**Case Summary: Walter v. Kingswood Owners Association**
**Case No:** 12F-H1213012-BFS
**Forum:** Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings
**Date:** March 29, 2013 (Decision); May 10, 2013 (Final Certification)

**Background and Key Facts**
Petitioner Margo L. Walter filed a complaint with the Arizona Department of Fire, Building, and Life Safety (the "Department") against the Kingswood Owners Association ("Respondent"). The Petitioner alleged that the Respondent was violating its Articles and CC&Rs by using HOA membership dues to maintain private property—specifically providing snow removal and crack sealing for six private driveways—despite the fact that the City of Prescott had annexed the community's private streets on June 9, 2000.

**Key Arguments and Issues**
The central issue was whether the Department possessed subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute.

* **Respondent’s Argument:** The Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss, contending that the Department lacked jurisdiction under A.R.S. § 41-2198.01. The Respondent argued it was neither a condominium nor a "planned community" because the Association did not own any real property.
* **Petitioner’s Argument:** The Petitioner opposed the motion and requested the matter proceed to a hearing.

**Legal Analysis and Findings**
Administrative Law Judge Brian Brendan Tully issued a decision focusing on the statutory definition of the entities under the Department's purview.

1. **Statutory Authority:** The Department is authorized to adjudicate disputes involving mobile home parks, condominiums, and planned communities.
2. **Definition of Planned Community:** Under A.R.S. § 33-1802(4), a "planned community" is defined as a real estate development that includes real estate "owned and operated" by the association.
3. **Application to Facts:** The ALJ found it uncontroverted that the Respondent is a nonprofit corporation that does not own any real estate, having sold its private streets to the City of Prescott in 2000.
4. **Conclusion:** Because the Respondent does not own real estate, it does not meet the statutory definition of a "planned community" pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-1802(4). Consequently, the Department lacked jurisdiction over the Respondent.

**Final Decision and Outcome**
* **Dismissal:** The Administrative Law Judge ordered that the Petition be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.
* **Costs and Fees:** The Respondent's request for attorney’s fees and costs was denied. The Tribunal noted that the statute cited by the Respondent (A.R.S. § 41-1092.12) applies to the Department of Environmental Quality, not the Department of Fire, Building, and Life Safety.
* **Certification:** The Department took no action to reject or modify the ALJ's decision within the statutory review period. Therefore, the decision was certified as the final administrative decision on May 10, 2013