State says “move your HOA” because of “Managed Retreat”

I ran across an article on “managed retreat” that impacted an HOA in California.

You can find the link below.

Managed retreat, also known as strategic retreat or planned relocation, refers to the process of relocating infrastructure away from areas that are vulnerable to natural hazards, including coastal flooding. It is also considered a climate adaptation policy.

The California Coastal Commission decided that a bluff which was destroyed, protecting homes of an HOA, would not be rebuilt.

They said owners should start planning to relocate or remove their vulnerable homes. There wasn’t a timeframe or information on who would pay for relocation.

Members of the HOA sued, and won. The state was required to protect the HOA’s road, and homes. Under state law, plans to relocate homes was found to be unconstitutional.

Could this happen in other states, and if so, what if the states prevail, and HOAs actually need to relocate?

We asked attorney David Byrne, licensed in New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania from Ansell Grimm & Aaron, PC about his thoughts on “managed retreat. "Most states, both via statute and local ordinances and/or regulations, generally recognize the sanctity of the terms by which a particular development was approved. Absent a government’s use of ‘eminent domain’, which exercise might be lawful and constitutional depending on a variety of factors, courts in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York would likely rule similarly should the same circumstances occur there," said Byrne.

The issue for HOAs is not that the state lost that case, it’s that the state pushed for this issue. Just another trend boards need to be aware of.

– Raymond Dickey