Proposed Changes to Community Association Management Rules
March 13, 2026
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
The Frame
The bill would have increased operational costs for large community associations and imposed new compliance duties on board members to verify the professional licenses of their management firms.
Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.
Community association board members
They would have been legally required to verify the licensing status of management firms before entering into contracts.
Community association management firms
They would have been required to obtain $1 million in errors or omissions insurance and meet specific licensing requirements to serve associations with $750,000+ in revenue.
Timeshare management firms
They would have been subject to specific regulatory exemptions and priority of application rules regarding their management practices.
Last recorded activity March 13, 2026.
Introduced.
Summary
Key Facts
You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.
Frequently Asked Questions
Would this bill have affected my homeowners' association?
What happens if a manager is convicted of a felony?
Did this bill pass?
Why It Matters
The bill would have increased operational costs for large community associations and imposed new compliance duties on board members to verify the professional licenses of their management firms.
News Coverage
Lobbying Activity
HEIM NOACK KELLY & SPAHNN
on behalf of CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY MANAGERS
DEFENDING OUR COUNTRY, LLC
on behalf of CREATIVE ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(C) MANAGEMENT INC.
on behalf of Association of Community Cancer Centers
2021
“THE TELEHEALTH MODERNIZATION ACT (H.R. 1332/ S.368) Organized a Virtual Capitol Hill Day for ACCC members (70+) on May 12th, 2021. Created one-pagers and talking points on importance of this legislation. ACCC views telehealth expansion as critical for cancer patient access to healthcare providers. THE SAFE STEP ACT (H.R.2163/S.464) Organized a Virtual Capitol Hill Day for ACCC members (70+) on May 12th, 2021. Created one-pagers and talking points on importance of this legislation. ACCC views step therapy in the use of cancer care delivery to be a hinderance to best practice and timely treatment/access of care for patients. THE ACCESS TO GENETIC COUNSELOR SERVICES ACT (H.R. 2144/S.1450) Organized a Virtual Capitol Hill Day for ACCC members (70+) on May 12th, 2021. Created one-pagers and talking points on importance of this legislation. ACCC views genetic counselors as integral members of the cancer care delivery team in oncology programs/practices in the US. THE RESEARCH INVESTMENT TO SPARK THE ECONOMY (RISE) ACT (H.R. 869/S.289) Organized a Virtual Capitol Hill Day for ACCC members (70+) on May 12th, 2021. Created one-pagers and talking points on importance of this legislation. ACCC understands the importance of research funding for the NIH and oncology investigators to promote clinical trials that impact improving cancer outcomes. THE MEDICARE MULTI-CANCER EARLY DETECTION SCREENING COVERAGE ACT OF 2021 (H.R. 1946) Organized a Virtual Capitol Hill Day for ACCC members (70+) on May 12th, 2021. Created one-pagers and talking points on importance of this legislation. ACCC advocates for the use and coverage of cancer screening modalities that will diagnose cancer at earlier stages therefore improving patient outcomes. MOST FAVORED NATION (Proposed by Trump Administration at end of 2020) ACCC entered into a lawsuit against HHS in December 2020 opposing the Most Favored Nation proposal tying drug reimbursements to international reference pricing. By lowering reimbursement to cancer programs and practices, patient access to care would be limited as supportive cancer care services limited due to lack of reimbursement to cover positions. ACCC was concerned over programs/practices closing if proposal were to move forward. ACCC met with one Senators office on this topic expressing concern in January 2021. RADIATION ONCOLOGY MODEL (Proposed by CMMI) ACCC met with 1 Senate office and 1 House office over concerns re: this alternative payment model. ACCC has concerns over mandatory nature of Radiation Oncology model testing reimbursement rates and potentially limiting access to care for patients who are recommended radiation for their cancer diagnosis, particularly in rural areas of the U.S. ”
(C) MANAGEMENT INC.
on behalf of Association of Community Cancer Centers
2018
“Flexibility in implementing CMS' Quality Payment Program Limiting the role of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) ”
(C) MANAGEMENT INC.
on behalf of Association of Community Cancer Centers
2019
“ACCC advocated to the US House of Representatives and US Senate on the following issues: (1) passage of a federal oral parity bill in US Congress in support of H.R. 1730 (Cancer Drug Parity Act of 2019) and S. 741 (Cancer Drug Parity Act of 2019) to see the same out of pocket cost sharing for oral chemotherapy as IV chemotherapy and (2) passage of H.R. 913 CLINICAL TREATMENT Act in support of Medicaid funding for routine care costs for cancer patients in clinical trials.”
RON TABACZYNSKI
on behalf of BUILDING OWNERS AND MANAGERS ASSOCIATION OF CHICAGO
(C) MANAGEMENT INC.
on behalf of Association of Community Cancer Centers
2018
“Excluding Part B payments from CMS' Merit Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) adjustment under the Quality Payment Program (QPP) Reimbursement for care planning for cancer patients in the Medicare Program (The Cancer Care Planning & Communications (CCPC) Act (H.R. 5160)) ”
(C) MANAGEMENT INC.
on behalf of Association of Community Cancer Centers
2017
“Flexibility in implementing CMS' Quality Payment Program Limiting the role of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) ”
(C) MANAGEMENT INC.
on behalf of Association of Community Cancer Centers
2017
“Flexibility in implementing CMS' Quality Payment Program Limiting the role of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) ”
(C) MANAGEMENT INC.
on behalf of Association of Community Cancer Centers
2017
“Flexibility in implementing CMS' Quality Payment Program Limiting the role of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) ”
Voting Record
Favorable With Committee Substitute (Commerce Committee)
Total
26
Yes
21
No
3
Present
0
Not Voting
2
Abstain
0
How they voted (26)
Jason Shoaf
Republican · yes
Vanessa Oliver
Republican · yes
Chip LaMarca
Republican · yes
Yvette Benarroch
Republican · yes
Felicia Robinson
Democratic · yes
James Buchanan
Republican · yes
Erika Booth
Republican · yes
Chase Tramont
Republican · yes
Wyman Duggan
Republican · yes
Juan Porras
Republican · yes
Chuck Brannan
Republican · yes
Michele Rayner
Democratic · no
Mike Giallombardo
Republican · no
Michelle Salzman
Republican · yes
Christine Hunschofsky
Democratic · yes
David Borrero
Republican · yes
Leonard Spencer
Democratic · yes
Brad Yeager
Republican · yes
Dave Smith
Republican · yes
Peggy Gossett-Seidman
Republican · yes
Tyler Sirois
Republican · yes
Kevin Chambliss
Democratic · yes
Gallop Franklin
Democratic · not voting
Tiffany Esposito
Republican · no
+ 2 more
Favorable (Housing, Agriculture & Tourism Subcommittee)
Total
17
Yes
16
No
0
Present
0
Not Voting
1
Abstain
0
How they voted (17)
Lindsay Cross
Democratic · yes
Peggy Gossett-Seidman
Republican · yes
Kaylee Tuck
Republican · yes
Felicia Robinson
Democratic · yes
Chase Tramont
Republican · yes
Jon Albert
Republican · yes
Erika Booth
Republican · yes
Jenna Persons-Mulicka
Republican · yes
Mike Redondo
Republican · yes
Bill Partington
Republican · yes
Christine Hunschofsky
Democratic · yes
Hillary Cassel
Republican · yes
Rob Long
Democratic · yes
Shane Abbott
Republican · not voting
Jim Mooney
Republican · yes
Michelle Salzman
Republican · yes
Gallop Franklin
Democratic · yes
Sponsors
Show 1 more sponsor
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Mandatory Professional Management
The bill attempted to shift the management of larger associations (>$750k revenue) from optional to mandatory professional management.
Connected Entities
Sources
openstates.org
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance65How much this matters to a regular citizen
- Controversy40Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment10Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz20Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools