Tag Archives: CC&R § 4.3

Michael J Stoltenberg v. Rancho Del Oro Homeowners Association

Posted on by

Case Summary

Case ID 19F-H1919068-REL
Agency ADRE
Tribunal OAH
Decision Date 2019-09-04
Administrative Law Judge Thomas Shedden
Outcome yes
Filing Fees Refunded $500.00
Civil Penalties $0.00

Parties & Counsel

Petitioner Michael J. Stoltenberg Counsel —
Respondent Rancho Del Oro Homeowners Association Counsel Nicole Payne

Alleged Violations

CC&R 4.3

Outcome Summary

The ALJ found the HOA violated CC&R 4.3 regarding the timing of budget delivery. While the Petitioner prevailed on the violation and was awarded the $500 filing fee, the ALJ denied the request to rescind the dues increase and denied civil penalties.

Key Issues & Findings

Failure to deliver budget 15 days prior to meeting

Petitioner alleged the HOA violated CC&R 4.3 by failing to deliver the budget 15 days before the meeting. The HOA mailed the budget exactly 15 days prior (Jan 2 for Jan 17 meeting), but the ALJ ruled the contract required delivery, not just mailing, 15 days prior.

Orders: Respondent must pay to Petitioner his filing fee of $500.00 within thirty days.

Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: Yes

Disposition: petitioner_win

Decision Documents

19F-H1919068-REL Decision – 735330.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-27T21:17:02 (80.1 KB)

**Case Summary: Stoltenberg v. Rancho Del Oro Homeowners Association**
**Case Number:** 19F-H1919068-REL
**Date of Decision:** September 4, 2019
**Administrative Law Judge:** Thomas Shedden

**Proceedings and Main Issue**
This matter was heard before the Arizona Department of Real Estate on August 21, 2019. Petitioner Michael J. Stoltenberg initially alleged multiple violations of the Association’s Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs). However, the proceedings were limited to a single issue: whether the Respondent, Rancho Del Oro Homeowners Association, violated CC&R section 4.3 by failing to deliver the 2019 budget to unit owners at least fifteen days prior to the annual meeting,.

**Key Facts**
* **The Requirement:** CC&R section 4.3 requires the Board to deliver a copy of the budget and assessment amounts to unit owners at least fifteen days before the meeting at which they are presented,.
* **The Meeting:** The Association conducted its annual meeting on January 17, 2019, at which time monthly dues were increased by 10%.
* **The Delivery:** Evidence showed the Association postmarked the budget on January 2, 2019. The Petitioner testified he did not receive the budget fifteen days prior to the meeting.
* **Petitioner's Request:** The Petitioner requested that the dues increase be rescinded and a civil penalty be issued against the Association.

**Legal Analysis**
The Administrative Law Judge emphasized that CC&Rs constitute a contract between the parties, and the tribunal must enforce clear and unambiguous terms,. The Judge found that CC&R section 4.3 explicitly requires the budget be "delivered"—not just mailed—at least fifteen days before the meeting. Although the Association mailed the document exactly fifteen days prior (January 2), the preponderance of the evidence established that it was not *delivered* to the Petitioner by the required deadline.

**Outcome and Order**
The Judge ruled in favor of the Petitioner, deeming him the prevailing party. The final order stipulated:
1. **Violation:** The Association violated CC&R section 4.3 regarding the timely delivery of the budget.
2. **Remedies:** The Petitioner’s requests to rescind the dues increase and impose civil penalties were denied, as he did not demonstrate these measures were appropriate.
3. **Fees:** The Association was ordered to reimburse the Petitioner’s $500.00 filing fee within thirty days.

Case Participants

Petitioner Side

  • Michael J. Stoltenberg (petitioner)
    Appeared on his own behalf

Respondent Side

  • Nicole Payne (respondent attorney)
    Carpenter, Hazlewood, Delgado & Bolen LLP
  • Diana Crites (witness)
    Crites Property Management
    Testified for the Association
  • Lydia A. Peirce Linsmeier (respondent attorney)
    Carpenter, Hazlewood, Delgado & Bolen LLP
    Listed in transmission block

Neutral Parties

  • Thomas Shedden (ALJ)
    Office of Administrative Hearings
  • Judy Lowe (Commissioner)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Recipient of transmitted order
  • F. Del Sol (clerk/staff)
    Office of Administrative Hearings
    Signed the transmission of the order

Myron H Colvin vs. Tierra Del Sol RV Resort Association

Posted on by

Case Summary

Case ID 19F-H19190064-REL
Agency ADRE
Tribunal OAH
Decision Date 2019-08-27
Administrative Law Judge Velva Moses-Thompson
Outcome no
Filing Fees Refunded $500.00
Civil Penalties $0.00

Parties & Counsel

Petitioner Myron H. Colvin Counsel —
Respondent Tierra Del Sol RV Resort Association Counsel Nicholas Nogami

Alleged Violations

CC&R § 4.3

Outcome Summary

The Administrative Law Judge dismissed the petition. The Petitioner failed to meet the burden of proof to establish that the HOA violated the CC&Rs. The ALJ ruled that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to issue a declaratory judgment regarding the Petitioner's request to determine if his own actions constituted a violation.

Why this result: Failure to prove HOA violation; lack of jurisdiction for declaratory judgment.

Key Issues & Findings

Dispute over lot setbacks and paver installation violation notice

Petitioner installed concrete pavers in his lot's setback area. The HOA issued a Notice of Violation stating the pavers violated CC&R § 4.3 because they were not small enough to be moved by one person. Petitioner argued he had approval and sought a hearing regarding the alleged violation. The ALJ found Petitioner failed to prove the HOA violated the CC&Rs.

Orders: Petition dismissed.

Filing fee: $500.00, Fee refunded: No

Disposition: petitioner_loss

Decision Documents

19F-H19190064-REL Decision – 733836.pdf

Uploaded 2026-01-27T21:16:06 (83.2 KB)

**Case Summary: Myron H. Colvin v. Tierra Del Sol RV Resort Association**
**Case Number:** 19F-H19190064-REL
**Forum:** Office of Administrative Hearings, Arizona
**Decision Date:** August 27, 2019

**Key Facts**
Petitioner Myron H. Colvin, a member of the Tierra Del Sol RV Resort Association, received approval from the Association in March 2018 and again in March 2019 to install concrete pavers in the setback area of his lot. Following the installation, the Association issued a Notice of Violation on May 8, 2019, citing a violation of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) § 4.3. The Association alleged the pavers were too large to be moved by one person without mechanical assistance. In response, Mr. Colvin filed a petition with the Arizona Department of Real Estate alleging that the Association violated CC&R § 4.3.

**Legal Issues and Arguments**
The hearing focused on whether the Association violated the community documents and the tribunal’s jurisdiction over the dispute.
* **Petitioner’s Position:** Mr. Colvin contended that the Association had previously approved his project and asserted that he had not violated CC&R § 4.3.
* **Respondent’s Position:** The Association argued that CC&R § 4.3 restricts the placement of improvements in setback areas. They asserted that the section is violated only if an entity places an unapproved object there. Since the Association did not place any object in the setback, it could not be in violation. Additionally, the Association argued that the Office of Administrative Hearings lacked jurisdiction to issue a declaratory judgment regarding whether Mr. Colvin was in violation.

**Decision and Reasoning**
Administrative Law Judge Velva Moses-Thompson dismissed the petition based on the following legal conclusions:
1. **Burden of Proof:** The Petitioner bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent (the Association) violated its CC&Rs.
2. **Contract Interpretation:** CC&R § 4.3 prohibits structures, vehicles, or landscaping features in lot setbacks under specific conditions. The Judge found that Mr. Colvin did not allege facts showing the *Association* placed any such items in the setback. Instead, Mr. Colvin was asserting that *he* did not violate the section.
3. **Jurisdiction:** The Judge ruled that Mr. Colvin failed to establish that the Association violated Section 4.3. Furthermore, the tribunal determined it did not have jurisdiction to grant a declaratory judgment regarding the Petitioner's request to be found compliant with the rule.

**Outcome**
The Administrative Law Judge ordered the petition dismissed.

Case Participants

Petitioner Side

  • Myron H. Colvin (petitioner)
    Tierra Del Sol RV Resort Association (member)
    Appeared on behalf of himself

Respondent Side

  • Nicholas Nogami (attorney)
    Tierra Del Sol RV Resort Association
    Esq.

Neutral Parties

  • Velva Moses-Thompson (ALJ)
    Office of Administrative Hearings
  • Judy Lowe (Commissioner)
    Arizona Department of Real Estate
    Received electronic transmission of order