## Facts

- A developer created a mixed-use condominium complex with a recorded declaration establishing three units: (1) a residential tower, (2) a commercial office/retail unit, and (3) a parking garage unit.
- The developer later recorded a separate declaration creating the residential tower as its own condominium governed internally by a separate association, producing a “condominium within a condominium” structure.
- The mixed-use condominium declaration allocated voting power in its association equally among the three units (one vote per unit, three votes total), while allocating common expenses among the units based on square footage.
- Major actions at the mixed-use level required approval of two of the three unit votes; the developer initially owned the commercial and garage units and thus controlled two votes.
- The residential tower association believed the mixed-use association overcharged the tower unit for expenses and refused to pay certain assessments.
- The mixed-use association sued to collect unpaid assessments; the tower association counterclaimed for mismanagement and improper charges.
- The parties settled monetary and management disputes but sought declaratory rulings on (1) whether the voting allocation violated the Washington Condominium Act and (2) whether the mixed-use association qualified as a “master association.”
- The trial court granted summary judgment to the mixed-use association on both declaratory issues, and the tower association appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a condominium declaration’s one-unit/one-vote allocation among three units violates RCW 64.34.224(1) of the Washington Condominium Act.
2. Whether the mixed-use condominium owners association is a “master association” under RCW 64.34.308 when the declarations do not expressly create one.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the mixed-use association.
- The court held the one-unit/one-vote allocation complied with RCW 64.34.224(1) because the statute requires allocation of votes and common-expense liabilities in the declaration but does not require voting to mirror the expense-allocation method.
- The court held the mixed-use association was not a master association under RCW 64.34.308 because a master association must be created by the declaration, and the governing declarations did not do so.
- The court rejected the argument that the “condominium within a condominium” arrangement, by itself, triggers master-association status.

## Legal Principles

- RCW 64.34.224(1) requires that a declaration allocate votes and common-expense liabilities to units and that totals equal 1 or 100%, but it does not mandate that voting rights be proportional to common-expense liability, square footage, or unit value.
- A declarant may structure condominium voting so that ownership of a majority of units results in control of the association, absent a statutory prohibition.
- A “master association” under RCW 64.34.308 must be expressly created by the declaration; functional coordination among related condominiums does not substitute for the statutory creation requirement.
- Distinct allocation methodologies can coexist within related condominium regimes (e.g., one set of rules for voting and another for expenses), so long as the declarations comply with statutory allocation requirements.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a declaration allocating association voting equally among three units despite expenses being allocated by square footage and held that master-association rules apply only when a master association is expressly created by declaration.


Bellevue Pac. Ctr. Condo. Owners Ass'n v. Bellevue Pac. Tower Condo. Ass'n, 124 Wn. App. 178, 100 P.3d 832 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004)