In Case No. 13F-H1314005-BFS, Alexander Winter (Petitioner) brought an action against the Cortina Homeowners Association (Respondent) [1]. On September 10, 2013, Winter filed a petition with the Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety alleging that the association's Board of Directors violated open meeting laws, specifically A.R.S. §§ 33-1804(D) and 33-1248(D) [2, 3].

The main issue centered on Winter's claim that the Board improperly authorized financial compensation increases for its property management vendor during a closed executive session rather than in an open meeting [3, 4]. Winter alleged that the Board approved an hourly fee of $50 for staff and $75 for the community manager, Kevin Bishop of Renaissance Community Partners, to compensate them for time spent answering homeowner information requests [5-8]. The association categorically denied these allegations [9]. During the hearing, Winter acknowledged that he lacked first-hand knowledge of the executive sessions, did not know the exact dates they occurred, and could not confirm if a quorum of the Board was present [7, 8, 10].

The Administrative Law Judge ruled against Winter, concluding that he failed to meet his burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence [11]. The judge determined that there was insufficient credible evidence to prove the Board actually authorized the disputed payments during an executive session within the one-year timeframe prior to the petition's filing (September 10, 2012, through September 10, 2013) [12, 13]. Furthermore, the judge clarified that even if the Board had discussed and authorized the compensation during a closed executive session, A.R.S. § 33-1804(A)(4) explicitly allows boards to address matters relating to the compensation of an association contractor's employee in closed meetings [11, 13, 14].

As a result, the judge ordered the petition dismissed and deemed the Cortina Homeowners Association the prevailing party [11]. Because the Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety did not take action to accept, reject, or modify the ruling by its May 22, 2014 deadline, the Administrative Law Judge's decision was certified as the final administrative action on May 28, 2014 [15, 16].