**Case Title:** *Allen R. Tobin v. Sunland Village Community Association* (Consolidated Case Nos. 11F-H1112006-BFS, 11F-H1112010-BFS, and 12F-H1212001-BFS)

**Overview**
This hearing before the Arizona Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety addressed three consolidated petitions involving disputes between Allen R. Tobin, a Board member, and the Sunland Village Community Association (Sunland). The disputes arose from a divided Board of Directors unable to form a quorum, resulting in allegations regarding improper bylaw amendments, invalid meetings, and unauthorized legal expenditures,.

**Key Issues and Arguments**

**1. Improper Bylaw Amendments (Sunland v. Tobin)**
* **Issue:** Sunland alleged that Tobin violated the Association's Bylaws by proposing three amendments from the floor during the January 12, 2011, annual meeting without providing prior written notice to the membership.
* **Arguments:** Sunland cited Article XII, Section 2, which requires notice of proposed amendments be given in the same manner as the annual meeting notice,. Tobin admitted he provided no formal notice but argued that because the members present voted on the motions, the defect was waived,.
* **Legal Finding:** The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that the Bylaws explicitly require advance written notice. As a serving Director, Tobin was aware of this requirement. Therefore, his presentation of motions without notice violated Article XII, Section 2 of the Bylaws,.

**2. Lack of Quorum (Tobin v. Sunland)**
* **Issue:** Tobin challenged the validity of a February 11, 2011, Board meeting where three directors met to declare the actions of the annual meeting "null and void",.
* **Arguments:** Tobin argued that a quorum of four directors was required to conduct business, and only three were present.
* **Legal Finding:** The Bylaws define a quorum as a majority of directors then serving. With six serving directors, a quorum required four members. The ALJ ruled that the three members present did not constitute a quorum; therefore, their attempt to conduct business violated Article V, Section 7 of the Bylaws,.

**3. Unauthorized Legal Expenditures (Tobin v. Sunland)**
* **Issue:** Tobin alleged that the Association manager and a minority of Board members incurred legal fees ($640) and authorized legal representation without the knowledge or approval of the full Board,.
* **Arguments:** Tobin argued that Association funds cannot be obligated without Board approval. The manager claimed he had oral authority to contact counsel,.
* **Legal Finding:** The Sunland Policy Manual requires that all contact with the law firm be at the Board's direction and that such contacts be documented and reported to the Board monthly. The ALJ found that Sunland violated Article VI (D)(7) of the Policy Manual because the legal contacts were made without Board direction or proper reporting,.

**Outcome and Final Decision**

The ALJ issued a split decision on April 30, 2012