46:07 Unknown example with the parties that that resident may have every weekend, it's possible that that's not even the owner. It's possible that it could be the tenant. And the owner who is the landlord may not be happy with the fact that they're being called into a hearing very regularly and then being imposed certain types of assessments, because that's cutting into their profit margin, in which case we might, you know, collaborate with the owner to gain compliance. 16:02:46:07 - 16:03:18:13 Unknown So it really just depends on the circumstances of it. But yes, those types of violations are increasingly hard to enforce. So it seemed to me that one of the other impacts of AB 130 is to really put a strong incentive in place for associations and, by extension, management companies to promote a a positive campaign to the homeowners as to why compliance is in their best interest. 16:03:18:15 - 16:03:52:20 Unknown If you can resolve violations without because they don't ever happen in the first place, everybody wins. What have you seen? Maybe a successful with helping homeowners get a better understanding of why being in compliance is actually in their best interest? You mean like different strategies strategies around membership cooperation? Sure. Yeah. Well, I mean, I have seen some boards do a very good job of just, you know, regularly communicating with their members because a lot of times some of the members just don't know what's a violation. 16:03:52:20 - 16:04:20:15 Unknown And, you know, I hate to bring up the newsletter, but very well written and executed newsletters are very helpful to the membership because they just don't know. I've also seen some associations have very good. I guess I would call it more of like a, you know, culture around their membership, like they do a very good job of fostering community where they have a lot of events. 16:04:20:15 - 16:04:21:06 Unknown And so 16:04:21:07 - 16:04:25:22 Unknown it's very hard for a member to just kind of, you know, 16:04:26:01 - 16:04:41:05 Unknown brush off the rules. If, you know, all of a sudden they feel accountable to their neighbors because they know their neighbors, because they like their neighbors. So having that kind of friendship and community in a homeowner's association really humanizes the place. And that really cuts down on the violations. 16:04:41:09 - 16:05:12:10 Unknown Yeah. So the humanization of the community is a is a big part of that. I have also seen in what we've been promoting lately is the utilization of social media. I think there's a place for board members and managers to make short 62nd videos appealing to homeowners as to this is why this isn't the best interest of the community, and leveraging an association Facebook or Instagram page or something like that. 16:05:12:12 - 16:05:22:12 Unknown I've made the case, and it's proven to be true over and over that homeowners these days often don't read their newsletter. They often don't read. 16:05:22:14 - 16:05:43:15 Unknown Their regular mail. Less and less are they reading their email? They're often not even reading their text messages, but what they are going to do is sit in their bed at 1130 at night and scroll through social media, and if your face pops up and tells them about their community, that might be a way to engage, when otherwise you might not be able to get that message across. 16:05:43:17 - 16:06:05:07 Unknown I like that idea, but I don't know. Call me old fashioned. I also like the idea of just going to meet someone in your neighborhood. I know, I don't know if we don't have time to do that these days, and I know board members are busy when they still work full time jobs. But you know, like I said, I've seen some board members be very successful around, you know, just socialization goals. 16:06:05:07 - 16:06:34:17 Unknown Just can I meet one neighbor a week? Just something small, you know? Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. Especially in smaller communities. You get to 3 or 4000 units. That gets to be a little bit harder and you have to find other ways. But I do think that the approach on educating homeowners on the value of compliance and the fact that there's different studies that show different data points, but I think you can say reasonably that homes in a well-maintained might have as much as 10% higher value. 16:06:34:21 - 16:06:58:02 Unknown You take $1 million home, 10% is $100,000 per homeowner in value. These are these are real numbers. And I think that as boards and management companies can educate their homeowners on that value, there's an opportunity to gain compliance. I'm in total agreement. And, you know, I hate to say the word violation because it sounds dirty and nobody likes it. 16:06:58:02 - 16:07:14:14 Unknown But what really tired about is, you know, can we make it nice? Can we keep it nice? Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And that's in everyone's best interest. So. Well thank you very much Maria. Really appreciate your your insights on this and looking forward to seeing how this episode can be helpful to people. Great. Thanks for having me. 16:07:14:15 - 16:07:32:15 Unknown Well, I appreciate Maria and the expertise she brings to helping to unpack the issues related to AB 130. If you found this episode to be helpful, we would love it for you to subscribe to the uncommon area and to tell other people about this podcast.