guest blog by Dave Russell
The news this past weekend was shocking! Blondie Brewer signed Senate 
Bill 1482 which prevents property owners from screening potential renters in Homeowners Associations.
This controversial bill essentially eliminates crime-free programs in HOAs. It banishes criminal background checks on renters, and will allow criminals to move in right next door to your family.
Gal-Pals & Realtor chums Rep. Michelle Ugenti & Senator Gail Griffin plotted a sneaky scheme to bully their HOA legislation through. And they totally snowed fellow lawmakers into passing it.
Homeowner advocates are lining up at the courthouse to file their lawsuits to block SB 1482. As a community manager in Mesa, Arizona, I have now filed my own lawsuit to block this bill from becoming law. I believe there are serious Constitutional issues with this legislation.
The Stakeholders of this bill, none of whom were actually homeowners, told the Legislature that SB 1482 wouldn’t affect crime prevention programs. They’re dead wrong.
This same sneaky legislation slipped its way through last year. Rep. Ugenti hid it by tucking it away in a campaign finance bill. It was deemed illegal because it violated the state constitution and it was thrown out by the courts.
Do Blondie Brewer and Bimbo Ugenti just not care about the safety of folks and their children who live in HOAs?
(CBS5 TV story on controversial law)
(link to Dave Russell’s lawsuit)
I don’t understand the point of this blog post.
Is it the editorial policy of NeighborsAtWar.com that H.O.A. corporations should have the authority and power to screen and approve renters?
What Mr. Russell fails to mention was that the bill was ruled unconstitutional because
It was not ruled unconstitutional due to the contents of the bill; i.e., the court took no position as to whether allowing H.O.A. corporations to screen renters is a good or bad idea.
George Staropoli was one of the plaintiffs in that lawsuit. If you read his Complaint (PDF), its claims for relief are “Violation Of Single-Subject” and “Violation of Title Requirement“.
According to George, SB 1482 is also a multi-subject bill:
Is Mr. Russell challenging all of those provisions, or just the ones that curtail his power as a self-described “community manager”?
Hello Robert,
I am challenging all of the above. Especially permitting unlicensed and untrained HOA managers to represent HOAs in small claims court, and before administrative hearings.
I would be happy to send you a copy of the lawsuit. You can email me davecr102@yahoo.com
I only became the manager of this complex because of the corruption this community endured. As most know, I’m an activist for homeowners first, then an HOA manager.
I see it’s true. A picture does say 1,000 words. Perhaps in this case it says, 2,000?
It’s a pretty bad state of affairs when the court system has to keep the state legislators from breaking the law.
Thank goodness the people of Arizona now have Dave, George, Shelly, and Jill on their side working tirelessly to keep the legislators from putting their self-serving needs above the security and safety of their constituents.
A few years ago I read about a guy in Florida that got ticked off at his HOA and rented his house to registered sex offenders. With that some neighbors sold cheap to get out. He bought those units, too. And rented to more registered sex offenders With that more cheap houses and he bought more and put more sex offenders in them. It all worked in his favor…and the HOA lost the war.
I read some comments where a group was forming to buy a house in Ugenti’s neighborhood where they could rent it to registered sex offenders. Perhaps that will force her to stay at home to protect her children and let somebody more responsible become a legislator? Everybody wins!
Nila,
Is it your position that H.O.A. corporations should have the authority and power to screen renters?
Yes, Robert. Based on the history of these condos in the Phoenix area and what has been done to make them safer then I feel it’s a prudent thing to keep those programs in place.
If I vote, board a plane, see a doctor, get pulled over for speeding, I have to show a photo ID. If I apply for a job with an airline they require a 10 year background check, drug test me, and have my fingerprints done by the police department. If I rent an apartment they run a credit report and take a copy of my driver’s license.
An HOA is a non-profit corporation and should have a right to know who’s living there…and even DNA test my dog’s poop if that’s what the members have voted to do. If I opt to not owner occupy my unit then the tenant I put in there should be subjected to the same rules as the owners.
None of it is a Democrat, Republican, Independent thing…it’s strictly a safety issue…and it benefits everybody because if the place turns into a crime area the property values drop and the owners lose money, not to mention if somebody gets killed there could be a liability issue for the HOA/COA to pay for. (Think Trayvon Martin)
It’s one thing to believe that a property owner has a right to screen whoever he wants to rent his property to.
It’s quite another to say that a 3rd party corporation — which is not contributing to the mortgage payments — should have the power to approve or deny prospective tenants — even if you believe that power will not be abused. Personally, I don’t think it’s any of your business or Dave Russell’s business or anybody else’s business who I rent my property to, unless you’re going to pay me to keep my unit vacant.
The H.O.A. lobby thrives by exploiting people’s fears — the fear of what their neighbors will do with their own property — because it is a tactic that apparently works. You even played the “property values” card.
I divide the “H.O.A. reform movement” — as much as there is one — into two general camps:
– Those who accept the legitimacy of a contractual relationship between home owners and H.O.A. corporations. These people seek to preserve the contractual relationship, while regulating and tweaking the terms of the contract. They believe that the H.O.A. regime can be made to work; all that’s needed is some Glasnost and Perestroika.
– Those who do not accept the legitimacy of a contractual relationship between home owners and H.O.A. corporations. These people believe that adhesion documents, fine print, and the legal fiction of constructive notice do not carry moral authority. Since CC&Rs are currently enforceable as contracts, it will take either legislation or a court ruling to change the current situation.
You obviously fall into the first camp.
There was an interesting series of blog posts on Evan McKenzie’s “Privatopia Papers” about this:
“HOA Convenants Not Generally Regarded As Contracts”
by Fred Pilot. Saturday, December 31, 2011
with 14 comments
“Do Americans Consider CC&Rs Contracts, Revisited”
by Evan McKenzie. Monday, January 02, 2012
with 07 comments
“Do Owners Believe CC&Rs Are Contracts, Part Trois…”
by Tyler Berding. Monday, January 02, 2012
with 03 comments
“George Staropoli On The ‘Do Owners Believe CC&Rs Are Contracts?’ Debate”
by George Staropoli. Wednesday, January 04, 2012
with 01 comment
“Fred Fischer On The “Do Owners Believe CC&Rs Are Contracts?” Debate”
by Fred Fischer. Wednesday, January 04, 2012
with 03 comments
Personally, I believe an H.O.A. reform movement that continues to accept the legitimacy of a contractual relatioship between home owner and H.O.A. corporation has already lost the war, regardless of how many battles it may win. But that’s just my opinion, which is worth what you’re paying for it. Others may have different viewpoints.
George Staropoli was a few years ahead of me on this, athough he divides the home owners into five groups
1. Revolutionary
2. Reformer
3. Complacent
4. Team Player
5. True Believer
See his blog post, “HOA Privatization Scale: Facing Reality” ( June 03, 2012 ) for his definitions of these groups.
I agree with his conclusion (emphasis in original):
You’ve got that exactly backwards. The Retreat at Twin Lakes settled with the Martin family becuase George Zimmerman was working (or believed he was working) for the H.O.A. corporation; not because the H.O.A. corporation failed to provide security services.
If an H.O.A. corporation is prohibited by law from screening tenants, then it can not be held liable for the actions of a tenant.
If an H.O.A. corporation does have the statutory power to approve or deny tenants, then the corporation — and by extension, the home owners — can be held liable if the H.O.A. corporation fails to screen a tenant who later commits a crime. The fear of liability will drive the H.O.A. corporation to be heavy handed. Given that we all commit three felonies a day, god-knows how many Americans have been charged with non-violent offenses, and this country has the highest incarceration in the world, it won’t end up well.
In general, the more power an H.O.A. corporation has, the more at-risk its mandatory members are, because the home owners are personally resopnsible for any debts and liabilities created by the H.O.A. corporation.
PS — If H.O.A. corporations were truly interested in keeping criminals out, they’d get rid of their lawyers and property managers.
Nila,
Then you must also believe that H.O.A. corporations should have the power to conduct criminal back ground checks on prospective home buyers, and the authority to approve or deny a sale on that basis. Right?
If not, why not?
Nila, I like the way you think and write. There are more people involved here in AZ to educate the legislature or Governor. I’ve been in contact and supported a lady in Sun City. Mary has been working on HOA legislation for 15 years. She informs many of us of how and when to write to the legislators and Governor. Despite our efforts, this HOA bill was not vetoed and Ugenti won and our Governor won again. Ugenti has to be defeated in next election. If not, maybe we’ll have to take your suggestion to heart and find a sex offender to move in next to her. Rumor has it she’s getting a divorce. Maybe she’ll have to move into a condo and then she’ll learn of the inequities in HOA.
Sandy,
I should be clear here. For the safety sake of children, Ugenti’s children included, I would never want anybody to win a battle (HOA or otherwise) at the expense of a child’s safety. With that said, I wish Ugenti, Brewer, Petersen, and Griffin, would have the same concern for the children they have now chosen to put at risk. I pray no child pays the price for their selfishness and stupidity, but if they do the parents or guardians of that child should go after these irresponsible legislators.
Dave Russell and the other property manager (her name I cannot recall) have already demonstrated the difference it makes to have a “Crime Free Program” in place. To me, reversing that is no different than if the legislators said, okay we’ve gone into the automobile manufacturing business and we’ve decided to remove the seatbelts from the cars. Or we have invested in the tobacco industry and the bans on smoking in public places are now lifted. Does that make sense? No. And neither does this new law that Dave has filed a lawsuit over.
I consider what they are doing as an abuse of power. Therefore, they should be removed from office in the next election. If I lived in Arizona I’d be campaigning hard against them.
On a side note: I’ve worked closely with the legislators in Kansas where I live. The men are gentlemen and the women dress like professionals. Ugenti may think she’s impressing people with her distasteful comments (I’ve watched the youtube videos that were emailed to me)and her trashy tight clothes but when she’s my age, I’d bet she’s going to look back at herself during her legislative days…and at the least she will say…WHAT WAS I THINKING????????? And, today her parents probably hold their heads in shame. If her husband is divorcing her I hope he has better taste in women on his next go around. And I hope her children get to enjoy time with a really classy and refined step-mother.
Sandy, I hope you and Mary will team up with the other HOA activists in Arizona and become part of our national HOA Army. Together we will make a difference and we need intelligent committed people like yourself.
Thank you for reading this website and for taking the time to post your comment and compliment. And, please keep spreading the word about HOAs, Sandy!