**Case Title:** *Katherine A. Windis v. Fairway Court West Condominium Association*
**Case Number:** 12F-H1213002-BFS
**Forum:** Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings

**Overview**
This case involved a dispute between Petitioner Katherine A. Windis, a unit owner, and the Respondent, Fairway Court West Condominium Association. The hearing took place on December 17, 2012, before Administrative Law Judge M. Douglas regarding alleged statutory and CC&R violations by the Association’s Board of Directors.

**Key Facts and Proceedings**
On April 23, 2012, the Association’s Board passed a resolution allowing first-floor unit owners to install pavers outside their lower lanai areas as part of a landscape conversion project. The resolution specified that these installations were not permanent, were the financial responsibility of the unit owner, and were considered "Limited Common Areas" under Board control.

The Petitioner argued that this resolution allowed first-floor owners to encroach upon and convert "common areas" for private use without the required approval of at least 80% of the property owners, in violation of A.R.S. § 33-1217, § 33-1252, and § 33-1218. She further contended that the resolution discriminated against second-floor unit owners and violated the Association's CC&Rs regarding the use of common areas.

**Key Arguments**
* **Petitioner:** Windis asserted that the Board effectively conveyed common property to private individuals without a vote. She claimed the pavers constituted an unauthorized structural change and encroachment on common property in violation of the Declaration.
* **Respondent:** The Association argued that no conveyance of property occurred and no owner vote was necessary. Board Vice-Chair Dave Harris testified that the pavers were installed on entryways serving specific units. The Association relied on A.R.S. § 33-1212(4), which defines stoops, porches, and entryways serving a single unit as "limited common elements" allocated exclusively to that unit, rather than general common elements.

**Legal Findings and Decision**
The Administrative Law Judge ruled in favor of the Respondent, dismissing the petition. The decision was based on the following key points:

1. **Burden of Proof:** The Petitioner bore the burden of proving the allegations by a preponderance of the evidence but failed to do so.
2. **Limited Common Elements:** The ALJ accepted credible testimony and evidence establishing that the pavers were installed on areas designed for ingress and egress for specific units.
3. **Statutory Application:** Under A.R.S. § 33-1212, such entryways are classified as "limited common elements" allocated exclusively to the specific condominium unit. Therefore, the Board's resolution regarding the pavers did not constitute an illegal conveyance of general common elements or a violation of the CC&Rs.

**Final Outcome**
The ALJ recommended that the petition be dismissed and deemed Fairway Court West Condominium Association the prevailing party. This decision was certified as the final administrative decision of the Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety on February 5, 2013, after the Department took no action to reject or modify it within the statutory timeframe.