New Mexico Discrimination

An investment buyer in our New Mexico HOA community of 68 homes has purchased 10 homes which he rents. His objective is to purchase more homes. During special meetings he has 10 votes and is already taking control. Someday he will have 20 or more votes.

Is this issue discrimination?

In part, discrimination means restricting members of one group from opportunities or privileges that are available to another group; disadvantageous treatment or consideration. In other words, if you are treated worse than others for some arbitrary reason, then discrimination exists. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 outlawed discriminatory voting practices. Homeowner Associations (HOAs) are democracies at the basic level. Voting rights in our democracy do not apply. It is all about the by-laws and covenants.

Changing the covenants is NOW not an option. He has too much control. What else can we do? Complain to the ACLU? Steve

Hi Steve,

Lets take a look at your definition of discrimination.


When the houses go on the market, are you or others being refused the opportunity to purchase the properties? If not, then one could conclude that you are being offered the same opportunity as others.


When it comes time for nominations to be candidates for the Board, are you or others denied this privilege? When it comes time to vote, are you or others denied your privilege to cast the total number of votes under your control? If you or others are denied voting privileges, is this denial based on failure to be current with assessments and are others held to that same requirement?

Are you and others receiving the same services as this individual? Do you and others have access to the same amenities as this individual?

If all of this is happening, it doesn't appear that privileges are being denied.


If you or others are not being denied an opportunity to be considered a candidate for the Board, access to amenities or common areas, being able to cast the number of votes authorized (typically 1 vote per lot owned) and the opportunity to purchase additional lots if so desired it doesn't appear that you or others are receiving disadvantageous treatment or consideration.


I expect that the CC&Rs specify x number of votes per lot owned.
I expect that Assessments are also paid based on a per lot basis.
I expect that you and others had the opportunity to purchase all the property you could afford.
I expect that the rules which may prevent you or others from casting a vote or enjoying amenities are applied equally to all in the development.
If proxies are allowed, I expect that you and others may solicit proxies from other owners so you or others are able to control the votes.

If these expectations are correct, then it appears that you or others are not being treated worse for an arbitrary reason.



HOAs are actually civil contracts with the CC&Rs being the contract.
As a civil contract, the law you post about would not apply. However, other laws would.

HOAs are not a democracy they, like the United States, is actually a Republic where the governing body is elected by the membership to make decisions on behalf of the membership. For the United States, the membership is the citizens limited to one vote per person authorized to vote. For HOA/COAs the membership is the owners of the property, typically limited to one vote per lot owned.


Out of 68 properties, if someone could collect proxies or encourage other owners to participate in the annual meeting and exercise their right to vote, even if the individual did own 20 properties, they would still not have enough votes to control the outcome of an election.


Based on what has been provided, I would have to say no it is not discrimination.


Honestly, organize and gather support from the other owners.
As pointed out earlier, if the other owners banded together, this investor would not control the votes.

Currently with only 10 lots owned, if the other owners did band together, they could amend the governing documents.

This individual only has control of the votes if the enough members chose not to participate in the process.

Hope this helps,

Tim

The investment buyer is our VP. Our HOA recently had a special meeting to vote on a $20.00 increase in dues. The vote was 32 FOR and 24 AGAINST. Our VP had 10 votes FOR.

32 + 24 = 56 you have 68 homes, if the ones who failed to vote had voted against the increase it would have been 32 to 36 and the measure would have lost. I'd blame those 12 more than him.

A HOA is only funded by it's members for it's members. His raising the dues also means he raised his too. So there must be a project that needs to be done requiring more money to complete.

The lawsuit/small claims court waste of money and time. It only gives you a judgement not money. The person can sale and never pay a dime. A lien means can not sell until lien paid. If they will not budge, been over a year, and are not in bank foreclosure, then go the foreclosure route. Which stops as soon as they pay.