Basic situation: I'm buying the upper unit in a 2-story, 2-unit condo. The terms establish 50% voting rights for each unit.

Written into the deal is the option for the Lower unit to split its rear in-law structure into a 3rd condo sometime in the future.

In that event, voting rights would become 33%, 33%, 33%. So I'd lose "veto power" on stuff.

However, there would be a 3rd person paying into the dues. And chances are that the main structure where my unit is would have more of the maintenance needs. So in all likelihood my interests and vote will tend to be aligned with the lower unit in the main building, where my unit is.

All things considered it would be better to have a 3rd owner back there paying dues than some kind of renter, too.

In any event, it's unlikely that the 3rd condo will ever happen. Getting the permits for that conversion has proved difficult and probably won't be possible in the long run.

And here's a thought... if it does turn out to be possible, maybe I'll buy it.

SO - MY QUESTION:

Is this a walk-away issue? Should I be concerned about introducing a third party and potentially going from 50% voting rights to 33% voting rights? Or should I be glad that a 3rd party might someday pay into the dues, etc?

Thanks for your advice, bunnies! If the deal goes through, I'm making you all dinner at the new place! :)

Woo hoo! What can I bring? ::books plane ticket::

"In that event, voting rights would become 33%, 33%, 33%."

Huh, what? Last time I was in the market, voting rights were based on square footage. Things might be different in your state, or since I was last in the market, but I thought condos worked like co-ops do, with percentage of the vote based on how much of the place you own. Of course, these were all huge NJ multiunit buildings (two units? HA! NJ scoffs at your logical and rational zoning laws). But check on this if it's not explicitly stated in the bylaws or whatever you're reading (and if it is, then nevermind me).

The equation is simply: 1 vote per unit. I don't know if CA law allows for dividing this by square footage. If we did divide it up by square footage or even value, I'd come out at just under 50% anyway.

If somebody could cross-post this to the Green as well I'd be grateful.

You've got it. You owe me a shoutout at the next L.A. meetup (or a Guinness in the hell-freezes-over chance you're ever in Edmonton).

And let me know if you need any more tags added (or deleted).

at the next L.A. meetup

L.A., S.F. - just a cab ride away, ennit?

thanks, hangashore!