Tag Archives: ARS 33-1812

AZNH Revocable Trust V. Sunland Springs Village Homeowners Association

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

ROBERT J. GARING v. PRESCOTT LAKES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC.

Posted on by

Case Summary

Case ID 24F-H012-REL
Agency ADRE
Tribunal OAH
Decision Date 2023-11-20
Administrative Law Judge Jenna Clark
Outcome none
Filing Fees Refunded $500.00
Civil Penalties $0.00

Parties & Counsel

Petitioner Robert J. Garing Counsel —
Respondent Prescott Lakes Community Association, Inc. Counsel Adrianne A. Speas, Esq.

Alleged Violations

ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812

Outcome Summary

The ALJ denied the petition, concluding that the Association's voting system constituted permissible delegate voting, which is not prohibited by the Planned Community Act. The prohibition in ARS § 33-1812 against proxy voting applies only when votes are “allocated to a unit,” which is not the case for Director elections where votes are allocated to the Neighborhood Voting Members as delegates.

Why this result: Petitioner did not sustain the burden of proving a violation of ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812.

Key Issues & Findings

Whether Respondent is in violation of ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812

Petitioner alleged that the Association's use of a voting delegate system, where Voting Members cast votes for unit owners who did not respond to neighborhood polls, constitutes proxy voting prohibited under ARS § 33-1812.

Orders: Petitioner's petition is denied.

Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No

Disposition: respondent_win

Cited:

  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708
  • ARIZ. ADMIN. CODE R2-19-119(B)(2)

Analytics Highlights

Topics: HOA, Planned Community Act, Delegate Voting, Proxy Voting, Board Election, ARS 33-1812, Nonprofit Corporation Act
Additional Citations:

  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1812
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.05
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.02
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092 et seq.
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 10-3708
  • ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 1-211(B)
  • ARIZ. ADMIN. CODE R2-19-119(B)(2)
  • Tierra Ranchos Homeowners Ass'n v. Kitchukov

Video Overview

Audio Overview

Decision Documents

24F-H012-REL Decision – 1115010.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-23T18:01:58 (162.7 KB)





Study Guide – 24F-H012-REL


{ “case”: { “docket_no”: “24F-H012-REL”, “case_title”: “Robert J. Garing v. Prescott Lakes Community Association, Inc.”, “decision_date”: “2023-11-20”, “alj_name”: “Jenna Clark”, “tribunal”: “OAH”, “agency”: “ADRE” }, “questions”: [ { “question”: “Is a delegate voting system considered the same as illegal proxy voting in Arizona HOAs?”, “short_answer”: “No. The ALJ determined that a delegate voting system is distinct from proxy voting and is not prohibited by the Planned Communities Act.”, “detailed_answer”: “While Arizona law (A.R.S. § 33-1812) explicitly prohibits proxy voting in planned communities after the period of declarant control, the Administrative Law Judge found that the legislature did not prohibit ‘delegate voting.’ In a delegate system, votes are allocated to the elected Voting Member (delegate) rather than directly to the individual unit for that specific election, meaning the prohibition on casting unit votes via proxy does not apply.”, “alj_quote”: “Here, the relevant and credible evidence of record establishes that while proxy voting is explicitly prohibited under the Planned Community Act, the legislature made no such bar regarding delegate voting as a form of HOA governance.”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 33-1812”, “topic_tags”: [ “voting”, “proxies”, “delegates”, “elections” ] }, { “question”: “Can my HOA allow neighborhood representatives to vote on behalf of owners?”, “short_answer”: “Yes, if the governing documents establish a delegate system where votes are allocated to the representative rather than the unit.”, “detailed_answer”: “The decision upholds a system where neighborhoods elect ‘Voting Members’ who then cast votes for the Board of Directors. The ALJ reasoned that the Planned Communities Act prohibits proxy voting only when votes are ‘allocated to a unit.’ Under the delegate system described, the votes for directors were allocated to the Voting Members, not the individual units.”, “alj_quote”: “The Planned Community Act does not regulate who is authorized to vote in planned community elections. Instead, it prohibits proxy voting when votes have been ‘allocated to a unit.’ Regarding the election of Board Directors, there are no votes ‘allocated to a unit.’ Instead, all votes are allocated to Neighborhood Voting Members as delegates…”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 33-1812”, “topic_tags”: [ “voting”, “board of directors”, “governing documents” ] }, { “question”: “Can neighborhood delegates cast votes for homeowners who did not participate in the poll?”, “short_answer”: “Yes, provided the governing documents allow the delegate to cast unreceived votes at their discretion.”, “detailed_answer”: “The ALJ noted that Voting Members in this case had the discretion to cast votes for units that did not respond to the neighborhood poll. This practice was found not to violate the statutory prohibition on proxies because it was part of a valid delegate voting structure.”, “alj_quote”: “Voting Members do not have complete discretion when casting votes. They only have discretion to cast unreceived votes.”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 33-1812”, “topic_tags”: [ “voting”, “discretionary voting”, “absentee ballots” ] }, { “question”: “What is the burden of proof for a homeowner challenging their HOA in an administrative hearing?”, “short_answer”: “The homeowner must prove their case by a ‘preponderance of the evidence’.”, “detailed_answer”: “The homeowner (Petitioner) is responsible for proving that the HOA violated the statute. The standard used is ‘preponderance of the evidence,’ which means the homeowner must show that their contention is more likely true than not.”, “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.”, “legal_basis”: “A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(2)”, “topic_tags”: [ “burden of proof”, “administrative hearing”, “legal procedure” ] }, { “question”: “Does the Nonprofit Corporation Act apply to HOAs in Arizona?”, “short_answer”: “Yes, unless the Planned Communities Act specifically exempts the HOA from a provision.”, “detailed_answer”: “The ALJ reasoned that because the legislature specifically exempted planned communities from some parts of the Nonprofit Act but was silent on delegate voting, the Nonprofit Act’s allowance of such systems remains relevant context for HOA governance.”, “alj_quote”: “In fact, the legislature specifically exempted planned communities from certain enumerated provisions of the Nonprofit Act, but did not address delegate voting within the Planned Community Act in any capacity.”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 10-3101 et seq.”, “topic_tags”: [ “corporate law”, “statutory interpretation”, “nonprofit act” ] }, { “question”: “If I disagree with the Administrative Law Judge’s decision, what can I do?”, “short_answer”: “You can appeal to the Superior Court within 35 days of being served the order.”, “detailed_answer”: “The decision is binding, but parties have the right to seek judicial review. This appeal must be filed with the Superior Court within a strict 35-day window following the service of the order.”, “alj_quote”: “A party wishing to appeal this order must seek judicial review as prescribed by ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092.08(H) and title 12, chapter 7, article 6. Any such appeal must be filed with the superior court within thirty-five days from the date when a copy of this order was served upon the parties.”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(H); A.R.S. § 12-904(A)”, “topic_tags”: [ “appeals”, “judicial review”, “superior court” ] } ] }






Blog Post – 24F-H012-REL


{ “case”: { “docket_no”: “24F-H012-REL”, “case_title”: “Robert J. Garing v. Prescott Lakes Community Association, Inc.”, “decision_date”: “2023-11-20”, “alj_name”: “Jenna Clark”, “tribunal”: “OAH”, “agency”: “ADRE” }, “questions”: [ { “question”: “Is a delegate voting system considered the same as illegal proxy voting in Arizona HOAs?”, “short_answer”: “No. The ALJ determined that a delegate voting system is distinct from proxy voting and is not prohibited by the Planned Communities Act.”, “detailed_answer”: “While Arizona law (A.R.S. § 33-1812) explicitly prohibits proxy voting in planned communities after the period of declarant control, the Administrative Law Judge found that the legislature did not prohibit ‘delegate voting.’ In a delegate system, votes are allocated to the elected Voting Member (delegate) rather than directly to the individual unit for that specific election, meaning the prohibition on casting unit votes via proxy does not apply.”, “alj_quote”: “Here, the relevant and credible evidence of record establishes that while proxy voting is explicitly prohibited under the Planned Community Act, the legislature made no such bar regarding delegate voting as a form of HOA governance.”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 33-1812”, “topic_tags”: [ “voting”, “proxies”, “delegates”, “elections” ] }, { “question”: “Can my HOA allow neighborhood representatives to vote on behalf of owners?”, “short_answer”: “Yes, if the governing documents establish a delegate system where votes are allocated to the representative rather than the unit.”, “detailed_answer”: “The decision upholds a system where neighborhoods elect ‘Voting Members’ who then cast votes for the Board of Directors. The ALJ reasoned that the Planned Communities Act prohibits proxy voting only when votes are ‘allocated to a unit.’ Under the delegate system described, the votes for directors were allocated to the Voting Members, not the individual units.”, “alj_quote”: “The Planned Community Act does not regulate who is authorized to vote in planned community elections. Instead, it prohibits proxy voting when votes have been ‘allocated to a unit.’ Regarding the election of Board Directors, there are no votes ‘allocated to a unit.’ Instead, all votes are allocated to Neighborhood Voting Members as delegates…”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 33-1812”, “topic_tags”: [ “voting”, “board of directors”, “governing documents” ] }, { “question”: “Can neighborhood delegates cast votes for homeowners who did not participate in the poll?”, “short_answer”: “Yes, provided the governing documents allow the delegate to cast unreceived votes at their discretion.”, “detailed_answer”: “The ALJ noted that Voting Members in this case had the discretion to cast votes for units that did not respond to the neighborhood poll. This practice was found not to violate the statutory prohibition on proxies because it was part of a valid delegate voting structure.”, “alj_quote”: “Voting Members do not have complete discretion when casting votes. They only have discretion to cast unreceived votes.”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 33-1812”, “topic_tags”: [ “voting”, “discretionary voting”, “absentee ballots” ] }, { “question”: “What is the burden of proof for a homeowner challenging their HOA in an administrative hearing?”, “short_answer”: “The homeowner must prove their case by a ‘preponderance of the evidence’.”, “detailed_answer”: “The homeowner (Petitioner) is responsible for proving that the HOA violated the statute. The standard used is ‘preponderance of the evidence,’ which means the homeowner must show that their contention is more likely true than not.”, “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.”, “legal_basis”: “A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(2)”, “topic_tags”: [ “burden of proof”, “administrative hearing”, “legal procedure” ] }, { “question”: “Does the Nonprofit Corporation Act apply to HOAs in Arizona?”, “short_answer”: “Yes, unless the Planned Communities Act specifically exempts the HOA from a provision.”, “detailed_answer”: “The ALJ reasoned that because the legislature specifically exempted planned communities from some parts of the Nonprofit Act but was silent on delegate voting, the Nonprofit Act’s allowance of such systems remains relevant context for HOA governance.”, “alj_quote”: “In fact, the legislature specifically exempted planned communities from certain enumerated provisions of the Nonprofit Act, but did not address delegate voting within the Planned Community Act in any capacity.”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 10-3101 et seq.”, “topic_tags”: [ “corporate law”, “statutory interpretation”, “nonprofit act” ] }, { “question”: “If I disagree with the Administrative Law Judge’s decision, what can I do?”, “short_answer”: “You can appeal to the Superior Court within 35 days of being served the order.”, “detailed_answer”: “The decision is binding, but parties have the right to seek judicial review. This appeal must be filed with the Superior Court within a strict 35-day window following the service of the order.”, “alj_quote”: “A party wishing to appeal this order must seek judicial review as prescribed by ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-1092.08(H) and title 12, chapter 7, article 6. Any such appeal must be filed with the superior court within thirty-five days from the date when a copy of this order was served upon the parties.”, “legal_basis”: “A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(H); A.R.S. § 12-904(A)”, “topic_tags”: [ “appeals”, “judicial review”, “superior court” ] } ] }


Case Participants

Petitioner Side

  • Robert J. Garing (petitioner)
    Prescott Lakes Community Association, Inc. member
    Also served as alternate Voting Member for 2 years
  • James Thomas Joan (witness)
    Also listed as Jimmy Yiannis

Respondent Side

  • Adrianne A. Speas (HOA attorney)
    Krupnik & Speas, LLC
    Appeared as counsel for Respondent
  • Robert Sisley (board president; witness)
    Prescott Lakes Community Association, Inc.
    Also Alternate Voting Member for Parkside; served as the association representative
  • Catherine Black (assistant community manager; witness)
    Homeco
    Homeco is the HOA management company for Respondent
  • Lynn M. Krupnik (HOA attorney)
    Krupnik & Speas, LLC
    Counsel listed for Respondent in distribution

Neutral Parties

  • Jenna Clark (ALJ)
    OAH
  • Susan Nicolson (ADRE Commissioner)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Final decision authority/recipient of ALJ Decision