Case Summary
| Case ID | 23F-H034-REL |
|---|---|
| Agency | ADRE |
| Tribunal | OAH |
| Decision Date | 2023-04-10 |
| Administrative Law Judge | Velva Moses-Thompson |
| Outcome | partial |
| Filing Fees Refunded | $2,500.00 |
| Civil Penalties | $0.00 |
Parties & Counsel
| Petitioner | Senol Pekin | Counsel | — |
|---|---|---|---|
| Respondent | Artesian Ranch Community Association | Counsel | Ashley N. Moscarello |
Alleged Violations
Bylaws Article II Paragraph 2.3
Bylaws Article III Section A Paragraph 3.5, Section B Paragraph 3.7, and Article IV Paragraph 4.2
Bylaws Article III Section B, Article IV Section 6.7(b), Article I Paragraph 1.3
A.R.S. 33-1804(A)
A.R.S. 33-1804
Outcome Summary
Petitioner succeeded on two issues regarding the HOA's failure to hold its annual meeting at the prescribed time and improperly prohibiting the recording of an open session meeting. Respondent prevailed on the remaining three issues, as the ALJ found the bylaws did not require a separate organizational meeting, the community manager acted as an authorized agent to call a meeting, and Petitioner was not denied the opportunity to speak despite being muted at times during a videoconference. Respondent was ordered to refund $1,000 for the two successful issues.
Why this result: Petitioner lost on three issues because the bylaws did not strictly require the organizational meeting to be held separately, the community manager had authority as an agent to organize a meeting, and evidence demonstrated Petitioner was afforded multiple opportunities to speak during the Zoom meeting.
Key Issues & Findings
Annual Meetings
Petitioner alleged the HOA failed to hold its annual meeting at the prescribed time in April 2022.
Orders: Petitioner deemed prevailing party. Respondent ordered to pay Petitioner filing fee of $500 for this issue.
Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: Yes
Disposition: petitioner_win
Organizational Meetings
Petitioner alleged the HOA failed to hold a separate organizational meeting to elect officers.
Orders: Respondent deemed prevailing party.
Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: petitioner_loss
Authority to Call Board Meeting
Petitioner alleged the HOA manager was not authorized to organize or call a board meeting.
Orders: Respondent deemed prevailing party.
Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: petitioner_loss
Open Meeting Recording
Petitioner alleged the HOA illegally prohibited homeowners from recording an open board meeting.
Orders: Petitioner deemed prevailing party. Respondent ordered to pay Petitioner filing fee of $500 for this issue.
Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: Yes
Disposition: petitioner_win
Open Meeting Opportunity to Speak
Petitioner alleged the HOA muted participants during a Zoom meeting, preventing them from speaking.
Orders: Respondent deemed prevailing party.
Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: petitioner_loss
Decision Documents
23F-H037-REL Decision – 1037672.pdf
23F-H037-REL Decision – 1041383.pdf
23F-H037-REL Decision – 1044671.pdf
23F-H037-REL Decision – 1044839.pdf
23F-H037-REL Decision – 1048179.pdf
23F-H037-REL Decision – 1054714.pdf
**Case Overview**
**Case Title:** Consolidated Docket Nos. 23F-H034-REL and 23F-H037-REL
**Parties:** Senol Pekin (Petitioner) vs. Artesian Ranch Community Association (Respondent)
**Hearing Date:** March 20, 2023
**Judge:** Administrative Law Judge Velva Moses-Thompson, Office of Administrative Hearings
**Main Issues**
The Petitioner brought five central allegations against the Respondent (the Homeowners' Association or HOA), claiming violations of the HOA's Bylaws and Arizona state law (A.R.S. § 33-1804):
1. The HOA failed to hold its 2022 annual meeting on the required date (the second Wednesday of April).
2. The HOA failed to hold an exclusively scheduled organizational meeting to elect officers.
3. The HOA held a board meeting on September 22, 2022, that was unlawfully organized by the HOA Manager rather than the Board.
4. The HOA prohibited the recording of an open board session on October 24, 2022, violating A.R.S. § 33-1804(A).
5. The HOA unfairly silenced opposing sides by muting attendees during the October 24 Zoom meeting.
**Key Facts and Legal Arguments**
* **Annual Meeting Timing:** The HOA admitted it held the 2022 annual meeting in May instead of April, arguing it was merely a technical violation without harm, relying on A.R.S. § 10-3701(e). The Judge ruled that while corporate actions may remain valid under that statute, the HOA still directly violated its own Bylaws which mandate a specific timeline.
* **Organizational and Manager-Called Meetings:** The Judge found no requirement in the Bylaws that an organizational meeting to elect officers must be separate from a regular board meeting. Regarding the September meeting, the Judge determined that the HOA Manager acted lawfully as an agent of the Board at the request of the Board President.
* **Recording Prohibition and Muting:** Evidence confirmed the HOA Manager instructed homeowners not to record the October open meeting and required advance notice to do so. The Judge ruled this was a clear violation of A.R.S. § 33-1804, which explicitly guarantees members the right to record open meetings without providing advance notice. However, the Judge dismissed the claim regarding muting; evidence showed the Manager muted the Petitioner due to aggressive behavior, but the Petitioner was still given ample opportunity to speak during the meeting.
**Outcome and Final Decision**
The Administrative Law Judge issued a split decision on April 10, 2023:
* **Petitioner Prevailed:** The Petitioner won on Issues 1 (failure to hold the annual meeting on time) and 4 (unlawfully prohibiting the recording of an open meeting) [
Case Participants
Petitioner Side
- Senol Pekin (petitioner)
Testified on his own behalf - Julie Willoughby (witness)
Also spelled Julie Willowby in transcript - Shelley Nelson (witness)
Also spelled Shelly Nelson in transcript - Sherry Swanson (witness)
Respondent Side
- Ashley N. Moscarello (HOA attorney)
Goodman Law Group
Represented the respondent - Daniel S. Francom (HOA attorney)
Goodman Law Group - Mandy Rogers (property manager)
AAM, LLC
Community Manager; testified as a witness for respondent - Susanne Easterday Roskens (board member)
Artesian Ranch Community Association
Director/President of Respondent's Board; testified as a witness for respondent
Neutral Parties
- Velva Moses-Thompson (ALJ)
Office of Administrative Hearings
Assigned Administrative Law Judge - Susan Nicolson (commissioner)
Arizona Department of Real Estate
Other Participants
- Dennis Berger (subpoenaed individual)
Subpoena for this individual was quashed - Brock O’Neal (subpoenaed individual)
Motion to quash subpoena for this individual was denied - Rick Beaver (homeowner)
Artesian Ranch Community Association
Had an appeal reviewed during a board meeting; candidate for the board - Sandra Carlson (unknown)
Copied on board packet email
