ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS and CC&Rs

This page presents the FINAL JUDICIAL RULINGS that demonstrate instances of the Meister/Ackerley board’s violation of Arizona Laws and/or our CC&Rs. Some complete court documents and direct links to other court records are provided for reference. As new rulings are issued, they will be included here to maintain up-to-date information.

We are committed to upholding the integrity of our community by promoting adherence to laws and CC&Rs.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Against the Meister/Ackerley Board

Case: 23F-H015-REL (login: “gen”, password: “general”) in the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) for the Arizona Department of Real Estate (ADRE). Burns v Tonto Forest Estates HOA. Litigation concluded May 18, 2023. This case addressed two different violations.

THREE OPEN MEETING LAWS VIOLATIONS: “The plain language of the statute provides that when a quorum of a board of directors meets, even informally, to discuss association business, the meeting must be open to the members of the association, even if they do not vote or take any action during the informal meeting.  Here, the transcript of the meeting … demonstrated that the Board members … were discussing the issue of septic system maintenance.  Specifically, Mr. Meister stated that, during the open meeting, ‘we would just go through the septic discussion, come back to this page, and Rich, if you just say, ‘This will be the septic policy posting.’ And then if Kerry says, ‘Is everybody on the board in agreement with that?’ We just nod our heads.  That’s an acceptance.’  The comments by Mr. Meister indicate that, at some point prior to the open meeting, the members of the Board discussed the matter and agreed on a new septic policy that would be presented at the open meeting with the Board members then signifying their agreement.  Accordingly, … [the Meister/Ackerley board] acted in violation of ARIZ. REV. STAT. §33-1804 (A), (C) and (E).” Note: Although only one Statute violation was claimed, the Judge determined sua sponte that three Statutes were actually violated: Statutes A, C, and E.

VIOLATION OF OUR CC&Rs: This one is so simple, the Judge defeated the Meister/Ackerley claim in three sentences:
(1) “Assessments” … is defined [in the CC&Rs] to mean ‘the charges levied and assessed each year against each Membership pursuant to Article 8.’” Emphasis added by the Judge.
(2) “Nothing in Article 8 provides a mechanism by which a single owner may be charged for fees associated with their lot.”
(3) “the terms of the CC&Rs requires that … the [septic] maintenance is to be paid for from the annual Assessments collected by [the Association].”

Based on that judicial construction (see CCR 15.1), “[the Meister/Ackerley board] improperly charged [Burns] $1750.00 for the repair and pumpout to her septic system.” And so the Judge “FURTHER ORDERED that [the Association] reimburse [Burns’] filing fee of $1,000.“

The Judge then admonished the Meister/Ackerley board: “It is FURTHER ORDERED that [the Association] shall henceforth comply with ARS 33-1804 and Section 4.32 of the CC&Rs.“

Below is the full JUDICIAL CONSTRUCTION (c.f., CCR 15.1):