The ALJ denied the petition, concluding that the Sanalina HOA did not violate its Bylaws when it removed Petitioner John Zumph from the Board of Directors. The tribunal held that a 'regular meeting' can occur even without the presence of a quorum necessary to conduct business, validating the HOA's decision to declare his office vacant after three consecutive absences.
Why this result: The Petitioner failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent violated the Bylaws. The ALJ determined that the meetings existed despite lack of quorum, and the Petitioner's intentional absences constituted an abuse of process and were not in the spirit of the bylaws.
Key Issues & Findings
Wrongful removal from the Board of Directors
Petitioner challenged his removal from the Board of Directors, arguing that his three consecutive absences from regularly scheduled meetings (July 8, 2021, September 9, 2021, and November 11, 2021) did not count because no quorum was met at those meetings, meaning the meetings did not exist.
Orders: Petitioner's petition is denied.
Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No
Disposition: petitioner_loss
Cited:
A.R.S. § 32-2199(B)
A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2)
A.R.S. § 41-1092
A.A.C. R2-19-119(A)
A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(1)
A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(2)
Sanalina Bylaws Article VII Section 1(d)
Sanalina Bylaws Article VI Section 3
Analytics Highlights
Topics: HOA Board Removal, Quorum Dispute, Bylaw Interpretation, Director Absence, Regular Meeting Definition
These sources document an Arizona administrative hearing and the subsequent legal ruling regarding a dispute between John Zumph and the Sanalina Homeowners Association. Zumph challenged his removal from the Board of Directors, which the association justified based on his absence from three consecutive meetings. While Zumph argued that these sessions did not legally qualify as meetings due to a lack of quorum, the association contended he intentionally skipped them to obstruct board business and force leadership changes. The provided transcript details the testimony and cross-examination of the parties involved, highlighting the internal conflicts within the board. Ultimately, the Administrative Law Judge ruled in favor of the association, concluding that meetings can exist even without a quorum to transact business. The final decision affirmed that Zumph’s intentional absences harmed the community and legally permitted the board to declare his seat vacant.
What was the core disagreement regarding the definition of a quorum?
Explain the impacts of the board’s inability to conduct official business.
How did the Administrative Law Judge rule on the petitioner’s removal?
Thursday, February 12
Save to note
Today • 1:35 PM
Video Overview
Mind Map
Reports
Flashcards
Quiz
Infographic
Slide Deck
Data Table
Blog Post – 22F-H2222049-REL
Select all sources
986676.aac
988629.pdf
No emoji found
Loading
22F-H2222049-REL
2 sources
These sources document an Arizona administrative hearing and the subsequent legal ruling regarding a dispute between John Zumph and the Sanalina Homeowners Association. Zumph challenged his removal from the Board of Directors, which the association justified based on his absence from three consecutive meetings. While Zumph argued that these sessions did not legally qualify as meetings due to a lack of quorum, the association contended he intentionally skipped them to obstruct board business and force leadership changes. The provided transcript details the testimony and cross-examination of the parties involved, highlighting the internal conflicts within the board. Ultimately, the Administrative Law Judge ruled in favor of the association, concluding that meetings can exist even without a quorum to transact business. The final decision affirmed that Zumph’s intentional absences harmed the community and legally permitted the board to declare his seat vacant.
What was the core disagreement regarding the definition of a quorum?
Explain the impacts of the board’s inability to conduct official business.
How did the Administrative Law Judge rule on the petitioner’s removal?
Thursday, February 12
Save to note
Today • 1:35 PM
Video Overview
Mind Map
Reports
Flashcards
Quiz
Infographic
Slide Deck
Data Table
Case Participants
Petitioner Side
John Zumph(petitioner) Sanalina Homeowners Association Also referred to as John Zump or John Edward Dump; Former Board member removed from his position
Pete Selei(board member) Sanalina Homeowners Association Aligned with petitioner's refusal to attend meetings; Board member removed/vacated position; Also referred to as Joe Pete or Pete
Joe(board member) Sanalina Homeowners Association Aligned with petitioner's refusal to attend meetings
Respondent Side
Nick Eicher(HOA attorney) Sanalina Homeowners Association Also referred to as Nick Aker
Lisa Jean Terror(board member) Sanalina Homeowners Association Board Secretary; witness for Respondent
Neutral Parties
Adam D. Stone(ALJ) OAH
Louis Dettorre(commissioner) Arizona Department of Real Estate
Miranda Alvarez(legal secretary)
Other Participants
Thomas Campanella(property manager) Sanalina Homeowners Association Community Manager; Also referred to as Thomas Pampanella
Javier Gimenez(management representative) Sanalina Homeowners Association Handled minutes for March meeting
The Petitioner prevailed by showing the Association violated ARIZ. REV. STAT. section 33-1243. The Association was ordered to refund the $500.00 filing fee. Petitioner's requests for voiding election results, assessing a civil penalty, and appointing an administrator were denied.
Key Issues & Findings
Violation of statutory procedure for board member removal concerning ballot tabulation after deadline.
The Association violated the statute by tabulating ballots for a recall election at the August 19, 2021 meeting, as those ballots were only valid for the canceled June 30, 2021 special meeting.
Orders: Respondent must pay the Petitioner his filing fee of $500.00 within thirty days of the Order. Other requested remedies (voiding results, assessing civil penalty, appointing administrator) were denied.
Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: Yes
Disposition: petitioner_win
Cited:
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243(H)(4)
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1250(C)(3)
Analytics Highlights
Topics: HOA board recall, Ballot tabulation, Quorum dispute, Statutory violation, Filing fee refund
Additional Citations:
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1250
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.02
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.01
ARIZ. ADMIN. CODE § R2-19-119
Whitmer v. Hilton Casitas Homeowners Ass'n
Gutierrez v. Industrial Commission of Arizona
State v. McFall
Video Overview
Audio Overview
Decision Documents
22F-H2221014-REL Decision – 935534.pdf
Uploaded 2026-01-23T17:41:19 (128.9 KB)
22F-H2221014-REL Decision – 945764.pdf
Uploaded 2026-01-23T17:41:24 (48.2 KB)
22F-H2221014-REL Decision – 949683.pdf
Uploaded 2026-01-23T17:41:26 (49.4 KB)
Questions
Question
What is the deadline for an HOA to hold a special meeting after receiving a petition to recall board members?
Short Answer
The meeting must be held within 30 days of receiving the petition.
Detailed Answer
According to Arizona statute, once an HOA receives a petition for the removal of a board member, it is legally required to call, notice, and actually hold the special meeting within a 30-day timeframe.
Alj Quote
The special meeting shall be called, noticed and held within thirty days after receipt of the petition.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243(H)(4)(c)
Topic Tags
recall election
deadlines
board removal
Question
Can an HOA count ballots collected for a specific meeting date at a later, rescheduled meeting?
Short Answer
No, ballots are only valid for the specific meeting they were issued for.
Detailed Answer
An HOA cannot use ballots collected for a canceled meeting at a subsequent meeting held on a different date. The decision clarified that counting such ballots violates the statute because the ballots are strictly limited to the meeting for which they were originally valid.
Alj Quote
The Association’s decision to count the ballots at the August 19th meeting does not comply with section 33-1243 because those ballots were valid only for the June 30th meeting as evidenced by the ballots, the Notice, and the voting instructions.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1250(C)(3)
Topic Tags
voting
ballots
meetings
Question
Can an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) void an HOA election or remove board members?
Short Answer
No, the ALJ does not have the authority to void election results or appoint administrators.
Detailed Answer
While an ALJ can determine if a violation occurred and levy penalties, they cannot order an election to be voided or appoint an independent administrator to oversee the HOA. These remedies are outside the tribunal's statutory scope.
Alj Quote
Mr. Iannuzo’s requests that the tribunal void the election results and that an oversight administrator be appointed have not been shown to be within the scope of the tribunal’s authority.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.02(A)
Topic Tags
legal remedies
ALJ authority
elections
Question
Is an HOA allowed to determine a quorum based solely on mail-in ballots before the meeting starts?
Short Answer
Likely no; the quorum should be determined based on eligible voters present at the time of the meeting.
Detailed Answer
The ALJ noted that the statute calls for a quorum to be determined based on the number of eligible voters at the time of the meeting, implying that canceling a meeting beforehand based solely on returned ballots is not supported by persuasive legal argument.
Alj Quote
The Association presented no persuasive legal argument or authority showing that in determining whether a quorum existed it was appropriate for the Association to use only the ballots returned by June 29th, rather than using the ballots and the members present at the meeting on June 30th.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243(H)(4)(d)
Topic Tags
quorum
meetings
voting
Question
If I win my case against the HOA, can I get my filing fee refunded?
Short Answer
Yes, if the homeowner prevails, the HOA must be ordered to pay the filing fee.
Detailed Answer
If the Administrative Law Judge determines that the homeowner has prevailed in proving a violation, the law mandates that the Judge order the HOA to reimburse the petitioner for the filing fee.
Alj Quote
If the petitioner prevails, the administrative law judge shall order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the filing fee required by section 32-2199.01.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.02(A)
Topic Tags
fees
penalties
reimbursement
Question
Can an HOA fix a violation for missing the 30-day recall meeting deadline by holding the meeting later?
Short Answer
No, this specific violation cannot be cured after the fact.
Detailed Answer
Once the 30-day window for holding a recall meeting has passed, the violation is established and cannot be retroactively fixed by holding the meeting late.
Alj Quote
And although the Association did not conduct the required meeting within 30 days of receiving the recall petitions, this violation cannot be cured.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243
Topic Tags
violations
compliance
deadlines
Case
Docket No
22F-H2221014-REL
Case Title
James Iannuzo vs. Moonrise at Starr Pass Community Association
Decision Date
2021-12-30
Alj Name
Thomas Shedden
Tribunal
OAH
Agency
ADRE
Questions
Question
What is the deadline for an HOA to hold a special meeting after receiving a petition to recall board members?
Short Answer
The meeting must be held within 30 days of receiving the petition.
Detailed Answer
According to Arizona statute, once an HOA receives a petition for the removal of a board member, it is legally required to call, notice, and actually hold the special meeting within a 30-day timeframe.
Alj Quote
The special meeting shall be called, noticed and held within thirty days after receipt of the petition.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243(H)(4)(c)
Topic Tags
recall election
deadlines
board removal
Question
Can an HOA count ballots collected for a specific meeting date at a later, rescheduled meeting?
Short Answer
No, ballots are only valid for the specific meeting they were issued for.
Detailed Answer
An HOA cannot use ballots collected for a canceled meeting at a subsequent meeting held on a different date. The decision clarified that counting such ballots violates the statute because the ballots are strictly limited to the meeting for which they were originally valid.
Alj Quote
The Association’s decision to count the ballots at the August 19th meeting does not comply with section 33-1243 because those ballots were valid only for the June 30th meeting as evidenced by the ballots, the Notice, and the voting instructions.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1250(C)(3)
Topic Tags
voting
ballots
meetings
Question
Can an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) void an HOA election or remove board members?
Short Answer
No, the ALJ does not have the authority to void election results or appoint administrators.
Detailed Answer
While an ALJ can determine if a violation occurred and levy penalties, they cannot order an election to be voided or appoint an independent administrator to oversee the HOA. These remedies are outside the tribunal's statutory scope.
Alj Quote
Mr. Iannuzo’s requests that the tribunal void the election results and that an oversight administrator be appointed have not been shown to be within the scope of the tribunal’s authority.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.02(A)
Topic Tags
legal remedies
ALJ authority
elections
Question
Is an HOA allowed to determine a quorum based solely on mail-in ballots before the meeting starts?
Short Answer
Likely no; the quorum should be determined based on eligible voters present at the time of the meeting.
Detailed Answer
The ALJ noted that the statute calls for a quorum to be determined based on the number of eligible voters at the time of the meeting, implying that canceling a meeting beforehand based solely on returned ballots is not supported by persuasive legal argument.
Alj Quote
The Association presented no persuasive legal argument or authority showing that in determining whether a quorum existed it was appropriate for the Association to use only the ballots returned by June 29th, rather than using the ballots and the members present at the meeting on June 30th.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243(H)(4)(d)
Topic Tags
quorum
meetings
voting
Question
If I win my case against the HOA, can I get my filing fee refunded?
Short Answer
Yes, if the homeowner prevails, the HOA must be ordered to pay the filing fee.
Detailed Answer
If the Administrative Law Judge determines that the homeowner has prevailed in proving a violation, the law mandates that the Judge order the HOA to reimburse the petitioner for the filing fee.
Alj Quote
If the petitioner prevails, the administrative law judge shall order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the filing fee required by section 32-2199.01.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 32-2199.02(A)
Topic Tags
fees
penalties
reimbursement
Question
Can an HOA fix a violation for missing the 30-day recall meeting deadline by holding the meeting later?
Short Answer
No, this specific violation cannot be cured after the fact.
Detailed Answer
Once the 30-day window for holding a recall meeting has passed, the violation is established and cannot be retroactively fixed by holding the meeting late.
Alj Quote
And although the Association did not conduct the required meeting within 30 days of receiving the recall petitions, this violation cannot be cured.
Legal Basis
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 33-1243
Topic Tags
violations
compliance
deadlines
Case
Docket No
22F-H2221014-REL
Case Title
James Iannuzo vs. Moonrise at Starr Pass Community Association
Decision Date
2021-12-30
Alj Name
Thomas Shedden
Tribunal
OAH
Agency
ADRE
Case Participants
Petitioner Side
James Iannuzo(petitioner) Appeared and testified on his own behalf
Respondent Side
Jason E. Smith(respondent attorney) Smith & Wamsley, PLLC Counsel for Respondent
Neutral Parties
Thomas Shedden(ALJ) Office of Administrative Hearings
Louis Dettorre(Commissioner) Arizona Department of Real Estate
Miranda Alvarez(clerk) Transmitted Decision
c. serrano(clerk) Transmitted Advisements
AHansen(staff) Arizona Department of Real Estate Recipient of transmission (Attn)
djones(staff) Arizona Department of Real Estate Recipient of transmission (Attn)
DGardner(staff) Arizona Department of Real Estate Recipient of transmission (Attn)
vnunez(staff) Arizona Department of Real Estate Recipient of transmission (Attn)
