AZNH Revocable Trust V. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association

Case Summary

Case ID 24F-H047-REL
Agency ADRE
Tribunal OAH
Decision Date 2024-11-05
Administrative Law Judge Kay A. Abramsohn
Outcome no
Filing Fees Refunded $500.00
Civil Penalties $0.00

Parties & Counsel

Petitioner AZNH Revocable Trust Counsel John F. Sullivan
Respondent Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association Counsel Chad M. Gallacher

Alleged Violations

ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7)

Outcome Summary

The Administrative Law Judge denied the petition, concluding that the Association was in compliance with ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(7) by providing the electronic data lists received from the voting vendor (Vote HOA Now), as the statute requires storage of 'electronic votes' not necessarily 'electronic ballots' (images).

Why this result: Petitioner failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7).

Key Issues & Findings

Failure to provide voting records (electronic ballots) for inspection

Petitioner alleged the Association failed to provide all voting materials, specifically images of each actual online ballot, in response to the February 28, 2024, inspection request, arguing this violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7).

Orders: Petitioner's petition is denied.

Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No

Disposition: respondent_win

Cited:

  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708(F)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1258
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2102
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199 et seq.
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.05
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199(2)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.01(A)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.01(D)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.02
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092 et seq.

Analytics Highlights

Topics: Voting Records, Electronic Voting, HOA Records Inspection, Statutory Interpretation, ARS 33-1812
Additional Citations:

  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708(F)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1258
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2102
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199 et seq.
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.05
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199(2)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.01(A)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.01(D)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.02
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092 et seq.
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.02(B)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092.09
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.04

Video Overview

Audio Overview

Decision Documents

24F-H047-REL-RMD Decision – 1240168.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:10:22 (184.8 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RMD Decision – 1330098.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:10:26 (48.9 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RMD Decision – 1330115.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:10:30 (6.2 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RMD Decision – 1338932.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:10:35 (56.6 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RMD Decision – 1340272.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:10:38 (53.7 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RMD Decision – 1357165.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:10:42 (59.5 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RMD Decision – 1358023.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:10:50 (12.1 KB)

Questions

Question

If I challenge my HOA's election procedures, do I have to prove they did something wrong, or do they have to prove they did it right?

Short Answer

The burden of proof falls on the homeowner (Petitioner) to prove the violation.

Detailed Answer

In an administrative hearing regarding an HOA dispute, the homeowner filing the petition bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the HOA violated the relevant statutes.

Alj Quote

In this proceeding, Petitioner bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7).

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7); A.A.C. R2-19-119

Topic Tags

  • Burden of Proof
  • Legal Procedure

Question

Is my HOA required to provide me with the actual visual image of every electronic ballot cast in an election?

Short Answer

No. The HOA is only required to store and provide 'electronic votes,' typically in data list format, not the visual 'ballot' image.

Detailed Answer

The ALJ determined that statutes require the storage of 'electronic votes' for inspection, but this does not mean the HOA must retain a visual image of the specific screen or ballot seen by the voter. Data lists that document the vote satisfy the requirement.

Alj Quote

ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708(F)(4) requires storage of 'electronic votes' not electronic ballots.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)(4)

Topic Tags

  • Electronic Voting
  • Records Inspection

Question

Does a spreadsheet or data list of votes count as a valid record of 'ballots' for inspection purposes?

Short Answer

Yes. Data lists generated by voting software are considered compliant records of electronic ballots.

Detailed Answer

When an HOA uses a third-party vendor for online voting, retaining the data lists provided by that vendor (which show member information and votes cast) satisfies the statutory requirement to retain materials in an 'electronic format'.

Alj Quote

Association is in compliance with ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(7) by retaining the Vote HOA Now data lists which demonstrate the electronic ballots 'in electronic … format.'

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(7)

Topic Tags

  • Records Inspection
  • Electronic Voting

Question

How long must an HOA keep election materials like ballots and sign-in sheets?

Short Answer

The HOA must retain these materials for at least one year.

Detailed Answer

State law mandates that ballots, envelopes, sign-in sheets, and related materials be kept and made available for member inspection for a minimum of one year following the election.

Alj Quote

Ballots, envelopes and related materials, including sign-in sheets if used, shall be retained in electronic or paper format and made available for member inspection for at least one year after completion of the election.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7)

Topic Tags

  • Record Retention
  • Elections

Question

What specific features must an online voting system have to be legal?

Short Answer

It must authenticate identity, ensure validity, send a receipt, and store votes.

Detailed Answer

An online voting system is legally permitted if it authenticates the member's identity, ensures the vote is not altered in transit, transmits a receipt to the voter, and stores the electronic votes for recount or inspection.

Alj Quote

online voting system that does all of the following: a. Authenticates the member's identity; b. Authenticates the validity of each electronic vote… c. Transmits a receipt… and d. Stores electronic votes for recount, inspection and review purposes.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)

Topic Tags

  • Electronic Voting
  • HOA Obligations

Question

Can I use 'secret ballots' if I am voting by mail or absentee?

Short Answer

Yes, but your name/address must still appear on the envelope.

Detailed Answer

If community documents allow for secret ballots, the ballot itself does not need the voter's signature, but the outer envelope must contain the name, address, and signature to verify eligibility.

Alj Quote

The completed ballot shall contain the name, address and signature of the person voting, except that if the community documents permit secret ballots, only the envelope shall contain the name, address and signature of the voter.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(6)

Topic Tags

  • Voting Rights
  • Privacy

Question

How does the law define 'preponderance of the evidence' in these hearings?

Short Answer

It means the claim is 'more probably true than not'.

Detailed Answer

The standard of proof requires evidence that has the most convincing force and inclines a fair mind to one side of the issue, even if it doesn't remove all doubt.

Alj Quote

A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.

Legal Basis

Case Law (Morris K. Udall)

Topic Tags

  • Legal Standards
  • Definitions

Case

Docket No
24F-H047-REL
Case Title
AZNH Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
Decision Date
2024-11-05
Alj Name
Kay A. Abramsohn
Tribunal
OAH
Agency
ADRE

Questions

Question

If I challenge my HOA's election procedures, do I have to prove they did something wrong, or do they have to prove they did it right?

Short Answer

The burden of proof falls on the homeowner (Petitioner) to prove the violation.

Detailed Answer

In an administrative hearing regarding an HOA dispute, the homeowner filing the petition bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the HOA violated the relevant statutes.

Alj Quote

In this proceeding, Petitioner bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7).

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7); A.A.C. R2-19-119

Topic Tags

  • Burden of Proof
  • Legal Procedure

Question

Is my HOA required to provide me with the actual visual image of every electronic ballot cast in an election?

Short Answer

No. The HOA is only required to store and provide 'electronic votes,' typically in data list format, not the visual 'ballot' image.

Detailed Answer

The ALJ determined that statutes require the storage of 'electronic votes' for inspection, but this does not mean the HOA must retain a visual image of the specific screen or ballot seen by the voter. Data lists that document the vote satisfy the requirement.

Alj Quote

ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708(F)(4) requires storage of 'electronic votes' not electronic ballots.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)(4)

Topic Tags

  • Electronic Voting
  • Records Inspection

Question

Does a spreadsheet or data list of votes count as a valid record of 'ballots' for inspection purposes?

Short Answer

Yes. Data lists generated by voting software are considered compliant records of electronic ballots.

Detailed Answer

When an HOA uses a third-party vendor for online voting, retaining the data lists provided by that vendor (which show member information and votes cast) satisfies the statutory requirement to retain materials in an 'electronic format'.

Alj Quote

Association is in compliance with ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(7) by retaining the Vote HOA Now data lists which demonstrate the electronic ballots 'in electronic … format.'

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(7)

Topic Tags

  • Records Inspection
  • Electronic Voting

Question

How long must an HOA keep election materials like ballots and sign-in sheets?

Short Answer

The HOA must retain these materials for at least one year.

Detailed Answer

State law mandates that ballots, envelopes, sign-in sheets, and related materials be kept and made available for member inspection for a minimum of one year following the election.

Alj Quote

Ballots, envelopes and related materials, including sign-in sheets if used, shall be retained in electronic or paper format and made available for member inspection for at least one year after completion of the election.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7)

Topic Tags

  • Record Retention
  • Elections

Question

What specific features must an online voting system have to be legal?

Short Answer

It must authenticate identity, ensure validity, send a receipt, and store votes.

Detailed Answer

An online voting system is legally permitted if it authenticates the member's identity, ensures the vote is not altered in transit, transmits a receipt to the voter, and stores the electronic votes for recount or inspection.

Alj Quote

online voting system that does all of the following: a. Authenticates the member's identity; b. Authenticates the validity of each electronic vote… c. Transmits a receipt… and d. Stores electronic votes for recount, inspection and review purposes.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)

Topic Tags

  • Electronic Voting
  • HOA Obligations

Question

Can I use 'secret ballots' if I am voting by mail or absentee?

Short Answer

Yes, but your name/address must still appear on the envelope.

Detailed Answer

If community documents allow for secret ballots, the ballot itself does not need the voter's signature, but the outer envelope must contain the name, address, and signature to verify eligibility.

Alj Quote

The completed ballot shall contain the name, address and signature of the person voting, except that if the community documents permit secret ballots, only the envelope shall contain the name, address and signature of the voter.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(6)

Topic Tags

  • Voting Rights
  • Privacy

Question

How does the law define 'preponderance of the evidence' in these hearings?

Short Answer

It means the claim is 'more probably true than not'.

Detailed Answer

The standard of proof requires evidence that has the most convincing force and inclines a fair mind to one side of the issue, even if it doesn't remove all doubt.

Alj Quote

A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.

Legal Basis

Case Law (Morris K. Udall)

Topic Tags

  • Legal Standards
  • Definitions

Case

Docket No
24F-H047-REL
Case Title
AZNH Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
Decision Date
2024-11-05
Alj Name
Kay A. Abramsohn
Tribunal
OAH
Agency
ADRE

Case Participants

Petitioner Side

  • John F. Sullivan (Petitioner Attorney)
    AZNH Revocable Trust
    Counsel for Susan Sullivan/AZNH Trust
  • Susan Sullivan (Petitioner Trustee)
    AZNH Revocable Trust

Respondent Side

  • Chad M. Gallacher (Respondent Attorney)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Affiliated with MAXWELL & MORGAN, P.C.
  • Kathy Fowers (General Manager/Witness)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Custodian of Records
  • Cathy Braun (Association Secretary/Treasurer)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Referenced in emails regarding documents inspection
  • Paul Minda (Board President/Board Member)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Present at rehearing
  • Mar (Board Vice President/Board Member)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Partial name only; present at rehearing
  • Mrs. Holden (Affiliate/Witness)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Present at Superior Court argument

Neutral Parties

  • Kay A. Abramsohn (ALJ)
    Office of Administrative Hearings
  • Judge McKish (Superior Court Judge)
    Maricopa County Superior Court
    Presided over appeal/remand process
  • Susan Nicolson (ADRE Commissioner)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate

Other Participants

  • vnunez (ADRE Staff)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Recipient of electronic transmission; partial name
  • djones (ADRE Staff)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Recipient of electronic transmission; partial name
  • labril (ADRE Staff)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Recipient of electronic transmission; partial name
  • mneat (ADRE Staff)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Recipient of electronic transmission; partial name
  • lrecchia (ADRE Staff)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Recipient of electronic transmission; partial name
  • gosborn (ADRE Staff)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Recipient of electronic transmission; partial name

AZNH Revocable Trust V. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners

Case Summary

Case ID 24F-H047-REL
Agency ADRE
Tribunal OAH
Decision Date 2024-11-05
Administrative Law Judge Kay A. Abramsohn
Outcome no
Filing Fees Refunded $500.00
Civil Penalties $0.00

Parties & Counsel

Petitioner AZNH Revocable Trust Counsel John F. Sullivan
Respondent Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association Counsel Chad M. Gallacher

Alleged Violations

ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7)

Outcome Summary

The Administrative Law Judge denied the petition, concluding that the Association was in compliance with ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(7) by providing the electronic data lists received from the voting vendor (Vote HOA Now), as the statute requires storage of 'electronic votes' not necessarily 'electronic ballots' (images).

Why this result: Petitioner failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7).

Key Issues & Findings

Failure to provide voting records (electronic ballots) for inspection

Petitioner alleged the Association failed to provide all voting materials, specifically images of each actual online ballot, in response to the February 28, 2024, inspection request, arguing this violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7).

Orders: Petitioner's petition is denied.

Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No

Disposition: respondent_win

Cited:

  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708(F)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1258
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2102
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199 et seq.
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.05
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199(2)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.01(A)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.01(D)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.02
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092 et seq.

Analytics Highlights

Topics: Voting Records, Electronic Voting, HOA Records Inspection, Statutory Interpretation, ARS 33-1812
Additional Citations:

  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708(F)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1258
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2102
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199 et seq.
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.05
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199(2)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.01(A)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.01(D)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 32-2199.02
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092 et seq.
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.02(B)
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092.09
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.04

Video Overview

Audio Overview

Decision Documents

24F-H047-REL Decision – 1240168.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:09:21 (184.8 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 1330098.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:09:24 (48.9 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 1330115.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:09:27 (6.2 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 1338932.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:09:32 (56.6 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 1340272.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:09:37 (53.7 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 1357165.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:09:41 (59.5 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 1358023.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:09:45 (12.1 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 2026-03-07_attorney_email_thread_aznh_revocable_trust.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-09T16:45:57 (492.6 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 2026-03-07_superior_court_complaint_special_action_cv2025-036466.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-09T16:46:03 (973.0 KB)

24F-H047-REL Decision – 2026-03-07_superior_court_motion_for_judgment_cv2025-036466.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-09T16:46:07 (212.7 KB)

Questions

Question

If I challenge my HOA's election procedures, do I have to prove they did something wrong, or do they have to prove they did it right?

Short Answer

The burden of proof falls on the homeowner (Petitioner) to prove the violation.

Detailed Answer

In an administrative hearing regarding an HOA dispute, the homeowner filing the petition bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the HOA violated the relevant statutes.

Alj Quote

In this proceeding, Petitioner bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7).

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7); A.A.C. R2-19-119

Topic Tags

  • Burden of Proof
  • Legal Procedure

Question

Is my HOA required to provide me with the actual visual image of every electronic ballot cast in an election?

Short Answer

No. The HOA is only required to store and provide 'electronic votes,' typically in data list format, not the visual 'ballot' image.

Detailed Answer

The ALJ determined that statutes require the storage of 'electronic votes' for inspection, but this does not mean the HOA must retain a visual image of the specific screen or ballot seen by the voter. Data lists that document the vote satisfy the requirement.

Alj Quote

ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708(F)(4) requires storage of 'electronic votes' not electronic ballots.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)(4)

Topic Tags

  • Electronic Voting
  • Records Inspection

Question

Does a spreadsheet or data list of votes count as a valid record of 'ballots' for inspection purposes?

Short Answer

Yes. Data lists generated by voting software are considered compliant records of electronic ballots.

Detailed Answer

When an HOA uses a third-party vendor for online voting, retaining the data lists provided by that vendor (which show member information and votes cast) satisfies the statutory requirement to retain materials in an 'electronic format'.

Alj Quote

Association is in compliance with ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(7) by retaining the Vote HOA Now data lists which demonstrate the electronic ballots 'in electronic … format.'

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(7)

Topic Tags

  • Records Inspection
  • Electronic Voting

Question

How long must an HOA keep election materials like ballots and sign-in sheets?

Short Answer

The HOA must retain these materials for at least one year.

Detailed Answer

State law mandates that ballots, envelopes, sign-in sheets, and related materials be kept and made available for member inspection for a minimum of one year following the election.

Alj Quote

Ballots, envelopes and related materials, including sign-in sheets if used, shall be retained in electronic or paper format and made available for member inspection for at least one year after completion of the election.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7)

Topic Tags

  • Record Retention
  • Elections

Question

What specific features must an online voting system have to be legal?

Short Answer

It must authenticate identity, ensure validity, send a receipt, and store votes.

Detailed Answer

An online voting system is legally permitted if it authenticates the member's identity, ensures the vote is not altered in transit, transmits a receipt to the voter, and stores the electronic votes for recount or inspection.

Alj Quote

online voting system that does all of the following: a. Authenticates the member's identity; b. Authenticates the validity of each electronic vote… c. Transmits a receipt… and d. Stores electronic votes for recount, inspection and review purposes.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)

Topic Tags

  • Electronic Voting
  • HOA Obligations

Question

Can I use 'secret ballots' if I am voting by mail or absentee?

Short Answer

Yes, but your name/address must still appear on the envelope.

Detailed Answer

If community documents allow for secret ballots, the ballot itself does not need the voter's signature, but the outer envelope must contain the name, address, and signature to verify eligibility.

Alj Quote

The completed ballot shall contain the name, address and signature of the person voting, except that if the community documents permit secret ballots, only the envelope shall contain the name, address and signature of the voter.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(6)

Topic Tags

  • Voting Rights
  • Privacy

Question

How does the law define 'preponderance of the evidence' in these hearings?

Short Answer

It means the claim is 'more probably true than not'.

Detailed Answer

The standard of proof requires evidence that has the most convincing force and inclines a fair mind to one side of the issue, even if it doesn't remove all doubt.

Alj Quote

A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.

Legal Basis

Case Law (Morris K. Udall)

Topic Tags

  • Legal Standards
  • Definitions

Case

Docket No
24F-H047-REL
Case Title
AZNH Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
Decision Date
2024-11-05
Alj Name
Kay A. Abramsohn
Tribunal
OAH
Agency
ADRE

Questions

Question

If I challenge my HOA's election procedures, do I have to prove they did something wrong, or do they have to prove they did it right?

Short Answer

The burden of proof falls on the homeowner (Petitioner) to prove the violation.

Detailed Answer

In an administrative hearing regarding an HOA dispute, the homeowner filing the petition bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the HOA violated the relevant statutes.

Alj Quote

In this proceeding, Petitioner bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(A)(7).

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7); A.A.C. R2-19-119

Topic Tags

  • Burden of Proof
  • Legal Procedure

Question

Is my HOA required to provide me with the actual visual image of every electronic ballot cast in an election?

Short Answer

No. The HOA is only required to store and provide 'electronic votes,' typically in data list format, not the visual 'ballot' image.

Detailed Answer

The ALJ determined that statutes require the storage of 'electronic votes' for inspection, but this does not mean the HOA must retain a visual image of the specific screen or ballot seen by the voter. Data lists that document the vote satisfy the requirement.

Alj Quote

ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708(F)(4) requires storage of 'electronic votes' not electronic ballots.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)(4)

Topic Tags

  • Electronic Voting
  • Records Inspection

Question

Does a spreadsheet or data list of votes count as a valid record of 'ballots' for inspection purposes?

Short Answer

Yes. Data lists generated by voting software are considered compliant records of electronic ballots.

Detailed Answer

When an HOA uses a third-party vendor for online voting, retaining the data lists provided by that vendor (which show member information and votes cast) satisfies the statutory requirement to retain materials in an 'electronic format'.

Alj Quote

Association is in compliance with ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812(7) by retaining the Vote HOA Now data lists which demonstrate the electronic ballots 'in electronic … format.'

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(7)

Topic Tags

  • Records Inspection
  • Electronic Voting

Question

How long must an HOA keep election materials like ballots and sign-in sheets?

Short Answer

The HOA must retain these materials for at least one year.

Detailed Answer

State law mandates that ballots, envelopes, sign-in sheets, and related materials be kept and made available for member inspection for a minimum of one year following the election.

Alj Quote

Ballots, envelopes and related materials, including sign-in sheets if used, shall be retained in electronic or paper format and made available for member inspection for at least one year after completion of the election.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7)

Topic Tags

  • Record Retention
  • Elections

Question

What specific features must an online voting system have to be legal?

Short Answer

It must authenticate identity, ensure validity, send a receipt, and store votes.

Detailed Answer

An online voting system is legally permitted if it authenticates the member's identity, ensures the vote is not altered in transit, transmits a receipt to the voter, and stores the electronic votes for recount or inspection.

Alj Quote

online voting system that does all of the following: a. Authenticates the member's identity; b. Authenticates the validity of each electronic vote… c. Transmits a receipt… and d. Stores electronic votes for recount, inspection and review purposes.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)

Topic Tags

  • Electronic Voting
  • HOA Obligations

Question

Can I use 'secret ballots' if I am voting by mail or absentee?

Short Answer

Yes, but your name/address must still appear on the envelope.

Detailed Answer

If community documents allow for secret ballots, the ballot itself does not need the voter's signature, but the outer envelope must contain the name, address, and signature to verify eligibility.

Alj Quote

The completed ballot shall contain the name, address and signature of the person voting, except that if the community documents permit secret ballots, only the envelope shall contain the name, address and signature of the voter.

Legal Basis

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(6)

Topic Tags

  • Voting Rights
  • Privacy

Question

How does the law define 'preponderance of the evidence' in these hearings?

Short Answer

It means the claim is 'more probably true than not'.

Detailed Answer

The standard of proof requires evidence that has the most convincing force and inclines a fair mind to one side of the issue, even if it doesn't remove all doubt.

Alj Quote

A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.

Legal Basis

Case Law (Morris K. Udall)

Topic Tags

  • Legal Standards
  • Definitions

Case

Docket No
24F-H047-REL
Case Title
AZNH Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
Decision Date
2024-11-05
Alj Name
Kay A. Abramsohn
Tribunal
OAH
Agency
ADRE

Case Participants

Petitioner Side

  • John F. Sullivan (Attorney)
    AZNH Revocable Trust
    Counsel for Petitioner
  • Susan Sullivan (Petitioner Trustee)
    AZNH Revocable Trust
    Filed motion for peremptory change of judge

Respondent Side

  • Chad M. Gallacher (HOA attorney)
    MAXWELL & MORGAN, P.C.
    Counsel for Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
  • Kathy Fowers (General Manager)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Custodian of Records; Present at hearing
  • Paul Minda (board member)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Board President
  • Mar (board member)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Vice President (Partial name identified)
  • Cathy Braun (Association Secretary/Treasurer)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Exchanged emails with Petitioner regarding inspection request

Neutral Parties

  • Kay A. Abramsohn (ALJ)
    OAH
    Administrative Law Judge
  • Susan Nicolson (ADRE Commissioner)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
  • Judge McKish (Judge)
    Superior Court
    Superior Court Judge who handled remand; also referred to as Judge McKittish

Other Participants

  • Mrs. Holden (witness)
    Present at Superior Court argument with Respondent representatives

AZNH Revocable Trust V. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners

Note: A Rehearing was requested for this case. The dashboard statistics reflect the final outcome of the rehearing process.

Case Summary

Case ID 24F-H047-REL
Agency ADRE
Tribunal OAH
Decision Date 2024-11-05
Administrative Law Judge Kay A. Abramsohn
Outcome loss
Filing Fees Refunded $500.00
Civil Penalties $0.00

Parties & Counsel

Petitioner AZNH Revocable Trust Counsel John F. Sullivan
Respondent Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association Counsel Chad M. Gallacher

Alleged Violations

A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7)

Outcome Summary

The ALJ denied the petition, concluding that the Association complied with A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7) by providing the electronic data lists from the voting software company, which met the requirement for retaining electronic records of votes.

Why this result: The tribunal ruled that A.R.S. § 10-3708(F) requires the storage of 'electronic votes', not exact visual images of electronic ballots. The voting data lists adequately documented each member's vote in compliance with the law.

Key Issues & Findings

Records Inspection

Petitioner alleged the Association failed to produce all voting materials from a February 2024 election, specifically arguing that images of the actual online ballots were not provided.

Orders: Petition denied. The Association was found to be in compliance by retaining and providing the electronic voting data lists.

Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No

Disposition: petitioner_loss

Cited:

  • A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7)
  • A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)
  • A.R.S. § 33-1258
  • A.R.S. § 32-2199.05

Video Overview

Audio Overview

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4r23M0yylebjpOrTk2pJ4V

Decision Documents

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – 1330098.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:06 (48.9 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – 1330115.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:17 (6.2 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – 1338932.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:21 (56.6 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – 1340272.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:23 (53.7 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – 1357165.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:26 (59.5 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – 1358023.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:28 (12.1 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – _override/Complaint For Special Action.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:31 (973.0 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – _override/Plaintiff’s+Motion+for+Judgment+on+the+Case+Filings+.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:35 (212.7 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – ../24F-H047-REL/1240168.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:39 (184.8 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – ../24F-H047-REL/2026-03-07_superior_court_complaint_special_action_cv2025-036466.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:48 (973.0 KB)

24F-H047-REL-RHG Decision – ../24F-H047-REL/2026-03-07_superior_court_motion_for_judgment_cv2025-036466.pdf

Uploaded 2026-03-10T22:32:53 (212.7 KB)





Briefing Doc – 24F-H047-REL-RHG


Case Summary: AZNH Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association

Explicit Notice: This summary covers both the original administrative decision (Case No. 24F-H047-REL) and the subsequent rehearing proceedings (Case No. 24F-H047-REL-RHG). The procedural history, issues, and outcomes of the two proceedings are distinct and outlined separately below to prevent conflation.

I. Original Proceeding (Case No. 24F-H047-REL)

Key Facts: The Petitioner, AZNH Revocable Trust, requested to inspect election documents from the Respondent, Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association (HOA), concerning a February 2024 election. The HOA utilized a third-party vendor, “Vote HOA Now,” to conduct electronic voting. In response to the inspection request, the HOA provided paper ballots, absentee envelopes, and data tally lists verifying the electronic votes cast via the vendor.

Main Issue: The Petitioner argued that the HOA violated A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7) by failing to produce an actual image of each electronic ballot as seen and voted on by the members, asserting that data lists were insufficient for a valid recount or inspection.

Outcome: On November 5, 2024, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied the petition. The ALJ concluded that the HOA complied with statutory requirements, determining that retaining the data lists demonstrating the electronic votes satisfied the requirement to keep records “in electronic format”. The ALJ noted that A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)(4) mandates the storage of “electronic votes,” not necessarily visual images of electronic ballots.

II. Procedural History & Rehearing (Case No. 24F-H047-REL-RHG)

Procedural History: Following the original decision, the Petitioner appealed to the Maricopa County Superior Court. The Superior Court remanded the matter to the Arizona Department of Real Estate to conduct an evidentiary hearing to address “additional evidence” proposed by the Petitioner (specifically, an electronic ballot allegedly in the HOA’s custody). Consequently, the Department granted a rehearing, leading to the RHG docket.

Rehearing Proceedings & Key Arguments: The rehearing was scheduled for September 26, 2025. At 12:13 a.m. on the day of the hearing, the Petitioner electronically filed a “Peremptory Change of Administrative Law Judge” alongside a request for a continuance. The Petitioner invoked a newly revised statute (A.R.S. § 41-1092.07), effective that same day, which entitles a party to one peremptory change of judge.

Prior to going on the record, the ALJ and the OAH Interim Director determined that the Petitioner’s filing was a “motion” and was untimely under Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-106. Because the filing was deemed untimely, the ALJ retained the case. The Petitioner’s attorney argued that the peremptory change was an absolute statutory right—not a discretionary “motion”—and subsequently refused to participate, leaving the hearing room before the proceedings officially went on the record.

Rehearing Outcome: Because the Petitioner’s counsel left and failed to present evidence or argument, the HOA moved to dismiss the matter. On October 9, 2025, the ALJ formally granted the dismissal based on the Petitioner’s failure to proceed with the case.

Note: Following the dismissal of the rehearing, the Petitioner filed an Original Special Action Complaint in Superior Court (CV2025-036466) against the ALJ, OAH, and the HOA. The Petitioner is seeking a judgment declaring that the peremptory change of judge was immediate and incontrovertible by legislative fiat, and that the ALJ exceeded her legal authority by dismissing the rehearing






Study Guide – 24F-H047-REL-RHG


Case Summary: AZNH Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association

Explicit Notice: This summary covers both the original administrative decision (Case No. 24F-H047-REL) and the subsequent rehearing proceedings (Case No. 24F-H047-REL-RHG). The procedural history, issues, and outcomes of the two proceedings are distinct and outlined separately below to prevent conflation.

I. Original Proceeding (Case No. 24F-H047-REL)

Key Facts: The Petitioner, AZNH Revocable Trust, requested to inspect election documents from the Respondent, Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association (HOA), concerning a February 2024 election. The HOA utilized a third-party vendor, “Vote HOA Now,” to conduct electronic voting. In response to the inspection request, the HOA provided paper ballots, absentee envelopes, and data tally lists verifying the electronic votes cast via the vendor.

Main Issue: The Petitioner argued that the HOA violated A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7) by failing to produce an actual image of each electronic ballot as seen and voted on by the members, asserting that data lists were insufficient for a valid recount or inspection.

Outcome: On November 5, 2024, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied the petition. The ALJ concluded that the HOA complied with statutory requirements, determining that retaining the data lists demonstrating the electronic votes satisfied the requirement to keep records “in electronic format”. The ALJ noted that A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)(4) mandates the storage of “electronic votes,” not necessarily visual images of electronic ballots.

II. Procedural History & Rehearing (Case No. 24F-H047-REL-RHG)

Procedural History: Following the original decision, the Petitioner appealed to the Maricopa County Superior Court. The Superior Court remanded the matter to the Arizona Department of Real Estate to conduct an evidentiary hearing to address “additional evidence” proposed by the Petitioner (specifically, an electronic ballot allegedly in the HOA’s custody). Consequently, the Department granted a rehearing, leading to the RHG docket.

Rehearing Proceedings & Key Arguments: The rehearing was scheduled for September 26, 2025. At 12:13 a.m. on the day of the hearing, the Petitioner electronically filed a “Peremptory Change of Administrative Law Judge” alongside a request for a continuance. The Petitioner invoked a newly revised statute (A.R.S. § 41-1092.07), effective that same day, which entitles a party to one peremptory change of judge.

Prior to going on the record, the ALJ and the OAH Interim Director determined that the Petitioner’s filing was a “motion” and was untimely under Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-106. Because the filing was deemed untimely, the ALJ retained the case. The Petitioner’s attorney argued that the peremptory change was an absolute statutory right—not a discretionary “motion”—and subsequently refused to participate, leaving the hearing room before the proceedings officially went on the record.

Rehearing Outcome: Because the Petitioner’s counsel left and failed to present evidence or argument, the HOA moved to dismiss the matter. On October 9, 2025, the ALJ formally granted the dismissal based on the Petitioner’s failure to proceed with the case.

Note: Following the dismissal of the rehearing, the Petitioner filed an Original Special Action Complaint in Superior Court (CV2025-036466) against the ALJ, OAH, and the HOA. The Petitioner is seeking a judgment declaring that the peremptory change of judge was immediate and incontrovertible by legislative fiat, and that the ALJ exceeded her legal authority by dismissing the rehearing






Blog Post – 24F-H047-REL-RHG


Case Summary: AZNH Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association

Explicit Notice: This summary covers both the original administrative decision (Case No. 24F-H047-REL) and the subsequent rehearing proceedings (Case No. 24F-H047-REL-RHG). The procedural history, issues, and outcomes of the two proceedings are distinct and outlined separately below to prevent conflation.

I. Original Proceeding (Case No. 24F-H047-REL)

Key Facts: The Petitioner, AZNH Revocable Trust, requested to inspect election documents from the Respondent, Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association (HOA), concerning a February 2024 election. The HOA utilized a third-party vendor, “Vote HOA Now,” to conduct electronic voting. In response to the inspection request, the HOA provided paper ballots, absentee envelopes, and data tally lists verifying the electronic votes cast via the vendor.

Main Issue: The Petitioner argued that the HOA violated A.R.S. § 33-1812(A)(7) by failing to produce an actual image of each electronic ballot as seen and voted on by the members, asserting that data lists were insufficient for a valid recount or inspection.

Outcome: On November 5, 2024, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied the petition. The ALJ concluded that the HOA complied with statutory requirements, determining that retaining the data lists demonstrating the electronic votes satisfied the requirement to keep records “in electronic format”. The ALJ noted that A.R.S. § 10-3708(F)(4) mandates the storage of “electronic votes,” not necessarily visual images of electronic ballots.

II. Procedural History & Rehearing (Case No. 24F-H047-REL-RHG)

Procedural History: Following the original decision, the Petitioner appealed to the Maricopa County Superior Court. The Superior Court remanded the matter to the Arizona Department of Real Estate to conduct an evidentiary hearing to address “additional evidence” proposed by the Petitioner (specifically, an electronic ballot allegedly in the HOA’s custody). Consequently, the Department granted a rehearing, leading to the RHG docket.

Rehearing Proceedings & Key Arguments: The rehearing was scheduled for September 26, 2025. At 12:13 a.m. on the day of the hearing, the Petitioner electronically filed a “Peremptory Change of Administrative Law Judge” alongside a request for a continuance. The Petitioner invoked a newly revised statute (A.R.S. § 41-1092.07), effective that same day, which entitles a party to one peremptory change of judge.

Prior to going on the record, the ALJ and the OAH Interim Director determined that the Petitioner’s filing was a “motion” and was untimely under Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-106. Because the filing was deemed untimely, the ALJ retained the case. The Petitioner’s attorney argued that the peremptory change was an absolute statutory right—not a discretionary “motion”—and subsequently refused to participate, leaving the hearing room before the proceedings officially went on the record.

Rehearing Outcome: Because the Petitioner’s counsel left and failed to present evidence or argument, the HOA moved to dismiss the matter. On October 9, 2025, the ALJ formally granted the dismissal based on the Petitioner’s failure to proceed with the case.

Note: Following the dismissal of the rehearing, the Petitioner filed an Original Special Action Complaint in Superior Court (CV2025-036466) against the ALJ, OAH, and the HOA. The Petitioner is seeking a judgment declaring that the peremptory change of judge was immediate and incontrovertible by legislative fiat, and that the ALJ exceeded her legal authority by dismissing the rehearing


Case Participants

Petitioner Side

  • John F. Sullivan (attorney)
    AZNH Revocable Trust
    Attorney and Trustee for AZNH Revocable Trust.
  • Susan Sullivan (petitioner)
    AZNH Revocable Trust
    Trustee of AZNH Revocable Trust.

Respondent Side

  • Chad M. Gallacher (HOA attorney)
    Maxwell & Morgan, P.C.
    Represented Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association.
  • Cathy Braun (board member)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Association Secretary/Treasurer.
  • Kathy Fowers (property manager)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    General Manager and Custodian of Records.
  • Paul Minda (board member)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Board President.
  • B Austin Baillio (HOA attorney)
    Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association
    Listed on the minute entry and notice of hearing.

Neutral Parties

  • Kay A. Abramsohn (ALJ)
    OAH
    Administrative Law Judge who initially decided the case and was later the subject of a peremptory change request.
  • Susan Nicolson (commissioner)
    ADRE
  • Tammy Eigenheer (director)
    OAH
    Interim Director of the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings.
  • Joseph P. Mikitish (judge)
    Maricopa County Superior Court
    Judge who handled the appeal LC2025-000025-001 DT.
  • Scott Blaney (judge)
    Maricopa County Superior Court
    Judge assigned to the Original Special Action CV2025-036466.
  • Deanie Reh (attorney)
    Attorney General's Office
    Counsel for Arizona Department of Real Estate.
  • Raya Gardner (attorney)
    Attorney General's Office
    Counsel for Arizona Department of Real Estate.
  • Kara Karlson (attorney)
    Attorney General's Office
    Counsel for Defendants Eigenheer & Abramsohn.
  • Mandy Neat (deputy commissioner)
    ADRE
    Signed the Department's Order and Notice of Hearing.
  • Lynette Evans (attorney)
    Listed on the minute entry for the Maricopa County Superior Court.
  • N. Johnson (clerk)
    Maricopa County Superior Court
    Deputy clerk.
  • J. Thampy (clerk)
    Maricopa County Superior Court
    Deputy clerk.
  • V. Nunez (staff)
    ADRE
  • D. Jones (staff)
    ADRE
  • L. Abril (staff)
    ADRE
  • L. Recchia (staff)
    ADRE
  • G. Osborn (staff)
    ADRE