Covenant, Articles of Incorporation, and Bylaws
Summary of Changes 1965-2022
February 2023
Member submittals detail the below changes to Surfside governing documents between 1965 and 2022.
Governing documents are publicly available via Pacific County Auditor.
As reflected, the Covenants are reviewed regularly including at least two comprehensive updates done in 1981 and again in July 2007 by the Covenant Revision Taskforce with contributions and review/approval of the Surfside attorney. A full listing of the changes made in 2007 is provided here.
The detailed study done in 1981 includes a January 22, 1976 letter from Ken Kimura, Planning Director Pacific County Planning Commission clarifying that when County zoning is in conflict with the Restrictive Covenants, the County enforces the stricter of the two. It also highlighted that changes to the covenants over time have been with the objective of ensuring restrictions are specific and not vague. The 2007 update continued that approach by specifically linking vegetation and building heights while removing the ambiguity associated with the statement "the view of other property owners shall be preserved to the greatest extent reasonably possible".
We further know that view protection in the covenants has legal precedence as established in Baker vs. Surfside Homeowners Association October 7, 1980. Judge Wieland ruled in favor of the Bakers and stated "The covenants led Baker to believe his view would not be unreasonably diminished."
The founders intent has been clear since inception to protect member views, has legal precedent, and has been reconfirmed throughout the multiple covenant revisions since 1965.
Governing documents are publicly available via Pacific County Auditor.
As reflected, the Covenants are reviewed regularly including at least two comprehensive updates done in 1981 and again in July 2007 by the Covenant Revision Taskforce with contributions and review/approval of the Surfside attorney. A full listing of the changes made in 2007 is provided here.
The detailed study done in 1981 includes a January 22, 1976 letter from Ken Kimura, Planning Director Pacific County Planning Commission clarifying that when County zoning is in conflict with the Restrictive Covenants, the County enforces the stricter of the two. It also highlighted that changes to the covenants over time have been with the objective of ensuring restrictions are specific and not vague. The 2007 update continued that approach by specifically linking vegetation and building heights while removing the ambiguity associated with the statement "the view of other property owners shall be preserved to the greatest extent reasonably possible".
We further know that view protection in the covenants has legal precedence as established in Baker vs. Surfside Homeowners Association October 7, 1980. Judge Wieland ruled in favor of the Bakers and stated "The covenants led Baker to believe his view would not be unreasonably diminished."
The founders intent has been clear since inception to protect member views, has legal precedent, and has been reconfirmed throughout the multiple covenant revisions since 1965.
Height limitations and view protection in Section 2.2 and in the Architectural Guide of the 1978 Covenants state:
Neat and attractive wording existed in the 1980 governing documents:
|