HOA land owners rights

I am a new member here and I want to thank everyone responsible for this site for the opportunity for me to ask a few HOA questions. What is the general procedure of most HOA to take action against a member in good standing that they claim is violating the covenants. I would expect that first, they would call a special session of the board, notify the member that there will be a hearing, and then make a decision.

It all depends on what your documents say. I would read those first to find out. The CC&R's should be referenced on actions the HOA can take. Fines are a bit tricky. The HOA may or may not be able to issue them. There are many variables. If they do, then they should have what is called a "Fining Schedule" detailing the violation and it's fine. The basically work like speeding tickets for the HOA.

The HOA doesn't have to call a special meeting necessarily. Ours we did not. I would write the violation and reference the violation. If they had an issue, then they could come to the open board meeting.

Our HOA we did not issue fines. Instead if you were in violation, we could first tell you to fix it. If you did not, the HOA could fix it and send the owner the bill. If the owner did not pay that bill, then we could lien for that amount. That is not how most HOA's do but in ours it is how it worked in our rules.

A HOA can't evict someone unless for unpaid dues. So a convenant violation would not be grounds. Something more to this story has to be going on. Need more details on that.

Of course, I have read the covenants and the by-laws and I find them rather strange in that they do not have a meeting protocol included or guidelines for disciplinary action. They do have guide lines for foreclosing on property for non payment of dues, which they pursue rigorously. The board is so off the hook that they do not even publish a agenda before the scheduled meetings. I have requested an agenda for the April 21 meeting, but have they just ignored me. Have you ever seen a covenants that states that the covenants can’t be amended?
I was on the parliamentary procedure debating team in high school, so I know Robert’s Rules of Order by heart. I have tabulated 4 violations of the New Mexico Open Meeting law that they are oblivious of, and yes, I will be filling a complaint with the state attorney generals office.
I live in a rural and rather unique HOA where there are about 900 absentee dues paying landowners and about 50 full time residence. I am the only builder this year of a single family residence in the HOA which is a requirement to stay on the 5 acres of land in my motorhome. You would think that the HOA would be delighted that I was building, but that is not the case. The residence with the Board of Directors have formed into a clique where they enjoy the $120,000 yearly dues from the absentee owners and in actuality, they do not want any new residence, they like it the way it is. It is a very hostile and unfriendly environment. These people are so ignorant and backward that the president and directors think that a title company makes loans on titles. Ha. Ha. Ha. How can they have a quorum of 1/3 of the membership for a legal meeting when there is only 20 to 30 members show up? This is getting to long, I can go on and on.

That would be a logical expectation.

Serving on our Board and having served on our enforcement committee, I would expect owners who are informed of violations to respond to the notice either saying they disagree, will comply or don't understand the issue. Unfortunately, too often there is zero return communication.

Each State varies on it’s laws. Some are similar because they will base their HOA State laws on UCIOA (Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act). I personally like UCIOA based statutes because I feel it does a great job of equally protecting owners, developers, and secured creditors. New Mexico statutes are not based on UCIOA and primarily will rely upon what is contained in your Governing Documents and the few State Statutes such as: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2017/chapter-47/article-16/

When you state: “Have you ever seen a covenants that states that the covenants can’t be amended?“ ... YEP seen them and I personally really like them and others which are difficult to amend. WHY ... because you have the choice BEFORE you purchase whether or not you like what you see ... and if not like you then have the Freedom to Choose NOT to purchase. It really peeves me when people will purchase in an HOA and then make huge waves wanting to make a lot of changes after they purchased. Why did they purchase in an HOA that they potentially did not like what was stated in the CCR’s??? Again ... If anybody does not like what they see ... do not buy!!!

Lawrence,

The open meeting act likely applies to the government and not the Association.

The HOA act would be considered a civil law and civil laws are typically enforced by the individuals involved either though mutual agreement or the courts.

-- Lawrence, HOAs in New Mexico are not subject to the NM Open Meetings Act. From NMSA 10-15-1: Only a "All meetings of a quorum of members of any board, commission, administrative adjudicatory body or other policymaking body of any state agency, any agency or authority of any county, municipality, district or any political subdivision, held for the purpose of formulating public policy, including the development of personnel policy, rules, regulations or ordinances, discussing public business or for the purpose of taking any action within the authority of or the delegated authority of any board, commission or other policymaking body are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times, except as otherwise provided in the constitution of New Mexico or the Open Meetings Act." HOAs are not "political subdivisions" of any of the above-named entities. For elaboration, see Example 10 and the other examples in the NM Open Meetign Act Compliance guide at https://www.nmag.gov/uploads/files/Publications/ComplianceGuides/Open%20Meetings%20Act%20Compliance%20Guide%202015.pdf

-- The New Mexico Homeowners' Association Act (of 2013, not 2001) refers to open meetings exactly once, at NMSA 47-7E-9, as follows: "Ballots, if used, shall be counted by a neutral third party or by a committee of volunteers. The volunteers shall be selected or appointed at an open meeting, in a fair manner, by the chair of the board or another person presiding during that portion of the meeting." See the NM HOA Act at https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2013/chapter-47/article-7e . The NM HOA Act says nothing further about having open meetings.

-- At NMSA 47-7E-6(A), the NM HOA Act states that, "The association shall exercise any powers conferred to the association in the community documents." If your HOA's governing documents state that all board meetings must be open to members, then it is your HOA's governing documents that gives you as a HOA member the legal right to attend board meetings.

-- Neither the NM Homeowners' Association Act nor the Open Meetings Act require the use of Robert's Rules.

-- The NM Nonprofit Corporation Act also typically applies to HOAs. Like the statutes above, it also does not require open meetings nor the use of Robert's Rules.

-- Neither the NM Attorney General nor the NM Open Meetings Division can do anything for you when it comes to open meetings at your HOA. To enforce any part of your HOA's governing documents, requiring open meetings, will require that you threaten legal action via an attorney you hire or pro se.

Lawrence, for a criminal prosecution to be considered, a violation of the New Mexico Criminal Code must be alleged. See https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2017/chapter-30/. See if you can find anything there that indicates criminal activity by your board. So far, I see nothing indicating criminal activity. The New Mexico attorney general will eventually get back to you and tell you that it has no enforcement authority over your HOA for the issues you cite. Else I am happy to agree to disagree. Good luck.

Don't know, but China has done it for years and look where they are at. Just saying??

Commentator please erase my previous post I should have redacted some names. I tried to edit, but could not find the link.

Thank You Augustine, I had read the lawsuit and the result along with the CCR’s of the association before I bought the property. Paying the assessment is not the issue here. The association has about $200,000 in reserves and a powerful law firm in Santa Fe. They can lobby and appeal to the court until they get a favorable decission: a land owner can’t afford the expense. Indeed, pay the expense of opposing attorneys.
My appeal to the Attorney General Office was mailed May 9th and it should be in review this week. We will have to wait on their decission. The longer it takes for them to reply is an indication of their interest. If it is not in their purview, they will reject very soon, possibly with recommendation for action in District Court. Like, Racketeering charges. I should have never posted here, now the cat is out of the bag.

Lawrence, unfortunately, based on a request I made in the past that went unanswered, whatever moderator exists does not seem all that responsive.

I do not think you have posted anything that hurts your position.

I agree that one of the problems with HOAs run by amateurs is the unwitting directors often use all the HOA money they want on the HOA attorney. The HOA attorney is, for the greater part, obliged to take direction from the Board. Plus doing so often results in the billable hours being higher. On the other hand, the directors are unpaid and often give many hours to a lot of baloney. Do you want to serve on the board? At this point, I am ready to put up with a lot of waste and mistakes by the board, as long as the mistakes are not too expensive, so I do not have to do all the work.

Sometimes the moderator(s) act quickly, sometimes they don't. Nevertheless, I agree with AugustinD re. what you've said doesn't hurt your position.

For the deletion request I made (following advice by a few people here) some months ago, the moderator did not act at all. I am glad they heard Lawrence and deleted what he requested.

Lawrence

You came on nice and polite. Now all you want to do is argue with people that do not agree with you.

Sorry, you can't take a joke. Hell, I even thought it was funny.

In reply to Richard: “Sorry, you can't take a joke. Hell, I even thought it was funny“.
Only someone with a Homer Simpson mentality would think your stement is “funny”.

Ahhh..My feeling are really hurt.