The City of Bellevue has shared an update regarding follow-up work related to the recent water main break on SE 43rd St.

Residents along SE 43rd St should expect door-to-door notifications and a temporary water service disruption next week as crews make system improvements. Additional construction and paving work will follow.

Please see the attached notice from the City of Bellevue for the full schedule and details.

For City of Bellevue utilities information and the 24/7 emergency maintenance phone number, please visit:

https://bellevuewa.gov/city-government/departments/utilities

There appears to be a water line break on SE 43rd Street in Division 6. The City of Bellevue is aware of the situation and is expected to shut off the water when they begin repair work.

Residents nearby may experience a temporary water shutoff once the repair process starts. 

We will share additional updates if more information becomes available.

For City of Bellevue utilities information and the 24/7 emergency maintenance phone number, please visit:

https://bellevuewa.gov/city-government/departments/utilities

The Somerset Covenant Review Committee (CRC) Invites you to the March CRC Meeting open to Somerset Residents

Date: Thursday, March 5
Time: 7 PM
Location: Zoom Attendance. Please make sure to register to receive the invite link: https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/3vTscVXZQsa3gOUo0j1JmQ
Meeting Objectives:

• Give current status updates on each open case.
• Review case materials for each case.
• Understand the concerns of impacted neighbors and the applicants for each case.
• Discuss next steps.
  

Agenda:

Overview

• Superior Court Invalidates Division 8 Third Amendment Recorded by Bofferding
• Chinese Translation: 金郡高等法院裁定：Bofferding 备案的第 8 分区第三修正案无效
  
  

Superior Court Invalidates Division 8 Third Amendment Recorded by Bofferding

On February 20, 2026, the King County Superior Court in Mickelson, et al. v. Bofferding, upheld a challenge to the Third Amendment (A3) to Division 8 Covenants recorded by Charles Bofferding in 2024. The Court determined that the amendment is “invalid, unenforceable, and without legal effect.” The Judge’s order, official audio recording, and the plaintiff’s summary judgment briefs are available here. 

The issues addressed and their outcome are relevant to other Somerset divisions. They arose when Charles Bofferding recorded the A3 in King County land records. In response and after study and consultation with its counsel, the SCA recorded a Notice of Determination of Invalidity with the King County Recorder's Office, providing notice that the Division 8 Covenant Amendment recorded by Mr. Bofferding was invalid and would not be applied.  Unfortunately, the A3’s key proponents declined to acknowledge its fundamental legal deficiencies. A definitive Court decision was therefore needed, resulting in additional legal costs incurred by all sides.  To obtain that definitive ruling, Mickelson and other Division 8 property owners, joined by the Somerset Community Association (SCA), filed a lawsuit asking King County Superior Court for a judicial declaration that A3 was invalid. 

The Court’s decision specifically addressed amendment approval requirements under the governing Covenants and applicable Washington law. In doing so, the Court concluded A3 was invalid on grounds consistent with the legal review the SCA had previously obtained and shared with the community.  Fortunately, because the SCA had previously declined to implement it, A3 was never applied by the Covenants Review Committee (CRC), so no procedural changes are necessary at this time.

While the losing party could appeal, imposing further burden and expense on the community, the Court’s ruling provides definitive clarification on several important points, including:

• Covenant amendments must comply with required protections against fraud, including notarized signatures
• Amendments to covenants that are not consistent with the general plan of the development and diminish the authority of the CRC are considered “new” requirements, and require unanimous approval from division property owners  
• Specifically in A3, adding a roof height limitation, allowing neighbors to veto roof height increases, and allowing view obstructions to be deemed “unnecessary” by means other than CRC judgment were all considered “new” requirements
• Prior recorded amendments (A1 and A2) remain in effect
• The SCA has standing to participate in litigation involving the interpretation and enforcement of covenants and amendments
• The CRC is responsible for administering and enforcing covenant provisions
  
  

In accordance with the Court’s ruling, the Third Amendment will not be implemented or enforced by the SCA or the CRC. The SCA will notify Division 8 property owners of the Court’s decision and will proceed in accordance with the Judge’s order, subject to any further legal proceedings.

The SCA and CRC remain committed to administering the governing documents transparently, consistently, and in accordance with the law, in service of the entire Somerset community. We appreciate the continued engagement and support of our residents as we move forward.

SCA Board of Directors
[email protected]

Chinese Translation: 金郡高等法院裁定：Bofferding 备案的第 8 分区第三修正案无效

2026 年 2 月 20 日，金郡高等法院在 Mickelson 等诉 Bofferding 一案中，裁定支持原告主张，判定 Charles Bofferding 于 2024 年在金郡备案的第 8 分区契约第三修正案（A3）无效。法院认定该修正案“无效、不可执行，且不具法律效力”。法官命令、完整的庭审音频记录以及原告的简易判决书面陈述可在此处查看。
 
本案所涉及的问题及其裁决结果亦与 Somerset 其他分区相关。争议起因于 Charles Bofferding 将 A3 备案于金郡不动产记录。SCA 在深入研究并咨询法律顾问后，向金郡记录官办公室备案《无效性认定通知》（Notice of Determination of Invalidity），以正式通告：Bofferding 先生备案的第 8 分区契约修正案无效，且不予适用。遗憾的是，由于A3 的主要支持者拒绝承认其根本性的法律缺陷，致使本案必须由法院作出明确裁定，导致各方均产生了额外法律费用。为获得该明确裁定，Mickelson 及其他第 8 分区业主在 Somerset Community Association（SCA，Somerset 社区协会）的加入下提起诉讼，请求金郡高等法院作出司法宣告，确认 A3 无效。
 
法院的裁决重点审查了《契约》及适用的华盛顿州法律所规定的修正案批准要求。法院据此认定 A3 无效，其理由与 SCA 先前取得并向社区分享的法律审查意见一致。所幸由于 SCA 先前已决定不予实施，契约审查委员会（CRC，Covenants Review Committee）从未适用 A3，因此目前无需进行任何程序性变更。
 
尽管败诉方仍可能提出上诉，从而给社区带来进一步负担与费用，但法院裁决对若干重要问题作出了明确澄清，包括：

• 契约修正案必须符合必要的防欺诈保障措施，包括由参与表决的居民签名并办理公证 (Sign and Acknowledge)
• 与开发项目总体规划不一致、并削弱 CRC 权限的契约修正案，属于“新增”要求，须获得该分区全体业主一致同意
• 就 A3 而言：新增屋顶高度限制、允许邻居否决屋顶高度增加、以及允许通过 CRC 判断以外的方式将视线遮挡认定为“不必要”，均被视为“新增”要求,因此必须获得全体业主一致同意方可生效
• 先前备案的修正案（A1 与 A2）仍然有效
• SCA 具有参与涉及契约及修正案解释与执行之诉讼的诉讼资格（standing）
• CRC 负责管理并执行契约条款

 
依据法院裁决，第三修正案将不会由 SCA 或 CRC 实施或执行。SCA 将正式向第 8 分区全体业主通告法院的这一决定，并依照法官令状推进后续工作；同时，协会将密切关注并根据任何进一步的法律程序（如上诉等）作出相应调整。
 
SCA 与 CRC 将继续以公开透明、一贯一致、并依法合规的方式管理相关治理文件，服务整个 Somerset 社区。感谢各位居民在我们继续前行过程中持续的参与与支持。
 
SCA 董事会
[email protected]