Edgewater Isle governing documents
CC&Rs are recorded with San Mateo County. Bylaws and Rules are not. Despite boards' assertions that CC&Rs must be updated to comply with California law, it is not so. California law always supersedes any CC&Rs or Bylaws.
NOTE: These documents are provided for informational purposes only. In situations in which the accuracy and reliability of the information is of paramount importance, readers are advised to obtain certified copies from the relevant association.
Master Association
Parking Rules
- Parking Rules
118 KB
for North and South residents. Not dated.
CC & Rs
- Revised C C & Rs 2.07 MB
Recorded April 07, 2007 at San Mateo County Clerk-Recorder
- Original C C & Rs 2.87 MB
Recorded January 4, 1984 at San Mateo County Clerk-Recorder
Bylaws
- Revised Bylaws 762 KB
Amended April 7, 2007
- Revised Bylaws 762 KB
Amended May 21, 1992
North Association
CC & Rs
- Revised C C & Rs 3.0 MB
Recorded March 4, 2004 at San Mateo County Clerk-Recorder
First Amendment to Revised CC&Rs < 1 MB
Recorded December 15, 2004
Deletes in its entirety Section 5.1.7, where North Association was obligated to collect dues for Master Association because the Master Association sued the North Association.
- Original CC & Rs 3.18 MB
Recorded January 4, 1984
Bylaws
- Revised Bylaws 1.1 MB
Dated February 25, 2004
- Revised Bylaws 947 KB
Amended May 21, 1992
Rules
- Rules 3 MB
Dated May 2004
South Association
CC & Rs
- C C & Rs 3.4 MB
Recorded November 27, 1985 at San Mateo County Clerk-Recorder
- C C & Rs
Recorded October 6, 2016
South proposes draconian amendment
February 18, 2016
VOTE NO!
The Edgewater Isle South Association sent out a mailing to owners with the Board's proposed updates to their 30-years-old CC & Rs and 20-years-old Bylaws.
Owners have been asked to approve a new article that would give the City of San Mateo “police power” over unspecified matters of the Association. This broad and undefined proposed amendment has potential to drag homeowners into a battle with the City of San Mateo over as-of-yet undefined matters and would leave the homeowner on the hook for the City's attorney fees.
Such a proposed amendment is only in the association attorneys' benefit (including Berding and Weil) as association attorneys have no incentive to resolve disputes while having every reason to prolong them (money).
All homeowners should reject the proposal as it is just another (potential) grab of homeowners' equity and in no way benefits owners, just the Association lawyers.
As an aside, why do the Edgewater Isle South Association and/or their attorneys Berding & Weil LLP believe that a “copyright” and a “no part of this document may be reproduced” clause is appropriate for a matter of public interest?
Bylaws
- Bylaws 1.2 MB
Dated October 1992, with amendment dated December 2003
Contact