**Case Summary: Clifford and Jean Butler v. Happy Trails Community Association**
**Case No.** 12F-H1212004-BFS

**Overview and Proceedings**
On June 18, 2012, Administrative Law Judge Sondra J. Vanella presided over a hearing regarding a dispute between Petitioners Clifford and Jean Butler and Respondent Happy Trails Community Association. The Butlers sought to challenge the Association's enforcement of residency requirements within the Happy Trails planned community.

**Key Facts**
The Butlers, full-time residents of Happy Trails for approximately 12 years, resided on a lot containing a "Residence Vehicle" (RV) and a separate structure known as an "Arizona Room". After selling their RV, the Butlers attempted to reside solely in their Arizona Room. The Association issued a "Courtesy Notice" stating that living in an Arizona Room without an RV on the property violated the community's Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Design Guidelines.

**Main Issues and Arguments**
The central issue was whether the Association’s policy requiring the presence of an RV to reside on a lot violated the CC&Rs.

* **Petitioners’ Argument:** The Butlers argued the policy was unreasonable, costly, and unsupported by the CC&Rs. They testified that maintaining an unused RV was financially burdensome due to depreciation, insurance, and licensing costs. They further argued that the Association had historically condoned residents living in Arizona Rooms full-time without RVs.
* **Respondent’s Argument:** The Association contended that the CC&Rs explicitly require owners to occupy a Residence Vehicle as their main residence. They asserted that while owners may occupy an Arizona Room, they must do so contemporaneously with the required RV. The Association’s Board noted they do not grant variances to this rule to avoid setting a precedent.

**Legal Findings and Decision**
The Administrative Law Judge ruled in favor of the Association, concluding that the Butlers failed to prove a violation of the governing documents.

The decision relied heavily on the specific language of the CC&Rs:
1. **Definition of Arizona Room:** The CC&Rs define an Arizona Room as a structure used for residential purposes "but that does not serve as the main residence on the Lot".
2. **Residency Requirement:** The documents state that individuals "may only reside in a Residence Vehicle" and that no other portion of the lot may be occupied as a residence.
3. **Contemporaneous Use:** The Judge determined that while an Arizona Room may be occupied, it cannot replace the RV as the main residence; therefore, an RV must be present on the lot.

**Outcome**
The ALJ recommended that the Petition be dismissed, finding that Happy Trails’ enforcement actions comported with the provisions of the governing CC&Rs.

**Final Status**
On August 20, 2012, the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings certified the ALJ’s decision as the final administrative decision of the Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety, as the Department took no action to reject or modify the decision within the statutory timeframe.