Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 64.38.025 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Except as provided in the association's governing documents or this chapter, the board of directors shall act in all instances on behalf of the association. In the performance of their duties, the officers and members of the board of directors shall exercise the degree of care and loyalty required of an officer or director of a corporation organized under chapter 24.03A RCW.

(2) The board of directors shall not act on behalf of the association to amend the articles of incorporation, to take any action that requires the vote or approval of the owners, to terminate the association, to elect members of the board of directors, or to determine the qualifications, powers, and duties, or terms of office of members of the board of directors; but the board of directors may fill vacancies in its membership of the unexpired portion of any term.

(3) Except as provided in RCW 64.90.080, 64.90.405(1) (b) and (c), and 64.90.525, within thirty days after adoption by the board of directors of any proposed regular or special budget of the association, the board shall set a date for a meeting of the owners to consider ratification of the budget not less than fourteen nor more than sixty days after mailing of the summary. Unless at that meeting the owners of a majority of the votes in the association are allocated or any larger percentage specified in the governing documents reject the budget, in person or by proxy, the budget is ratified, whether or not a quorum is present. In the event the proposed budget is rejected or the required notice is not given, the periodic budget last ratified by the owners shall be continued until such time as the owners ratify a subsequent budget proposed by the board of directors.

(4) As part of the summary of the budget provided to all owners, the board of directors shall disclose to the owners:

(a) The current amount of regular assessments budgeted for contribution to the reserve account, the recommended contribution rate from the reserve study, and the funding plan upon which the recommended contribution rate is based;

(b) If additional regular or special assessments are scheduled to be imposed, the date the assessments are due, the amount of the assessments per each owner per month or year, and the purpose of the assessments;

(c) Based upon the most recent reserve study and other information, whether currently projected reserve account balances will be sufficient at the end of each year to meet the association's obligation for major maintenance, repair, or replacement of reserve components during the next thirty years;

(d) If reserve account balances are not projected to be sufficient, what additional assessments may be necessary to ensure that sufficient reserve account funds will be available each year during the next thirty years, the approximate dates assessments may be due, and the amount of the assessments per owner per month or year;

(e) The estimated amount recommended in the reserve account at the end of the current fiscal year based on the most recent reserve study, the projected reserve account cash balance at the end of the current fiscal year, and the percent funded at the date of the latest reserve study;

(f) The estimated amount recommended in the reserve account based upon the most recent reserve study at the end of each of the next five budget years, the projected reserve account cash balance in each of those years, and the projected percent funded for each of those years; and

(g) If the funding plan approved by the association is implemented, the projected reserve account cash balance in each of the next five budget years and the percent funded for each of those years.

(5) The owners by a majority vote of the voting power in the association present, in person or by proxy, and entitled to vote at any meeting of the owners at which a quorum is present, may remove any member of the board of directors with or without cause.

[ 2021 c 176 s 5232; 2019 c 238 s 222; 2011 c 189 s 8; 1995 c 283 s 5.]

Notes:

Effective date—2021 c 176: See note following RCW 24.03A.005.

Effective date—2011 c 189: See note following RCW 64.38.065.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2022 · leading case: Parker Estates, Bluestone, Hockley, V William & Lesley Pattison, 391 P.3d 481 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Parker Estates, Bluestone, Hockley, V William & Lesley Pattison, 391 P.3d 481 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “4 because that provision, together with RCW 64.38.025(2) and RCW 24.03.105, permit the current board to appoint directors to fill vacant board positions until a director can be elected.”

Casey v. Sudden Valley Cmty. Ass'n, 329 P.3d 919 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 28× “FACTS Association’s Budget and Assessment Policies under Bylaws and RCW 64.38.025 ¶2 The Association is a nonprofit corporation and homeowners’ association in Whatcom County.”

Riss v. Angel, 934 P.2d 669 (Wash. 1997). “RCW 64.38.025. RCW 24.03.127 defines a director's duties comparably to those set out in former RCW 23A.”

Wimberly v. Caravello, 149 P.3d 402 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “" RCW 64.38.025(1). And the governing documents here clearly do provide otherwise.”

Bangerter v. Hat Island Cmty. Ass'n, 504 P.3d 813 (Wash. 2022). “RCW 64.38.025(3). HICA’s bylaws establish a more stringent procedure of owner approval by providing that the proposed annual assessment amount, if increased from the prior year, must be “presented to the community for approval during the annual meeting of the Association.”

Wimberly v. Caravello, 136 Wash. App. 327 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “” RCW 64.38.025(1) (emphasis added). And the governing documents here clearly do provide otherwise.”

Sudden Valley Cmty. Ass'n, App v. Curt Casey, Dave Scott, Barbara Volkov, Resps (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 29× “FACTS Association's Budget and Assessment Policies under Bylaws and RCW 64.38.025 Sudden Valley Community Association is a nonprofit corporation and homeowners' association in Whatcom County.”

Chad Stevens, Appellant/x-resp. v. Bellevue Farm Owners Ass'n, Respondents/x-apps. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 11× “Based on these findings, the court concluded that BFOA had no liability under RCW 64.38.025(1) for the installation of the fence because that statute did not apply to decisions made by the corporation or by individual association members.”

Chad Stevens v. Bellevue Farm Owner's Ass'n (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 11× “Based on these findings, the court concluded that BFOA had no liability under RCW 64.38.025(1) for the installation of the fence because that statute did not apply to decisions made by the corporation or by individual association members.”

Bellevue Farms,et Al., Appellants/cross-respondents v. Chad Stevens, Respondent/cross-appellant (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 11× “Based on these findings, the court concluded that BFOA had no liability under RCW 64.38.025(1) for the installation of the fence because that statute did not apply to decisions made by the corporation or by individual association members.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.38.025(1) — 5 cases

Wimberly v. Caravello, 149 P.3d 402 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “" RCW 64.38.025(1). And the governing documents here clearly do provide otherwise.”

Wimberly v. Caravello, 136 Wash. App. 327 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “” RCW 64.38.025(1) (emphasis added). And the governing documents here clearly do provide otherwise.”

Chad Stevens, Appellant/x-resp. v. Bellevue Farm Owners Ass'n, Respondents/x-apps. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “Based on these findings, the court concluded that BFOA had no liability under RCW 64.38.025(1) for the installation of the fence because that statute did not apply to decisions made by the corporation or by individual association members.”

Chad Stevens v. Bellevue Farm Owner's Ass'n (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “Based on these findings, the court concluded that BFOA had no liability under RCW 64.38.025(1) for the installation of the fence because that statute did not apply to decisions made by the corporation or by individual association members.”

Bellevue Farms,et Al., Appellants/cross-respondents v. Chad Stevens, Respondent/cross-appellant (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “Based on these findings, the court concluded that BFOA had no liability under RCW 64.38.025(1) for the installation of the fence because that statute did not apply to decisions made by the corporation or by individual association members.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.38.025(2) — 1 case

Parker Estates, Bluestone, Hockley, V William & Lesley Pattison, 391 P.3d 481 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “4 because that provision, together with RCW 64.38.025(2) and RCW 24.03.105, permit the current board to appoint directors to fill vacant board positions until a director can be elected.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.38.025(3) — 3 cases

Casey v. Sudden Valley Cmty. Ass'n, 329 P.3d 919 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “FACTS Association’s Budget and Assessment Policies under Bylaws and RCW 64.38.025 ¶2 The Association is a nonprofit corporation and homeowners’ association in Whatcom County.”

Sudden Valley Cmty. Ass'n, App v. Curt Casey, Dave Scott, Barbara Volkov, Resps (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “FACTS Association's Budget and Assessment Policies under Bylaws and RCW 64.38.025 Sudden Valley Community Association is a nonprofit corporation and homeowners' association in Whatcom County.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 64.38.025(4) — 2 cases

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.