Court-House

October 28, 2009

ALL WELCOME TO COURT-HOUSE

Filed under: LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 9:33 pm


Welcome to Courthouse Services Inc. ©  The following Chapters and Points of Interest can be downloaded as a PDF file. The information collected  in this publication has been compiled by James W. Burneson over a 10 year period.

Court house


In addition to listed  Chapters there are  transcripts published  that relate to trials and hearings tied  to each Chapter when available. These transcripts have been edited with comments by Jim Burneson and noted in red print. The transcripts can be reviewed and downloaded at no charge to verify the statements made in each Chapter.   All Chapters and statements offered by this website are based on the opinions of James W. Burneson or by the opinion of individual contributors.

WHAT IS THIS WEBSITE ABOUT ?

The range of  subjects covered on this site are as follows:

  • Litigation within the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County,
  • Perjury in our civil court is not enforced by the civil judge.
  • Wrongful actions by judges and lawyers,
  • Abuse of Homeowner Association members  by crooked property managers and HOA lawyers for their own profit.
  • There are multiple chapters on how members can protect themselves from incompetent HOA Board of Directors and crooked property managers and HOA Lawyers.
  • The Denver City and County jail
  • The Woman’s Correctional Institute on Havana Ave. in Denver, Colorado.
  • Immigration , Thanks to the 1986 Immigration law we have over 20 million Illegal Mexicans roaming our country tax free.
  • Cost of education of Illegal Mexican children to State of Colorado,
  • Colorado Supreme Court,
  • Attorney Regulation Counsel, Rulings on threatening emails by a lawyer.
  • Appellant Court of Colorado, denies freedom of speech in an appeal if a judge or lawyer is criticize. Peasants are not allowed to criticize royalty.
  • CPA accountants for HOAs audits that all checks paid are board approved  as required by Covenants and By law.
  • Sham Fence Program by City of Aurora,
  • Lack of complaint process against Police Officers at City of Aurora,
  • State legislature  passage of  SB 06-89 by  Senator Morgan Carroll, This law was written by Community Associations Institute  (CAI) This is the ACORN of the HOA business.
  • Earl Johnson of Western States Property Services Inc., etc.
  • HOA Attorneys methods of rape and plunder of Associations.
  • Community Association Institution. CAI known as the ACORN of the HOA business
  • Over 20 District Judges implicated in ex parte communication with trial lawyer prior to trial that same attorney later won.
  • If you want to convert your HOA to a self management Association James Burneson can assist you as a consultant.  Go to Chapter 15 for a review of how to run an HOA without lawyer and property manager.

You can reach customer service at: burnesonj@msn.com

TO START THIS PROGRAM SCROLL TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE AND CHAPTERS  WILL BE DISPLAYED IN NUMERICAL ORDER

OR

YOU CAN ENTER A NAME OF A SUBJECT OR CHAPTER NUMBER IN THE SEARCH SCREEN UPPER RIGHT AND YOUR REQUEST WILL BE DISPLAYED.

OR

A TABLE OF CONTENTS HAS BEEN POSTED WITH CHAPTER NUMBERS AND  SUBJECTS DISPLAYED

PRESS THE KEY UPPER RIGHT”DOWNLOAD CHAPTERS”

THERE IS A SEARCH SCREEN UPPER RIGHT TOP OF THE PAGE FOR ENTERING A KEY WORD WITHIN A CHAPTER AND THOSE WITH MATCHING KEY WORDS WILL BE DISPLAYED.

ALL CHAPTERS “ONE”  THROUGH “FIFTY FIVE ” CAN BE FOUND BY A  CATEGORY FROM THE CATEGORIES SECTION AND ARE AVAILABLE TO BE DOWNLOADED AND PRINTED.

PRINTING INSTRUCTIONS

Printing the text of a Chapter’s introduction  copy the text and transfer to your computer word software and print it from there. Any documents downloaded or attached files will print directly from that file to your printer.  Another way to print a Chapter Test is once you have the Chapter you want to click on the Chapter Label on the top of the page and that Chapter will be separated from all other Chapters and then you can print directly from the screen. If you don’t click on the Chapter label you will get the printing of all Chapters.

_________________________________________________________

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF CHAPTERS AT COURT-HOUSE.COM

CHAPTER 01  18TH DISTRICT COURT OF ARAPAHOE COUNTY COLORADO JUSTICE DENIED 1999-2009

CHAPTER 02 COUNTY TRIAL BY AURORA COUNTY JUDGE STEPHEN RUDDICK AND DISTRICT JUDGE RAFFERTY. THIS IS ONE OF THE EXAMPLES OF A JUDGE AND LAWYER WORKING TOGETHER TO DENY JUSTICE. Judge Ruddick’s Court

CHAPTER 03 THE PUBLIC IS DENIED OPEN RECORD ACT OF AUDIO CDs OF COURT TRIALS.

CHAPTER 04 REVIEW OF KANGAROO COURT HELD IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE COUGHLIN

CHAPTER 05 COLORADO ATTORNEY GENERAL KEN SALAZAR RICHARD FOREMAN AND HEATHER JONES

CHAPTER 06 REVIEW DISTRICT JUDGE CARLOS A SAMOUR JR. Order to deny review of the Dam East HOA books.  He was working with Jeffrey Lane ex parte on this dismissal of Plaintiff’s request.

CHAPTER 07 STATE FARM AND OTHER INSURANCE COMPANIES DOUBLE DIPPING IN HOA INSURANCE POLICIES

CHAPTER 08 VENGEFUL HOA/COA & JUSTICE DENIED

CHAPTER 09 STATE LEGISLATURE PASSED SENATE BILL 06-89 WITHOUT READING IT. This bill neutered SB 100 By Senator Morgan Carroll. .

CHAPTER 10 MAGISTRATE PETRIE 18TH COUNTY COURT OF AURORA CASE NUMBER BO 3 C 8084 c-2

CHAPTER 11 CHIEF JUDGE LEOPOLD DROPS DOWN TO PERFORM AS A COUNTY COURT JUDGE ALL SCRIPTED BY JEFFREY LANE ESQ.

CHAPTER 12 COURT CASE 07CV 1609 JUDGE SPENCER PRESIDING AND WORKED WITH JEFFREY LANE EX PARTE BEFORE THE HEARING

CHAPTER 13 DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION 1999 TO 2006

CHAPTER 14 REVIEW YOUR HOA TO DETERMINE IF THE PROPERTY MANAGER AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE HONEST. Chapter 14A List of Dirty tricks used by Association Attorney and Property Managers Chapter 14B. How to Protect Yourself from Being Ripped Off by Property Managers.

CHAPTER 14C WESTERN STATES PROPERTY SERVICES INC. HOA Properties Managed Member of “COMMUNITY ASSOCIATES INSTITUTE”

CHAPTER 15 HOW TO RUN AN HOA WITHOUT LAWYERS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS

CHAPTER 16 WHAT TO REVIEW BEFORE YOU BUY INTO AN HOA

CHAPTER 17 COUNTY JUDGE CROSS LITTLETON COURT. GRANTING PERMENATE PROTECTION ORDER AGAINST MR. BURNESON TO NOT “ANNOY” BOARD OF DIRECTORS DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION

CHAPTER 18 JUDGE ETTENBERG RULINGS ON THE PERMENATE PROTECTIONS ORDER HERE IS A SENIOR JUDGE WHO ALLOWS JEFFREY LANE CONTROL HIS COURT AS TO HOW DEFENDANT MR. BURNESON WILL BE SENT TO JAIL FOR ANNOYING THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

CHAPTER 19 THIRTY ONE DAYS IN ARAPAHOE COUNTY JAIL

CHAPTER 20 MISMANAGEMENT OF THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION AND PAST AND PRESENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR JANUARY 2007 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

CHAPTER 21  EDITED TRANSCRIPT OF COURT PROCEEDING BY DISTRICT JUDGE ANTRIM AND RETIRED DISTRICT ATTORNEY GALLAGHER

CHAPTER 22 DENVER CITY AND COUNTY JAIL REPORT ON THE DENVER COUNTY INFIRMARY JAIL

CHAPTER 23 DENVER COUNTY JAIL COVERS UP REPORTED THIEF INMATES PROPERTY BY MAJOR PHILIP DEEDS

CHAPTER 24 ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS FOR HOAS REVIEW OF TIM MOELLER, RICH JOHNSTON AND JAKE HUMMEL

CHAPTER 25 LETTERS TO GOVERNOR RITTER

CHAPTER 26 LETTERS TO CHERRY CREEK HOA PROFESSIONALS LLC. Problems OF THE PAST CROOKED MANAGEMENT OF THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

CHAPTER 28 DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION PENDING $8 MILLION LAWSUIT

CHAPTER 29 CITY OF AURORA INTENTIONALLY LACKS AN EFFECTIVE SYSTEM TO FILE A COMPLAINT AGAINST AN AURORA POLICE OFFICER

CHAPTER 30 TRANSCRIPT OF TRIAL BO 4C 4421 JEFFREY LANE TRIES TO PUT BURNESON IN JAIL FOR 180 DAYS AND STOP HIS REQUEST TO SEE THE BOOKS OF THE DAM EAST HOA

CHAPTER 31 THE APPELLANT COURT OR COLORADO MAIN PURPOSE IS TO PROTECT JUDGES AND LAWYERS FROM THE PUBLIC. THE PUBLIC DOESN’T HAVE COURT OF APPEALS TO PROTECT IT’S SELF

CHAPTER 32 MOTION TO DISMISS STIPULATED LETTER AND PPO AGAINST JIM BURNESON

CHAPTER 33 JUDGE ADDISON L. ADAMS IS APPOINTED COUNTY JUDGE TO HEAR THIS CASE

CHAPTER 33 JUDGE ADDISON L. ADAMS IS APPOINTED COUNTY JUDGE TO HEAR THIS CASE

CHAPTER 34 JEFFREY LANE SENDS AN UNETHICAL EMAIL THREAT TO DEFENDANT MR. BURNESON. A COMPLAINT IS FILED WITH THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT

CHAPTER 35 COLORADO SUPREME COURT (by means of it’s agency “Attorney Regulation Counsel”) APPROVES JEFFREY LANE’S EMAIL THREAT FOR ALL ATTORNEYS TO USE AGAINST LITIGATING OPPONENTS

CHAPTER 36 Jeffrey Lane’s efforts to find a rollover judge to win his litigation

CHAPTER 37 IMMIGRATION AND REFORM ACT OF 1986. 2.5 Million Illegal Mexicans were granted Citizenship. Ted Kennedy and John McCain promised to build the Mexican Wall and failed on this promise.

CHAPTER 38 DENVER WOMEN’S CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES

CHAPTER 39 LITIGATING HISTORY OF EX-MAGISTRATE JEFFREY LANE ESQ.

Chapter 40 HOA ORDERED TO USE INVALID COLLECTIONS POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

CHAPTER 41 SENATOR MORGAN CARROLL’S SECOND SCAM BILL 1278 database to collect HOA owners abused by Property Managers and Lawyers members of CAI (Community Association Institution)

CHAPTER 42 NOTICE TO OWNERS OF WOODSTREAM FALLS CONDOS

CHAPTER 44 WHAT DOES ILLEGAL MEXICANS COST COLORADO TAXPAYERS FOR CHILDREN EDUCATION

CHAPTER 45 PERJURY IS NOT ENFORCED IN CIVIL COURT. A CIVIL JUDGE CAN’T RULE ON A FELONY, PERJURY IS A FELONY!

CHAPTER 46 Judge Adams and Jeffrey Lane work together Ex Parte to deny a Motion

CHAPTER 48 Jeffrey Lane of Springer and Steinberg runs the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County

CHAPTER 49 Chief Judge Sylvester, Jeffrey Lane is Emotionally Involved and can’t be involved in litigation against the Burnesons

CHAPTER 50 Complaint filed Against Cherry Creek HOA Professionals with the District Attorney of Arapahoe County and with Attorney General of Colorado.

CHAPTER 51 How Crooked is the Dam East Homeowners Association?

CHAPTER 52 COPY OF NEVADA’S REAL ESTATE COMMISSION PROPERTY MANAGER LICENSE RULES.

CHAPTER 53 Message to the Neighbors from Jim Burneson. This Message will be inserted in the June Dam East Newsletter

CHAPTER 54. LETTERS TO CHIEF JUDGE SYLVESTER

CHAPTER 55. ATTORNEY R.L. STEENROD DENVER COLORADO



CHAPTER 1  STARTS RIGHT AFTER THE FOLLOWING SUBJECTS.

SCROLL DOWN

MOST CHAPTERS ALLOW A COMMENT TO BE LEFT WHICH WILL BE PUBLISHED WITH THE CHOSEN CHAPTER.

_____________________________________________

THE LEGAL FEDERAL LAW ON IMMIGRATIONS REFORM

AND CONTROL ACT OF 1986

IMMIGRATION BILL

THANKS TO THIS BILL WE HAVE OVER 20,000,000

ILLEGAL MEXICANS RUNNING LOSE IN OUR COUNTRY

DOWNLOAD IMMIGRATION BILL TO SAVE AND PRINT

All State legislators need to know this law

so download it and read it later.

KENNEDY, SALAZAR, Mc CAIN AND PRESIDENT BUSH TRIED TO PASS A NEW IMMIGRATION LAW THAT WAS DEFEATED BY VOTERS PRESSURE ON CONGRESS.

Starting in 1986 to the present there have been 7 new laws passed with Kennedy involvement and none of them have been enforced.  1986 Bill calls for an 800 mile fence and the bill just killed had 345 miles of fence. When the 800 mile fence is completed and proof it works then and only then will discussions be held on new Immigration laws.  There are laws on our books that need to be enforced while the fence is being built.  When government officials fail to enforce laws passed they are traitors to our county.

State legislature where bills are passed without being read. i.e. SB 06-89

Our State legislature needs to pass an Oklahoma law on Immigration.  If this is not done we need to turn more of these legislators out of our State Government. THANKS TO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL BE TURNED OUT OF OFFICE YEARS 2010 AND 2012. OBAMA IS A SINGLE TERM PRESIDENT WORSE THAN CARTER’S RECORD.

Important points of the Oklahoma law

1. it deals with identity theft;
2. it terminates public assistance benefits to illegal’s;
3. it empowers state and local police to enforce federal immigration
laws; and
4. it punishes employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens.

______________________________________________________________________________

WHAT DOES ILLEGAL MEXICANS COST COLORADO TAX PAYERS FOR THEIR INVASION TO OUR  STATE?

GO TO THE FOLLOWING WEBSITES AND YOU WILL KNOW WHAT WE THE TAXPAYERS ARE CHARGED FOR THE FREE SERVICES PROVIDED THE ILLEGAL MEXICANS IN OUR SCHOOLS.

http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=19646&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1741

http://www.defendcoloradonow.org/studies/studies.html

http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/facts/state_data_CO

WHY DO THE LEGAL AMERICANS HAVE TO PAY TAXES AND THE MEXICANS GET IN FOR FREE?  CALL OR EMAIL YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE OR SENATOR AND ASK WHY ARE THE BENEFITS FOR ILLEGAL MEXICANS FREE?

Quote of the Decade

” The American Indians found out what happens when you don’t control immigration ! !

NEW WEBSITE TO VISIT www.ratethecourts.com.  THE PEOPLE   get to vote their opinion  on judges across the country.

ANOTHER NEW WEBSITE T0  VISIT   www.rateyourhoa.com An HOA MEMBER can list his/her HOA and give it a rating.  If the ratings prove poor the buyers will not purchase in those HOAs whose Board of Directors forgot who they represent as Directors. Many Directors don’t represent the membership but they let lawyers and property managers abuse the members for their profit.  The Courts and State Legislature also forgot who they represent.  IT’S THE MEMBERSHIP WHO OWNS THE HOA THAT ARE TO BENEFIT NOT THE LAWYERS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS.

A NEW TOOL TO HELP THE JUSTICE INDUSTRY TO REPRESENT TH E PUBLIC INSTEAD OF A FELLOW LAWYER.  GO TO www.alltranscripts.com YOU CAN UPLOAD TRANSCRIPTS, DOCUMENTS, AND LETTERS FOR PUBLICATION.  THIS IS A NEUTRAL COMMERCIAL WEBSITE THAT CAN PROTECT AGAINST HACKERS.  WHEN A TRIAL IS COMPLETED THE TRANSCRIPT IS FILED IN A CABINET OR A WAREHOUSE NEVER TO BE READ AGAIN. PUBLISH A COPY OF A COURT TRIAL TRANSCRIPT CAUSES JUDGES AND LAWYER TO CLEAN UP THEIR ACT IN PUBLIC. ONCE A DOCUMENT OR TRANSCRIPT IS PUBLISHED YOU CAN PROVIDE AN ADDRESS FOR DIRECT LOCATION OF THE FILE FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE PUBLIC.

0806_high9

Download Online book JUSTICE DENIED ©
by James Burneson

Welcome to the Courthouse Services Inc. The following book of the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County “JUSTICE DENIED” can be downloaded as a individual chapters.

The information collected in this publication has been compiled by Mr. James W. Burneson over a 15 year period that involved the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County. For the most part he represented himself Pro Se without counsel. His involvement was not planned or instigated but became a constant add on to a next litigation one after the other.

In addition to the chapters there is a list of transcripts which relate to each chapter when available. These transcripts have been edited with comments by Jim Burneson and noted in re. These transcripts can be review at no charge to verify the statements made in each chapter.  All Chapters and statements offered by this website are based on the sole opinions of  James W . Burneson.

November 3, 2009

CHAPTER 01 18TH DISTRICT COURT OF ARAPAHOE COUNTY COLORADO JUSTICE DENIED 1999-2009

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,Jeffrey Lane — Tags: , , , — admin @ 10:03 pm

WHATS WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM?

LIST OF JUDGES WHO ROLLED OVER FOR

JEFFREY LANE ESQ. OF SPRINGER AND STEINBERG

Download Chapter 1 18th District of Arapahoe County

November 5, 2009

CHAPTER 02 COUNTY TRIAL BY AURORA COUNTY JUDGE STEPHEN RUDDICK AND DISTRICT JUDGE RAFFERTY. THIS IS ONE OF THE EXAMPLES OF A JUDGE AND LAWYER WORKING TOGETHER TO DENY JUSTICE.


Involves County Judge Ruddick, Jeffrey Lane attorney for the Plaintiffs’ Dam East Home Owners Association Board of Directors, (name all of them) and District Judge Rafferty, Senior Judge Steinhardt, Supreme Court of Colorado Namely Chief Judge Mullarkey.  THE TRANSCRIPT OF THIS TRIAL IS A DISGRACE.  JUDGE RUDDICK  UNDER JEFFREY’S CONTROL LOST THREE HOURS OF TRANSCRIPT OF THE TRIAL WHICH WAS AN EMBARRASSMENT TO THE COURT  IT TOOK 6 MONTHS FOR JUDGE RUDDICK TO FIND THE LOST THREE HOURS.  Because the audio tape was available the three hours missing could be discovered.  If the audio tapes were denied as it is today we the defendants could not prove there was anything missing in this trial. This trial is what started Chief Judge Leopold issuing his Order to deny audio CDs issued for $5.00 of any trial in Arapahoe County.

BEGINNING OF TRANSCRIPT OF ONE OF THE WORST MISTRIAL IN ARAPAHOE COUNTY THANKS TO JEFFREY LANE ESQ. AND JUDGE RUDDICK WHO WAS VOTED TO NOT BE REELECTED BUT WAS STILL ELECTED.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 2

CHAPTER 03 THE PUBLIC IS DENIED OPEN RECORD ACT OF AUDIO CDs OF COURT TRIALS.

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,Jeffrey Lane — Tags: , , — admin @ 4:08 pm

WE THE PUBLIC BY THE ACTS OF CHIEF JUDGE LEOPOLD OF THE 18TH DISTRICT COURT ISSUED AN ORDER TO DENY ALL REQUESTS BY THE PUBLIC TO OBTAIN COPIES OF THE AUDIO RECORDS OF A TRIAL DOWNLOADED TO A CD.   WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO OBTAIN A COPY OF THE AUDIO TAPE OF A TRIAL LEAVES OPEN THE DOOR FOR A JUDGE INSTRUCTING A TRANSCRIPT TRANSCRIBER TO OMIT PORTION OF THE TRIAL IN TYPING OF THE TRANSCRIPT.  ALL OTHER STATES CONSIDERS A COPY OF THE AUDIO TAPE OR CD TO BE GRANTED  BY THEIR OPEN RECORDS ACT.  CHIEF JUDGE SYLVESTER REFUSED TO CORRECT THIS OMISSION SO NO REQUESTED COPIES OF THE AUDIO TAPE CAN BE GIVEN TO THE PUBLIC AS OF THIS DATE.  THE STATE LEGISLATURE MUST PASS LEGISLATION TO CORRECT THIS CORRUPT DENIAL BY THE JUSTICE INDUSTRY TO REFUSE AUDIO COPIES OF ANY TRIAL OR HEARING IN THE STATE.

WITHOUT ACCESS TO A COPY OF AN AUDIO CD OF A TRIAL JUDGE RUDDICK AND JEFFREY LANE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CAUGHT HIDING THREE  AND A HALF HOURS OF THE TRIAL FROM THE TRANSCRIPT CASE NUMBER  B004042 Div B-2.

Click on download and review the documents that involve Chief Judge Leopold, Chief Judge Sylvester,  Governor Ritter.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 3

CHAPTER 04 COURT HELD IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ALJ COUGHLIN

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book — Tags: , — admin @ 5:17 am

COMING SOON:  DOWNLOAD CHAPTER FOUR

November 8, 2009

CHAPTER 05 COLORADO ATTORNEY GENERAL KEN SALAZAR RICHARD FOREMAN AND HEATHER JONES

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book — Tags: , — admin @ 10:38 pm

COMING SOON.

October 29, 2009

CHAPTER 06 REVIEW DISTRICT JUDGE CARLOS A SAMOUR JR. Order to deny review of the Dam East HOA books. He was working with Jeffrey Lane ex parte on this dismissal of Plaintiff’s request.

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,Jeffrey Lane — Tags: — admin @ 5:43 am

CHAPTER 6  REVIEW  JUDGE  CARLOS A.  SAMOUR JR 18TH DISTRICT COURT OF ARAPAHOE  COUNTY. THE JUDGE’S ACTIONS OF BEING THE DEFENSE COUNSEL INSTEAD OF A JUDGE.  Judge Carlos A. Samour, Jr. denial of Plaintiff’s request to see the books is an out right legal joke by a Judge who believes his immunity as a Judge gives him the right to abuse his JUDICIAL DISCRETION.  The Defendants to the request is indirectly three lawyers who are guilty of stealing money from this HOA without any authorization and Judge Samour newly appointed to the bench is trying to protect his fellow lawyers.

The 18th District Court has no records of any Pro Se litigate ever winning a case in this District.   This District exists for the enrichment of lawyers and no justice for the public.  Mr. Burneson has tried unsuccessful to get the books opened so the membership can see why they are now paying $90.00 a month assessments caused by over $125,000 paid to lawyers without board approval.  The new Board of Directors is so embarrassed by the loss of this money they would rather protect the crooks than let the membership know what happened to their money.

Since all the judges in the 18th District Court always find in favor of the Board of Directors in litigation against a pro se homeowner because the judge would have to find against a fellow attorney if he awarded a decision to the pro se homeowner.  This is not being impartial which is a requirement of the Code of Ethics for judges in Colorado. Judges don’t care about Ethics; they have to protect their fellow lawyers against the public.

Judge Samour has been on the bench under several months (At the time of this  writing) and he should not be a judge upon his first review 2 years from now. So as proof of my claims I have copied Judge Samour’s Order to deny and inserted comments of statute law that makes all claims for denial to be baseless and without any merit.  This judge like lots of judges didn’t know about the Internet and what can be done to Orders and transcripts for the public to read.  This is also an eye opener for lawyers who will be in front of this judge in the future.

A word of warning to all HOA members’ who are in the Arapahoe County of the 18th District Court.  You don’t stand a chance of winning in this District so you will have to put up with the abuse of your Board of Directors until you can sell out and buy in a non-HOA community.   You as a homeowner in an HOA are there for the rape and plunder by the Association attorney and the property managers (Members of the Community Association Institute CAI) while the Board of Directors hides the books.  That’s what happens at the Dam East Homeowner Association with a President Jake Hummel who also is an attorney.

YOU CAN VIEW OR DOWNLOAD A COPY OF JUDGE SAMOUR’S ORDER TO DENY THE BOOKS WHICH HAS INSERTED COMMENTS BY JIM BURNESON IN BLUE TYPE.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 6

Motion to Vacate Order to Deny Request to Open the Books of the Dam East Homeowners Association

November 5, 2009

CHAPTER 07 STATE FARM AND OTHER INSURANCE COMPANIES DOUBLE DIPPING IN HOA INSURANCE POLICIES

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA — Tags: , — admin @ 5:30 am

When insurance companies insure an board of directors of an HOA and at the same time insures a member’s home is a conflict if a lawsuit develops between the members and the Association board of directors.  The insurance company will hire an attorney to protect the HOA board of directors and will hire another lawyer to represent the homeowner.  The insurance company can’t be on both sides of the lawsuit.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 7 STATE FARM AND OTHER INSURANCE COMPANIES INSURANCE PROVIDERS FOR BOTH INDIVIDUAL MEMBER’S HOME AND THE HOA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

October 29, 2009

CHAPTER 08 VENGEFUL HOA/COA & JUSTICE DENIED

1200 VINE STREET, DENVER , CO 80203

Download chapter 8

CHAPTER 09 STATE LEGISLATURE PASSED SENATE BILL 06-89 WITHOUT READING IT. This bill neutered SB 100 By Senator Morgan Carroll.

ONE REPRESENTATIVE READ THE BILL AND WAS THE SOLE VOTE AGAINST PASSAGE.  ALL REMAINING  REPRESENTATIVES VOTED  FOR THE BILL  WITHOUT READING IT.

Persons involved in the passage of SB 06-89 Morgan Carroll Representative, Senator Robert Hagendorn, Committee members of the Senate Judicial Committee Sen. Bob Bacon, Sen. Brandon Shaffer, Sen. Dan Grossman Chairman, Sen. Jim Dyer, Sen. Ken Gordon, Sen. Kiki Traylor, and Sen. Shawn Mitchell And  The House Government Committee Mary Hodge D, Chairman, Gary Lindstorm D, Vice Chairman, Bill Berens R, Mike Cerbo D, Kathleen Curry D, Richard Decker R, Tom Massey R, Mike May.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 9 A Comments why this bill needs to be reversed.




CHAPTER 10 MAGISTRATE PETRIE 18TH COUNTY COURT OF AURORA CASE NUMBER BO 3 C 8084 c-2

Chapter 10 MAGISTRATE PETRIE COUNTY COURT OF AURORA 18TH DISTRICT CASE NUMBER BO 3 C 8084 C-2

Earl Johnson, Rich Johnston stuffing the court files with missing minutes and documents they removed to prevent Defendant  Jacqueline G. Aymami from reading them during her 6 day review as ordered by this court.
Read Chapter 10 Chapter 10

GAVEL_COURT

CHAPTER 11 CHIEF JUDGE LEOPOLD DROPS DOWN TO PERFORM AS A COUNTY COURT JUDGE ALL SCRIPTED BY JEFFREY LANE ESQ.

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA,LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: , — admin @ 10:26 pm

THIS TRANSCRIPT REVEALS HOW A CHIEF JUDGE CAN BE CONTROLLED BY AN EX-MAGISTRATE JEFFREY LANE IN AN EFFORT TO PUT DEFENDANT JAMES BURNESON IN JAIL TO STOP HIM FROM ASKING TO SEE THE BOOKS OF THE HOA DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION.  THE TRANSCRIPT IS EDITED BY JIM BURNESON WITH COMMENTS  PRINTED IN RED PRINT.

Download  Chapter 11

October 30, 2009

CHAPTER 12 COURT CASE 07CV 1609 JUDGE SPENCER PRESIDING AND WORKED WITH JEFFREY LANE EX PARTE BEFORE THE HEARING

THIS LAWSUIT HAS TURNED INTO A KANGAROO COURT WITH JEFFREY LANE OF SPRINGER  &  STEINBERG RUNNING THE COURT EX PARTE. JUDGE SPENCER IS NEW TO THE BENCH (at the time of this writing)AND IS TOTALLY UNDER THE CONTROL OF MR. LANE.  LAW STUDENTS SHOULD REVIEW THIS CHAPTER 12, WITH  ALL SUB-CHAPTERS TO  LEARN WHAT THEIR  EXPERIENCE WILL BE IN THE FUTURE BUSINESS OF LITIGATION.  NEWS BULLETIN THE FORTH JUDGE HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO RUN THIS COURT.  JUDGE SPENCER REFUSED TO RECUSE HERSELF BECAUSE JEFFREY LANE WOULD NOT LET HER.  SO MANAGEMENT OF THE   18TH DISTRICT COURT REASSIGNED COURT ROOMS WITH JUDGE PRATT BEING ASSIGNED THIS COURT AND THUS REMOVING JUDGE SPENCER FROM THIS CASE.   On the day of the hearing Jeffrey Lane was in Judge Spencer’s court chambers rehearsing the direction to be taken by  Judge Spencer in the hearing. This is grounds for both attorneys to  be disbarred but not in the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County. Judges and lawyers can confer outside of the of the court and then hold a sham trial to make it appear within the law.  HOW DOES THE PUBLIC PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM THIS KIND OF JUSTICE?

DOWNLOAD \”LAWSUIT COMPLAINT\”

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 12 A Plaintiff\’s updated motion to review actions taken by the Court at the February 13, Case Management Hearing require Judge Spencer to Recuse herself and Motions and orders issue be reversed by a new appointed Experienced District Judge

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER A1 Plaintiff provides copy of transcript of Case Management Conference held February 13, 2008 with comments of misconduct by the court printed in red type.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 12 A 2 Transcript of Case Management Conference.  Edited comments inserted in red print by Jim Burneson

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER TWELVE B Copy Motion filed by  Plaintiff’s reviews  actions taken by the court a the February 13, 2008 Case Management Conference require Judge Spencer to Recuse herself and motions and Orders Issue be Reversed by a new Appointed Experienced District Judge.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER C Plaintiff Rescues Jeffrey Lane from Representing  the Dam East Homeowner Association Affidavit

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 12 D Lane’s Response to Plaintiff’s Recusal of Mr. Lane.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 12 F Plaintiff’s Motion to Hold this Court  statue 13-5-136 Forfeit of salary.  This is one of those laws never used by lawyer against a judge.  It can’t be use by any lawyer if he wants to continue practicing law in Colorado. If a Judge does not rule on a motion within 90 days the Judge can be held liable to lose 90 days salary from their own income. See the reaction by Judge Spencer in following Chapter 12

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 12 G Order by Judge Spence really mad for having to comply with a law cited by a Pro Se Defendant or lose 90 days pay. This is an order EVERYONE NEEDS TO READ 14 PAGES LONG ALL DEFENDANT’S DENIED FOR FALSE REASON. THIS IS CALLED A PREJUDICE JUDGE WHICH IS NOT AGAINST THE LAW IN COLORADO.  JUDGES IN COLORADO CAN BE PREJUDICE BY REFUSING TO RESCUE THEMSELVES.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 12 H Plaintiff’s Motion request this Court explain how Mr. Lane will be prevented from committing suborn perjury in this Court Trial


CHAPTER 13 DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION 1999 TO 2006

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA — Tags: , — admin @ 3:37 am

Heather Individuals involved: Greg Silva President, 2000 to 2003, Jake Hummel Esq. 2003 to present, Finn Larsen, Marge Moore, Kelsey Quigg, Glen White, Julie Geyer, Cathleen Speidel and Swigert

Download Chapter 13

CHAPTER 14 REVIEW YOUR HOA TO DETERMINE IF THE PROPERTY MANAGER AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE HONEST. Chapter 14 A List of Dirty tricks used by Association Attorney and Property Managers Chapter B. How to Protect Yourself from being ripped off by Property Managers.

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA — Tags: — admin @ 4:28 am

A. List of dirty tricks used by Association Attorney and Property managers to rip off the membership.

B. How to protect yourself from being ripped off by property managers.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 14 A AND B


CHAPTER 14C WESTERN STATES PROPERTY SERVICES INC. HOA Properties Managed Member of “COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIES INSTITUTE”

MEMBERSHIP IN THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATES INSTITUTE

THE ORGANIZATION “CAI” IS THE ACORN OF PROPERTY MANAGERS AND LAWYERS IN THE HOA BUSINESS.

THE FOLLOWING LIST OF HOA’s are or were managed by WESTERN STATES.  EARL JOHNSON IS ONE OF THE MANAGERS

Bella Vista, Brookshire Downs at Heatherridge, Cheesman Wildcrest Condominiums Cornerstone

Cornerstone at Tamarac, Creekside at Bridgecreek, Creekside Townhomes, Dam East Homeowner’s Association, Dayton Green Condominiums, Eastpointe/Southwide (Sandpiper), Enclave at Heritage Hills, Florida Park Condominiums,  Four Mile Conds/Townhomes, Four Mile Village Condominiums

Greenbrooke, Innsbruck in Aurora, Jasmine Park, Jasmine Place Townhomes, Lakepointe Condos,

Norman Condominiums,  The Ridge at Tamarac, Smoky Hill Homeowner’s Association, Snowbird II Phase I Condominiums, Torrey Pines Condos, Vista Pointe, Westgate Plaza, Windstream Condominiums, Woodgate Commons Woodgate South Bella Vista Brookshire Downs at Heatherridge

Cheesman Wildcrest Condominiums, Cornerstone. Cornerstone at Tamarac, Creekside at Bridgecreek,

Creekside Townhomes, Dam East Homeowner’s Association, Dayton Green Condominiums, Eastpointe/Southwide (Sandpiper), Enclave at Heritage Hills, Florida Park Condominiums, Four Mile Conds/Townhomes, Four Mile Village Condominiums, Greenbrooke, Innsbruck in Aurora, Jasmine Park, Jasmine Place Townhomes, Lakepointe Condos, Norman Condominiums, The Ridge at Tamarac

Smoky Hill Homeowner’s Association, Snowbird II Phase I Condominiums, Torrey Pines Condos

Vista Pointe, Westgate Plaza, Windstream Condominiums, Woodgate Commons, Woodgate South.

Download  Chapter 14

CHAPTER 15 HOW TO RUN AN HOA WITHOUT LAWYERS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA — Tags: , — admin @ 5:00 am

AN HOA CAN BE MANAGED BY BOARD OF DIRECTOR S WITHOUT LAWYERS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS. Self managed HOA’s are the the most honest and well managed over using a property management company.

If you want assistance in coveting Your HOA to self management contact Jim Burneson  who is a consultant to help make the change.  Go To: burnesonj@msn.com

Download Chapter 15

CHAPTER 16 WHAT TO REVIEW BEFORE YOU BUY INTO AN HOA

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA — Tags: — admin @ 5:04 am

WHAT TO LEARN IS NEEDED TO KNOW BEFORE YOU BUY INTO AN HOA.

Download chapter 16

CHAPTER 17 COUNTY JUDGE CROSS LITTLETON COURT GRANTING PERMENATE PROTECTION ORDER AGAINST MR. BURNESON TO NOT “ANNOY” BOARD OF DIRECTORS DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book — Tags: , , — admin @ 8:12 pm

HOW ABOUT THAT CHARGE TO NOT “ANNOYING A BOARD OF DIRECTORS”  IS DENYING AN HOA MEMBER HIS RIGHT TO “FREEDOM OF SPEECH”  JUDGE CROSS HAS BEEN PROMOTED TO DISTRICT COURT FOR DISPENSING JUSTICE AS A COUNTY JUDGE.  HIS GREATEST MOVE AS A JUDGE WAS TO TELL A DEFENDANT TO SHUT UP THE JUDGE  TALKS IN THIS COURT.  FROM THAT POINT ON THE DEFENDANT IS DENIED HIS RIGHT TO DEFEND HIMSELF IN JUDGE CROSS’S COURT. HERE IS A JUDGE THAT FAILED TO READ 4 MOTIONS SUBMITTED BY DEFENDANT JIM BURNESON AND WHILE NOT READING THEM HE DISMISSED THE MOTIONS UPON THE DEMANDS OF HIS FRIEND JEFFREY LANE ATTORNEY FOR THE HOA.  JUDGE CROSS DOES WHAT HE TOLD TO DO BY A FELLOW EX-MAGISTRATE FRIEND JEFFREY LANE.  THAT IS HOW JUDGE CROSS RULES IN HIS COURT WHICH IS NOT IMPARTIAL AS REQUIRED BY HIS OATH.

CHAPTER 17 C TRANSCRIPT JUDGE CROSS FAILED TO READ 4 MOTIONS FILED BY DEFENDANT JIM BURNESON AND DENIED THE MOTIONS AS ORDERED BY JEFFREY LANE LAWYER FOR HOA

October 31, 2009

CHAPTER 18 JUDGE ETTENBERG RULINGS ON THE PERMENATE PROTECTIONS ORDER

Jim Burneson was sentenced to 60 days in Jail for violating a Permenate Protection Order by calling The HOA President/Lawyer Jake Hummel a “TORT TWISTER”.

COMING SOON: DOWNLOAD CHAPTER EIGHTEEN

CHAPTER 19 THIRTY ONE DAYS IN ARAPAHOE COUNTY JAIL

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book — Tags: , , — admin @ 6:31 am

Jim Burneson (68 years old)when sentenced to the Arapahoe County Jail for violating a Permanent Protection Order (PPO) by calling the President of the Dam East Homeowner Association a ‘TORT TWISTER.’ This jail sentence was arranged by the HOA President Jake Hummel Esq. and Jeffrey Lane of Patterson, Nuss & Seymour, P.C. The legal fees for this action paid to Jeffrey Lane cost The Dam East Homeowner Association $30,000. The Permanent Protection Order was arranged by Mr. Jeffrey Lane with the cooperation of Arapahoe County Judge Cross and Chief Judge Leopold of the 18th District Court in an effort to censor Mr. Burneson. The original sentence was set for 60 days by Senior Denver County Judge Ettenberg who suspended this sentence, subject to Mr. Burneson’s appeal based on Constitutional issues which Judge Ettenberg was unable to rule on. This is a misdemeanor inmate wears a blue jump suit not orange.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 19 THIRTY ONE DAYS IN ARAPAHOE COUNTY JAIL

November 2, 2009

CHAPTER 20 MISMANAGEMENT OF THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND PRESENT MONTHYLY REPORT FOR JANUARY 2007 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA — Tags: — admin @ 5:06 pm

CHAPTER 20 MISMANAGEMENT OF THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND PRESENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR JANUARY 2007 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

President Jake Hummel Esq., Vice President Julie Geyer, Kelsey Quigg Director, Chad Hamel Secretary, Cathleen Speidel Treasurer. Property Manager Earl Johnson Western States Property Services

Download Chapter 20

CHAPTER 21 EDITED TRANSCRIPT OF COURT PROCEEDING BY DISTRICT JUDGE ANTRIM AND RETIRED DISTRICT ATTORNEY GALLAGHER

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book — Tags: , , — admin @ 5:19 pm

THIS REVIEW HAS COMMENTS INSERTED IN RED PRINT WHERE MR. GALLAGHER MADE MISREPRESENTATIONS OR THE JUDGE’S STATEMENTS AND RULING WERE ENTIRELY OUT OF ORDER. JUDGE ANTRIM DOES NOT BELONG ON THE BENCH OF A DISTRICT COURT.

CHAPTER 21 DOWNLOAD

CHAPTER 22 DENVER CITY AND COUNTY JAIL REPORT ON THE DENVER COUNTY INFIRMARY JAIL

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book — Tags: , — admin @ 5:33 pm

THE FOLLOWING IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF THIS REVIEW.

1. Infirmary is not used for medical purposes but for a holding area of inmates that
complain too much. When inmates want to voice their complaints they submit a form
called a KITE. In Denver this form is used as in other jails except in Denver the inmate
is not allowed to keep a copy of his complaint. This way the staff doesn’t need to answer
these kites (complaint). When there is no paper trail of a complaint the staff can lose the
complaint.
2. There are inmates with cancer who have not received any medical treatments for 3
months. It seems Dr. Crum doesn’t believe in treating illness since inmates are always
lying when they claim to be sick.
3. Inmates were confined 4 men to a cell 24 hour lock down. An 8×10 cell with 4
inmates is cruel and unusual punishment. Three inmates at this altitude in an 8×10 cell
cause severer breathing problems much less 4 inmates. This occurred in the Infirmary
where treatment of sick inmates is supposed to be treated medically not punished

Download CHAPTER 22 DENVER CITY AND COUNTY JAIL

CHAPTER 23 DENVER COUNTY JAIL COVERS UP REPORTED THIEF INMATES PROPERTY BY MAJOR PHILIP DEEDS

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book — Tags: , — admin @ 5:39 pm

Report of thief handled by jail staff to disprove any thief occurred.  Download letter for further review.

Download Chapter 23

CHAPTER 24 ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS FOR HOAS REVIEW OF TIM MOELLER, RICH JOHNSTON AND JAKE HUMMEL

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA — Tags: — admin @ 5:44 pm

These attorneys past actions as attorneys for and HOA will be exposed.

CHAPTER 25 LETTERS TO GOVERNOR RITTER

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,Letters From... — Tags: , — admin @ 5:48 pm

ABOUT RB 08-1325

Download Chapter 25

CHAPTER 26 LETTER TO CHERRY CREEK HOA PROFESSIONALS LLC. Problems OF THE PAST CROOKED MANAGEMENT OF THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA — Tags: , — admin @ 5:51 pm

SECOND UPDATE 07/11/07. LETTERS TO CHERRY CREEK HOA  ABOUT FAKE EFFORTS OF PRESIDENT HUMMEL TO ADJURE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING TO STOP MR. BURNESON’S QUESTION IN FRONT TO THE MEMBERSHIP

LETTER TO TREASURER HEATHER SWIGERT WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT FEBRUARY 28TH 2007 FINANCIAL  STATEMENT WITH A COPY OF STATEMENT ATTACHED.  SHE HAS REFUSED TO ANSWER THIS LETTER OF QUESTIONS. WHY?

Letter To Treasurer

Download Chapter 26

October 29, 2009

CHAPTER 27 CITY OF AURORA ACCEPTS SHAM REPORT “BENEFIT/IMPACT ANALYSIS” REPORT MISREPRESENTS FACTS

THE CITY OF AURORA HAS ACCEPTED A SHAM REPORT “BENEFIT/IMPACT ANALYSIS”  IT IS A LIE TO  BRING IN $5,000,000 IN TAXES FOR A WALL OF 4,000 FEET ON YALE AND PEORIA FOR THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION.

A Report called Benefit/Impact Analysis Falsely claims all homeowners properties will benefit by the construction of a new Masonry Wall that borders only 65 homes in a subdivision of 425 homes.

The petition submitted by the Fence Committee of the Dam East HOA with 160 signatures is void by the following errors.

1.      Signatures were signed in blue ink by homeowners and dates were later penned in with green ink. (How dumb can anyone be to try this?) This makes the entire petition void and can’t be used in this Special District Project. Which signatures are true and which are altered? No one can tell which signatures are valid.  If you can alter the dates with green ink how many signatures were also altered with blue ink.

2.      There is evidence whiteout was used in places of the petition.  You can’t do correction to a petition with whiteout and claim it is still legal.

But in the City of Aurora these errors are OKed by the Clerk of Court. The City is fighting for additional taxes and this is what it takes to get those taxes. Its called a Made As Instructed (or MAI report) ordered by City of Aurora with their payment of $5,200 for 17 pages. (That’s $304 per page.)

This Report in question was prepared by:

Mr. Raymond C. Hart,  Shelton Associates Inc.,  230 South Holland St.  Lakewood, CO 80226

This same company “Shelton Associates did the Benefit/Impact Analysis” for the wall built at Ptarmigan Subdivision located on the North east corner of Yale and Peoria. It’s across the street from the Dam East Homeowner Association which wants a similar wall built located on the South East corner of Yale and Peoria. These reports can’t be considered arms length and the staff person who approved these reports are Lyman Ho and Joani Cravens, Managers of Real Property Services City of Aurora.

Under an Open Records Act the City of Aurora was asked to provide the background information on the qualifications of these two staff persons as to what their real estate experience is to be able to approve either Benefit/Impact Analysis which involves a $5,000,000 wall project. To date the City of Aurora has refused to provide what background Ly Mo or Joani Cravens has to qualify holding the position of manager of Real Property Services.   It is a disgrace to continue this project after the petition was rigged and a sham report fails to prove any home owner benefits from a new wall other than 65 properties that abut the fence improvement on their property line. None of the interior properties will benefited a projected increase in property value of 4 to 8 percent by the construction of this fence as claimed in the B/I Analysis. The Tax Assessor of Arapahoe County recently mailed new appraised values for the homes in the Dam East Homeowner Association which dropped the values by 20 percent.  This new appraisal does not indicate a drop in value due to the existing wooden fence. The Tax Assessor of Arapahoe County staff appraisers will not give any increased value to the interior properties due to the construction of a masonry wall. The main issue is the claim Circle 4 does not increase in value by this fence. Properties in Circle 4 can’t be taxed for an improvement costing maybe over $5,000,000 for any annual charge of over a one time charge of $200.00 per home paid over 20 years

Everyone needs to read the report to understand how wrong the value is as stated and how much out of line any of the noted property comparisons are out of date to try and give a Sham report to support a tax increase of over $11,000 per home over 20 years in taxes.

This disgrace of promoting a sham by the City of Aurora, the Board of Directors of the Dam East Homeowner Association and the members of the Fence Committee after it has been proven to be a sham will not stand up in court if pursued as stated herein.

The Benefit/Impact Analysis Report has been edited by Jim Burneson and his comments are printed in red type.

DOWNLOAD THE BENEFIT/IMPACT ANALYSIS edited by Jim Burneson.

SEE AN UPDATE TO THIS FENCE ISSUE FOLLOWING THIS OPEN LETTER BELOW.

OPEN LETTER TO AURORA MAYOR  TAUER,  CITY MANAGER  MILLER

AND CITY  COUNCIL MEMBERS.

June 20, 2009

Published on the Internet at www.court-house.com Chapter 27.

City of Aurora, Mayor Tauer and City Manager, Miller and City Council

Re: Running a Sham Wall Project to shaft the taxpayers of the Dam East Homeowner Association.

The Dam East Newsletter was received today with no facts or information on the Wall Project.  The City of Aurora likes to work in a verbal mode and not print any facts about a project the City wants that has no benefit to the interior homeowners of the Dam East Homeowner Association. The fence will benefit 65 homeowners whose property boarders the new fence. That’s it and no report can prove any interior homeowner or the owners in circle 4.

The facts of this project is kept secret from the owners and will be verbalized for the first time at a June 30 meeting by the City of Aurora. A meeting during the summer months while owners out of town on vacation.  With the facts hidden the homeowners will not have time to discuss the cost and lack of benefits among themselves all on purpose.  Mayor Tauer and City Manager Miller don’t want the taxpayers to have too much information for fear the taxpayers might object to the terms.

Where does the City and Fence Committee get the authority to set a three tier charge against property owners depending on where the property is located?  Who set the price at $6,000 for the properties on the fence line and $5,000 for all interior homes and $4,000 for all homes in circle 4?  Was this ever discussed with the homeowners of the Dam East? Answer NO.  Mayor Tauer or City Manager Miller did you issue these values for the Dam East Homeowner to base the taxes paid  to the City?

The Fence Committee of the HOA has intentionally refused to explain what the true monthly costs will be if a homeowner pays his share over a 10 or 20 year term.  Lets spring this bad news verbally on the few owners who attend the meeting and it will have a better chance of getting passed. (DON’T PUT THE FACTS IN WRITING DO IT VERBALLY) This action is dirty politics by a City Government who needs to dismiss all city employees who are part of this scam. This includes the City Attorney who allowed the scam to continue after the Benefit/Impact Analysis was proven to be totally fraud. An edited copy of this report is published on the Internet at www.court-house.com Chapter 27.

The scheduled meeting on June 30 has to be cancelled since it is 10 days from today with no written facts for the entire HOA membership to review.  All costs must be published in writing 30 days before any meeting is held at City of Aurora.  How can anyone consider voting for or against this project without a complete explanation of all the facts? The HOA also hides the Benefit/Impact Analysis from the membership knowing it is a complete sham of misinformation that was written to favor the wall project and was not objective in its opinion. How many owners received copies of this report not counting the Fence Committee?  (Answer TWO) The facts claimed in this sham report are inaccurate and misleading on purpose.  The price of $5,200 paid for this report is $5000 over priced. This repost is fraud and intentionally bias for building the fence.

Continuing this Fence Project will end all future fence projects managed by the City.  No taxpayer will trust the City of Aurora on any tax proposal in the future. That’s a hell of a price to pay for this sham.

Why does the City of Aurora own the fence after we the taxpayers paid for it with interest? We the taxpayers who paid for a fence will own the fence when completed. That means the City has to title the fences built for the Dam West and Ptarmigan back to the HOAs. The City has no right to ownership of a project paid for directly by taxpayers.  If ownership is demanded for this Special District then it must be canceled now.

Mayor Tauer and City Manager Miller you both are a disgrace to your office for allowing this sham to get his far. Council person Sue Sandatrom needs to resign now for failing to protect her neighbors in the Dam East Homeowner Association.

This project can’t be voted on by anyone because of the sham committed by the City of Aurora staff all the way to the Mayor’s office and City Manager’s Office.

Lets see how crooked the City of Aurora is by how they allow this scam to continue.  The meeting on June 30th must be canceled by the City of Aurora and rescheduled for an extended time to allow all the facts to be published for the owner’s review 30 days before any meeting..

Jim Burneson

12641 E Bates Cir

Aurora, CO 80014

OCTOBER 4, 2009 UPDATE ON THE SHAM FENCE EFFORT

BY THE CITY OF AURORA AND THE FENCE COMMITTEE OF THE DAM EAST HOA.

The following is a copy of a speech  I gave to City of Aurora Council and never received answers to my questions.  Homeowners in the Dam East also need the answers to this speech.

Meeting July 27, 2009

City Council Meeting

My Name is Jim Burneson 12641 E Bates Cir Aurora 80014

  1. I have the following questions to ask under the Open Public Records Act that has been illegally denied by Mr. Richardson City Attorney. I have copies for each of you for your record. I sent you an email this morning and if you didn’t get it you mail is being censored by Mr. Richardson.
  1. Is Freedom Of Speech allowed in the City of Aurora Building?
  1. How many Fence Programs are under way in the City Of Aurora?  This means being considered without a petition started or ones with a filed petition for either a SID or GID financing.
  1. I want a meeting rescheduled with the City Manager Miller to replace the one cancelled by Mr. Richardson
  1. I want everyone on this council to visit the Clerk of Records and inspect the petition that was submitted by the Dam East Homeowner Association for whiteout marks and different color ink used for signatures and dates of signatures. This makes the petition void and Mr. Richardson lied when he passed his approval of the Petition.
  1. I want a meeting rescheduled with Mayor Tauer and Sue Sandstrom for Me and my witness to discuss the violations committed by the staff of Aurora and Fence Committee of this HOA.
  1. I want a new PAR Officer assigned to the Dam East Homeowner Association.  Muldoon has been there too long and was involved with false claims against Me by Attorneys Jeffrey Lane and Jake Hummel.  See Chapter 29 on my website at www.court-house.com
  1. The Homeowners of the Dam East have not been told that the signatures on the petition will be counted with a weighted average given to the homes on the fence line counting for 1 a half  vote (app.) and the interior homes count 1 and ¼ and the votes from the 4th circle for less than one vote.  This is but one of the intentionally omitted facts hidden by the Staff of Aurora and the Fence Committee. That’s how dirty this City plays with its citizens. Don’t tell then voters the whole story.

  1. No matter what the number of signatures are on the Petition if this fence Proposal if submitted to City Council it can’t be approved by your vote with the list of wrongful acts committed by this City Government.  For that reason it is best you stop the process now to prevent the continuation of a miscarriage of justice being knowingly committed by you the City of Aurora
  1. I want a hearing before this Council on the wrongful acts of City Attorney Richardson in his involvement in trying to hide everyone from being involved in telling the truth about the fence program at the Dam East Homeowner Association.  Efforts to have me arrested for asking to set a meeting with Mayor Tauer.
  1. If this fence program isn’t stopped and the City Attorney Richardson isn’t immediately suspended from his office this mess will make it to the court to get justice for the citizens of Aurora.
  1. Who runs this City?  The Mayor, City Attorney Richardson, or City Council?  I want a written answer to these questions and charges made tonight?  I will not be stopped by intimidation and it will just keep getting bigger and louder until the newspapers pick it up.

Jim Burneson

Email: burnesonj@msn.com

303-750-1500

_____________________________________________________________________________

The following is a copy of answers by City Attorney Richardson.  If you have questions about the answers Richardson gave ask your council member Sue Sandstrom who lives in Circle 4 of the Dam East.   Mr. Burneson inserted his comments in red print.

Dear Mr. Burneson,

Please let this serve as a response to the written questions you submitted to me during our meeting last week.  I must say at the outset because of your profound objection to the concept of the City’s fence program, I seriously doubt that my responses will serve to enhance your acceptance of the program and its benefits.  Nevertheless, because I promised I would respond, here are my answers:

1.

Q.  Benefit/Impact Analysis must be published in the Dam East Homeowner Association Newsletter before any signatures requested on Petition to build the Masonry wall now proposed.

A.     The Benefit Study is a public record and is available for inspection and copying at the City offices during normal business hours.  In fact, you have acknowledged that you have obtained a copy.  Publication in the HOA newsletter is up to the HOA Board. If the board does not publish the entire study that was paid for and accepted by the City of Aurora as suppose to indicate what benefit is assigned three tier charges against homes on the fence line homes interior and circle 4 then it is fraud on the tax payers committed by the board of directors of the Dam East Homeowners Association and the City of Aurora.

2.

Q.    All petitions signed to begin this project and any petitions signed before the meeting on March 30, 2009 are void.

A.     This represents an opinion of yours and I cannot respond to such. The Clerk of the Court is responsible to accept and approval all petitions as being correct.  The subject petition was incorrectly signed and dated and whiteout was used all three issues are proven not an opinion.  The Clerk of the Court must now recertify the petition challenged by Mr. Burneson as being void and must be withdrawn from the project.  This will be proven in court.  Without a valued approved petition by the Clerk of Courts of City of Aurora the petition is throw out and this entire project is void right now.

3.

Q.  Who set the three tiered taxes $6,000, $5,000 and $4,000 for Fourth Circle?

A.  For a point of clarification, this is a special assessment driven by petition of the property owners of the proposed district and not a tax.  The three tiers were suggested by the petition Representatives as an equitable means of assessing the costs of the fence project. Fraud again. The Fence Committee are not appointed to have the authority to decide three tiers when the Benefit/Impact Analysis states all properties receive equal benefit from the projected fence. If anyone with this authority would be the City of Aurora and the Board of Directors who can’t approve something that was not approved by the Benefit/Impact Analysis.

4.

Q.  Our CC R’s state the membership must vote on any changes in our properties and 61 percent must vote in favor of the change.  We can’t remove a wooden fence and change to a masonry fence without this vote occurring.

A.  The City has not and cannot be placed in a position to interpret and/or enforce the private/neighborhood covenants.  The fence project is a public improvement and will be built on City property.  When a City government received notice that a partner in a project has not completed the requirements to authorize project it is required that notice be given to the HOA for them to certify to the City they are in compliance with the Covenants and Bylaws to be a partner in this project.  At this point the City of Aurora does not own any fence property and it can’t be built if the board of directors are committing fraud by failure to abide by the recorded Article of Incorporation, Covenants and Bylaws as required by law.  This is not just opinion.

5.

Q.  All facts about the fence has been withheld from the membership and only provided the homeowners who attended the March 30, 2009 meeting.  Don’t put the facts in writing keep all facts verbal.

A.  The City has not and cannot be placed in a position to interpret and/or enforce the private/neighborhood covenants. Wrong I am not placing the City of Aurora in any position to interpret anything.  The law in a court lawsuit will determine an illegal act by your refusal to require all terms of the HOA recorded documents to be completed before any petition is accepted from a fence committee who has no authority to rule on three tier values.  The board of directors will be be able to vote on the three tier since the crooked Benefit/Impact Analysis study denies this fact.  The three tier suggestion came from Dick Palmer Chairman of the Fence Committee who has stated publicly the Benefit study is worthless.

Q.  Fence Committee has refused any suggestions of a difference fence construction.  Three members of the committee are employees of the City of Aurora.  This is a conflict of interest.

A.  The fact that the fence committee may be composed in part by City employees does not constitute a conflict of interest.  These employees would clearly be acting in their capacity as property owners. Sorry but they can’t have an independent opinion when their paycheck comes from City of Aurora. In a Court of law will prove this.  The City, as I explained to you during our meeting has chosen to facilitate the construction of masonry walls but does not receive a benefit. The City of Aurora does receive a benefit when the financing is audited for a $2,000,000 construction turned into $5,000,000 fence.  Because the new masonry wall will be on public property, owned by the City, and maintained by the City we have put restrictions on the type of wall and its materials.  Where is there any written statement by the City this wall is restricted by the City of Aurora when in the public meeting the state said other fences could be built not just this wall?  Its hell when you try to cover for staff when you were not in the meeting.

7.

Q.  Why does the City insist on owning the fence when completed?

A.  The law does not allow the City to use City money to build private improvements.  The continuing maintenance obligation is to ensure that the wall stays perpetually in good shape. The membership of this HOA have been denied information on how much a private financed wall will cost without the involvement by the City of Aurora.  This can and will be proven in a court of law.

8.

Q.  75% of owners at the Dam East are over 50 years old.  Many are widows and easily intimidated.  You are not being a good neighbor if you don’t sign this petition.  The membership doesn’t understand there will not be a vote for or against the fence.  The only way to express no is not vote on the petition.

A.     Because this is not a tax, it is not subject to a voting requirement – rather the District can be formed and assessments can be levied upon a petition signed by property owners responsible for paying no less than two-thirds of the estimated assessment and approval by the City Council after a public hearing.  Therefore, I agree with you that a refusal to sign the petition is the way to say “no” to the District. City Council watch out for this double talk.  The petitions signed to date were done without complete transparency of all information censored by the City of Aurora. You as members of council need to read a copy of this report before any part of this project continues right now not when it is tried to be brought before you later.  Richardson didn’t answer my question above. This entire report is an example of a shifty Tort Twister trying to hide the City’s involvement is a fraud project.

9.

Q.  What is [sic] Joani Cravens qualifications to approve the Benefit/Impact Analysis?

A.  Joani Cravens is the Manager of Real Property Services and part of her job is to retain experts for the purposes of preparing benefit studies for special improvement districts.  I can speak based upon my tenure in the City Attorney’s Office that Ms. Cravens is very well qualified based upon her experience and credentials.  Benefit studies are not appraisals, however, Mr. Hart who performed the study is State certified. Also, the benefit study is not approved by staff, rather it is used as evidence at a public hearing to support a finding that property within the District is specially benefited by the proposed improvement. So Name the public hearing where this Benefit/Impact Analysis was used as evidence to support the finding that the property within the District will specifically benefit by the proposed fence improvement?  There has not been any public meeting where the study was published.   On Ms. Craven’s credentials I received a specific description of what she must have to be the Manager of the Property Services Office. You did not answer my question because she doesn’t qualify.  Again your double talk doesn’t answer anything.  The Mayor and City Council need to fire Richardson as his 33 years is an over stay of his position as City Attorney.  This written document is evidence the City of Attorney seems to believe its 20 years in the past when his answer would cover an illegal act by the City. It doesn’t work now with the Internet publishing everything for the world to read.  This entire joke will be publish on the Internet at www.court-house.com/ Chapter 27. All emails to the City will also be published.

Mr. Burneson, the purpose of my responses is not to trigger a continuing dialogue between the two of us or my client.  As I stated in my introduction above, it is clear to me beyond a reasonable doubt that no matter what our responses are, you will remain adamantly opposed to this process.  I would again urge you to try to convey your opposition to your neighbors, City staff, and City Council in a cogent, non-accusatory, and civil manner, which would be much more effective. This is a plea by Richardson to let him hide from any response to my questions and to dance around this subject. Sorry but your answer is proof it’s not the crime but the cover up that catches the criminal.

________________________________________

Charles H. Richardson, City Attorney

City of Aurora, City Attorney’s Office

15151 East Alameda Parkway, 5th Floor

Aurora, Colorado 80012

Phone:  303.739.7030

Facsimile: 303.739.7042

crichard@auroragov.org

CITY ATTORNEY RICHARDSON HAS ORDER THE MUSSED ENTIRE STAFF OF CITY OF AURORA FROM TALKING TO CITIZEN JIM BURNESON.  THAT’S ILLEGAL FOR A CITY OF ATTORNEY TO STOP A TAX PAYER FROM COMMUNICATING WITH CITY EMPLOYEES.  THAT’S HOW SCARE CITY MANAGEMENT IS INCLUDING MAYOR TAUER. UNDER THE OPEN PUBLIC ACT JAMES W BURNESON HAS ASKED FOR RECORDS AND HAS BEEN DENIED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF AURORA.  THATS HOW CROOKED THE CITY OF AURORA IS. WAKE UP CITIZENS YOU ARE BEING HAD BY COUNCIL OF AURORA.

80% OF CITY COUNCIL ARE TERM LIMITED AS OF 2012. LAME DUCK ADMINISTRATIONS TEND TO SET BACK AND DO NOTHING DURING THEIR LAST TERM IN OFFICE.  I BELIEVE THESE COUNCIL LAME DUCKS ARE HANGING ON FOR SOME BENEFITS IF THE RACE TRACK IS APPROVED EAST OF OUR CITY.  WONDER WHAT THOSE BENEFITS WILL BE?

JIM BURNESON

December 19, 2009

CHAPTER 28 DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION PENDING $8 MILLION LAWSUIT

December 18, 2009

Board of Directors

Dam East Homeowner Association

David Kinney Cherry Creek HOA Professionals

Faxed to David Kinney for

The Board of Directors

Fax 303-693-8803

In response to Mr. Kinney’s letter of December 16, 2009

I will not communicate with Mr. Wilder on subjects not involving the illegal foreclosure on my house.  All other subjects are allowed between me and my Board of Directors. I expect you will deliver all my mail or email or faxes to the “Board of Directors at individual directors home. You have no authority to censor their mail. So to prevent the past censorship by Jake Hummel and Jeffrey Lane I will each week collect my letters and hand deliver them on a weekly bases to each director’s home.. I will ask if these letters were delivered by you David and if not the board is being censored illegally by Jake Hummel and Jeffrey Lane who are still running this HOA to protect themselves not the Membership. The present Board of Directors isn’t running anything so long as Mrs. Hummel is a board member. These two Attorneys Lane and Hummel have an excellent chance to be disbarred after my lawsuit of 8M.

David if you want to send copies of my correspondence to Mr. Wilder please do but you must send all copies to the board and to be included in the books of this HOA  None of my past letters are on file from 2,000 to the present which number over 600. All those letters have to be refilled in the books.  Lane has most of them and Jake Hummel has the rest.

Because you don’t know me except by the slander repeated against my name I provide you the following short review of actions taken against crooked HOA lawyers and Property Manager who have been raping and plundering the membership of this HOAs they were hired to protect.

  • First Management Company. Named “Management and Management”.  Not very creative and they really weren’t.  I asked them for financial statements for the past 2 years which they agreed I had a right to receive.  New software came to market which I used in my business. It was called Quick Books.  It took several hours to enter those simple financial statements into the computer and I came up with a missing $15,000.  My God who would believe a simple audit could be done and catch a crooked property management missing $15,000.  Reported this fact to the board of directors who were more embarrassed by the discovery and so they did nothing about the missing funds because it would reflect on them that they let it happened.
  • I found out the Board of Directors in the beginning years of our HOA held the monthly meetings at a different restaurant each month with wives and the HOA General Fund paid for the dinners. The Board used to hold a welcome open house for new members to the HOA and only 10% of the liquor purchased was served at the function and the rest went home with the directors. Big numbers for liquor.
  • Then I came across a Director named Howard Kutzer who also ran the property management company who also contracted to manage the Dam East Homeowner Association at the same time.  Director and manager under one hat.  Wow was that crooked? I started attending monthly meetings and was responsible for getting the meeting to allow homeowners to speak at the beginning of all meetings. Its called open forum for Homeowners. At that time no member was allowed to speak at a meeting.  Howard Kutzer admitted the books had not been audited for the last 14 years.  Wow how about that.  I cause the audits to begin. The audits have become a nothing audit by a crooked CPAs whose contract states they will not look for any criminal activity during the audit. So what good was an audit?
  • Howard Kutzer was voted off the board and the shit hit the fan because the new board member would tell the membership what was going on in the board meeting which was illegal.
  • New management Company can’t remember the name but his name is Mike Coffman is Congress.  This company didn’t know anything about management and soon quit.
  • Now we got a real crook company name Ill wind also known as WestWind.  Larson was so crooked no one would believer it but he did one smart thing when I started attacking him for his books run by his wife and his arresting a HOA member for demanding to see the books. He was smart enough to quit and run from this HOA.
  • Now comes Earl Johnson of Western States Property Services.  I learn most of what I know about crooked property Management companies from Earl.  He assaulted me in his office while the staff watched and when I reported him to the police his two secretaries swore no attack happened. I reported this assault to Jake Hummel and he refused to investigate the incident.  This was supposed to cause me to move on or give up my efforts to stop the money being stolen from this HOA. It didn’t stop me but the problem for the homeowners is Jake Hummel didn’t stop either. I met with Jake Hummel after he was elected to the board for two hours in my living room.  He listened and listened and then went back to doing what I had complained about. He knew what I said was true and saw an open door for his own benefit.  I thought we got a lawyer on the board and he will clean it up.  He made it worse and as a lawyer held himself out to the membership of protecting them from that bad guy Burneson.
  • I met with Jake Hummel after he was elected to the board two hours in my living room. He listened and listened and then went back doing whea I had complained about. He knew what I said was true and saw an open door of for his own benefit. I thought we got a lawyer on the board and he will clean it up. He made it worse and as a lawyer held himself out to the membership of protecting them from that bad guy Burneson.
  • Yes David you are a crook because you are doing the same acts of denying the books and all the illegal acts Earl Johnson performed.  You have refused a copy of your management agreement and refused to tell me what you charge for transfer fees.  As each week goes by you will continue to violate my rights as per our Covenants and Bylaws.  Instead of being crooked you might with some backbone stand up to Jake Hummel who is still running this board and say you as an honest property manager refuse to continue to violate our Bylaws by refusing Mr. Burneson the books and if it isn’t stopped you will quit. That will prove less expensive than following Mr. Hummel’s orders cited in the $8 M lawsuit.
  • Check the books and you will not find any of my letters in the files.  I wrote over 600 letters from 2000 to the present excluding 2 years.  Where are those letters?
  • I have found since 1997 to the present over 120 lawsuits filed in the 18th District Courts with The Dam East Homeowner Association mentioned as the Plaintiff or Defendant.  Not one of these files is in our books.  They are in the lawyers offices who were paid by this association without authorization by the board.
  • The membership can forget any $5,000,000 wall with the City of Aurora. This lawsuit will take precedence over any such sham. I feel sorry for these members who haven’t signed the petition for this wall because the threats against you by now have to be unbearable.  The City Of Aurora Counsel will not approve this wall project if I put it in court.

THIS COULD GO ON FOR PAGES. SO NOW I WILL ADDRESS JUST A SMALL PART OF THE FUTURE LAWSUIT FOR $8 MILLION.

  1. 425 HOMEOWNERS PUT ME IN JAIL FOR 60 DAYS WITHOUT CAUSE.
  2. 425 HOMEOWNERS LET LAWYERS SUCK MONEY OUT OF THE ASSOCIATION WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION OF THE BOARD. THE MONEY PAID LAWYERS WITHOUT BOARD APPROVAL MUST BE REFUND TO THE ASSOCIATION ALL SUMS AT 8 % INTEREST.
  3. 425 HOMEOWNERS LET CROOKED PROPERTY MANAGES SUCK MONEY LIKE THE LAWYERS FROM THE HOA WITHOUT BOARD APPROVAL. SAME DEMAND ALL FUNDS RETURNED PLUS ALL TRANSFER FEES SLIPPED INTO THE POCKETS OF PROPERTY MANAGERS WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE HOA GENERAL FUND
  4. 425 HOMEOWNERS HIRED CROOKED LAWYERS TO STOP MR. BURNESON FROM GETTING TO SEE THE BOOKS OF THE HOA. IT’S STILL GOING ON BY CHEERY CREEK HOA PROFESSIONAL.425 HOME OWNERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE ILLEGAL ACTS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM 2000 TO THE PRESENT.
  5. 425 HOMEOWNERS ARE GOING TO BE HELD LIABLE FOR $ 8 MILLION LAWSUIT AND THEN THERE WILL BE PUNITIVE DAMAGES TO PAY.

I JUST FILED A COMPLAINT AGAINST 21 JUDGES IN THE 18TH DISTRICT COURT OF ARAPAHOE COUNTY TO THE  COMMISSION FOR JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE FOR VIOLATIONS INVOLVING JAKE HUMMEL AND EX MAGISTRATE JEFFREY LANE.  I DON’T BELIEVE ANYTHING LIKE THIS HAS EVER BEEN FILED IN THE HISTORY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF COLORADO. See the list of judges below.  This list is not included on the website at this time but it will be published at a later date.

JEFFREY LANE WAS FIRED AS A MAGISTRATE JUDGE IN LITTLETON FOR SEVERAL FELONY COUNTS. WE MUST BE TOLD WHY  HE WAS GIVEN A CHOICE TO RESIGN OR HE WOULD BE PROSECUTED.

OTHER LAWYERS INVOLVED ARE RICH JOHNSTON, TIM MOELLER, AND JAMES WILDER.  ALSO INCLUDED ARE ALL LAWYERS HIRED TO SUE THE MEMBERSHIP AND OTHERS. WE HAVE NO RECORDS WHO WERE SUED AND WHAT FOR BECAUSE PAST BOARD DIDN’T KEEP THE BOOKS UP TO DATE. THE LAWYERS TOLD THE BOARD THEY DIDN’T NEED THESE RECORDS AND BECAUSE THEY WERE LAWYERS THE BOARD DIDN’T QUESTION THIS ADVICE.

PROPERTY MANAGERS ARE AT THE HEART OF THE RAPE AND PLUNDER OF THE MEMBERSHIP.  THEY DEMAND A KICK BACK FROM SUPPLIERS OF SERVICES FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES, POOL MAINTENANCE COMPANIES, ANYONE WHO SUPPLIES ANYTHING AND CUTS THE GRASS OR PRUNES THE TREES OR REPAIRS THE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS.

MOST LAWYERS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE “COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INSTITUTE” (CAI) ARE CROOKED AND IN ON THE SCAM OF RAPE AND PLUNDER MEMBERS OF HOAs ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

GO TO ahrc@ahrc.com WEBSITE AND REVIEW CAI ACTIONS IN OTHER STATES.  LOCALLY THE CAI CHAPTER ARRANGE WITH SENATOR MORGAN CARROLL TO PASS A LAW TO BENEFIT CAI MEMBERS OVER THE HOA MEMBERSHIP. Law 06-89 WAS VOTED IN BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE WITHOUT READING IT EXCEPT FOR ONE REPRESENTATIVE WHO VOTED NO BECAUSE HE READ THE BILL.  WE DON’T NEED LEGISLATURES (DEMOCRATS) IN THIS STATE THAT DON’T READ THE LAWS TO BE PASSED AND THE HEALTH CARE BILL IN CONGRESS WE THE PUBLIC HAVEN’T READ YET.  THIS IS CHICAGO DIRTY POLITICS NOW FOR THE USA.

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE MEMBERSHIP FAILS TO PERFORM THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES AS A MEMBER OF AN HOA. AND ALLOW ILLEGAL ACTS OF A BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE AT THE FAULT OF THE MEMBERSHIP AND THE LIABILITIES FOR DAMAGES ARE THE COSTS TO THE MEMBERSHIP. REMEMBER THE PEOPLE DESERVE THE GOVERNMENT THEY VOTED IN AND THAT APPLIES TO BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AN HOA.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MUST HOLD A SPECIAL MEETING TO ANSWER WHAT THIS ANNOUNCEMENT MEANS TO 425 HOME OWNER’S PROPERTY VALUES. LET’S FIND OUT WHY MR. BURNESON HAS BEEN SLANDERED TO THE POINT OF HATRED BY THE MEMBERSHIP.

List of judges filed with the Commission on Judicial Discipline.

Mr. Lane is employed or is a partner of Springer and Steinberg law firm.

Each of these Judges will be featured at www.court-house.com along with their transcripts edited by Mr. Burneson in red print.

Jim Burneson

Victim of a dysfunctional HOA and Justice system.

October 29, 2009

CHAPTER 29 CITY OF AURORA INTENTIONALLY LACKS AN EFFECTIVE SYSTEM TO FILE A COMPLAINT AGAINST AN AURORA POLICE OFFICER

CHAPTER 29. POLICE COMPLAINT ABOUT FALSE POLICE CHARGES FILED BY TWO LAWYERS, MR. JEFFERY LANE ESQ. AND JAKE HUMMEL ESQ. PAST PRESIDENT DAM EAST HOA.

Police Chief Oats makes the finial decision on whether a complaint from an Aurora citizen against a police officer is valid.  This means no complaints by a citizen against any Police Officer will ever be charged so long as Chief Oats has the final decision on the charges.  If  Chief Oats ruled  officer  was guilty of a complaint the police force would go on strike. City Counsel knows of this problem along with the City Manager of Aurora.

If a search were made of the records of the Aurora Police Department for valid complaints against Police Officers for the last 5 years none will be found! This makes the City of Aurora Police Dept. eh cleanest in the USA.  The Aurora Police should be honored on Good Morning America for an award.

CHAPTER 29 DOWNLOAD

November 6, 2009

CHAPTER 30 TRANSCRIPT OF TRIAL BO 4C 4421 JEFFREY LANE TRIES TO PUT BURNESON IN JAIL FOR 180 DAYS AND STOP HIS REQUEST TO SEE THE BOOKS OF THE DAM EAST HOA

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,Jeffrey Lane — Tags: , — admin @ 5:35 pm

Justice in the 18th District County Court

Judge Morris Presiding

The court transcript is provided with edited comments inserted in red print by

Jim Burneson

QUOTE BY SENIOR JUDGE MORRIS,” IF YOU SO MUCH AS SPIT ON THE SIDEWALK OF YOUR NEIGHBOR’S HOME YOU’LL BE IN CONTEMPT, AND YOU WILL SERVE 180 DAYS IN JAIL.” THIS WAS A GIFT FROM JUDGE MORRIS TO JEFFREY LANE AS STATED IN THE TRANSCRIPT.  Judge Morris has since retired so he can’t be questioned about his misstatements in this transcript to include his lack of jurisdiction to issue orders over my website www.court-house.com.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 30

NEWSBULLETIN JUDGE MORRIS RESIGNED AS A SENOR JUDGE AND RETIRED RATHER THAN ANSWER DEFENDANTS MOTIONS TO DISMISS THE PPO AND STIPULATED LETTER WITH PREJUDICE.



CHAPTER 31 THE APPELLANT COURT OR COLORADO MAIN PURPOSE IS TO PROTECT JUDGES AND LAWYERS FROM THE PUBLIC. THE PUBLIC DOESN’T HAVE COURT OF APPEALS TO PROTECT IT’S SELF

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book — Tags: , , — admin @ 5:42 pm

A COMPLETE REVIEW OF AN APPEAL TO THE COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS.

CASE NUMBER 07CA0222 ARAPAHOE COUNTY DISTRICT COURT NO. 99CV2076

DIVISION V

OPINION BY JUDGE GRAHAM

ROY AND J. JONES, JJ., CONCUR

IN PROCESS OF BEING COMPLETED

COMING SOON DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 31

CHAPTER 32 MOTION TO DISMISS STIPULATED LETTER AND PPO AGAINST JIM BURNESON

SENIOR JUDGE MORRIS

This Motion request Judge Morris to dismiss the Stipulated Letter and PPO since he ordered the continuances of the PPO without interviewing any witnesses and never named who the Board of Directors were that was to be protected from being annoyed by Mr. Burneson.

Then in a subsequent hearing Judge Morris TRIED TO expanded the coverage of the Stipulated Letter to cover all homeowners of the entire subdivision 425 homes. THATS NOT WHAT JIM BURNESON AGREED TO AT THE ORIGINAL SIGNING OF THE STIPULATE  LETTER.  JUDGE MORRIS DOESN’T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO EXPAND ANY STIPULATED LETTER AFTER IT HAS BEEN AGREED TO BY BOTH PARTIES.  NEITHER THE PPO OR THE STIPULATED LETTER HAS BEEN LEGALLY EXPANDED TO INCLUDE ALL 425  OWNERS OF THE SUBDIVISION.

During this hearing Mr. Burneson refused to be intimidated by Mr. Lane or Judge Morris to revise his website at www.court-house.com.  Judge Morris became angry when Burneson stated the court didn’t have jurisdiction over the website and it was Mr. Burneson’s to Right of Freedom of Speech 1st Amendment.

Judge Morris exposed his lack of impartially by threatening Mr. Burneson if he receive a report that Mr. Burneson spit on a neighbor’s sidewalk he would throw Mr. Burneson in Jail for 180 days.

Mr. Burneson objected to this threat because it could be set up by two owners who falsely claimed they saw Mr. Burneson spit on their sidewalk.  Judge Morris agreed he knew of this danger and let it stand.  THERE IS NO LAW IN COLORADO AGAINST PREJUDICE JUDGES.  Other States have laws against a judge being prejudice but not our State.

So Judge Morris has two choices he can dismiss the Stipulated Letter and the PPO to correct a miscarriage of justice or he can recuse himself and let another judge rule.  JUDGE MORRIS THIRD CHOICE WAS TO RESIGN AS A JUDGE AND  GO INTO RETIREMENT.  HE RETIRED APRIL 2008 AND HIS REMOVAL FROM THIS CASE WAS NOT GIVEN NOTICE TO THE PARTIES OF THI S CASE.  A NEW JUDGE WAS NOT SOUGHT UNTIL DEFENDANT BURNESON FILE HI S MOTION TO DISMISS THE PPO AND STIPULATED LETTER.  JUDGE ADAMS WASN’T APPOINTED UNTIL MAY OF 2009 ONE YEAR AFTER JUDGE MORRIS RETIRED.

Motion PPO has Expired Judge Morris

CHAPTER 32 Motion to dismiss PPO and Spitulation JUDGE MORRIS

Motion to  to dismiss Stipulated Letter and PPO. QUOTES FROM THE THE TRANSCRIPT OF JUDGE MORRIS HEARING ——

geer_letter_650


November 7, 2009

CHAPTER 33 JUDGE ADDISON L. ADAMS IS APPOINTED COUNTY JUDGE TO HEAR THIS CASE

JUDGE MORRIS RESIGNED APRIL 2008 WAS A SECRET BY CHIEF JUDGE SYLVESTER OF THE 18TH DISTRICT COURT OF ARAPAHOE. BY JUDGE MORRIS  RESIGNATION RATHER THAN RULE ON THIS MOTION ABOVE.  AFTER MANY MONTHS JUDGE SYLVESTER SETTLED ON APPOINTING A MAGISTRATE  ADDISON L. ADAMS TO COUNTY JUDGE AND ASSIGNED HIM TO REPLACE JUDGE MORRIS ON THIS CASE.  JEFFREY LANE OF SPRINGER AND STEINBERG IMMEDIATELY CONTACTED HIS LAW SCHOOL CLASS MATE (JUDGE ADAMS) AND BEGAN HIS OUTSIDE OF COURT EX PARTE INSTRUCTION ON HOW TO DISMISS THE DEFENDANT’S CHARGES.

THIS NEW JUDGE WITHOUT A HEARING AND WITHOUT NOTICE  TO DEFENDANT JAMES BURNESON THAT A NEW JUDGE WAS ASSIGNED THIS CASE YEP YOU GUESSED IT ON 6/01/09 (TEN DAYS AFTER LANES FILING)JUDGE SPIKE ADAMS DISMISSED DEFENDANTS MOTIONS OUT OF HAND WITHOUT REVIEW OF THE MOTION OR DEFENDANTS RESPONSE THE MR. LANES FILED RESPONSE DATED MAY 22, 2009.  AS OF THIS DATE DEFENDANT STILL DIDN’T KNOW ANOTHER JUDGE HAD BEEN APPOINTED TO THIS CASE. BUT JEFFREY LANE KNEW IT BECAUSE HE FILED HIS MOTION IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION NOT IN LITTLETON COURTHOUSE WHERE THE CASE HAS BEEN FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS BUT IN THE AURORA, COURTHOUSE OF THE 18TH COUNTY COURT WHERE THE NEW  JUDGE ADAMS HAS HIS COURT. THAT’S HOW CROOKED THE 18TH DISTRICT COURT IS FOR JEFFREY LANE’S BENEFIT. CHIEF JUDGE SYLVESTER OF THE 18TH DISTRICT COURT ALLOWED THIS KIND OF UNDER THE TABLE UNETHICAL ACTION BY ONE OF HIS JUDGES.

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 33.

Motion to dismiss PPO and Stipulation JUDGE MORRIS

October 29, 2009

CHAPTER 34 ATTORNEY REGULATON COUNSEL APPROVES LANES EMAIL

Filed under: LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 1:32 am

COLORADO SUPREME COURT

(by means of its agency

“Attorney Regulation Counsel”)

APPROVES JEFFREY LANE’S EMAIL THREAT

FOR ALL ATTORNEYS TO USE

AGAINST LITIGATING OPPONENTS

This is another ruling by Ms. Louise Culberson-Smith and Mr. John Gleason

THIS IS ONE REPORT ALL LAWYERS NEED TO READ.

DOWNLOAD TO READ OR PRINT.

November 7, 2009

CHAPTER 34 JEFFREY LANE SENDS AN UNETHICAL EMAIL THREAT TO DEFENDANT MR. BURNESON. A COMPLAINT IS FILED WITH THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT

JUDGE MORRIS ACCUSED JEFFREY LANE OF BEING EMOTIONALLY INVOLVED IN THIS CASE.  THIS INVOLVEMENT BY A LAWYER IS A MAJOR VIOLATION OF THE CODE OF ETHICS.  TO PROVE THIS VIOLATION  OF ETHICS THE FOLLOWING EMAIL WAS SENT BY MR. LANE TO A FRIEND OF DEFENDANT FOR YOUR REVIEW.

Exhibit-

Email sent to Mr. Alex Walter from Jeffrey Lane to be delivered to Jim Burneson.

Delivered-To: alexw@mai l-dnvr. uswest, net

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 15:08:44 -0600

From: “feff Lane” <jlane@pns-pc.com>

To: “Alex Walter” <alexw@alexwalter.com>

Subject:

Tell your buddy Burneson he will not and can not win this battle. He will be

living in a cardboard box under a bridge when I get through with him.

Jeffrey A. Lane, Esq.

Patterson, Nuss & Seymour P.C.

304 Inverness Way South, Suite 305:

Englewood, Colorado 801 12

Telephone : 303-74 1-4539

Fax: 303-741-5043

THIS IS A THREAT BY AN OFFICER OF THE COURT AGAINST

JAMES W. BURNESON. JEFFREY LANE HAS ADMITTED IN

PUBLIC AT THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ANNUAL MEETING

HE SENT THIS EMAIL.  SEE HOW A CROOKED LAWYER CAN USE HIS LAW LICENSE TO THREATEN THE PUBLIC AND GET AWAY WITH IT.

LANE IS THE STAR OF THE LAW FIRM SPRINGER AND STEINBERG

JIM BURNESON.  DEFENDANT MR. BURNESON FILES A COMPLAINT WITH THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT “ATTORNEY REGULATION COUNSEL” FOR  THIS EMAIL SENT BY JEFFREY LANE.

COLORADO SUPREME COURT

“ATTORNEY REGULATION COUNSEL”

ANSWERS TO COMPLAINT ARE TO PROTECT JEFFREY LANE AND JAMES WILDER

LAWYERS FOR THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION

Mr. John Gleason and Ms. Louise Culberson-Smith are quoted in these letters

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 34

Letters between all parties including answer from Attorney Regulation Counsel



CHAPTER 35 COLORADO SUPREME COURT (by means of it’s agency “Attorney Regulation Counsel”) APPROVES JEFFREY LANE’S EMAIL THREAT FOR ALL ATTORNEYS TO USE AGAINST LITIGATING OPPONENTS

3col_lg_judge-seat-in-courtroom-leather-chairThis is the cause and effect of ruling by Ms. Louise Culberson-Smith and Mr. John Gleason

THIS IS ONE REPORT ALL LAWYERS NEED TO READ

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 35

January 14, 2010

CHAPTER 36 Jeffrey Lane’s efforts to find a rollover judge to win his litigation

January 14, 2010

Chief Judge Sylvester

18th District Court Arapahoe County

7325 South Potomac Street

Centennial, CO 80112

Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey

Supreme Court of Colorado

Two East 14th Ave

Denver, CO 80203

Board of Directors

Dam East Homeowner Association

%Cherry Creek HOA Professionals

14901 E. Hampden Ave Ste #120

E. James Wilder P.C.

10200East Girard Ave Suite C255

Denver, Co 80231

Aurora, CO 80014

Jeffrey Lane and Harvey Steinberg

Springer and Steinberg P.C.

1600 Broadway Suite 1200

Denver, CO 80202

Case 09CV2541

Miscarriage of Justice for the benefit of ex magistrate Jeffrey Lane Esq. of Springer and Steinberg.

In the 18th District of Arapahoe County Mr. Jeffrey Lane using a straw man lawyer to hide behind has filed a foreclosure lawsuit which is very unusual at best.

1. The defendant Mr. Burneson has filed a complaint with the Commission of Judicial Discipline against 21 judges in the 18th District of Arapahoe County.  With the exception of one judge Mr. Lane is responsible for all the complaints as filed.

2. Mr. James Wilder Esq. has filed the foreclosure in the name of The Dam East Homeowner Association. The board of this HOA has loaned the HOA name for this lawsuit for purposes that will be explained later. It must be noted that the Board failed to approve this litigation by a motion and vote in a board meeting as required by the Covenants and Bylaws of the Association.  This mean Mr. Wilder doesn’t have the authority to file the lawsuit in the name of this HOA.

3. Chief Judge Sylvester since his appointment has allow Mr. Lane to pick his judges who he knows will always find in his favor. This is further achieved by Mr. Lanes habit of having ex parte discussions with the judge outside of the court prior to the trial.

4. The Board of Directors of the Dam East Homeowner Association  are as follows;  President Rob Celoni  Susan Hummel VP (Wife of past President Jake Hummel Esq. By this means Mr. Hummel is still running the association through his wife) Brendon Clancy Secretary, Joe Paull Treasurer Fritz Herman Director.  Mr. Clancy and Mr. Paull are new and have very little knowledge of what a Director does on a board.  Members of the board recently learned their mail sent in care of the property manage Mr. David Kinney of Cherry Creek HOA Professionals had been censored. I hope by now censorship of a Director’s mail has been corrected and not allowed in the future. This censoring of Director’s mail was a trick of Jake Hummel’s as past president to deny information from the Director’s. Its possible Ms Hummel’s  is now carrying out the direction of her husband Mr. Jake Hummel.

5. The Dam East Homeowner Association has no financial interest in this litigation as no funds sought in the foreclosure are owed the HOA and all money in the liens are to be paid to Jeffrey Lane of Springer and Steinberg. So Why did the board take on the lialbity of loaning the HOA’s name to this lawsuit?

6. Mr. Lane’s lawsuit filed by Mr. James Wilder without authority of the board has two liens recorded against Mr. Burneson’s home.  These liens are from Court Orders by Judges in the 18th District of Arapahoe County.  Problem for Mr. Lane is the liens are behind the secured lenders of record and can’t be accelerated for payment over all other lenders.

7. So Mr. Lane convinces the Board of Directors to file the lawsuit in their name claiming his liens are to be reclassified as assessments of the HOA and not liens recorded on the property. By this redefinition of the liens to an HOA assessment will allow the liens the rights to jump ahead of the secure lenders and demand payment in a foreclosure action will get Mr. Lane paid in advance of all other lenders. What Lane needs to accomplish this feat of imagination is a crooked judge to be appointed in the 18th District Court of Arapahoe who will be set up to rule in advance of the trial by Lane as he has accomplished in past trials in the same District. This is how justice works in Colorado.

8. Problem Mr. Lane so far has not been successful window shopping for a buddy judge to volunteer to run his trial. What judge in his right mind wants to jump into the miscarriage of justice and ruin his reputation for a friend Mr. Jeffrey Lane?

Its time for Chief Judge Sylvester to take back control of his position as Chief Justice and order the requested Change of Venue to a non-contaminated District Court Jurisdiction. It appears the Chief Justice needs Mr. Lane’s approval to make this change which will not be granted by Mr. Lane of Springer and Steinberg. Without a buddy judge of Lane’s he will not win his lawsuit to miss label liens as assessments which doesn’t fit the HOA’s definition of assessments. But then again Mr. Lane in the past had been very successful with the right judge running the trial

Of the participants in this scam who above is wrong in this letter.

1. Chief Judge Sylvester for allowing this case to continue knowing there are no judges in the entire 18th District Court of Arapahoe County that can be impartial in a trial involving Mr. or Mrs. James W. Burneson.

2. Board of Directors participation in a scam that is of no benefit to the Membership of this HOA which makes their actions to be severely criticized. They also failed to authorize Mr. James Wilder to file the foreclosure in the first place. The Board must remember they are here to represent the membership not sham lawyers. The Association is now liable for damages to the Defendant’s credit ratings and a suit will be filed for $50,000 for these damages.

3. James Wilder now knows his filing is illegal and must be withdrawn since his claimed client didn’t authorize the lawsuit on the date of filing as required by the HOA Covenants and Bylaws. Trying to correct this lack of authorization after the fact is not possible. If Jeffrey Lane still wants to pursue finding a rollover judge for this lawsuit he must refill the litigation with the proper authorization if the Board of Directors of the Dam East Homeowner Association.  That is if the board wants to loan their name of the HOA to participate a second time in a sham for the sole benefit of Jeffrey Lane of Springer and Steinberg.

4. Stay tuned to this Chapter for future announcements as to the name of a judge who Mr. Lanes has found to run his set up trial.

Jim Burneson

burnesonj@msn.com

This letter has been posted on the Internet at Chapter 36.

October 29, 2009

CHAPTER 37 IMMIGRATION AND REFORM ACT OF 1986. 2.5 Million Illegal Mexicans were granted Citizenship. Ted Kennedy and John McCain promised to build the Mexican Wall and failed on this promise.

IMMIGRATION BILL

THANKS TO THE NON-ENFORCEMENT OF THIS BILL WE HAVE OVER 20,000,000

ILLEGAL MEXICANS RUNNING LOSE IN OUR COUNTRY

All State legislators need to know this law so download and read it.

KENNEDY, SALAZAR, Mc CAIN AND PRESIDENT BUSH

Starting in 1986 to the present there have been 7 new laws passed with Kennedy’s involvement and none of them have been enforced.  1986 Bill calls for an 800 mile fence and the immigration bill just killed had 345 miles of fence. When the 800 mile fence is completed and proof it works then and only then will discussions be held on new Immigration laws.  There are laws on our books that need to be enforced while the boarder fence is under construction.  When government officials fail to enforce laws passed they are traitors to our country.

Our State legislature needs to pass an Oklahoma law on Immigration.  If this is not done we need to turn more of these legislators out of our State Government. THANKS TO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WILL BE TURNED OUT OF OFFICE YEARS 2010 AND 2012. OBAMA IS A SINGLE TERM PRESIDENT WORSE THAN CARTER’S RECORD.

DOWNLOAD IMMIGRATION LAW OF 1986



CHAPTER 38 DENVER WOMEN’S CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES

THE DENVER WOMEN’S CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES  3600 Havana Denver CO. 80239.

A. Women inmates get pregnant and their DNA is never checked to find out which guard is eh father before an abortion is performed at State expense. A guard whose DNA proves he caused the pregnancy must be charged with rape and sentenced by a court of law to serve in prison. This enforcement would cut down on the rapes in a woman’s prison caused by the guards.  A Women can not give sexual consent when she is an inmate.

B. Why Beef or pork is never served the inmates at this women’s prison?  Its always chicken and some time it’s under cooked.

C. Is it considered profiteering if a month supply of sanitary napkins costs a women inmate $4.00 a month?  How much does a month supply of sanitary napkins cost at the local markets?

D. Are inmates health endangered when the guards are so out of shape they can’t run 10 yards without fall down exhausted?  A guards waist should measure half his height which means some guards should be 10 feet tall.

E. Wherever Prison guards check in for duty in should be at a private entrance where dogs trained to detect drugs will smell all bags and containers of the guards. Drugs are entering all prisons and it’s brought in by the guards. Guards get sex or money in addition to their salaries.

F. Where prison guards leave the prison there needs to be a search of the guards bags for prison food stolen from the kitchen..  The kitchen staff made up of inmates can’t stop a guard stealing prison food.

G. Governor Ritter needs to order all women prisons to be staffed with women prison guards. Sex in a women’s prison is too powerful for male guards to overcome and perform their duties. Female guards would remove this  drive and the inmates would be better protected. Rape in a women’s prison is a constant danger. There is no way an attractive inmate can protect herself and then report a rape to the same guard involved in the rape.

A recent lawsuit has found the women’s prison  prison guilty of allowing a guard of rape of an inmate and ordered payment of $1,300,000 damages.  The rape went on for 6 years.

LETTERS TO THE MR. MARK BROADDUS WARDEN 0F THIS PRISON.

DOWNLOAD LETTERS TO MR. BROADDUS WARDEN

CHAPTER 39 LITIGATING HISTORY OF EX-MAGISTRATE JEFFREY LANE ESQ.

LITIGATING HISTORY OF EX-MAGISTRATE JEFFREY LANE ESQ. OF THE LAW FIRM PATTERSON NUSS & SEYMOUR, P.C. AND CURRENT LAW FIRM SPRINGER AND STEINBERG. THE FOLLOWING LIST OF CHAPTERS ARE COPIES OF TRANSCRIPTS OF COURT PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING MR. LANE ACTIONS TO STOP MR. BURNESON FROM GETTING THE BOOKS OPENED OF THE HOA “THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION.”  THIS LITIGATION HAS PREVENTED MR. BURNESON FROM INSPECTING THE BOOKS OF THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR 10 YEARS. LANE KEEPS THE BOOKS CLOSED TO PROTECT HIMSELF AND TWO OTHER LAWYERS, TIMOTHY MOELLER, AND RICH JOHNSTON FROM CHARGES OF THIEF. .

CHAPTER 2 COUNTY TRIAL BY AURORA COUNTY JUDGE STEPHEN RUDDICK. AND LAWYER JEFFREY LANE, WORKING TOGETHER AS A TEAM OUTSIDE OF COURT AND DURING THE TRIAL.

CHAPTER 6 REVIEW JUDGE CARLOS A. SAMOUR JR. 18TH DISTRICT COURT OF ARAPAHOE COUNTY. HE ACCEPTS EX PARTE COMMUNICATION FROM JEFFREY LANE OUTSIDE OF COURT.

CHAPTER 11. CHIEF JUDGE LEOPOLD ACTS AS A COUNTY JUDGE UNDER JEFFREY LANE’S CONTROL. THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATION BY JEFFREY LANE OUTSIDE OF COURT.

CHAPTER 12. KANGAROO TRIAL JUDGE SPENCER’S COURT.  MR. LANE HAS CONTROLLED JUDGE SPENCER BY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION.   MR. LANE ENTERED JUDGE SPENCER’S COURT ON THE COURT DATE AND INSTRUCTED JUDGE SPENCER HOW TO RUN THE TRIAL WHICH STARTED AT 9:00 AM.

CHAPTER 17. JUDGE CROSS LITTLETON COUNTY COURT.  HE WAS INVOLVED IN GRANTING A PERMENATE PROTECTION ORDER AGAINST MR. BURNESON FROM “ANNOYING THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DAM EAST HOA”. HOW ABOUT THAT ANNOYING A BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS DENYING A MEMBER HIS RIGHT TO “FREEDOM OF SPEECH”. JUDGE CROSS HAS BEEN PROMOTED TO DISTRICT COURT FOR DISPENSING JUSTICE AS A COUNTY JUDGE.  HIS GREATEST MOVE AS A JUDGE WAS TO TELL A DEFENDANT TO SHUT UP HE TALKS IN THIS COURT.  FROM THAT POINT ON THE DEFENDANT IS DENIED HIS RIGHT TO DEFEND HIMSELF IN JUDGE CROSS’S COURT.

CHAPTER 18 JUDGE ETTENBERG RULINGS ON THE PERMENATE PROTECTION ORDER.  HERE IS A SENIOR JUDGE WHO ALLOWS JEFFREY LANE CONTROL HIS COURT AS TO HOW DEFENDANT MR. BURNESON WILL BE SENT TO JAIL FOR ANNOYING THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

CHAPTER 20. MISMANAGEMENT OF THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION PAST AND PRESENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR JANUARY 2007 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

CHAPTER 24.  ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS FOR THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION REVIEW OF TIMOTHY MOELLER, RICH JOHNSON AND JAKE HUMMEL.

CHAPTER 29 CITY OF AURORA POLICE FORCE RUNS THE COMPLAINT SYSTEM THAT DENIES THE PUBLIC TO FILE A COMPLAINT. TWO ATTORNEYS FILLED A FALSE POLICE REPORT AGAINST JIM BURNESON IN AN EFFORT TO STOP HIS ATTENDANCES AT A DAM EAST HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION MEETING. THESE TWO ATTORNEYS ARE JEFFREY LANE ESQ. AND PRESIDENT OF THE HOA THE DAM EAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION JAKE HUMMEL ESQ.

CHAPTER 30 A REVIEW OF THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE HEARING TO SENTENCE MR. BURNESON TO JAIL FOR 180 DAYS: JUDGE MORRIS PRESIDING.  JUDGE MORRIS HAS SINCE RETIRED AS OF APRIL 30, 2008.  AFTER HIS PERFORMANCE IN THIS TRANSCRIPT IT’S CALLED CUT AND RUN.

CHAPTER 32 MOTIONS TO DISMISS STIPULATED LETTER AND PPO SENIOR JUDGE MORRIS.  JUDGE MORRIS RESIGNED HIS JUDGESHIP TO GET OUT OF RULING ON THE MOTION TO DISMISS.  ANOTHER COUNTY JUDGE SPIKE ADAMS WAS ASSIGNED THE CASE AND HE DENIED THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS BEFORE DEFENDANT BURNESON WAS TOLD JUDGE MORRIS HAD RESIGNED AND A NEW JUDGE WAS APPOINTED.  THIS IS HOW CROOKED THE 18TH DISTRICT COURT IS RUN BY CHIEF JUDGE SYLVESTER. JEFFREY LANE IS NOW CONTROLLING JUDGE ADAMS IN THIS CASE.

CHAPTER 32A MOTION TO DISMISS PPO AND STIPULATED LETTER DUE TO THE FACT IT HAS EXPIRED FOR LACK OF NAMING WHO IS TO BE PROTECTED AFTER ALL NAMED BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE NO LONGER ON THE BOARD.

ALL OF THE ABOVE PERTAIN TO THE ACTIONS OF JEFFREY LANE WHILE HE STALKS MR. BURNESON THROUGH THE COURTS OF COLORADO.  20 DISTRICT COURT JUDGES OF THE 18TH DISTRICT COURT OF ARAPAHOE WILL BE CHARGED AT THE COMMISSION OF DISCIPLINE FOR COMMUNICATING WITH JEFFREY LANE OUTSIDE OF COURT AND RUNNING THE COURT HEARING AS INSTRUCTED BY JEFFREY LANE.

November 8, 2009

CHAPTER 4 REVIEW OF KANGAROO COURT HELD IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW COURT, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE COUGHLIN

Filed under: Jeffrey Lane — Tags: , , — admin @ 10:42 pm

COMING SOON

December 16, 2009

Chapter 40 HOA ORDERED TO USE INVALID COLLECTIONS POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

December 16, 2009

To the Board of Directors of the Dam East Homeowner Association, Susan Hummel, Rob Celani, and Joe Paull,  Brendan Clancy and Property Manager  Dave Kenny of Cherry Creek HOA Professionals  of The Dam East Homeowner Association.

Notice of the false misrepresentation of the Collection Policies and Procedures which is invalid because it was not voted by the HOA Membership. In the body of this fraud document there are multiple changes to the HOA Covenants and Bylaws. Any Changes to these documents cannot be implemented unless approved by the members of the HOA at a Special Meeting or an Annual Meeting. Claiming this document voted by the board to be legal is fraud on the membership by Jake Hummel, Rick Johnston, Earl Johnson of Western Properties, David Kinney of Cherry Creek HOA Professionals and James Wilder Esq. All the years this document has been held to be valid implicates the Board of Directors who enforced an invalid law on the membership causing untold damages. The individual who bears the major fault is the President Lawyer named Jake Hummel. The law states when a lawyer takes a corporate office as a director he is to be held to a hirer standard. To me that means Mr. Hummel will be disbarred for the years he committed fraud on the membership of the Dam East Homeowner Association.

This new Board of Directors has to decide if they are honest or crooked like all the past boards.  You have three choices. 1. Resign and start running. 2. Try and hide all the wrongs committed by the past agents, lawyers, property managers, CPAs and all past Board of Directors starting 2001. 3. A new board can prove their intentions to manage the HOA honesty and within our Covenants and Bylaws by opening an investigation of all past actions committed by everyone starting with 2001 not three years past. This mean rebuilt all the books including bank records from HOA accounts to include all legal records of past lawsuits against this HOA or for the HOA against the membership. All past tax returns with all 1099s and any other attachments included in the filing. If these records are missing a request of the CPAs who filed them (will count in the 8 M lawsuit) If those records are still missing IRS is to be contacted to see what they have.  By the way the IRS is to be involved in this investigation.

I want a copy of the management agreement with Cherry Creek HOA NOT provided on Monday during the refusal of my request to inspect the books. I also requested what the amount is charged by David Kinney for transfer fees. David Kinney why are you refusing this information?  I want a written answer why I was refused the books on the 15th and it can’t be some law quoted by James Wilder.  You need a document that says a member can’t see the books for the following reasons from our Covenants and Bylaws.

I also want copies of the tape of the annual meetings I requested in the past and was refused by David Kinney.

Now move on to the enclosed document edited in RED print that will be posted on the Internet today.

Jim Burneson

Down load Chapter 40 The Attached Collection Policies and Procedures

April 19, 2010

CHAPTER 41 MORGAN CARROLL’S SECOND SCAM BILL 1278

The following email was sent to all legislators House and Senate and the Commission on the State Veterans, and Military Affairs  before it is voted by the Senate to approve or deny.

April 19, 2010

Members of the State Veterans, and Military Affairs

Subject 10-1278 the CAI bill to install an Obama Czar for 5 years to rule HOA homeowners and keep them quite.

Morgan Carroll pulls the second swindle on the legislature in Favor of the CAI

I note several of the committee members are term limited and may not have any concerns how you vote on this bill.  I will trust your ethics to be fair and impartial once you read this email and allow a public hearing on this matter. This message needs to be read in its entirety. The ending is dynamite.

I have discovered how the State Legislature follows the tradition of Democrats’ back room hiding votes and not listening to the public opinion as Pelosi, Obama, and Reid has operated in Washington. None of these elected officials is to be reelected.

This bill is another sham by Morgan Carroll who represents the CAI who is the Acorn of the HOA business nationally. It was her bill 06-89 9 (Also written by CAI)that you passed without reading it that cause the good points of SB 100 to be neutered.  Because of 06-89 named the “Clean Up Bill” I as an HOA member am denied my rights to inspect the books of the Dam East Homeowner Association. I have gone through 21. Judges in the 18th District of Arapahoe County over 10 years and still denied my rights to review the books.

Any legislature the CAI supports a law means the HOA homeowners are screwed and the crooked Property Managers and HOA Lawyers will be protected.

Now to the bill before you.  This clever attempt to sidetrack protection of HOA members by a 5-year appointed Czar who decides issues between property managers and HOA owners will be a disaster.  There is no right to appeal the Czar’s ruling allowed a HOA member and there is no oversight of the Czars rulings.  If this bill passes, come next year Morgan Carroll will propose increasing the Czars powers to rule all HOAs as she sees fit. (Obama’s principle of government ruling the people is for the benefit of Government not the people.)

The only way justice will served HOA members is a new law that requires all Property Managers of HOAs licensed under the Real Estate Commission just as Real Estate Brokers and Insurance Brokers are today. What the State Legislature doesn’t understand is many Property Managers are managing 50 to a 100 HOAs with total annual budgets of $15,000,000 to $150,000,000 a year with no oversight or any legal protection for HOA members. This bill doesn’t provide oversight and management requirements for HOAs. The members need protection with Millions in HOA budgets for Property Managers and lawyers to pay themselves as they want without opening the books for inspection.

The cost of seeking justice for a HOA owner in the County and District Courts can be over $20,000 in legal fees to stop the abuse of crooked lawyers’ in this business.

There is no justice from the County DA or the Appellant Court and yes, the Supreme Court fails.

The HOA market is one of the biggest moneymakers for Lawyers and Property Managers who are raping and plundering homeowners everyday.  It really gets worse when the little white haired widows are victims who have no recourse to defend themselves. This is who Morgan Carroll has thrown under the bus in favor of the members of CAI.

I will be reporting to all HOAs members located in each State Legislators District over the Internet who voted for this bill (CAI) and who voted against this bill (HOA members) for the next two elections. There are many voters in HOAs that far out number members of the CAI and their donations. I also suggest any CAI donations made to a legislator be refunded to clear any suspicion their vote was purchased.

I have made strong statements here, which must not to be taken lightly. This war is reaching a crisis and homeowners are mad. These HOA voters have no loyalty to either party come the next elections.  Our half-white President will continue to destroy the Democratic Party and for this blunder of passing 10-1278 will add to why fewer of you will return to office in the next two elections.

NOW ON TO THE MAJOR PROBLEMS IN MORGAN CARROLL’S BILL 1278. SHE FAILED TO ADVISE YOU IN THE HOUSE AND NOW SENATE.

1. HB 10-1278 doesn’t provide any oversight of the management of HOAs by Property Managers and the HOA lawyers. It sets up a Czar to mediate disputes between Property Managers and the members. We need to stop the disputes by listing illegal actions performed by Property Manager to increase their income. Strong laws like those that manage Real Estate Brokers and Insurance Brokers will bring peace to this industry.

2. The qualifications required for the appointment of a Czar for this position is a “Property Manager.” Where do you find an individual with these qualities why he/she is from the membership of CAI? That’s right and that’s why CAI backs this Bill.  HOW CAN YOU LEGISLATORS BE THIS NAÏVE? This bill puts the fox in charge of approving actions by Property Managers against HOA members in disputes with no appeal of the Czar’s decisions. Socialism has arrived. Government runs everything aren’t you proud?

3. Once the Czar is appointed, he is in for 5 years and can’t be removed. Wakeup this is a bad bill. Don’t rely on Carroll’s verbal answers to your questions. READ THE BILL.  Don’t make this another Carroll’s/CAI 06-89 bill, which none of you read and passed it. HOAs are paying a huge price for the bill that needs to be revoked immediately. Voters will be told here we go again, with Morgan Carroll’s shamming their legislators who were voted in by HOA members…

4. Now, you need to understand the method of charging for this bill is backwards. HOAs can’t be charge the operating cost for this bill. It’s the same as charging a fee for all real estate closings and refinancing of loans instead of charging the moneymakers who profit from the business of selling real estate or insurance. Now the Property Managers need to pay an annual fee for the Real Estate Commission to manage them to protect the HOA members from their abuse. CAI doesn’t want their members to be charged any fees and that’s why they wrote in this bill a charge to HOAs without notice to the HOAs what’s coming. The HOAs won’t know what hit them until after the bills passed. Have any of you gone to HOAs in your district and asked them if they would approve a tax (Pelosi, Reid and Obama) on their HOAs to pay for a CAI Property manager to rule over them and their disputes? You are working this bill behind closed doors. That’s why most of you will not be reelected over the next four elections.

ADD TO THIS BILL NO PAST OR PRESENT MEMBERS OF CAI CAN BE APPOINTED AN OMBUDSMAN EVER. THE CAI WHO WROTE THIS BILL WILL SCREAM AND THERE IS YOUR PROOF.

The appointment of an Ombudsman must be by the Real Estate Commissioners not the Executive Director of the Dept. of Regulatory Agencies. The Executive Director doesn’t know who to appoint until Morgan Carroll tells him.

5. What are the fees charged HOAs to pay for the Ombudsman? It’s a Pelosi scheme lets pass the bill and find out what’s in the bill after it passes.  If Legislators doesn’t know, the costs of a bill don’t pass it until you have a budget. Without limitation on fees, the CAI Property Manager Ombudsman could create a money empire budget and the HOAs have nothing to say about the charges. That makes you legislators look like crooks. That’s how we got the cost over runs now facing our budget. Pass this bill and figure the costs later because the taxpayers are wealthy. In November you will find out how the members feel about the unknown tax you passed in this bill.

Republican you are just as venerable to removal from office by HOAs in your district for failure to warn them of this pending statute and voting against it.

Last point the CAI, Morgan Carroll, and Property Managers have kept this tax and legislature secret from all HOAs.  No one has bragged about a new bill that will benefit HOAs in your district.  That’s right because its not a benefit and when the HOAs find you voted to pass a new tax without representation means all hell will break lose and Morgan Carroll will be laughing all the way home while you dodge the hateful emails and promises you are voted out of office. This is exactly what you need in November and 2012. You also have to thank the half-white president in the White House between now and November for what he and his gang of three will pull on their way out of office in 2012.

I want a public hearing on this bill in this committee and if you don’t comply passing, this bill will prove our State Legislature is as crooked as Congress.

Jim Burneson

This is published on www.court-house.com at Chapter 41.

October 29, 2009

CHAPTER 42 NOTICE TO OWNERS OF WOODSTREAM FALLS CONDOS

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 1:09 am

WOODSTREAM FALLS CONDOMINIUMS

9700 E Iliff Ave, Denver, CO‎

BOARD MEMBERS:

PANSY MORRIS

BARRY L. MCCONNELL ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR MANAGEMENT

UNIVERSITY of COLORADO-DENVER

AND

MR. GARY TOBEY ESQ.

LAW FIRM TOBEY & TORO

THE PEOPLE DESERVE THE GOVERNMENT THEY VOTED IN OFFICE.

THIS IS NOT TRUE OF HOA, CONDO, ASSOCIATIONS

BECAUSE OF MEMBERSHIP’S APATHY MOST BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE NOT ELECTED

TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE MEMBERSHIP.

THE BOARDS ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT THE INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBERS, PROPERTY MANAGERS AND WORST THE LAWYER WHO IS SUPPOSED TO BE REPRESENTING THE MEMBERSHIP. ONCE THESE THREE POSITION ARE UNIFIED THE MEMBERSHIP INTERESTS WILL NOT STAND A CHANCE OF BEING REPRESENTED AS THEIR RECORDED DOCUMENTS REQUIRE.

THE FOLLOWING REVIEW IS IN THE OPINION OF JAMES W BURNESON

Mr. Burneson has an extensive background in how HOAs become controlled by officers of the board and lawyers along with professional property managers.

I have met several times with the group of candidates who are running for election to the Board of Directors. For purpose of this report these candidates will be called the “Forrest Group”. (Forest Deyoung, Chu Son, Igor Pleskov and Boris Lipkind).

I have read most of the emails sent between the Board of Directors and the Forrest Group and have reached an opinion of what the membership of this HOA needs to know.

In this website I have Chapters which describe how a Board of Directors will act while trying to control an association for their benefit. See Chapters 14 A, B, C, and Chapter 15.

The following is a list of actions which a corrupt management system will perform to make more money for each of the entities, Property Manager, Board of Directors, lawyer and CPA firms. If this group can get away with it this year it will be worse in the coming years.

GARY TOBEY ESQ.

The law business for HOA ASSOCIATION is the lowest level of representation possible for a lawyer.  You see lawyers sign a contract to represent the “association” which in truth it’s the “association” that the lawyer will rape and plunder for his legal fees against the membership. The law firm of Tobey and Toro has been drawing down per month over $10,000 without an accounting what the legal fees covered. Mr. Gary Tobey issues his legal advice as verbal instruction and refuses to commit his legal advice in writing. When and if this Association sues Mr. Tobey for return of his wrongful receipt of legal fees he will not admit he gave any legal advice to Mr. McConnell and Ms. Moore. These two directors are out on the limb and don’t seem to know it.

Mr. Tobey has allowed the board to refuse giving the Forrest Group records, delinquent membership list for the election, and accounting records.  This is a red flag of wrongful hiding of the facts which is the first defense of a crooked Board of Directors. Hide the books.

Every action taken by a Board of Directors must be transparent to the membership. If this rule is not followed the opportunity to steal money from all members is too big a temptation. The only way to get rid of temptations is give in to it.  The money is just too easy for all three members’ reference herein.

BARRY L. MCCONNELL signs his name as a Professor at the University of Colorado at Denver, Business School. I hope he doesn’t teach Business Ethics.  He is on the board as Treasurer and Maintenance Manager with a $3,300 a month payment.  This is a conflict of interest being a Maintenance Manager for a fee while serving as an officer of the board. Receiving monthly payments for the additional position of Maintenance Manager is not allowed.

Mr. McConnell claims to be a full time professor and intends to be a board member and on top of that the Maintenance Manager for the Association.  Property Managers should include this service as part of their contract without an extra $3,300 per month fee.

PANSY MOORE

Pansy Moore is Secretary and Property Manager at a salary of $7,400 a month. This fee is too high for performing the list of actions stated on the contract between this Association and Cams L.L.C. The membership needs to read this contract.

Here again these two positions can’t be served by the same person.  The Board of Directors must be separate of any contracting work for the same Association.

THERE IS A CONSPIRACY BY THE OFFICERS AND LAWYER WHO ARE FIGHTING TO STOP AN OPEN LEGAL ELECTION.

The appearance of a conspiracy between these two Officers and the association lawyer is over powering and will stand in a court of law.  All three must resign starting with the lawyer since his law license is in jeopardy due to his failed conduct in this HOA. His legal decisions do not protect the membership but protect the two officers and lawyer’s ability to draw any monthly payment he deems to be worth his input.

The membership of this Association is being taken by three individuals who work to protect each others’ incomes to provide services that would not be allowed by an honest Board of Directors.

Members of this Association should attend the scheduled election and ask questions of these three why they are refusing to allow inspection of Association records by the Forest group? You want all the records to be brought to the election meeting for all members to review three hours before the meeting. The records will include all three years of financial records, minutes of all past meetings, three years of all past correspondence between the board and the membership. An audit of the books for the past 6 years by a public accountant is needed to be the first ordered of business by the newly elected Board of Directors.  This should scare this group as to what this audit will reveal to the membership.

CPA accountants that specialize in HOAs audits are predisposed to protect the Board of Directors and never for the membership.  Anything provide by a CPA firm will be shaded in favor of the board because the membership never hires CPA firms.  The CPA firm always provides a letter of commitment which will state they will never look for anything illegal during their audit. What good is an audit by a CPA?  It becomes a white wash of the lawyer’s and board of director’s actions.

A public accountant can do an audit to prove the books are in balance.  An HOA set of books are not complicated and don’t need the training of a CPA to perform an audit.  The audit will be cheaper and faster by a public accountant. Did the Board of Directors vote to approve the checks in payment to the lawyer, Professor Barry McConnell and Pansy Moore? If the board didn’t approve all checks paid for all expenses including these three in the minutes of the monthly board meetings then the money is stolen by the recipients.

This HOAs public image will be damaged if the membership doesn’t stop the current two Officers and Lawyer from allowed to continue their dictatory control of $2,000,000 a year cash flow. Lack of membership control will affect the resale price of the units because of the failure to controlling the board management of the Association.

The sooner this HOA is placed under the control of the Forest Group as new directors the turn around to clean management will occur. The membership must understand they are lucking to have 4 members willing to spend the time to correct the management of Woodstream Falls Condominiums for the benefit of all instead of what is managing the HOA today.

October 28, 2009

CHAPTER 44 WHAT DOES ILLEGAL MEXICANS COST COLORADO TAXPAYERS FOR CHILDREN EDUCATION

WHAT DOES ILLEGAL MEXICANS COST COLORADO TAX PAYERS FOR THEIR INVASION TO OUR  STATE?

GO TO THE FOLLOWING WEBSITES AND YOU WILL KNOW WHAT WE THE TAXPAYERS ARE CHARGED FOR THE FREE SERVICES PROVIDED THE ILLEGAL MEXICANS IN OUR SCHOOLS.

http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=19646&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1741

http://www.defendcoloradonow.org/studies/studies.html

http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/facts/state_data_CO

WHY DO THE LEGAL AMERICANS HAVE TO PAY TAXES AND THE MEXICANS GET IN FOR FREE?  CALL OR EMAIL YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVE OR SENATOR AND ASK WHY ARE THE BENEFITS FOR ILLEGAL MEXICANS FREE?

http://www.court-house.com/Immigration%20Reform%20&%20Control%20Act%20of%201986.pdf


Quote of the Decade

” The American Indians found out what happens when you don’t control immigration ! !

CHAPTER 45 PERJURY IS NOT ENFORCED IN CIVIL COURT

Filed under: Download Chapters Of Book,HOA,PERJURY — Tags: , — admin @ 7:00 pm

PERJURY IS NOT ENFORCED IN OUR CIVIL COURTS TO INCLUDE THE FEDERAL CIVIL COURTS.  YOU CAN LIE IN COURT AND NOTHING WILL HAPPEN BECAUSE THE JUDGE CAN’T RULE ON AN ISSUE THAT IS A FELONY.  LAWYERS AND JUDGES KNOW PERJURY CANNOT BE  ENFORCED IN CIVIL COURTS BUT THEY DON’T WANT YOU THE  PUBLIC TO KNOW. THAT’S WHY JUDGES STILL ASK A WITNESS TO “SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH” WHEN IT DOESN’T MATTER.

The following letter by Chief Justice Stuart with copies to Judge Macrum and Judge Fasing explains why a judge in any civil court can’t rule on Perjury.  After you have downloaded  a copy of Judge Stuart’s  letter you have to understand there is no record of any District Attorney prosecuting anyone for Perjury in a Civil court in the State of Colorado.   (NOR OTHER STATES)

James W. Burneson has sued the Arapahoe District Attorney for failure to prosecute a case which had proof in three separate court cases that perjury was proven in the court’s transcripts.  The District Attorney refused to prosecute and claimed he alone has he right to decide who he sues which is the law.  Thus Perjury is not enforced in our Civil and Federal Courts.

Why then does our judges continue to ask witnesses in court proceeding to raise their right hand and swear to tell the truth?  This is the dirty little secret of our Justice system which Supreme Court Chief Justice Mullarkey continues to deny is the truth.

Ask your local District Attorney when he last prosecuted a case of perjury in a civil court? You will never get an answer because he/she never has sued for perjury in a civil lawsuit.  He never will sue as all DAs have done across the country. The DA fear this enforcement would open the Pandora’s box and cause the loss of lawyers legal fees by requiring truth to be allowed in court.

If perjury was enforced in our civil courts half the lawsuits would be dropped.  THIS WOULD BE THE GREATEST REVISION OF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM WITHOUT CHANGING ALL THE STATE LAWS.  THIS WOULD ALSO MEAN THAT HALF THE  LITIGATING LAWYERS  WOULD GO BANKRUPT. ASK YOUR LAWYER WHY PERJURY IS NOT ENFORCED IN OUR COURTS?  IF YOU ARE A LAW STUDENT ASK YOU LAW PROFESSOR WHY PERJURY IS NOT ENFORCED IN OUR CIVIL COURTS. THIS DIRTY SECRET ALSO MEANS ALL PRO SE LAWSUITS ARE  MISTRIALS IF NO ONE TOLD THE PRO SE HE/SHE AND THEIR WITNESSES COULD LIE LIKE THE LAWYER OPPOSING HIM/HER COULD AND PROBABLY DID.  EVERY JUDGE IN EVERY COURT KNOWS WHAT A SHAM THEY ARE RUNNING IN THEIR JOBS.

The Justice Industry and Trial Lawyers have to be allowed to suborn witnesses in trials so they can make a living suing  the public.  So long as this dirty secret exists we are not a Nation of Laws. The public does not have any court that dispenses justice.  We the public are the sheep who are feed upon as a right of lawyers and judges for their income. EVERY LAWYER KNOWS THIS SECRET EXCEPT THE SHEEP. How do you like being a sheep with no rights to protect you against the rights of lawyers to receive income while you are seeking justice in our courts? Think about it truth is not allowed in our civil trials. Witnesses in medical lawsuits are allowed to lie (Perjury) for either side of the case whose pays the most. That’s because perjury is allowed in civil trials.  Judge Stuart’s letter one page explains this truth below. Download a copy and send it to friends who need to know what happens when you go to court in the USA.

DOWNLOAD CHIEF JUDGE STUART’S LETTER.

January 28, 2010

Chapter 46 Judge Adams and Jeffrey Lane work together Ex Parte to deny a Motion

This is an example of Judge Adams and Jeffrey Lane star of law firm Springer and Steinberg working an Ex Parte denial of the Defendant’s Motion as displayed by clicking on the Download button below:

Download copy of Motion  submitted by Defendant Judge Adams denial Motion

Please also note none of the named Plaintiffs listed in this litigation are board members at the Dam East Homeowner Association at time. This is a problem for Mr. Lane’s efforts to keep the PPO alive for Mr. Lane’s protection not the Plaintiffs.  Mr. Lane has accomplished this effort to continue the PPO without filing a motion by the only parties with the authorization to do so is by the past Board of Directors as listed in this motion to ask the court to continue the PPO. This authorization can’t be obtained even from the present Board of Directors not named in the PPO.

Judge Adams has no authority to continue a PPO that has not been requested by the Plaintiffs named in the PPO or even the Current Board of Directors. This is a mistake by a newly appointed Magistrate to a position of County Court under the control by Jeffrey Lane.

Mr. Lane has by his objections to Defendant’s Motions to dismiss the PPO that expired by the lack of any named parties to be protected has with the cooperation of Judge Adams denied any motions to dismiss the PPO which causes it to be continued without any authorization. How does a Judge decide he has the authority to extend or continue a case which no Plaintiff has filed a motion requesting the court to issue a continuance? Where does an attorney get the authority to litigate a continuance without his client’s approval to do so? Does a law license entitle lawyers to decide litigation without Client Approval?

I asked this question of many lawyers who all said only the client has the authority approval to decide what action an attorney can take in a court of law. Not according to Ex Magistrate Jeffrey Lane. He has the authority to decide his direction while representing his own interest in this case and not the HOA’s Interest.

There are several dates which the court will have to explain in a complaint filed with the Commission on Judicial Discipline. 1. The date of filing of Dec 14, 2009. The date of Defendant’s filing of a complaint with the Commission on Judicial Discipline was December 15, 2009. The date of Denial of 1/06/2010 and the date of the Denial was received at the Defendant’s residence was 1/25/2010. The date of receipt is 19 days after the date of denial which was not sent “W/ certificate as mailing “as written on the face of the motion.  The reason for this date game is by delaying the receipt of notice of denial beyond 15 days the Defendant can’t appeal the denial.  How crooked can two lawyers be one wearing a robe get?

In the Defendant’s “Motion to reconsider motion to dismiss an expired PPO to be held in reserve till a new judge is appointed to continue this case removes Judge Adams jurisdiction from ruling on any issues in this case”. The Defendant stated in the motion that he had filed notice of a complaint against Judge Adams with the Commission on Judicial Discipline and by this filing Judge Adams is prejudice against Defendant and can’t rule on a Motion to Reconsider an earlier decision.  A new Judge must be appointed. Problem Chief Judge Sylvester can’t find another judge to appoint to this case. This requirement doesn’t set well with Jeffrey Lane and thus he convinces Judge Adams without filing a motion with the Court that the judge has the right to rule on this issue because Jeffry Lane use to be a Magistrate before he was fired.

Judge Adams doesn’t belong on the any bench except in a Park. This entire case has been run by Jeffrey Lane by phone ex parte and not by filed motions in court authorized by the client. Both lawyers need to be disbarred one wearing a robe.

Chief Judge Sylvester of the 18th Court appointed Magistrate Adams to the position of County Judge and now must take action to stop a miscarriage of justice by County Judge Adams and Jeffrey Lane of Springer and Steinberg. If Chief Judge Sylvester has the claimed authority to deny the public their right to purchase audio tapes of trials then he surely has the authority to stop an illegal action by one of his judges.

Last point if Defendant tried to appeal this court’s action it would be directed from County court to an 18th District Court judge who doesn’t exist due to the filing of a complaint on 21 judges in this District.  This problem may requires Defendant to file future litigations in Federal Court do to the fact James W Burneson can not receive a fair trial in the 18th District Court for lack of impartial judges.

If you have an opinion on this Chapter you can leave a message at the bottom of this chapter. If deemed appropriate it will be published with this Chapter.

In all of Judge Adams past denials there is no explanation of the motion has been denied.  This I believe is because he doesn’t read the Motions becasue he relays on Jefffrey Lanes opinion on what to do.

Jim Burneson

www.court-house.com

February 1, 2010

Chapter 47 City of Aurora Sham Fence Program for The Dam East Homeowner Association

This Message is to the Membership of the Dam East Homeowner Association and the City of Aurora Council. It is published on the Internet for the Public to know what can happen to other HOAs

What a sham the City of Aurora runs under the name of a Fence Project. The following is a review of why City Council can’t vote approval of the Dam East Homeowner Association claimed fence approval along Yale and Peoria.

1. The Petition which claims to start the project is flawed to the point it can’t ever be approved and certified by the Clerk of the City Court. There are claimed signatures on this petition in blue ink and someone using green ink wrote in a date to complete the signature where dates were left out by the person signing the petition. There is also whiteout used which immediately disqualifies a Petition. Yet with this information provided City Attorney Richardson nothing was done to correct this misconduct. It seems crooked petitions are allowed by this City Attorney so long as he agrees with the subject.

2. The Benefit/Impact, Analysis is a $5,000 sham and needs to be dismissed as a fraudulent Appraisal. It will not stand verified by a review by another appraiser appointed as a court witness. In fact this City will not find any appraiser of any reputation who will approve this appraisal. There isn’t a staff member with a background to qualify accepting this joke appraisal. But that’s what was needed to cover for this fraudulent scam to defraud the homeowners of the Dam East Homeowner Association. Go to website www.court-house.com and search for Chapter 27 where there is a complete review of how wrong this study is. City Attorney Richardson is aware of this failure and has refused to acknowledge it.  It was City Attorney Richardson who tried to use a Police officer to intimidate Mr. Burneson from getting an appointment to meet with Mayor Tauer. I believe this is called miss use of a Police Officer yet it’s OK with the City Attorney Richardson.  I still have a request for a meeting with the Mayor and Mr. Tauer has so far refused. Why does the Mayor have to hide from me? Am I dangerous? We could have the Police Officer present during the meeting.

3. The Board of Directors of the Dam East has the requirement to have the membership of this HOA grant their approval at a special meeting to remove a wooden fence to be replaced by masonry wall or any major changes to HOA property.  Until this requirement of a vote by the membership is completed this project can’t be offered for approval by City Council.  A vote of City Council granting approval of this project doesn’t remove the Covenants, Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation which doesn’t change the law. City attorney Richardson doesn’t have jurisdiction or authority to overrule this HOA requirement. Attorney Richardson has refused to answer and is hiding from this question.  How does a City of Attorney have the latitude to hide from questions of law by a taxpayer citizen of City of Aurora? Its time to fire City Attorney Richardson since he doesn’t answer the hard questions just ignores them if they pose a problem. This is how the City screws the public and claims it’s OK by the law.

4. Cost of the construction needs to be rebid since our economy has continued to decline since the last bid. The new cost could be a savings of $2 to $400,000 in construction. I’ll bet the construction contract has already been promised to an insider company at a past higher price now out of date. This is called the sweet heart contract 3 years old. By the time it gets build it will be 4 to 5 years since the last bid.

5. The membership of this HOA has been refused their rights of Freedom of Speech. 1St Amendment to our Constitution. The petition used to approve this claimed fence project denied all members their right to vote for or against the proposal. This method used to count the votes as positive signatures on a petition is intentionally slanted for approval required by the City of Aurora. If you are against the Petition you can’t register a negative vote thus you are not allowed to sign the petition and thus denied your opinion as an owner.  That is nothing more than bull shit. This entire sham can’t be continued to a vote by Council without a method of counting all votes for and against. The use of a petition as a means of recording only the positive votes is as illegal as hell. City Attorney Richardson knows of this objection but hasn’t ruled against it because it makes it easier to pass approval of a fence project without negative votes. The Board of Directors of the HOA is also part of this crime of Denying Freedom of Speech by the membership.

6. I want to thank City of Aurora for providing me with an up to date registration of the all owners in the Dam East Homeowner Association. The board has refused printing an update membership registry for the past 5 years to prevent owners from learning who are new owners and who have moved out. That’s how crooked this board is and there is much more evidence of hiding the books and contracts from my request to see what is my right to inspect as provided by our Bylaws. This council supports a repressive Board of Directors who represent four crooked lawyers instead of the membership as follows: Jake Hummel past president, Jeffrey Lane star of Springer and Steinberg, James Wilder Esq. and Rich Johnston.

7.       This HOA is composed of owners who are 60 % over 55 years old. We have a very high number of single widows of an elderly age who were easy to intimidate by Fence Committee Members. These members demanded a meeting with them in their own homes to get their positive signature. The Fence Committee didn’t have to listen to those who opposed the fence project since they were denied a voice in this vote. Scare tactics of the Fence Committee quote “If this fence doesn’t get built we don’t know what kind of wooden fence will be built? This fence will improve your home sales value. All lies and if you don’t sign this petition you are not being a good neighbor.” What happened to the last fence project this council voted approval? It failed by a vote of the taxpayers with a negative vote allowed at the election.  We as homeowners have been denied our right to express our opinion of this fence project and you on council intend to vote positive in our place. That action is a City Government that follows Thomas Jefferson’s quote “”When the people fear their government, there is tyranny.  When the government fears the people, there is liberty.” If you continue this vote you as a government have no fear of us citizens of Aurora. That’s why court is necessary for to stop a sham project ruled legal by a City Attorney who will quit before going to court.

8. This whole project smacks of the same actions in Washington’s Obama’s administration called shove their laws down the public’s throat. This is of course in the name of what a few think is good for our country. That few are  incompetent Board of Directors of the HOA, the Fence Committee and now the question is if this Council?  Meanwhile Obama is destroying the Democratic Party. No one with a D after their name will get reelected through 2010, 2016. That includes State officials down to dog catcher. Where are you guys in this mix? Independents will decide who gets reelected across this country. They don’t like heavy handed government officials.

9. A picture of a fence offered by other owners in this project was not allowed to be presented at the Fence Committee meetings by Chairman Dick Palmer. You can see pictures of this fenceWall for Dam East

It can be built faster and a hell of a lot cheaper than Palmer’s sole option of a Masonry Fence which is up for a vote by Council. It was also denial of the membership’s right to Freedom of Speech.  Somewhere in the background I hear a Cho Cho train running through this council.  Much cheaper and built faster than the City approved fence before Council.  The fence is already built in panels and installs fast.  Whats wrong with this fence compared to a $5,000,000 financed wall Dick Palmer decided for all  owners in the Dam East Homeowner association.  Our HOA will own this fence instead of City of Aurora as in their fence program.  A local bank offered financing to the Association reasonable terms with payoff terms better than the City.

I will be at this scheduled meeting February 22, 2010.  I suggest members of council complete a full review of my charges with City staff which will determine I am telling the truth. With that in mind a vote against this Fence Project is all you can cast at this meeting. A repeat of a Fence Sham like this involving any of the 350 HOAs in Aurora will be a big mistake and needs to be canceled for all future projects.

I want a complete audit of all income to the City of Aurora off this project to include all City fees and a projection of what income will occur if 50 % of the financed units take 10 years to payoff. This information must be provided at the February 22, meeting in writing. Omit this secret and it will be very important issue in court.

I can support all the charges and more in court and you and staff will be witnesses on the stand. City Attorney Richardson needs to be fired he will never retire.

Jim Burneson

May 23, 2010

CHAPTER 48 Jeffrey Lane of Springer and Steinberg runs the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County

Jeffrey Lane over a period of 10 years ran his own justice system in the 18th District of Arapahoe County by picking his own judges and meeting with those judges ex parte before the trials to set how he would win the case against James W Burneson.  The trials were held and the transcripts of those trials are available on this website.

Mr. Lane is an ex magistrate having been a judge in the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County at Littleton. He chose to resign from the bench as apposed to prosecution. From this position, he had the sympathy of the judges and he worked them with the approval of both Chief Judge Sylvester and Chief Judge Leopold.

The named judges with their cases should be removed from the bench. These judges are working for the short term 12 year pension and don’t have the convictions to be an impartial judge who has to serve 25 years for retirement.

The following download is a copy of an appeal filed with a history of past trials managed by Mr. Jeffrey Lane against James W Burneson.

Go to Chapter 49 Jeffrey Lane is emotionally involved in litigation against James W Burnesona

DOWNLOAD CHAPTER 48 Jeffrey Lane of Springer and Steinberg runs the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County.

May 17, 2010

CHAPTER 49 Chief Judge Sylvester, Jeffrey Lane is Emotionally Involved and can’t be involved in litigation against the Burnesons

Filed under: CAI,HOA,Jeffrey Lane,LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: , — admin @ 1:31 pm

May 16, 2010

Chief Judge Sylvester

18th District Court Arapahoe County

7325 South Potomac Street

Centennial, CO 80112

And

Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey

Supreme Court of Colorado

1560 Broadway,

Denver, CO‎ Denver, CO 80203

Re: Jeffrey Lane is imbalanced as a lawyer when involved with litigation against James Burneson. He must be denied any further litigation in the 18th District Court against James w. Burneson.

Enclosed is a copy of my latest Motion filed with proof Mr. Lane is emotionally involved with prosecuting James Burneson. Twenty-two judges in the 18th District Court condoned this action with Judge Weishaupl assigned by you Chief Judge Sylvester for case 09CV2541 filed by James Wilder Esq. for Mr. Lane’s money.

When Judge Weishaupl was appointed to this trial she had to be coached and briefed what to expect as the 23rd judge working for Jeffrey Lane.  With a briefing she became prejudice and should have recused herself and save her reputation as a judge.

I have this case tied up in Appellant Court and believe the scandal of 23 judges working with Mr. Lane will cause both of your resignation.

I also discovered the Commission on Judicial Discipline is a total fraud and does nothing to protect citizens from incompetent judges and crooked lawyers. Mr. William Campbell Interim Director, has to be dismissed and someone whose ethics preclude prejudice decisions to protect actions of judges and lawyers from the public. Who oversees this Commission and staff’s actions? Is this the responsibility of Chief Justice Mullarkey? Answer this question: Who runs and oversees this Commission?

With this discovery, that complaints are dismissed by the gatekeeper Mr. Campbell proves the citizens of Colorado don’t stand a chance of getting justice in the States Courts.

For further review of the 18th District court go to www.court-house.com Chapter 1.

The Attorney General has informed me that the State of Colorado doesn’t have laws that protect HOA owners from the crooks at CAI. (Lawyers and Property Managers) HOA owners need all Property Managers to be licensed under the control of the Real Estate Commission before any law agency can prosecute lawyers and Property Managers for crimes against HOA members. This means HOA owners stand nude in our courts of law seeking justice. The crooks can do anything to HOA members and there is no recourse of protection or redress of crimes committed for money.

This fact is publicized to the State Legislature for next year’s session.  In addition, the fact-failed lawyers searching for a retirement program work to become a judge since retirement is achievable in 12 years.  I told a judge in another state about our 12-year retirement program and his comment was we have part time judges whose legal decisions are most likely ruled in favor of a friendly lawyer instead of what the laws requires. That describes 22 judges and Jeffrey Lane court fraud.  Jeffrey Lane who is proven to be out to ruin me controlled all judges before the trial associated with any litigation involving James Burneson.

Jeffrey Lane, of Springer and Steinberg Law Firm is a fired Magistrate for criminal charges why does he still have a license to practice law? Judge Sylvester you are at the end of your career in law and owe everything that you allowed Jeffrey Lane to perpetrate in the 18th District Courts of Arapahoe County.

All evidence and facts of Mr. Lane’s control over these judges is to be published in story form on the Internet with the tar brush of shame touching each judge in the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County.

There is a strong promotion for all voters in future elections to vote no against every judges running for reelection. This will be a wake up call to the justice system of Colorado. The public is fed up with how injustices as allowed Jeffrey Lane to run the 18th District Court Arapahoe County.  Ex Parte conferences with each judge before a trial was held so the judge has a script to follow in his/her court. Transcripts prove the judge’s prejudice attitude in each trial.

Chief Justice Mullarkey is also accused of allowing Jeffrey Lane actions against Mr. Burneson for over 10 years and hasn’t responded as a Supreme Court Justice of Colorado.

All further litigation by Jeffrey Lane against James W Burneson must be suspended in the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County. Any appointed judge in the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County cannot provide Justice after the history of injustice allowed by Chief Judge Sylvester.   Change of Venue must be granted any litigation filed against the Burnesons in the 18th District Court of Arapahoe County.  ALL JUDGES ARE PREJUDICE AGAINST BURNESON AFTER 22 TRIALS.

Jim Burneson

12641 E Bates Cir

Aurora, CO 80014

303-750-1500

Published on www.court-house.com Chapter 49 “Chief Judge Sylvester, Jeffrey Lane is Emotionally Involved and can’t be involved in litigation against the Burnesons”

THE FOLLOWING MOTION IS FILED UNDER RULE 19 TO JOIN PERSONS NEEDED TOR JUST ADJUDICATION AND PROOF JEFFREY LANE IS EMOTIONALLY INVOLVED AND THUS CAN’T CONTINUE LITIGATION AGAINST BURNESON.

DOWNLOAD  MOTION RULE 19 JOIN DAMAGES

April 1, 2010

CHAPTER 50 Complaint filed Against Cherry Creek HOA Professionals with the District Attorney of Arapahoe County and with Attorney General of Colorado

The following Complaint was filed against three Property Managers of HOAs.

1. Western States Property Services Inc, 2. Cherry Creek HOA professionals, and 3. Westwind Property Management for charging Transfer fees without authorization.  When and if an HOA board authorized charging fees the money collected is never deposited in the HOA account but in the Property Management business account.

_________________________________________________________

March 15, 2010

Attention Mike Knight

Carol Chambers

District Attorney Office.
6450 S Revere Parkway
Centennial, CO 80111
Faxed this date 720-874-8628

Re:  Fraud, Extortion and Thief.

Dear Mr. Knight,

The following is a description of how the above felonies are accomplished by Crooked lawyers, Property Managers (PM), Board of Directors and in some cases CPAs.

Transfer Certificates (TC) is a report that all Property Managers provide upon request of Title Companies to verify a seller’s assessment account is current. PM staff checks the owner’s assessment account on the computer and notes if it shows nothing owned or if there is a balance.  A letter is typed (by Computer) giving notice to the Title Company what to enter in the closing statement for a sale or refinancing by the owner. A lawyer of a Title Company told me a Transfer Certificate is not valid if sign by a staff member in the PM company. If the TC isn’t correct the Title Company would have problems getting redress from cost incurred by the wrong information.

1.  Most Covenants and Bylaws state the Association Treasurer is responsible to issue the Transfer Certificate (TC) for a (nominal) fee which uses to be $15.00 year 2000.

2.  Today the TCs are issued by the Property Manager’s staff for a fee of      $100.00 to $150.00 which is not authorized by the Board of Directors in most HOA. Without written approval in a contract there is no authorization to charge a TC fee. No paper record about a TC being authorized no one notices it being charged until a member sells his home. Many times the Board of Directors don’t even know they are responsible for TCs and it’s an on going tax free income for Property Managers and Crooked lawyers. Many times in the HOA rip off the PM and Lawyer share a portion of their fees. All Board of Directors are included in this Complaint as coconspirators with the PMs.

3. Here is the real crime listed above.  When a homeowner goes to a closing and see a fee of $150.00 listed on the closing statement they ask what is this fee about?  When it is explained it’s a fee from the Property Manager the owner can’t object without delaying the closing. Title Company will not say we will escrow this disputed amount and we will proceed with the closing.  This is called extortion, thief and fraud. The owner leaves the HOA mad but doesn’t fight the charge. Mafia loves this crime. The fee is too small for an owner to hire a lawyer to get the thief corrected. But the totals collected per year by a PM can be over $150,000.

4. If the contract between the PM and the HOA states the TC charge is legal then the TC fee must be deposited in the HOA General fund and a service fee paid the PM out of the General fund for this service and thus a record is created of this transaction. Without a paper trail of money charged collected and paid for IRS is out of the loop and doesn’t know to look for it. This is a national scandal. The PMs collect these fees on a nonscheduled base so the money paid from the closings can easily be hidden on the books of the Property Manager.

5.  Projections of PM cash follow: The Dam East Homeowner Association has 425 homes and had an average before the current recession of 5 transactions per month that require a TC. $150.00 X 5 = $750.00 per month X12= $9,000 per year per each HOA.  Some PMs have 10 to 60 HOAs which could be an annual income of (30 HOAs $270,000 a year of tax free income.

6.    All crooked Property Managers and crooked lawyers in the HOA business are members of Community Association Institute. (CAI)  this is a national organization which is the ACORN of the HOA screw the homeowners group. The CAI hire legislatures like Morgan Carroll to submit legislation that will protect the income of PMs and member Lawyers from the public. If you proceed on this complaint you will be lobbied to drop it by the CAI and Jeffrey Lane Esq.

7.  Call a title company and ask if they will confirm all PMs charge $100.00 to $150.00 for their TCs?  The evidence of all real estate transfers for the last 10 year will tie the Property Manager to the number of TCs he collected at the going rate charged for that year.  Title Companies can provide this list of closings for sales or refinancing in 5 minutes.

8.   These are the Property Managers who I know are in on this scam:

Mr. David Kinney

Cherry Creek HOA Professionals

14901 E. Hampden Ave Ste #120

Aurora, CO 80014   10 HOA managed

Earl Johnson

Western States Property Services

9145 E Kenyon Ave Ste 100

Denver, CO 80237

Phone 303-758-2220

Fax 303-754-3335

31 HOAs managed

Mr. Larson

WestWind Property Management Co.

15150 East Iliff Avenue
Aurora, CO 80014-4500
(303) 369-1800

Enclosed is a letter of refusal by Mr. Kinney when asked about the amount charged for his Transfer Certificates.  Please note he claims he doesn’t have to explain his fees since he is not charging the HOA. No he is charging a member of the HOA and he has no authority to do so. The Board of Directors are aware of this letter and has done nothing to correct it because they represent the crooked lawyer, and Property Manages against the membership which is who they are suppose to be protecting. Wonder how much kick back some of the Directors are receiving?

After 10 years of war in this HOA tragedy I say this scam is performed by all members of the CAI group nationwide.  Why not collect this money its tax free and it’s been operating with no hint of discovery for over 10 years. It’s like finding money on the sidewalk.

Mr. Knight I’m aware of the complaints filed with the Arapahoe County Sheriff Criminal Financial Investigator “Michael Garnsey” on two HOAs over a year ago. A claim has been made two investigators of your office has been assigned the case. I have been asked to find out what happened to this complaint? This is why I’m filing my complaint with this office instead of any other claimed law enforcement agency

I have more charges to file on individual lawyers and Board of Directors in this business which needs to be added to this complaint. It’s my belief this DA will not file against crooked lawyers and will do everything to protect them from the public. Ex Magistrate Jeffrey Lane is one that this office protected and now he is the star of Springer and Steinberg. What does a Magistrate have to do to loose his appointment as a Judge?  Pull my past complaint on Mr. Lane. .

I will be publishing this entire story of HOAs starting with the crooked lawyer President of the Dam East Homeowner Association named Jake Hummel. I have a Civil Lawsuit being completed for $8,000,000 damages against the Dam East Homeowner Association. Go to www.court-house.com . This complaint and any other complaints pending at other DAs offices will be published so the Public can understand how it’s denied justice.

There is enough hatred seething in the membership of HOA all over this state. The victims are looking for the cause of this injustice that is not protecting the little gray hair window who has just been screwed by the HOA lawyer.  I’m ready to prove Carol Chambers and all other DAs want to protect their brothers of the law. Do you know how many voters are members of an HOA?  Let me count the number. In Aurora there are 350 HOAs.

I expect to be called to give more evidence against all involved in this scam. If you and Ms. Chambers want to ignore my complaint let me say that will be a mistake.

Question has this office prosecuted any cases of perjury in a civil court lately?

Jim Burneson

12641 E Bates Cir

Aurora, CO 80014

Blind Copies to many. If I don’t have a response within one week I publish this Complaint on my website www.court-house.com. Look for Chapter 50.

March 20, 2010

Chapter 51 How Crooked is the Dam East Homeowners Association?

The following letters are copied and published here on the Internet because the Board of Directors of this HOA don’t publish their email addresses so the members can’t send messages to them.

This is one letter from a member James Burneson to the board of Directors named Rob Celoni Pres. owner of a child school for Martial Arts, Susan Hummel VP, Kaiser Medical, Brendan Clancy Sec. employment unknown, Joe Paull, employment unknown, Fritz Herman Director retired Kodak. and to James Wilder Attorney.

_______________________________________________________

This emailed sent to President Celoni and James Wilder Lawyer. All Board members are to receive distribution of this email from President Celoni since their email addresses are unknown by the membership.

This emailed sent to President Celoni and James Wilder. All Board members are to receive distribution of this email from President Celoni since their email addresses are unknown by the membership.

March 20, 2010

To: Board of Directors Rob Celoni, President, Mrs. Susan Hummel Vice President,(wife of Jake Hummel lawyer past president of the Dam East Homeowner Association) Brendan Clancy, Secretary, Joe Paull Treasurer, Fritz Herman, and James Wilder attorney. .

From Jim Burneson harassed member of the HOA.

Re: Lies by President Rob Celoni, and now all board members. Attorney James Wilder is  in on the lies to cover-up lack of authorization to file lawsuit to foreclose on my home.

“Continuing”      President’s Celoni fails to prove that the board voted authorization to file the foreclosure lawsuit in a board meeting of directors. A review of all past board meeting minutes does not have this vote recorded. The Board of Directors have been provided with a copy of Court Orders by Chief Judge Stuart and District Court Hickman that requires all actions of the board must be approved at a board meeting and recorded in the minutes of all meetings and thus if an action is not recorded as described the actions were never authorized.

Board members by this date you have signed on to President Celoni’s lies about authorization and are now coconspirators in a fraud. This is not civil court this is criminal court fraud.

The letter sent March 17th prepared by Jim Wilder but signed by President Celoni has nothing to do with lying about the lawsuit. I was aware of all the information provided in this letter back in 2000 or earlier.  The letter looks official but offers no proof of claims authorization was granted for the lawsuit. President Celoni’s verbal claim authorization occurred has no proof and that makes it a lie. When a lie is repeated 20 times it is still a lie. But now the entire Board of Directors is in on the lie. They also know they never voted to approve any lawsuit in a Board of Directors meeting.

President Celoni keeps demanding I sent my emails to the other Board of Directors knowing I don’t have their email addresses.  The HOA website lists the directors and other committee members but none of them have email addresses on purpose.. I refuse to have any contact with the property manager David Kinney of Cherry Creek HOA Professionals and I doubt if he is authorized to give me any email addresses of anyone even if asked. This is set up to be a dead end.

1. Plan B is now going into effect. This letter and all other emails and letters involving this board and lawyers will be published on the internet at www.court-house.com listed under Chapter 51. If I can’t correspond with my HOA directors as provided by our Covenants and Bylaws I will do so publicly.  Everything goes on the Internet. I will also provide the Director’s place of employment like Kaiser Medical and Kiddy school for Martial Arts, Retired from Kodak. Remaining two directors will be determined.

I suggest everyone go to website www.rateyourhoa.com and “CLICK HERE TO SEARCH FOR AN HOA THAT IS RATED” You will be directed to the Dam East Homeowner Association past ratings.  I will fill in a new updated rating leaving the old one published and give all of the new board members credit for the mess we have today.

2.    The board has not answered my questions.. Who without authority tried to transfer a recorded lien on my house in the name of Jeffrey Lane to the HOA books and now claims it’s a delinquent assessment account for over $18,000? The answer so far is “We don’t know who did it.” Well it must be the present Treasurer or the Past Treasurer and they are both on the board and yet neither one will admit he transferred the recorded lien to my assessment account. Maybe God did it. This transfer is illegal to collect a court ordered fee owed an attorney by reclassifying a court order to an assessment which is not validated by anything in the board minutes or CCIOA. The reason this transfer can’t be authorization is no one not even the Board of Directors can grant this transfer. Authorization doesn’t exist and transfer without meeting the requirements of the Covenants and Bylaws of our Association will not be accepted by the Court. James Wilder pay attention as you are hereby notified you have no authority to list $18,000 in my assessment account. You are not even a member of the board. It is not an assessment as defined by the Covenants and Bylaws. If this fraud is continued you are not only liable for loss of your license but assessed damages.

3.     I have proven this lawsuit is not authorized. There are no Board minutes where a vote of the board gave authorization at a scheduled meeting with a quorum was taken and a vote was recorded in the minutes of the meeting and those minutes were approved at the next board meeting. Without this action occurring you James Wilder and the board have a fraudulent lawsuit that is not legal in the 18th District Court. I know you and Jeffrey Lane believe you can get assigned another crooked judge but I doubt it will happen as the judge will be named the 22 Judge involved with Jeffrey Lane the star of Springer and Steinberg. No matter how many times President Celoni claims the lawsuit is authorized his verbal statements are a lie.

4.  With publication on the Internet I will included each Director’s place of employment. Lets see one works at Kaiser Medical, and another runs a kiddy studio to teach Martial Arts, one is retired from Kodak and the last two directors when I find out their employment will be added to the published Chapter 51.

5.  With this action taken on the Internet I believe it will be difficult to sell a home in the Dam East Homeowner Association. Who wants to buy into and HOA that the Board of Directors refuse to open the books to the membership?  This is what happens when the Board of Directors forgets who they are supposed to be protecting….. The membership or the crooked members of CAI. Since 2001 the Board of Directors has paid and protected the lawyers, property managers, and CPA accountants while they allowed the membership to be raped and plundered. The lawyers and Property Managers were paid without authorization by a vote of the board. This means receiving the money that is not authorized is thief by all. Jake Hummel Esq. and Finn Larson signed checks that were never approved by the Board of Directors from 2001 to 2007. With the books hidden I estimate the cost to the membership of these unauthorized payments to be over $600,000.  We now have an account called “Receivables” of over $80,000 of prepaid legal fees that has not been collected and still owed. It keeps growing as lawyers are paid by a check number without a total amount paid or the name of the lawyer receiving the money.  Lawyers and Property Managers like it that way it’s their secret from the membership.

6.  Who would want to join an HOA with a record of putting a member in jail for calling the president a tort twister and he Jake Hummel is a lawyer?

7.  This board mistakenly believes voting approval on a list of check numbers without amounts to be paid or to who its to be paid makes the checks approved for payment. That’s not what the Covenants and Bylaws state. Quote “The Treasurer shall receive and deposit in appropriate bank accounts all monies of the Association and shall disburse such funds (Not Check Numbers) as directed ( name and amounts) by resolution of the board of directors;” This doesn’t say approval of check numbers and hide the amounts paid and who received the money from the membership. Big wrong the amount and to who receive the money must be included in the minutes to be approved by the board.  Thus the board has not approved any payments listed in the minutes of all past board meetings. This is a trick used by CAI members to hide the amounts from the membership and who are receiving the funds. This is called a crooked Board of Directors.

Jim Burneson

burnesonj@msn.com

Blind copies to many and published on the Internet www.court-house.com scroll to Chapter 51.

May 5, 2010

CHAPTER 52 COPY OF NEVADA’S REAL ESTATE COMMISSION PROPERTY MANAGER LICENSE RULES.

Filed under: CAI,HOA,LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 11:23 am

HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE COLORADO PROPERTY MANAGERS LICENSE LAW COULD BE PATTERNED AFTER.

NAC: CHAPTER 116 – MANAGEMENT OF COMMON-INTEREST COMMUNITIES

[Rev. 2/15/2010 10:42:34 AM]

This chapter of NAC has changes which have been adopted but have not been codified; you can see those changes by viewing the following regulation(s) on the Nevada Register of Administrative Regulations: R145-06

CHAPTER 116 – MANAGEMENT OF COMMON-INTEREST COMMUNITIES

GENERAL PROVISIONS

116.010 Definitions.

116.013 “Administrator” defined.

116.015 “Audited financial statement” defined.

116.020 “Certificate” defined.

116.025 “Client” defined.

116.030 “Commission” defined.

116.033 “Common elements” defined.

116.035 “Community manager” defined.

116.037 “Component inventory” defined.

116.039 “Distance education” defined.

116.040 “Division” defined.

116.043 “Executive board” defined.

116.0433 “Financial records” defined.

116.0437Guide” defined.

116.044 “Hour of instruction” defined.

116.046 “Major components” defined.

116.047 “Management agreement” defined.

116.050 “Management of a common-interest community” defined.

116.055 “Permit” defined.

116.065 “Provisional community manager” defined.

116.070 “Reserve study” defined.

116.072 “Reviewed financial statement” defined.

116.075 “Supervising community manager” defined.

116.080 “Unit’s owner” defined.

116.090 “Limited-purpose association” interpreted.

116.095 Limited-purpose associations: Compliance with certain statutory provisions.

CERTIFICATION OF COMMUNITY MANAGERS

116.100 Application: Requirements; action by Division; burden of proof.

116.110 Prerequisites: Minimum age; natural person.

116.120 Prerequisites: Education and experience.

116.130 Examination.

116.140 Denial of application: Grounds; fee not refundable.

116.150 Denial of application: Notice; appeal.

116.160 Renewal of certificate.

116.165 Reinstatement of inactive certificate; reapplication following failure to renew.

116.169 Invalidation of certificate.

116.175 Provisional community managers: General requirements.

116.180 Provisional community managers: Renewal of certificate.

116.185 Supervising community managers: Qualifications and responsibilities.

EDUCATION OF COMMUNITY MANAGERS

General Provisions

116.195 “School” defined.

Courses for Original Certification

116.201 Approval of school required; exceptions.

116.204 Application for and period of approval.

116.207 Conditions of approval; evidence of certain licensure.

116.211 Requirements for course: Generally.

116.214 Requirements for course: Correspondence course.

116.217 Unacceptable courses.

116.221 Notice to Division of material change; requirements for renewal of approval; denial of renewal.

116.224 Misrepresentation in advertising prohibited.

Continuing Education

116.234 Approval of and requirements for course; record of attendance or completion.

116.237 Distance education course: Requirements and considerations for approval.

116.241 Approved course: Duties of sponsor.

116.244 Notice of policy concerning cancellations and refunds.

116.247 Restrictions on receipt of credit for course; final examination.

116.251 Credit for attendance at meeting of Commission.

Approved Courses and Instructors

116.261 Requirements for instructors and guest lecturers; advertising.

116.264 Instructors: Approval by Division.

116.267 Instructors: Responsibilities.

116.271 Instructors: Withdrawal of approval.

116.274 Courses: Responsibilities of sponsor; renewal of approval; review and audit; grounds for withdrawing or refusing to renew approval; discipline of sponsor.

116.277 Courses: Withdrawal of approval.

116.281 Courses: Reapproval by Division if no changes.

116.284 Evaluation of course and instructor by students.

116.287 Certificate of completion of course: Prerequisite activities of student; appeal of denial.

PRACTICE BY COMMUNITY MANAGERS

116.300 Responsibilities.

116.305 Management agreement; evidence of insurance.

116.310 Required disclosures.

116.321 Office; display of certificate.

116.331 Change of name, address, association or supervising community manager.

116.341 Prohibited acts.

116.351 Allegations of misconduct; submission of complaint; investigation and report; action by Administrator; appeal.

116.360 Grounds for disciplinary action; criteria for unprofessional conduct and professional incompetence.

116.370 Disciplinary action by Commission.

UNIT-OWNERS’ ASSOCIATIONS

116.400 Members of executive board: Responsibilities.

116.405 Members of executive board: Prohibited acts.

116.410 Adoption by reference of reporting principles and practices of financial accounting.

116.415 Contents of budget to maintain reserve.

116.420 Qualifications of person to conduct reserve study.

116.425 Reserve study: Contents.

116.430 Reserve study: Required disclosures.

116.435 Reserve study: Dissemination of summary of results.

116.440 Availability of records of association: “Regular working hours” interpreted.

116.445 Annual fee required from certain associations for deposit in Account for Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels.

116.451 Preparation, contents and distribution of interim financial statements.

116.453 Contents of financial statements subject to audit or review.

116.457 Preparation, contents and availability of audited financial statements; qualifications of auditor.

116.459 Inclusion of additional funds in financial statements.

116.461 Review of financial statements; qualifications of auditor.

116.465 Fee for preparation of certificate for resale of unit.

RECEIPT OF GIFTS, INCENTIVES, GRATUITIES, REWARDS OR OTHER ITEMS OF VALUE

116.480 Restriction on and statements by members of executive boards and officers of associations.

116.482 Restriction on and statements by community managers and employees of community managers.

116.484 Attendance of or participation in approved class.

116.486 Compliance with statutory prohibition.

ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT

General Provisions

116.500 Public inspection of records maintained by Division.

116.505 Fees of Division.

116.510 Check or draft returned to Division for lack of payment.

116.515 Fee for background investigation.

116.520 Subsidization of proceedings for binding arbitration.

116.525 Duties of Ombudsman for Owners in Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels: “Annual assessment” interpreted.

Administrative Proceedings

116.550 Investigation and audit of financial accounts of association; remedial and disciplinary action.

116.553 Hearing panels: Powers; qualifications of independent hearing officers.

116.555 Informality of proceedings; rules of evidence.

116.557 Prehearing conferences.

116.560 Motions.

116.565 Amendment and withdrawal of complaints; continuances.

116.570 Complaint or disciplinary hearing concerning provisional community manager.

116.575 Responsibilities of respondent.

116.580 Failure of party to appear.

116.585 Procedure for hearings; date of decision.

116.586 Recess of hearing for conference.

116.588 Preparation and dissemination of final decision after hearing.

116.590 Voluntary surrender of certificate in lieu of disciplinary action.

116.595 Reporting of disciplinary action or denial of certificate.

116.600 Appeal of final order of hearing panel; filing of briefs.

116.605 Review hearings: Setting; notice.

116.610 Review hearings: Oral argument.

116.615 Review hearings: Issuance of written decision.

116.620 Review of final order of hearing panel not appealed by party.

116.625 Payment of costs for transcript of hearing.

116.630 Request for hearing prohibited after initiation of civil action or submission for mediation or arbitration.

116.635 Request for hearing prohibited for improper purpose.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

NAC 116.010  Definitions. (NRS 116.615)  As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, the words and terms defined in NAC 116.013 to 116.080, inclusive, have the meanings ascribed to them in those sections.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by R136-99, 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005; R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.013  “Administrator” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Administrator” means the Real Estate Administrator.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.015  “Audited financial statement” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Audited financial statement” has the meaning ascribed to it in the Guide.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.020  “Certificate” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Certificate” means a certificate for the management of a common-interest community issued by the Division.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.025  “Client” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Client” means an executive board that has entered into a management agreement with a community manager.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.030  “Commission” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Commission” means the Commission for Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels created by NRS 116.600.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.033  “Common elements” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Common elements” means the common elements of a common-interest community.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.035  “Community manager” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Community manager” means a person who holds a certificate and who provides for or otherwise engages in the management of a common-interest community.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005; R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.037  “Component inventory” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Component inventory” means a list of major components of the common elements identified in a reserve study that may require repair, replacement or restoration.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.039  “Distance education” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Distance education” means instruction which is delivered by means of video, computer, television, correspondence, the Internet or other electronic means of communication, or any combination thereof, in such a manner that the person supervising or providing the instruction and the student receiving the instruction are separated by distance or by time, or by both distance and time.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.040  “Division” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Division” means the Real Estate Division of the Department of Business and Industry.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98)

NAC 116.043  “Executive board” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Executive board” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 116.045.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.0433  “Financial records” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Financial records” means the financial or transaction records necessary to support the financial statements of an association which include, without limitation, receipts, bank statements, income tax reports, reserve studies, budgets, contracts, minutes of executive board meetings, inventories, investments, expenses, disbursements, obligations, depreciation in property or equipment, contingent liabilities and any other records deemed necessary by the Division or by the accountants or auditors of an association.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.0437  “Guide” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Guide” means the Common Interest Realty Associations – AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide, as adopted by reference in NAC 116.410.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.044  “Hour of instruction” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Hour of instruction” means 50 minutes or more, and one semester credit is equal to 15 hours of instruction.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.046  “Major components” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Major components” means the major components of the common elements, whether real or personal property, which the association is responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring, including, without limitation, amenities, improvements, furnishings, fixtures, finishes, systems and equipment.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.047  “Management agreement” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Management agreement” means an agreement for the management of a common-interest community.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.050  “Management of a common-interest community” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Management of a common-interest community” means the physical, administrative or financial maintenance and management of a common-interest community, or the supervision of those activities, for a fee, commission or other valuable consideration.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.055  “Permit” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Permit” means a permit to engage in property management issued pursuant to the provisions of chapters 645 of NRS and NAC.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.065  “Provisional community manager” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Provisional community manager” means a person who has fulfilled the educational requirements for certification as set forth in NAC 116.120 but has not yet fulfilled the experience requirements for certification as set forth in NAC 116.175. A provisional community manager may perform the tasks of a community manager under the supervision of a supervising community manager.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005; A by R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.070  “Reserve study” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Reserve study” means the study required pursuant to NRS 116.31152.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.072  “Reviewed financial statement” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Reviewed financial statement” has the meaning ascribed to it in the Guide.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.075  “Supervising community manager” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Supervising community manager” means a community manager who:

1.  Meets the qualifications set forth in NAC 116.185; and

2.  Is responsible for the supervision of one or more provisional community managers or community managers.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005; A by R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.080  “Unit’s owner” defined. (NRS 116.615)  “Unit’s owner” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 116.095.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.090  “Limited-purpose association” interpreted. (NRS 116.1201, 116.615)

1.  An association is a limited-purpose association pursuant to subparagraph (1) of paragraph (a) of subsection 6 of NRS 116.1201 if:

(a) The association has been created for the sole purpose of maintaining the common elements consisting of landscaping, public lighting or security walls, or trails, parks and open space;

(b) The declaration states that the association has been created as a landscape maintenance association; and

(c) The declaration expressly prohibits:

(1) The association, and not a unit’s owner, from enforcing a use restriction against a unit’s owner;

(2) The association from adopting any rules or regulations concerning the enforcement of a use restriction against a unit’s owner; and

(3) The imposition of a fine or any other penalty against a unit’s owner for a violation of a use restriction.

2.  An association is a limited-purpose association pursuant to subparagraph (2) of paragraph (a) of subsection 6 of NRS 116.1201 if the association is created for the sole purpose of maintaining:

(a) Areas on an official plat that are designated as unsuitable for building;

(b) Areas required by the governing body to be designated as floodways, natural drainage or spillways; or

(c) Other areas that the governing body requires to be used for the purpose of collecting, facilitating, retaining or channeling storm water drainage of the residential property of the common-interest community.

3.  An association is a limited-purpose association pursuant to subparagraph (3) of paragraph (a) of subsection 6 of NRS 116.1201 if:

(a) The association has been created as a rural agricultural residential common-interest community;

(b) The residential lots in the common-interest community are a minimum of 1 acre and are zoned for agricultural purposes by the county in which the community is located; and

(c) The governing documents of the association authorize the residents to farm or raise livestock on the residential lots.

4.  As used in this section:

(a) “Governing body” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 278.015.

(b) “Landscaping” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 278.4781.

(c) “Public lighting” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 278.4783.

(d) “Security wall” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 271.203.

(e) “Trails, parks and open space” means trails, parks and open space that provide a substantial public benefit or are required by the governing body for the primary use of the public. The term does not include a private street or roadway, gated entry, swimming pool, gazebo, clubhouse, pond, tennis court, miniature golf course or frisbee golf course.

(f) “Use restriction” means any provision of the governing documents of an association that restricts a unit’s owner in the use of his unit.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Div. by R114-99, eff. 5-5-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005; R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.095  Limited-purpose associations: Compliance with certain statutory provisions. (NRS 116.1201, 116.615)  A limited-purpose association must comply with all the provisions of NRS 116.4101 to 116.412, inclusive.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

CERTIFICATION OF COMMUNITY MANAGERS

NAC 116.100  Application: Requirements; action by Division; burden of proof. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)

1.  A person who wishes to obtain a certificate must submit an application to the Division on a form prescribed by the Division.

2.  Each applicant must, as part of his application and at his own expense:

(a) Arrange to have a complete set of his fingerprints taken by a law enforcement agency or other authorized entity acceptable to the Division; and

(b) Submit to the Division:

(1) A completed fingerprint card and written permission authorizing the Division to submit the applicant’s fingerprints to the Central Repository for Nevada Records of Criminal History for submission to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a report on the applicant’s background and to such other law enforcement agencies as the Division deems necessary; or

(2) Written verification, on a form prescribed by the Division, stating that the fingerprints of the applicant were taken and directly forwarded electronically or by another means to the Central Repository and that the applicant has given written permission to the law enforcement agency or other authorized entity taking the fingerprints to submit the fingerprints to the Central Repository for submission to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a report on the applicant’s background and to such other law enforcement agencies as the Division deems necessary.

3.  In addition to the requirements set forth in subsection 2, the applicant must submit to the Division:

(a) A photograph of the applicant, measuring approximately 2 inches by 2 inches, taken within the 2 years immediately preceding the date of the application;

(b) Payment of the fees charged by a local law enforcement agency pursuant to NAC 116.515 or, if the fingerprints of the applicant were taken and directly forwarded electronically or by another means to the Central Repository pursuant to subsection 2, evidence of such payment;

(c) The social security number of the applicant;

(d) A statement concerning whether the applicant has been convicted of, or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to, forgery, embezzlement, obtaining money under false pretenses, larceny, extortion, conspiracy to defraud or possessing for the purpose of sale any controlled substance or any crime involving moral turpitude;

(e) Documentation that the applicant possesses the education and experience required pursuant to NAC 116.120 and, if applicable, NAC 116.175;

(f) Documentation of the employment history of the applicant for the 10 years immediately preceding the date of the application, including, without limitation, letters of recommendation and affidavits of employment from common-interest communities or employers in other related areas;

(g) The statement described in NRS 116A.440;

(h) The fee required by NAC 116.505 for a certificate; and

(i) Such other pertinent information as the Division may require.

4.  The Division shall act upon all applications for a certificate within 60 days after the date of receiving the completed application for a certificate.

5.  If the Division determines that additional investigation of the applicant is necessary, the Division may extend the 60-day period and may make such additional investigation as is necessary or desirable before acting upon the application.

6.  The burden of proof is on the applicant to establish to the satisfaction of the Division that he is qualified to receive a certificate.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by R136-99, 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.110  Prerequisites: Minimum age; natural person. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)

1.  An application for a certificate will not be accepted from a person under the age of 17 years.

2.  A certificate may only be issued to:

(a) A person 18 years of age or older.

(b) A natural person.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.120  Prerequisites: Education and experience. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)

1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, an applicant must have successfully completed at least 60 hours of instruction in courses in the management of a common-interest community that have been approved by the Commission, including, without limitation:

(a) At least 20 hours of instruction relating to federal, state and local laws applicable to the management of a common-interest community, including, without limitation:

(1) Not less than 2 hours of instruction relating to federal laws applicable to common-interest communities, including, but not limited to, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., the Fair Housing Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq., the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3602 et seq., and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act of 1996, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601 et seq.; and

(2) Not less than 18 hours of instruction relating to the Uniform Common-Interest Ownership Act as set forth in this chapter and chapter 116 of NRS.

(b) At least 40 cumulative hours of instruction in the following subjects:

(1) Understanding the legal basics of common-interest communities and their governing documents;

(2) The management of facilities and the use of experts;

(3) Accounting, including, without limitation, the preparation and monitoring of budgets, expenditures and reserves and the use of financial statements;

(4) Contracts with the common-interest community, including obtaining bids and requests for proposals;

(5) Parliamentary procedures, types and uses as may be required by law or the governing documents or bylaws of a common-interest community;

(6) The management of human resources, including, the ability to communicate and interact effectively with other people;

(7) Inspection and planning for property maintenance;

(8) Risk management;

(9) The types of insurance that must be maintained by a common-interest community pursuant to NRS 116.3113;

(10) Governmental regulations that affect a common-interest community, including, without limitation, zoning and planning;

(11) The Nevada Fair Housing Law as set forth in chapter 118 of NRS;

(12) The Residential Landlord and Tenant Act as set forth in chapter 118A of NRS;

(13) The disclosure of required information in real estate transactions;

(14) Defects in construction;

(15) Alternative dispute resolution for claims relating to residential property within a common-interest community as set forth in NRS 38.300 to 38.360, inclusive;

(16) Corporation law;

(17) Industrial insurance;

(18) Health and safety; and

(19) Business ethics.

(c) Provide evidence that he has been engaged in the management of a common-interest community or has held a management position in a related area for:

(1) The 12 months immediately preceding the date of his application; or

(2) At least 2 of the 4 years immediately preceding the date of his application.

2.  An applicant may provide evidence of any other combination of education and experience that the Division may deem to be equivalent to the requirements set forth in this section.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by R136-99, 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005, eff. 1-1-2006)

NAC 116.130  Examination. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)

1.  An applicant for a certificate must:

(a) Pass an examination which has been approved by the Division with a minimum score of 75 percent; and

(b) Pay the fee required by NAC 116.505 for an examination.

2.  The Division will only accept results of an examination taken during the 12 months immediately preceding the date of the application for a certificate.

3.  Passing the examination creates no vested right in the applicant to hold a certificate pending his appeal of a denial of his certification by the Division.

4.  An applicant who fails the examination may retake the examination.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R107-04, 8-25-2004; R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.140  Denial of application: Grounds; fee not refundable. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)

1.  The Division shall deny an application for a certificate if:

(a) The application is not in the proper form;

(b) The application is not accompanied by the fees required by NAC 116.505;

(c) The accompanying forms or documentation are incomplete or otherwise unsatisfactory;

(d) The application contains a false or misleading statement;

(e) Other deficiencies appear in the application;

(f) An investigation fails to show affirmatively that the applicant possesses the necessary qualifications;

(g) The applicant has willfully acted or attempted to act in violation of chapter 116, 119, 119A, 645 or 645A of NRS or the regulations adopted pursuant to those chapters or has willfully aided or abetted another person to act or attempt to act in violation of those chapters or regulations;

(h) The check or draft used to pay the fee for the application for a certificate is not honored by the financial institution upon which it is drawn;

(i) The applicant has had a license, certificate or permit revoked in another state;

(j) The applicant has been convicted of, or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to, forgery, embezzlement, obtaining money under false pretenses, larceny, extortion, conspiracy to defraud or possessing for the purpose of sale any controlled substance or any crime involving moral turpitude; or

(k) Any combination thereof.

2.  The Division shall not refund a fee for the application for a certificate.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.150  Denial of application: Notice; appeal. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)

1.  If the Division, after an application for a certificate in proper form has been filed, accompanied by the proper fees, denies an application, the Division shall give notice of this fact to the applicant within 15 days after the ruling, order or decision.

2.  Within 30 days after receipt of a notice of denial, an applicant may request, in writing, a hearing before the Commission. The Division will set the matter for a hearing to be conducted as soon as practicable after receipt of the request of the applicant if the request contains allegations which, if true, qualify the applicant for a certificate.

3.  The hearing must be held at such time and place as the Commission prescribes. At least 15 days before the date set for the hearing, the Division shall notify the applicant and shall accompany the notification with an exact copy of any protest filed, together with copies of all communications, reports, affidavits or depositions in possession of the Division relevant to the matter in question. Written notice of hearing may be served by delivery personally to the applicant, or by mailing it by certified mail to the last known address of the applicant.

4.  The hearing may be held by the Commission or a majority thereof, and a hearing must be held if the applicant so wishes. A record of the proceedings, or any part thereof, must be made available to each party upon the payment to the Division of the reasonable cost of transcription.

5.  The Commission will render a written decision on any appeal within 60 days after the final hearing and will notify the parties to the proceedings, in writing, of its ruling, order or decision within 15 days after it is made.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.160  Renewal of certificate. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)

1.  A certificate must be renewed biennially.

2.  Except as otherwise provided by subsection 5, the Division shall renew a certificate if the applicant submits to the Division before the expiration of his certificate:

(a) A completed application on a form prescribed by the Division;

(b) The statement described in NRS 116A.440;

(c) The fee required by NAC 116.505 for renewal; and

(d) Documentation of the successful completion by the applicant of at least 18 hours of continuing education in courses approved by the Commission within the 2 years immediately preceding the date on which the certificate expires. At least 3 hours of the continuing education must consist of instruction relating to this chapter and chapter 116 of NRS.

3.  The renewal of a certificate is effective on the date on which the renewal is issued.

4.  If the holder of a certificate fails to complete the required hours of continuing education or fails to file an application for the renewal of his certificate before it expires, he may not engage in the management of a common-interest community until his certificate is reinstated.

5.  The Division may refuse to renew a certificate if:

(a) The applicant has been convicted of, or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to, forgery, embezzlement, obtaining money under false pretenses, larceny, extortion, conspiracy to defraud or possessing for the purpose of sale any controlled substance or any crime involving moral turpitude;

(b) The applicant fails to complete, sign and submit the statement required pursuant to NRS 116A.440;

(c) The Division receives a copy of a court order issued pursuant to NRS 425.540 that provides for the suspension of all professional certificates and permits issued to the applicant; or

(d) The applicant has engaged in conduct which is grounds for disciplinary action pursuant to NAC 116.360 and has been disciplined by the Division or Commission.

6.  If the Division, after an application to renew a certificate in proper form has been filed, accompanied by the proper fees, refuses to renew the certificate, it shall give notice of this fact to the applicant within 15 days after the ruling, order or decision. The applicant may file a written request for a hearing before the Commission pursuant to the procedures set forth in NAC 116.150.

7.  If the Division refuses to renew a certificate because it receives a copy of a court order issued pursuant to NRS 425.540 that provides for the suspension of all professional certificates and permits issued to the applicant, the Division shall reinstate the certificate if the Division receives a letter issued by the district attorney or other public agency pursuant to NRS 425.550 to the person whose certificate was suspended stating that the person has complied with the subpoena or warrant or has satisfied the arrearage pursuant to NRS 425.560.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by R136-99, 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005; R205-05, 9-18-2006)

REVISER’S NOTE.

The regulation of the Commission on Common-Interest Communities filed with the Secretary of State on April 14, 2005 (LCB File No. R129-04), which amended this section, contains the following provision not included in NAC:

“The provisions of paragraph (d) of subsection 2 of NAC 116.160, as amended by this regulation, do not apply to a person who applies for renewal of a certificate before July 1, 2006.”

NAC 116.165  Reinstatement of inactive certificate; reapplication following failure to renew. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)

1.  A certificate holder whose certificate is on inactive status for a period of more than 1 year and who wishes to reinstate his certificate must submit an application to the Division on a form prescribed by the Division.

2.  Each applicant must, as part of his application and at his own expense:

(a) Arrange to have a complete set of his fingerprints taken by a law enforcement agency or other authorized entity acceptable to the Division; and

(b) Submit to the Division:

(1) A completed fingerprint card and written permission authorizing the Division to submit the applicant’s fingerprints to the Central Repository for Nevada Records of Criminal History for submission to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a report on the applicant’s background and to such other law enforcement agencies as the Division deems necessary; or

(2) Written verification, on a form prescribed by the Division, stating that the fingerprints of the applicant were taken and directly forwarded electronically or by another means to the Central Repository and that the applicant has given written permission to the law enforcement agency or other authorized entity taking the fingerprints to submit the fingerprints to the Central Repository for submission to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a report on the applicant’s background and to such other law enforcement agencies as the Division deems necessary.

3.  In addition to the requirements set forth in subsection 2, the applicant must submit to the Division:

(a) Payment of the fees charged by a local law enforcement agency pursuant to NAC 116.515 or, if the fingerprints of the applicant were taken and directly forwarded electronically or by another means to the Central Repository pursuant to subsection 2, evidence of such payment;

(b) Documentation that the applicant possesses the education required pursuant to NAC 116.160;

(c) Documentation that the applicant has passed the examination for certification;

(d) The statement described in NRS 116A.440;

(e) Payment of the fee required by NAC 116.505 for reinstatement; and

(f) Such other pertinent information as the Division may require.

4.  If a certificate has not been renewed for a period that exceeds 1 year past its expiration date, an applicant must reapply pursuant to the provisions of NAC 116.100.

5.  The Division may refuse to reinstate a certificate if:

(a) The applicant has been convicted of, or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to, forgery, embezzlement, obtaining money under false pretenses, larceny, extortion, conspiracy to defraud or possessing for the purpose of sale any controlled substance or any crime involving moral turpitude;

(b) The applicant fails to complete, sign and submit the statement required pursuant to NRS 116A.440;

(c) The Division receives a copy of a court order issued pursuant to NRS 425.540 that provides for the suspension of all professional certificates and permits issued to the applicant; or

(d) The applicant has engaged in conduct which is grounds for disciplinary action pursuant to NAC 116.360 and has been disciplined by the Division or the Commission.

6.  If the Division, after an application to reinstate a certificate in proper form has been filed, accompanied by the proper fees, refuses to reinstate the certificate, the Division shall give notice of this fact to the applicant within 15 days after the ruling, order or decision. The applicant may file a written request for a hearing before the Commission pursuant to the procedures set forth in NAC 116.150.

7.  If the Division refuses to reinstate a certificate solely because it receives a copy of a court order issued pursuant to NRS 425.540 that provides for the suspension of all professional certificates and permits issued to the applicant, the Division shall reinstate the certificate if the Division receives a letter issued by the district attorney or other public agency pursuant to NRS 425.550 to the person whose certificate was suspended stating that the person has complied with the subpoena or warrant or has satisfied the arrearage pursuant to NRS 425.560.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.169  Invalidation of certificate. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)  The Division, upon the discovery of any error in the issuance of a certificate which is related to the qualification or fitness of the holder thereof, may invalidate the certificate upon notice in writing to the holder. The holder shall surrender the certificate to the Division within 20 days after the notice is sent by the Division. A person whose certificate has been invalidated and surrendered pursuant to this section may request a hearing on the matter in the same manner as for the denial of an application pursuant to NAC 116.150.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.175  Provisional community managers: General requirements. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400, 116A.410)

1.  A provisional community manager must:

(a) Be associated with a supervising community manager for a minimum of 2 years; and

(b) Except as otherwise provided in NAC 116.180, within 2 years after the issuance of the certificate granting provisional status, obtain 3,120 hours of active experience in the following areas:

(1) Financial management of an association;

(2) Property and facilities management;

(3) Specific duties relating to the management of a common-interest community as provided in this chapter and chapter 116 of NRS;

(4) Governance of an association;

(5) Insurance coverage; and

(6) Building a sense of community within an association.

2.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 3, upon obtaining 2 years of active experience in this State, a provisional community manager is entitled to act as a community manager without being associated with a supervising community manager if the provisional community manager submits to the Division:

(a) A statement, on a form prescribed by the Division, completed and signed by his supervising community manager that verifies:

(1) The extent of the active experience gained in each of the areas set forth in subsection 1; and

(2) That the provisional community manager has met the active experience requirements set forth in subsection 1;

(b) A certificate of completion for the 18 hours of continuing education required pursuant to NAC 116.160; and

(c) The fee required by NAC 116.505 for the renewal of a certificate.

3.  A provisional community manager may submit to the Division evidence of any other education or experience that the Division may deem to be equivalent to the requirements of this section.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005, eff. 1-1-2006; A by R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.180  Provisional community managers: Renewal of certificate. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400, 116A.410)  A provisional community manager who has not obtained the active experience required pursuant to NAC 116.175 may renew his certificate granting provisional status for an additional 2 years if he submits to the Division:

1.  A certificate of completion for the 18 hours of continuing education required pursuant to NAC 116.160; and

2.  The fee required by NAC 116.505 for the renewal of a certificate.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005, eff. 1-1-2006)

NAC 116.185  Supervising community managers: Qualifications and responsibilities. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400, 116A.410)

1.  A community manager is qualified to act as a supervising community manager if:

(a) He submits to the Division, on a form prescribed by the Division, an application to act as a supervising community manager;

(b) He has been actively engaged in the full-time management of a common-interest community in this State, another state or the District of Columbia for at least 4 years immediately preceding his becoming a supervising community manager, with at least 2 of the 4 years of experience obtained in this State;

(c) He is in good standing with the Division or any state or the District of Columbia where he is licensed or certified; and

(d) He is competent to engage in the management of a common-interest community and the supervision of community managers in a manner which will safeguard the interests of the public.

2.  A supervising community manager is responsible for:

(a) Supervising one or more provisional community managers or community managers who are associated with him;

(b) Determining the competency of the provisional community managers or community managers who are associated with him to perform delegated tasks of managing a common-interest community;

(c) Teaching the provisional community managers and community managers who are associated with him the fundamentals of managing a common-interest community and the ethics of the profession;

(d) Supervising the activities and operation of managing a common-interest community;

(e) Establishing the policies, rules, procedures and systems that will allow the supervising community manager to review, oversee and manage any business conducted by the provisional community managers or community managers who are associated with him, including any other employees;

(f) Establishing reasonable procedures and safeguards for the filing, storage, handling and maintenance of documents that may have a material effect upon the rights or obligations of the parties to the management agreement and the association affected by the management agreement; and

(g) Establishing reasonable procedures and safeguards for the handling of any money received on behalf of a client.

3.  In establishing the policies, rules, procedures and systems pursuant to subsection 2, a supervising community manager shall consider the number of community managers and other employees associated with the supervising community manager and the number and location of branch offices operated or managed by the supervising community manager.

4.  The supervising community manager shall appoint for each branch office a supervising community manager to supervise and oversee the activities and operations of the branch office.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005, eff. 1-1-2006; A by R205-05, 9-18-2006)

EDUCATION OF COMMUNITY MANAGERS

General Provisions

NAC 116.195  “School” defined. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)  For the purposes of NAC 116.195 to 116.287, inclusive, “school” includes:

1.  Any university, school or community college which is a part of the Nevada System of Higher Education, or any other university or college bearing the same or an equivalent accreditation.

2.  Any professional school or college licensed by the Nevada Commission on Postsecondary Education.

3.  Any out-of-state professional school or college licensed or accredited by a real estate commission, a department of education or an equivalent agency of this or any other state.

4.  A nationally recognized professional organization which provides educational courses and national accreditation of courses or schools for those engaged in the management of common-interest communities.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

Courses for Original Certification

NAC 116.201  Approval of school required; exceptions. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, before any school offers or conducts a course of instruction designed to fulfill the educational requirements for issuance of an original certificate under this chapter and chapter 116 of NRS, the school must be approved by the Commission.

2.  The Commission may accept a course from any of the following schools without prior approval of the school:

(a) Any university, school or community college of the Nevada System of Higher Education or other university or college bearing the same or equivalent accreditation.

(b) Any other school offering a course in the management of common-interest communities if the course is:

(1) Approved by any real estate commission or division in any state of the United States or province of Canada; or

(2) In the judgment of the Commission, equivalent in quality to the courses of colleges or universities accredited by any regional accrediting agency recognized by the United States Department of Education.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.204  Application for and period of approval. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  A school that wishes to offer courses to meet the educational requirements for original certification under this chapter and chapter 116 of NRS must:

(a) Apply to the Commission annually for approval on a form prescribed by the Division; and

(b) Pay the appropriate fee required by NAC 116.505 for approval of courses.

2.  The application must include, without limitation:

(a) The name and address of the school;

(b) The type of school and a description of its facilities;

(c) Information concerning the ownership of the school, including the business organization and the names and addresses of all directors, principals, officers and others having interests as owners;

(d) A list of the instructors;

(e) A list of the courses to be offered and a topical syllabus for each;

(f) The allotment of time for each subject;

(g) A proposed schedule of courses for 1 year;

(h) The titles, authors and publishers of all required textbooks;

(i) A copy of each examination to be used and the correct answer for each question;

(j) A statement of:

(1) The purpose of the school;

(2) The fees to be charged;

(3) The days, times and locations of classes;

(4) The number of quizzes and examinations;

(5) The grading systems, including the methods of testing and standards of grading;

(6) The requirements for attendance; and

(7) The location of the students’ records; and

(k) A statement as to whether the school or any instructor employed by the school has been disciplined by any governmental agency in this or any other state.

3.  The Commission’s approval of a course to meet the educational requirements for an original certificate is effective for 1 year after the original approval or a renewal.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.207  Conditions of approval; evidence of certain licensure. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  If a school has applied for and received the approval of the Commission to offer courses to meet the requirements for original certification under this chapter and chapter 116 of NRS, the school shall, as a condition of the approval:

(a) Maintain a record of attendance and certification for each student in any of those courses for 7 years after his enrollment and shall have such records open to inspection by the Division, upon its request, during the regular business hours of the school.

(b) Upon the request of a transferring student, furnish the school to which he is transferring a copy of his attendance record and certification for each of those courses which he has completed.

(c) Upon the request of a student, furnish the Division a transcript of the record of his grades and attendance.

2.  A school that does not meet the definition of a “school” set forth in subsection 1, 3 or 4 of NAC 116.195 must provide evidence to the Division that the school is licensed to operate by the Commission on Postsecondary Education.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.211  Requirements for course: Generally. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  Except as otherwise provided in NAC 116.214, a school that the Commission has approved to give a course fulfilling the educational requirements for an original certificate shall require each student to attend the required number of hours of instruction and to pass at least two written examinations in the course with a minimum score of 75 percent as a condition of receiving certification for the course.

2.  The school may certify only the number of hours for which the course has been approved by the Commission.

3.  The entire course must be completed by the student to satisfy the requirements for an original certificate.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.214  Requirements for course: Correspondence course. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)  If the Commission approves a school to give a course of study which fulfills the educational requirements for an original certificate and the school offers the course by correspondence, the school shall:

1.  Require each student to:

(a) Pass a closed-book final examination with a minimum score of 75 percent and with a proctor present at a location designated by the school in its application for approval filed with the Commission;

(b) Take two progress examinations or quizzes in addition to the final examination;

(c) Prove his identity before he is allowed to take any examination; and

(d) Complete each course within an established minimum and maximum time.

2.  Certify the completion of only the number of hours for which the course has been approved by the Commission. A portion of a course does not satisfy the requirements for an original certificate.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.217  Unacceptable courses. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  The Division shall not accept an applicant’s completion of any course which is designed to prepare students for examination, commonly known as a “cram course,” as fulfillment of the educational requirements for his original certification.

2.  None of the following kinds of courses will be accepted from an applicant as fulfillment of any part of the 60 hours of education required by NAC 116.120 for original certification:

(a) Courses designed to develop or improve clerical, office or business skills that are not related to the management of a common-interest community, such as typing, shorthand, operation of business machines, the use of computers or computer software, improvement of memory, or writing of letters and reports; or

(b) Business courses in advertising, marketing or psychology.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.221  Notice to Division of material change; requirements for renewal of approval; denial of renewal. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  Within 15 days after the occurrence of any material change in the information provided by the school in its application pursuant to NAC 116.204 which would affect its approval by the Commission, the school shall give the Division written notice of that change.

2.  To qualify for annual renewal of approval by the Commission, a school must submit to the Commission before July 1:

(a) A written certification, in a form prescribed by the Division, declaring that the school has met all applicable requirements of this chapter;

(b) A sworn statement, in a form prescribed by the Division, declaring that the information contained in the original application is current or, if it is not current, a list of all material changes; and

(c) Payment of the appropriate fee required by NAC 116.505 for the renewal of courses.

3.  The Commission may deny renewal of approval to any school that does not meet the standards required by this chapter.

4.  Within 60 days after a decision is made to deny renewal of approval, the Commission must give written notice of the decision and the basis for that decision by certified mail to the last known address of the school.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.224  Misrepresentation in advertising prohibited. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)  A school approved by the Commission shall not make any misrepresentation in its advertising about any course of instruction which it offers to fulfill requirements for certification under this chapter.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

Continuing Education

NAC 116.234  Approval of and requirements for course; record of attendance or completion. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  An application for the approval of a course for continuing education must be submitted to the Division on a form provided by the Division for review and presentation to the Commission and must include the fee required by NAC 116.505. The Commission’s approval of a course for continuing education is effective for 1 year after the original approval or a renewal.

2.  The Commission may grant retroactive approval for a course for continuing education.

3.  The Commission will grant credit for a course for continuing education only if:

(a) The course consists of at least 3 hours of distance education or instruction in a classroom.

(b) For a course of instruction in a classroom, the sponsor of the course:

(1) Certifies the attendance of holders of a certificate who take the course for credit.

(2) Maintains for at least 4 years a record of attendance which contains the following information with respect to each holder of a certificate who has taken the course for credit:

(I) The name of the holder of a certificate in attendance and the number of his certificate.

(II) The title and number of the course.

(III) The hours of instruction attended and dates of attendance by the holder of a certificate.

(IV) A statement that the holder of a certificate has successfully completed the course, if applicable.

(3) Assures the Commission that an approved instructor will preside throughout the course.

(c) For a course of distance education, the sponsor of the course:

(1) Requires each student to:

(I) Take a closed-book final examination with a proctor present at a location designated by the sponsor in its application for approval filed with the Division and receive a score of at least 75 percent to pass the course;

(II) Prove his identity before he is allowed to take any examination;

(III) Complete an entire course to receive credit for taking the course; and

(IV) Complete each course within an established minimum and maximum time.

(2) Gives credit for only the number of hours for which the course has been approved by the Commission to a holder of a certificate who has completed the course.

(3) Publishes a policy for retaking an examination which a holder of a certificate failed.

(4) Maintains for at least 4 years a record of completion of the course which contains the following information with respect to each holder of a certificate who has taken the course for credit:

(I) The name of the holder of a certificate who completes the course and the number of his certificate.

(II) The title and number of the course.

(III) A statement that the holder of a certificate has successfully completed the course, which includes, without limitation, the date that the course was completed and the number of hours completed.

4.  If a course is approved, the sponsor shall provide a certified copy of the record of attendance or record of completion to the holder of a certificate upon his completion of the course. The Division shall accept the certified copy as proof of the attendance of the holder of a certificate or completion of the course by the holder of a certificate for the purpose of renewal or reinstatement of his certificate. If the course is taken at a university or community college, the proof of attendance must be a certified transcript. The certified copy of the record of attendance or record of completion of a sponsor must contain the:

(a) Name of the sponsor;

(b) Name of the holder of a certificate and his certificate number;

(c) Number of hours of credit for continuing education for which the course is approved;

(d) Dates of instruction for a course of instruction in a classroom;

(e) Date of completion of the course for a course of distance education;

(f) Title of the course or seminar;

(g) Number of the sponsor assigned by the Division and a statement that the course was approved by the Commission;

(h) Signature of the person authorized to sign for the sponsor;

(i) Grade received by the holder of a certificate or a statement of whether the holder of a certificate passed the class if an examination was given; and

(j) Manner in which instruction for the course was delivered.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.237  Distance education course: Requirements and considerations for approval. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  A person who requests approval of a distance education course must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Commission that the proposed distance education course satisfies the following requirements:

(a) The course must be designed to ensure that students actively participate in the instructional process by utilizing techniques that require substantial interaction with the instructor, other students or a computer program. If the subject matter of the course is such that the learning objectives for the course cannot be reasonably accomplished without direct interaction between the instructor and the students, the course design must provide for such interaction.

(b) If the course does not provide students with the opportunity for continuous audio and visual communication with the instructor during the presentation of the course, the course must utilize testing and remedial processes appropriate to ensure mastery of the subject matter of the course by the students.

(c) If the course involves self-paced study, the course must be designed so that the time required for a student of average ability to complete the course is within the number of hours for which the course is approved, and the sponsor of the course shall utilize a system which ensures that students have actually performed all tasks designed to ensure participation and mastery of the subject matter of the course by the students.

(d) The proposed methods of instruction used in the course must be appropriate to the proposed learning objectives of the course, and the scope and depth of the instructional materials must be consistent with the proposed learning objectives.

(e) The sponsor of the course shall provide appropriate technical support to enable students to complete the course satisfactorily.

(f) An approved instructor must be reasonably available to respond timely to questions asked by students concerning the subject matter of the course and to direct students to additional sources of information. For the purposes of this paragraph, a response by an approved instructor shall be deemed timely if the response is made within 2 business days after the question is submitted.

(g) The sponsor of the course shall provide students with an orientation or information package which contains all information that the Division requires to be provided to students and all necessary information about the course, including, without limitation, information concerning fees and refund policies, subject matter and learning objectives, procedures and requirements for satisfactory completion, any special requirements with regard to computer hardware and software or other equipment, and instructor and technical support. The sponsor shall make available to students technical support relating to the use of any computer hardware or software, or other equipment or technology needed to complete the course.

(h) The sponsor of the course shall utilize procedures which reasonably ensure that a student who receives credit for continuing education for completing the course actually performed all the work required to complete the course. If the course involves independent study by students, such procedures must include, without limitation, the opportunity for direct contact by the sponsor with the student at the student’s home or business via telephone or electronic mail and a signed statement by the student certifying that he personally completed all course work. The sponsor shall retain such signed statements and records of student contact together with all other course records the sponsor must maintain.

2.  A sponsor seeking approval of a computer-based distance education course must submit a complete copy of the course to the Division in the medium to be used and, if requested, must make available, at a date and time satisfactory to the Division and at the sponsor’s expense, all equipment and software necessary to enable the Division to review the course. In the case of an Internet-based course, the sponsor shall provide the Division with access to the course via the Internet at no charge at a date and time satisfactory to the Division.

3.  In determining whether to approve a distance education course pursuant to this section, the Commission will consider whether:

(a) The course consists of at least 3 hours of instruction;

(b) Students are required to complete a written examination proctored by a person acceptable to the Division or using a secure electronic method acceptable to the Division; and

(c) The course is presented by an accredited college or university that offers distance education in other disciplines, or whether the course design and method of delivery have been accredited by an accrediting agency which accredits distance education and which is approved by the Commission. For an accrediting agency to be approved by the Commission for the purposes of this paragraph, the accrediting agency must use the following considerations when making its determination on whether to accredit a distance education course:

(1) The mission statement of the sponsor of the course;

(2) The minimum design of the course and the procedures for updating the course;

(3) The interactivity of the instruction with the students;

(4) Whether the instruction provided in the course teaches mastery of the course material;

(5) The support services that are available to students;

(6) The medium through which the course is delivered to students;

(7) A time study of the range of instructional hours for which a course should be approved or accredited;

(8) For each module of instruction, whether there is:

(I) At least one learning objective for the module of instruction;

(II) A structured learning method to enable the student to achieve each such learning objective;

(III) A method of assessment of the student’s performance during the module of instruction; and

(IV) A method of remediation pursuant to which a student who, based on the assessment of his performance, is determined to be deficient in his mastery of the course material may repeat the module until the student understands the course material; and

(9) Whether a complete syllabus or student manual, or both, for all courses or programs is provided in written form and includes accurate and clearly stated information about admissions, progression, completion, criteria, dismissal and any applicable licensing requirements.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005, eff. 7-1-2005)

NAC 116.241  Approved course: Duties of sponsor. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  If a course has been approved and is being offered for continuing education, the sponsor must state on all the course materials:

(a) That the course is approved for continuing education in Nevada;

(b) The number of hours of credit for continuing education for which the course is approved;

(c) The number of the sponsor assigned by the Division; and

(d) The manner in which instruction for the course will be delivered.

2.  If a course offered by a sponsor that is a professional organization has been approved for continuing education, the sponsor shall not restrict attendance at the course to members of that organization.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.244  Notice of policy concerning cancellations and refunds. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)  Any advertising, promotional brochure or form for registration for a course for continuing education must contain, in writing, the policy of the sponsor concerning cancellations and refunds.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.247  Restrictions on receipt of credit for course; final examination. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  A course may not be taken for credit to meet the requirements for continuing education more than once during any two consecutive periods for renewal of a certificate.

2.  Courses taken to satisfy requirements for renewal or reinstatement of a certificate must be completed within 2 years immediately before the latest date for renewing or reinstating the certificate.

3.  A holder of a certificate may receive credit for continuing education only upon certification by the sponsor that the holder of the certificate has attended and completed at least 90 percent of the course.

4.  The sponsor shall determine whether a final examination is required for the completion of a course.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R058-98, 6-26-98, eff. 7-1-98; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)—(Substituted in revision for NAC 116.230)

NAC 116.251  Credit for attendance at meeting of Commission. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  The Commission will grant credit for continuing education, not to exceed 6 hours during a certification period, to a holder of a certificate for attending a meeting of the Commission if:

(a) The meeting of the Commission for which credit for continuing education is being sought is not a meeting in which the holder of a certificate was participating or otherwise affiliated with a specific disciplinary hearing;

(b) The meeting of the Commission for which credit for continuing education is being sought lasts at least 3 hours; and

(c) The Commission certifies, for the purposes of providing credit for continuing education, the attendance of the holder of a certificate at the meeting.

2.  If a holder of a certificate attends only part of a meeting of the Commission, the Division may determine the number of hours of credit, if any, that the holder of a certificate may receive for credit for continuing education pursuant to this section.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

Approved Courses and Instructors

NAC 116.261  Requirements for instructors and guest lecturers; advertising. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)  A school that conducts courses approved by the Commission:

1.  May employ as instructors of those courses only persons who meet the qualifications set forth in NAC 116.264.

2.  Shall limit noncertificated guest lecturers who are experts in the related fields to a total of 9 hours of instruction per approved course.

3.  Shall include a statement that the school is approved by the Commission on all advertisements of the school.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.264  Instructors: Approval by Division. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  An instructor must have written approval from the Division before teaching an approved course.

2.  An applicant for approval as an instructor must apply on a form prescribed by the Division.

3.  The Division shall not, without the approval of the Commission, approve a person as an instructor if the person:

(a) Has been disciplined by the Commission or the Division acting on behalf of the Commission:

(1) Within the immediately preceding 5 years; or

(2) More than one time; or

(b) Has been determined in an administrative or judicial proceeding to have violated any statute, rule, regulation or order pertaining to real estate in this or any other state.

4.  A person may be approved as an instructor to teach an approved course relating to his principal occupation if:

(a) He has:

(1) A bachelor’s degree or a more advanced degree, plus at least 2 years of full-time experience, in the field in which he will be providing instruction;

(2) At least 75 hours of teaching experience in the field in which he will be providing instruction within the 3 years immediately preceding the date of his application for approval plus at least 3 years of full-time experience in that field;

(3) At least 6 years of full-time experience in the field in which he will be providing instruction; or

(4) Any combination of at least 6 years of college-level course work and full-time experience in the field in which he will be providing instruction;

(b) He has a good reputation for honesty, integrity and trustworthiness; and

(c) He submits to the Division satisfactory documentation of his qualifications and a resume outlining his experience, education and teaching experience in the field in which he will be providing instruction.

5.  The Division shall periodically review and evaluate each approved instructor.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.267  Instructors: Responsibilities. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  An instructor shall ensure that:

(a) Class sessions are commenced in a timely manner and are conducted for the full amount of time that is approved; and

(b) Each course is taught according to the course plan and instructor guide that was approved by the Commission, including the furnishing to students of appropriate student materials.

2.  An instructor shall conduct himself in a professional and courteous manner when performing his instructional duties and shall conduct classes in a manner that demonstrates the following basic teaching skills:

(a) The ability to present instruction in a thorough, accurate, logical, orderly and understandable manner, to utilize illustrative examples as appropriate and to respond appropriately to questions from students;

(b) The ability to utilize effectively varied instructional techniques in addition to lectures, including, without limitation, class discussion, role-playing and other techniques;

(c) The ability to utilize varied instructional aids effectively to enhance learning;

(d) The ability to maintain an appropriate learning environment and effective control of a class; and

(e) The ability to interact with adult students in a positive manner that:

(1) Encourages students to learn;

(2) Demonstrates an understanding of varied student backgrounds;

(3) Avoids offending the sensibilities of students; and

(4) Avoids personal criticism of any other person, agency or organization.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.271  Instructors: Withdrawal of approval. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  The Administrator may withdraw the approval of an instructor who:

(a) Does an inadequate job of teaching the subject matter of a course as evidenced by student evaluations or an audit conducted by the Division;

(b) Has been determined in any administrative or judicial proceeding to have violated any statute, rule, regulation or order pertaining to real estate;

(c) Has been convicted of, or entered a plea of guilty or nolo contendere to, any crime involving fraud, deceit, misrepresentation or moral turpitude; or

(d) Engages in inappropriate behavior in the classroom as evidenced by an audit conducted by the Division.

2.  Before withdrawing approval of the instructor of a course, the Administrator must notify the sponsor of the course of his intent to withdraw approval of the instructor. The notice must include the specific reasons upon which the Administrator is basing his decision to withdraw the approval of the instructor. Not later than 30 days after the date on which he receives the notice, a sponsor may provide a written response to the Administrator that clearly sets forth the reasons why the approval of the instructor should not be withdrawn and outlining any corrective measures that the sponsor will undertake. After the 30-day period has elapsed, the Administrator shall review the notice and any response submitted by the sponsor and shall:

(a) Withdraw approval of the instructor;

(b) Allow the instructor to remain approved if certain specific enumerated conditions are met; or

(c) Allow the continued approval of the instructor.

Ê If the Administrator decides to withdraw approval of the instructor, the withdrawal of approval of the instructor becomes effective upon the mailing of the decision of the Administrator to the sponsor of the course taught by the instructor by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the sponsor’s last known business address.

3.  If the Administrator withdraws approval of an instructor, the Division shall give credit to a student for completing the course if the student began the course before the sponsor received written notice of the withdrawal of approval of the instructor.

4.  The sponsor may appeal the decision of the Administrator to withdraw approval of an instructor by filing an appeal with the Commission not later than 30 days after the date on which the withdrawal of the approval of the instructor becomes effective.

5.  If the sponsor files a timely appeal, the Commission will, as soon as practicable, hold a hearing concerning the withdrawal of approval of the instructor at a regularly scheduled meeting and will:

(a) Affirm the decision of the Administrator to withdraw approval of the instructor;

(b) Suspend approval of the instructor for a limited period and under such conditions as the Commission deems appropriate; or

(c) Reverse the decision of the Administrator to withdraw approval of the instructor.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.274  Courses: Responsibilities of sponsor; renewal of approval; review and audit; grounds for withdrawing or refusing to renew approval; discipline of sponsor. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  The sponsor of an approved course:

(a) Shall not allow a holder of a certificate to pass the course by taking an examination without having the required attendance;

(b) Shall admit authorized personnel of the Division to audit and evaluate the presentation of the course;

(c) Shall notify the Division within 15 days after making any material change in the course; and

(d) Shall not present a course for the main purpose of selling products or services and shall limit the announcement of products or services during the course to not more than 2 minutes.

2.  The sponsor must apply for renewal on a form provided by the Division and describe on that form any changes in the course. An application for renewal must be filed at least 2 weeks before the previous approval expires. If the sponsor does not timely file the application for renewal, the sponsor must apply for an original approval.

3.  Each approved course and instructor is subject to review and audit by the Division. If the Division conducts such a review or audit, the sponsor shall make available to the Division all records requested which are necessary to the review.

4.  The Division shall renew the approval of a course if the information concerning the course has been updated and there is no material change in the content of the course.

5.  Each of the following acts and conditions is a ground for the Commission to withdraw or refuse to renew its approval of a course:

(a) The curriculum or instruction, as shown by evaluations or audits, is of poor quality.

(b) The violation of any provision of this chapter relating to continuing education.

(c) The course is not taught within the last period for which the course is approved.

(d) The sponsor of the course has made a false statement or has presented any false information in connection with an application for the approval of the course, the renewal of such approval or the approval of the sponsor.

(e) The sponsor of the course or any official or instructor employed by the sponsor has refused or failed to comply with any provision of this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS.

(f) The sponsor of the course or any official or instructor employed by the sponsor has provided false or incorrect information in connection with any report the sponsor is required to submit to the Commission.

(g) The sponsor of the course has engaged in a pattern of consistently cancelling scheduled courses.

(h) The sponsor of the course has remitted to the Commission in payment for required fees a check which was dishonored by a bank.

(i) An instructor employed by the sponsor of an approved course fails to conduct approved courses in a manner that demonstrates possession of the teaching skills described in this chapter.

(j) A court of competent jurisdiction has found the sponsor of the approved course or any official or instructor employed by the sponsor to have violated, in connection with the offering of education courses, any applicable federal or state law or regulation:

(1) Prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability;

(2) Requiring places of public accommodation to be in compliance with prescribed standards relating to accessibility; or

(3) Requiring that courses related to certification for professional or trade purposes be offered in a place and manner accessible to persons with disabilities.

(k) The sponsor of the course or any official or instructor employed by the sponsor has been disciplined by the Commission or any other occupational certification agency in this State or any other jurisdiction.

(l) The sponsor of the course or any official or instructor employed by the sponsor has collected money for an educational course but has refused or failed to provide the promised instruction.

6.  A holder of a certificate who is the sponsor of an approved course is subject to disciplinary action pursuant to the provisions of this chapter for any dishonest, fraudulent or improper conduct by the holder of a certificate, or an instructor of the approved course employed by the holder of a certificate, in connection with activities related to the approved course.

7.  As used in this section, “disability” means:

(a) A physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the person;

(b) A record of such an impairment; or

(c) Being regarded as having such an impairment.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.277  Courses: Withdrawal of approval. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  If the Administrator determines, whether pursuant to an audit or otherwise, that an approved course does not meet the standards for such a course set forth in this chapter, the Administrator shall notify the sponsor of the course of his intent to withdraw approval of the course. The notice must include the specific reasons upon which the Administrator is basing his decision to withdraw approval of the course. Not later than 30 days after the date on which he receives the notice, the sponsor may provide a written response to the Administrator that clearly sets forth the reasons why approval of the course should not be withdrawn and outlining any corrective measures that the sponsor will undertake. After the 30-day period has elapsed, the Administrator shall review the notice and any response submitted by the sponsor and:

(a) Withdraw approval of the course;

(b) Allow the course to remain approved if certain specific enumerated conditions are met; or

(c) Allow the continued approval of the course.

Ê If the Administrator decides to withdraw approval of the course, the withdrawal of approval of the course becomes effective upon the mailing of the decision of the Administrator to withdraw approval to the sponsor by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the sponsor’s last known business address.

2.  If the Administrator withdraws approval of a course, the Division shall give credit to a student for completing the course if the student began the course before the sponsor received written notice of the withdrawal of approval of the course.

3.  The sponsor may appeal the decision of the Administrator to withdraw approval of a course by filing an appeal with the Commission not later than 30 days after the date on which the withdrawal of the approval of the course becomes effective.

4.  If the sponsor files a timely appeal, the Commission will, as soon as practicable, hold a hearing concerning the withdrawal of approval of the course at a regularly scheduled meeting and will:

(a) Affirm the decision of the Administrator to withdraw approval of the course;

(b) Suspend approval of the course for a limited period and under such conditions as the Commission deems appropriate; or

(c) Reverse the decision of the Administrator to withdraw approval of the course.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.281  Courses: Reapproval by Division if no changes. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)  The Division shall, on behalf of the Commission, reapprove an approved course if no changes in the course have occurred since the course was last approved or reapproved.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.284  Evaluation of course and instructor by students. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  Each approved course and each instructor of an approved course must be evaluated by students on a form prescribed by the Division and provided by the sponsor during every course offering.

2.  The sponsor shall:

(a) Arrange for the collection of the completed evaluations by a person other than the instructor of the approved course; and

(b) Mail or deliver copies of the completed evaluations to the Division within 10 working days after the last day of class for the course.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.287  Certificate of completion of course: Prerequisite activities of student; appeal of denial. (NRS 116.615, 116.665)

1.  To receive a certificate of completion for an approved course, a student must:

(a) Direct his attention to the instruction being provided and refrain from engaging in activities unrelated to the instruction; and

(b) Refrain from engaging in activities which are distracting to other students or the instructor, or which otherwise disrupt the orderly conduct of a class, including, without limitation, the use of voice pagers, beepers and telephones.

2.  An instructor shall deny the award of a certificate of completion to a student who fails to satisfy the conditions set forth in subsection 1.

3.  If an instructor denies the award of a certificate of completion to a student, the student may, within 30 days after that denial, file a written request with the Administrator to review the matter. If the written request contains allegations which, if true, would qualify the applicant to receive a certificate of completion, the Administrator shall set the matter for an informal hearing before him to be conducted as soon as practicable.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

PRACTICE BY COMMUNITY MANAGERS

NAC 116.300  Responsibilities. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400)  A community manager shall:

1.  Comply with the lawful provisions of the governing documents of each client;

2.  Maintain an inventory of all records of each client;

3.  Keep informed of new developments in the management of a common-interest community through continuing education, including, without limitation, new developments in law, insurance coverage and accounting principles;

4.  Advise a client to obtain advice from an expert relating to matters that are beyond the expertise of the community manager;

5.  Under the direction of a client, uniformly enforce the provisions of the governing documents of the association;

6.  At all times ensure that the financial transactions of a client are current, accurate and properly documented and that there are established policies and procedures surrounding the financial transactions that are designed to provide reasonable assurances in the reliability of the financial reporting, including, without limitation, proper maintenance of accounting records, documentation of the authorization for receipts and disbursements, verification of the integrity of the data used in business decisions, facilitation of fraud detection and prevention, and compliance with the applicable laws and regulations governing financial records;

7.  Prepare or cause to be prepared interim and annual financial statements that will allow the Division, the executive board, the units’ owners and the accountant or auditor to determine whether the financial position of an association is fairly presented in accordance with the provisions of NAC 116.451 to 116.461, inclusive;

8.  Make the financial records of an association available for inspection by the Division in accordance with the applicable laws of this State;

9.  Cooperate with the Division in resolving complaints filed with the Division;

10.  Upon written request, make the financial records of an association available to the units’ owners during regular business hours for inspection at a reasonably convenient location which must be within 60 miles from the physical location of the common-interest community and provide copies of such records in accordance with the applicable laws of this State;

11.  Deposit all money of an association that is in the possession or control of the community manager in a federally insured financial institution authorized to do business in this State;

12.  Recommend in writing to each client that the association register with the Division, maintain its registration and file all papers with the Division and the Secretary of State as required by law;

13.  Comply with the directions of a client, unless the directions conflict with the governing documents of the association, this chapter or other applicable laws of this State;

14.  Recommend in writing to each client that the association be in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and the governing documents of the association;

15.  Obtain, when practicable, at least three bids for any capital improvement project for the association; and

16.  Fairly enforce the collection policies of a client and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws relating to the collection of debt.

Ê As used in this section, “regular business hours” means Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., excluding state and federal holidays.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005; R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.305  Management agreement; evidence of insurance. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400)

1.  A management agreement must:

(a) Be in writing and signed by all parties;

(b) Be entered into between the client and the community manager or the employer of the community manager if the community manager is acting on behalf of a corporation, partnership, limited partnership, limited-liability company or other entity;

(c) State the term of the management agreement;

(d) State the basic consideration for the services to be provided and the payment schedule;

(e) Include a complete schedule of all fees, costs, expenses and charges to be imposed by the community manager, whether direct or indirect, including, without limitation:

(1) The costs for any new association or start-up costs;

(2) The fees for special or nonroutine services such as the mailing of collection letters, the recording of liens and foreclosing of property;

(3) Reimbursable expenses;

(4) The fees for the sale or resale of a unit or for setting up the account of a new member; and

(5) The portion of fees that are to be retained by the client and the portion to be retained by the community manager;

(f) State the identity and the legal status of the contracting parties;

(g) State any limitations on the liability of each contracting party, including any provisions for indemnification of the community manager;

(h) Include a statement of the scope of work of the community manager;

(i) State the spending limits of the community manager;

(j) Include provisions relating to the grounds and procedure for termination of the community manager;

(k) Identify the types and amounts of insurance coverage to be carried by each contracting party, including:

(1) Whether the community manager will maintain errors and omissions or professional liability insurance;

(2) Which contracting party will maintain fidelity bond coverage;

(3) Whether the association will maintain directors and officers liability coverage for the executive board; and

(4) Whether either contracting party must be named as an additional insured under any required insurance;

(l) Include provisions for dispute resolution;

(m) Acknowledge that all records and books of the client are the property of the client, with the exception of any proprietary information and software belonging to the community manager;

(n) State the physical location, including the street address, of the records of the client, which must be within 60 miles from the physical location of the common-interest community;

(o) State the frequency and extent of regular inspections of the common-interest community; and

(p) State the extent, if any, of the authority of the community manager to sign checks on behalf of the client in an operating account.

2.  A management agreement may:

(a) Provide for mandatory binding arbitration;

(b) Provide for indemnification of the community manager in accordance with and subject to the appropriate provisions of title 7 of NRS; and

(c) Allow the provisions of the management agreement to apply month to month following the end of the term of the management agreement but the management agreement may not contain an automatic renewal of the management agreement.

3.  Not later than 10 days after the effective date of a management agreement, the community manager shall provide each member of the executive board evidence of the existence of the required insurance which must include:

(a) The names and addresses of all insurance companies;

(b) The total amount of coverage; and

(c) The amount of any deductible.

4.  After signing a management agreement, the community manager shall provide a copy of the management agreement to each member of the executive board. Within 30 days after an election or appointment of a new member to the executive board, the community manager shall provide the new member with a copy of the management agreement.

5.  Any changes to a management agreement must be initialed by the contracting parties. If there are any changes after the execution of a management agreement, those changes must be in writing and signed by the contracting parties.

6.  Except as otherwise provided in a management agreement, upon the termination or assignment of a management agreement, the community manager shall, within 30 days after such termination or assignment, transfer possession of all books, records and other papers of the client to the succeeding community manager, or to the client if there is no succeeding community manager, regardless of any unpaid fees or charges to the community manager or management company.

7.  Notwithstanding any provision in a management agreement to the contrary, a management agreement may be terminated by the client without penalty upon 30 days’ notice following a violation by the community manager of any provision of this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.310  Required disclosures. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400)  Before entering into a management agreement, a community manager shall disclose in writing to the prospective client any material and relevant information that he knows or should know relates to the performance of the management agreement, including any matters which may affect his ability to comply with the provisions of this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS. Such disclosure must include, without limitation:

1.  Whether he expects to receive any direct or indirect compensation or profits from any person who will perform services for the client and, if so, the identity of the person;

2.  His affiliation with or financial interest in any person who furnishes any goods or services to the client; and

3.  His personal relationships with any unit’s owner, member of the executive board or officer of the association.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.321  Office; display of certificate. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400)

1.  A community manager shall establish an office in Nevada which is reasonably accessible to members of the general public. If he chooses to establish an office in a private home or in conjunction with another business, he shall:

(a) Set aside a separate room for conducting his duties as a community manager; and

(b) Comply with all local zoning requirements.

2.  A community manager shall display his certificate conspicuously in his office.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.331  Change of name, address, association or supervising community manager. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400, 116A.410)

1.  A community manager shall give written notice to the Division of any change of name, address or association within 10 business days after the change occurs and pay the appropriate fee required by NAC 116.505.

2.  A provisional community manager shall give written notice to the Division of any change of his supervising community manager within 10 business days after the change occurs and pay the appropriate fee required by NAC 116.505.

3.  Failure to give notice as required by this section constitutes cause for the involuntary inactivation of the certificate.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005; A by R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.341  Prohibited acts. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400)  A community manager shall not:

1.  Except as otherwise required by law or court order, disclose confidential information relating to a client which includes, without limitation, the business affairs and financial records of the client, unless the disclosure is consented to by the client;

2.  Impede or otherwise interfere with an investigation of the Division by:

(a) Failing to comply with a request by the Division to provide documents;

(b) Supplying false or misleading information to an investigator, auditor or any other officer or agent of the Division; or

(c) Concealing any facts or documents relating to the business of a client;

3.  Commingle money or other property of a client with the money or other property of another client, another association, the community manager or the employer of the community manager and shall not use money or other property of a client for his own personal use;

4.  Be a signor on a withdrawal from a reserve account of a client;

5.  Except as otherwise permitted by the provisions of the court rules governing the legal profession, establish an attorney-client relationship with an attorney or law firm which represents a client that employs the community manager or with whom the community manager has a management agreement;

6.  Provide or attempt to provide to a client services concerning a type of property or service:

(a) That is outside his field of experience or competence without the assistance of a qualified authority unless the fact of his inexperience or incompetence is disclosed fully to the client and is not otherwise prohibited by law; or

(b) For which he is not properly licensed;

7.  Apply a payment of an assessment from a unit’s owner towards any fine, fee or other charge that is due;

8.  Refuse to accept from a unit’s owner payment of any assessment, fine, fee or other charge that is due because of the fact that there is an outstanding payment due; or

9.  Collect any fees or other charges from a client not specified in the management agreement.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.351  Allegations of misconduct; submission of complaint; investigation and report; action by Administrator; appeal. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400)

1.  If a person who alleges that a community manager is guilty of misconduct sends the allegations of misconduct in writing to the community manager in an attempt to resolve the issue without filing a complaint with the Division, the community manager shall, in good faith, acknowledge and respond in writing to the person making the allegations within 12 working days after he receives the allegations.

2.  A complaint about a community manager must:

(a) Be submitted to the Division on a form provided by the Division;

(b) Be signed by the person submitting the complaint; and

(c) Include, without limitation:

(1) The identity of the community manager who is alleged to have violated a provision of this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS, and the nature of the alleged violation;

(2) All evidence supporting the allegations, including, without limitation, as appropriate, corroborating statements by other persons or specific information as to persons who may be contacted to provide such corroboration;

(3) The name, address and telephone number of the person submitting the complaint;

(4) Documents that evidence an attempt by the person submitting the complaint to resolve the issue with the executive board or the community manager, including, without limitation, any written response of the executive board or the community manager to the allegations of the person submitting the complaint; and

(5) If filed by a tenant of a unit’s owner, ratification of the complaint by the unit’s owner without the use of a power of attorney by the tenant.

3.  Upon receipt of a complaint that complies with subsection 2, the Division shall forward the complaint to an investigator. The investigator:

(a) Shall send a copy of the complaint to the community manager and the executive board of any association which relates to the subject of the complaint;

(b) Within 12 working days after the receipt of the allegations, shall attempt to obtain a response in writing from the person who is the subject of the complaint;

(c) May make such inquiries and investigation into matters relating to the allegations in the complaint as the investigator deems appropriate; and

(d) Shall submit to the Administrator a written report that summarizes the findings and conclusions of the investigator.

4.  Upon review of the written report of the investigator, if the Administrator determines that grounds for disciplinary action against the community manager exist, the Administrator may take one or more of the following actions as he deems appropriate:

(a) Issue a letter of censure to the community manager who is the subject of the complaint;

(b) Levy an administrative fine of:

(1) For the first offense, $500; and

(2) For the second offense, $1,000;

(c) Require the community manager to obtain additional education relating to the management of a common-interest community;

(d) Refer the matter to the Commission;

(e) Refer the matter to the Real Estate Commission; or

(f) Refer the matter to the Attorney General of this State.

5.  The Administrator may initiate an investigation, audit or inspection of the records of any community manager or any person who performs the duties of a community manager in this State.

6.  Any action taken by the Administrator pursuant to subsection 4 may be appealed by the community manager upon written request to the Commission within 30 days after the Administrator takes such action.

7.  As used in this section, “investigator” means a person whom the Division deems to be impartial and qualified with respect to the matter in a complaint and who is designated by the Division to investigate a complaint pursuant to this section.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)—(Substituted in revision for NAC 116.320)

NAC 116.360  Grounds for disciplinary action; criteria for unprofessional conduct and professional incompetence. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400, 116A.410)

1.  A community manager is subject to disciplinary action if the community manager:

(a) Commits any of the following:

(1) Unprofessional conduct;

(2) Professional incompetence;

(3) Negligence or gross negligence; or

(4) A felony or any offense involving moral turpitude; or

(b) Has had a certificate, permit or license that authorizes him to act as a community manager in another jurisdiction revoked or suspended.

2.  A community manager commits an act of unprofessional conduct if the community manager:

(a) Violates the provisions of:

(1) An order of the Commission;

(2) An agreement with the Division; or

(3) This chapter or chapter 116 of NRS;

(b) Fails to disclose to a client any material fact or other information that he knows or, in the exercise of reasonable care or diligence, should have known, which concerns or relates to the common-interest community and which is of customary or express interest to the client;

(c) Engages in deceitful, fraudulent or dishonest conduct, including, without limitation, knowingly communicating false, misleading or fraudulent information to a client;

(d) Before obtaining a certificate or permit, committed an act which was in fact unknown to the Division at the time it issued the certificate or permit and which would have been grounds for denial of a certificate or permit had the Division been aware of the conduct;

(e) Obtains a certificate or permit by fraud or deceit or by concealing a material fact from the Division, including, without limitation, making a false statement of material fact on the application for the certificate or permit;

(f) Fails to cooperate with the Division in the investigation of a complaint, including, without limitation, failure to produce any document, book or record in the possession or control of the community manager after the Division requests the production of such document, book or record in the course of an investigation of a complaint;

(g) Fails to perform impartially and consistently an activity that is lawful and properly authorized on behalf of a client or fails to perform a duty or obligation owed to a client because of the age, race, color, religion, national origin, disability, marital status, familial status, sex or ethnicity of any person, including, without limitation, a member of the executive board, an officer of the association, a unit’s owner, a tenant of the common-interest community or a visitor of the common-interest community;

(h) Fails to account for or remit money in his possession that belongs to another within a reasonable time of a request for an accounting or remittance of such money by the owner; or

(i) Exceeds the authority granted to him by the client.

3.  A community manager commits an act of professional incompetence if, without limitation, the community manager:

(a) Demonstrates a significant lack of ability, knowledge or fitness to perform a duty or obligation owed to a client; or

(b) Fails to exercise reasonable skill and care with respect to a duty or obligation owed to a client.

4.  In determining whether a community manager has committed unprofessional conduct or professional incompetence, the Commission and the Administrator may consider, without limitation, whether the community manager has:

(a) Done his utmost to protect the public against fraud, misrepresentation or unethical practices related to the business affairs of the client;

(b) Acquired the knowledge of all pertinent facts concerning a client;

(c) Provided or attempted to provide to a client services concerning a type of property or service:

(1) That is outside his field of experience or competence without the assistance of a qualified authority unless the fact of his inexperience or incompetence is disclosed fully to the client and is not otherwise prohibited by law; or

(2) For which he is not properly licensed;

(d) Complied with the disclosure requirement of NAC 116.310;

(e) Complied with the applicable governing documents, policies and procedures of the client;

(f) Kept informed of current statutes and regulations relating to common-interest communities and relating to other areas in which he attempts to provide guidance;

(g) Acted in the best interest of his client;

(h) Ensured that each management agreement is in writing and that each member of the executive board has received a copy of the management agreement;

(i) Obtained all changes of contractual terms in writing and has ensured that such changes are signed or initialed by the parties concerned;

(j) Acquired knowledge of all material facts that are reasonably ascertainable and are of customary or express concern to a client and has conveyed that knowledge to the client; or

(k) Failed to supervise a provisional community manager or employee.

5.  As used in this section:

(a) “Disability” means:

(1) A physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the person;

(2) A record of such an impairment; or

(3) Being regarded as having such an impairment.

(b) “Familial status” means the fact that a person:

(1) Lives with a child under the age of 19 years and has:

(I) Lawful custody of the child; or

(II) Written permission to live with the child from the person who has lawful custody of the child;

(2) Is pregnant; or

(3) Has begun a proceeding to adopt or otherwise obtain lawful custody of a child.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.370  Disciplinary action by Commission. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.400, 116A.410)

1.  If the Administrator refers the matter to the Commission and after conducting a hearing the Commission finds that grounds for disciplinary action against the community manager exist, the Commission may take one or more of the following actions:

(a) Revoke or suspend the certificate;

(b) Refuse to renew or reinstate the certificate;

(c) Place the community manager on probation;

(d) Issue a reprimand or censure to the community manager;

(e) Impose a fine of not more than $5,000 for each violation of a statute or regulation;

(f) Require the community manager to pay restitution;

(g) Require the community manager to pay the costs of the investigation and hearing;

(h) Require the community manager to obtain additional education relating to the management of common-interest communities; or

(i) Take such other disciplinary action as the Commission deems appropriate.

2.  Unless the Administrator determines otherwise and the person satisfies all the requirements for initial issuance of a certificate, the Commission will not issue another certificate to a person whose certificate has been revoked for at least 1 year after the date of the revocation.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)

UNIT-OWNERS’ ASSOCIATIONS

NAC 116.400  Members of executive board: Responsibilities. (NRS 116.3103, 116.615)  In performing the duties set forth in NRS 116.3103, a member of an executive board shall:

1.  Comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and the governing documents of the association;

2.  Uniformly enforce the provisions of the governing documents of the association;

3.  Ensure that meetings of the executive board are held with such frequency as to properly and efficiently address the affairs of the association;

4.  Keep informed of new developments in the management of a common-interest community through educational courses;

5.  Ensure that the executive board obtains, when practicable, at least three bids from reputable service providers who possess the proper licensing for any service used by the association;

6.  Ensure that the executive board consults with the appropriate professionals as necessary before making major decisions affecting the association;

7.  Deposit all money of an association in a federally insured financial institution authorized to do business in this State; and

8.  If the association does not employ a community manager:

(a) Maintain an inventory of all records of the association;

(b) At all times ensure that the financial transactions of the association are current, accurate and properly documented and that there are established policies and procedures surrounding the financial transactions that are designed to provide reasonable assurances in the reliability of the financial reporting, including, without limitation, proper maintenance of accounting records, documentation of the authorization for receipts and disbursements, verification of the integrity of the data used in business decisions, facilitation of fraud detection and prevention, and compliance with the applicable laws and regulations governing financial records;

(c) Prepare or cause to be prepared interim and annual financial statements that will allow the Division, the executive board, the units’ owners and the accountant or auditor to determine whether the financial position of the association is fairly presented in accordance with the provisions of NAC 116.451 to 116.461, inclusive;

(d) Make the financial records of the association available for inspection by the Division in accordance with the applicable laws of this State;

(e) Cooperate with the Division in resolving complaints filed with the Division;

(f) Upon written request, make the financial records of the association available to the units’ owners during regular business hours for inspection at a reasonably convenient location which must be within 60 miles from the physical location of the common-interest community and provide copies of such records in accordance with the applicable laws of this State; and

(g) Fairly enforce the collection policies of the association and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws relating to the collection of debt.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005; A by R205-05, 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.405  Members of executive board: Prohibited acts. (NRS 116.3103, 116.615)  In performing the duties set forth in NRS 116.3103, a member of an executive board shall not:

1.  Act outside the scope of the authority granted in the governing documents;

2.  Act for reasons of self-interest, gain, prejudice or revenge;

3.  Commit an act or omission which amounts to incompetence, negligence or gross negligence;

4.  Except as otherwise required by law or court order, disclose confidential information relating to a unit’s owner, a member of the executive board or an officer, employee or authorized agent of the association unless the disclosure is consented to by the person to whom the information relates; or

5.  Impede or otherwise interfere with an investigation of the Division by:

(a) Failing to comply with a request by the Division to provide documents;

(b) Supplying false or misleading information to an investigator, auditor or any other officer or agent of the Division; or

(c) Concealing any facts or documents relating to the business of the association.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.410  Adoption by reference of reporting principles and practices of financial accounting. (NRS 116.615)

1.  For purposes of providing recommended reporting principles and practices of financial accounting for common-interest communities, the Commission hereby adopts by reference the Common Interest Realty Associations – AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide, May 2004 edition. A copy of the publication may be obtained from the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10036-8775, by telephone at (888) 777-7077 or at the Internet address http://www.aicpa.org/index.htm or https://www.cpa2biz.com/CS2000/Products/CPA2BIZ/Publications/Sub+1/Common+Interest+Realty+Associations+%97+AICPA+Audit+and+Accounting+Guide.htm, at a price of $47 for members and $58.75 for nonmembers.

2.  If the publication adopted by reference in subsection 1 is revised, the Commission will review the revision to determine its suitability for this State. If the Commission determines that the revision is not suitable for this State, the Commission will hold a public hearing to review its determination and give notice of that hearing within 90 days after the date of the publication of the revision. If, after the hearing, the Commission does not revise its determination, the Commission will give notice that the revision is not suitable for this State within 90 days after the hearing. If the Commission does not give such notice, the revision becomes part of the publication adopted by reference pursuant to subsection 1.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.415  Contents of budget to maintain reserve. (NRS 116.31151, 116.615)  An executive board shall, in addition to the requirements set forth in paragraph (b) of subsection 1 of NRS 116.31151, include in the budget to maintain the reserve:

1.  An estimate of the amount of reserve funds necessary in the projected fiscal year, based on comparative bids or industry standards, to complete the repairs, replacement or restoration of the major components as recommended in the reserve study; and

2.  Whether there is a difference between the amount of the annual contribution suggested in the reserve study and the amount of the annual contribution for the current budget year and, if so:

(a) The reason for the difference; and

(b) How this difference is proposed to be resolved.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.420  Qualifications of person to conduct reserve study. (NRS 116.31152, 116.615)  A person is qualified by training and experience to conduct a reserve study if:

1.  The person has:

(a) A good reputation for honesty, trustworthiness and integrity;

(b) The ability to evaluate the items on the component inventory with regard to normal and accelerated deterioration, deferred maintenance, remaining years of useful life and current cost to repair or replace;

(c) The ability to perform financial analysis, cost estimates and 30-year projections, as applicable;

(d) The ability to review improvement plans and specifications, maintenance histories, recorded plats and governing documents of the association in order to compile a complete component inventory and to consult with the executive board to ascertain and confirm that the component inventory is complete;

(e) The ability to gather and analyze financial data, including, without limitation, monthly assessment fees per unit, current balance of reserves, interest rate anticipated on reserves, anticipated inflation and maximum assessment fee increases allowable; and

(f) The background and knowledge pertinent to all areas to be addressed by the reserve study; or

2.  The person:

(a) Has a good reputation for honesty, trustworthiness and integrity; and

(b) Uses consultants and other persons with expertise having the knowledge and abilities set forth in subsection 1 to assist in preparing the reserve study.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Div. by R114-99, eff. 5-5-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)—(Substituted in revision for NAC 116.450)

NAC 116.425  Reserve study: Contents. (NRS 116.31152, 116.615)

1.  A reserve study must, in addition to the requirements set forth in NRS 116.31152, include:

(a) A copy of the component inventory from the previous reserve study if such copy was provided by the executive board to the person conducting the reserve study;

(b) A 30-year schedule which shows:

(1) The projected increase in assessments that will be required in any given year to provide an adequately funded reserve; and

(2) The projected inflation and estimated interest income from the reserve fund;

(c) The names and credentials of any consultants and other persons with expertise used to assist in the preparation of the reserve study;

(d) Any written reports prepared by consultants and other persons with expertise;

(e) If there are any conflicting recommendations of the consultants or other persons with expertise while preparing the reserve study, a written explanation as to which recommendations are selected and the reasons for their selection;

(f) The disclosures set forth in NAC 116.430; and

(g) A statement, prominently displayed, which reads substantially as follows:

The projected life expectancy of the major components and the funding needs of the reserves of the association are based upon the association performing appropriate routine and preventative maintenance for each major component. Failure to perform such maintenance can negatively impact the remaining useful life of the major components and dramatically increase the funding needs of the reserves of the association.

2.  As used in this section, “adequately funded reserve” means the funds sufficient to maintain the common elements:

(a) At the level described in the governing documents and in a reserve study; and

(b) Without using the funds from the operating budget or without special assessments, except for occurrences that are a result of unforeseen catastrophic events.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.430  Reserve study: Required disclosures. (NRS 116.31152, 116.615)  A person conducting a reserve study and any consultant assisting in the preparation of a reserve study shall include in the reserve study the following disclosures:

1.  The background, training, qualifications and references that would qualify the person conducting or assisting in the preparation of the reserve study as competent to conduct or assist in the preparation of the reserve study;

2.  Any relationship which could result in actual or perceived conflicts of interest;

3.  Whether the person conducting or assisting in the preparation of the reserve study is bonded or has professional liability insurance;

4.  The method for determining the common area components based on:

(a) An actual field inspection of the common elements with representative sampling;

(b) An inventory and material information provided by the client; or

(c) A previous reserve study and the date of that study;

5.  Industry sources used for determining:

(a) The life of a major component; and

(b) The cost of repairing, replacing or restoring a major component;

6.  Any guarantees, express or implied, that are given with the predictions for the cost or life expectancy of any of the major components;

7.  The source of the information regarding the initial reserve fund balance presented in the reserve study; and

8.  Whether a special assessment is anticipated during the time of the contracted reserve study.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.435  Reserve study: Dissemination of summary of results. (NRS 116.31152, 116.615)  An executive board shall submit a summary of the results of the reserve study to the Commission pursuant to subsection 4 of NRS 116.31152 by filing, electronically if possible, on a form prescribed by the Division, the summary of the results of the reserve study with the Division. The Division may post the summary of the results of the reserve studies filed with the Division on its website.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.440  Availability of records of association: “Regular working hours” interpreted. (NRS 116.31175, 116.615)  As used in NRS 116.31175, “regular working hours” means a period of at least 4 consecutive hours per week.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.445  Annual fee required from certain associations for deposit in Account for Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels. (NRS 116.31155)  The amount of the fee that an association is required to pay pursuant to NRS 116.31155 is $3 for each unit in the association.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Div. by R066-98, eff. 6-26-98)—(Substituted in revision for NAC 116.250)

NAC 116.451  Preparation, contents and distribution of interim financial statements. (NRS 116.31142, 116.615)  The interim financial statements of an association may be prepared using fund accounting or a single-column presentation and must:

1.  Include, at a minimum, a month-to-date and year-to-date presentation of:

(a) The balance sheet, including operating and reserve for future repairs and replacement assets, liabilities and fund balances or members’ equity if a single-column format is used;

(b) The statement of revenues and expenses for all operating and reserve activities, presenting information about all assessments, revenues and expenses;

(c) A schedule comparing the details of the actual expenses of the association with the expenses budgeted for the association;

(d) Any changes in the fund balances to be presented on the statement of revenues and expenses if fund accounting is used; and

(e) A footnote which states that the association is in compliance with paragraph (b) of subsection 2 of NRS 116.3115 and that reserve funds have not been used for daily maintenance.

2.  Be prepared on a full accrual basis.

3.  Be prepared by, or the preparation of the interim financial statements must be supervised by, a person with accounting knowledge and experience in the preparation of financial statements.

4.  Be distributed monthly, promptly upon completion, to the treasurer of the association, the community manager and each member of the executive board.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.453  Contents of financial statements subject to audit or review. (NRS 116.31142, 116.31144, 116.615)  The financial statements of an association subject to an audit or review must be presented using fund accounting and must include, at a minimum:

1.  An operating fund which reflects the accounting transactions surrounding the normal maintenance and service operations of the association; and

2.  A reserve fund which reflects the accounting transactions pertaining to the long-term, major repair and replacement requirements of the association and the restrictions of its use as described in paragraph (b) of subsection 2 of NRS 116.3115.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

REVISER’S NOTE.

The regulation of the Commission for Common-Interest Communities filed with the Secretary of State on September 18, 2006 (LCB File No. R205-05), the source of this section, contains the following provisions not included in NAC:

“1.  If an association has not previously caused the financial statements of the association to be audited on an annual basis, the association must cause the financial statements of the association to be audited pursuant to NRS 116.31144 for the first fiscal year that begins on or after July 1, 2006.

2.  If an association which is required to cause the financial statements of the association to be audited at lease once every 4 years pursuant to NRS 116.31144 has caused the financial statements of the association to be audited for the fiscal year immediately preceding the first fiscal year that begins on or after July 1, 2006, the association is not required to cause the financial statements of the association to be audited for another 4 years.”

NAC 116.457  Preparation, contents and availability of audited financial statements; qualifications of auditor. (NRS 116.31142, 116.31144, 116.615)

1.  The audited financial statement of an association must:

(a) Include a full presentation of accrual-basis accounting prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles which includes, at a minimum:

(1) A balance sheet for the operating fund and reserve fund, presenting assets, liabilities and fund balances;

(2) A statement of revenues and expenses for the operating fund and reserve fund which presents information about all assessments, revenues and expenses;

(3) A statement of changes in fund balances which reconciles beginning and ending fund balances with results of operations;

(4) A statement of cash flows;

(5) Any note disclosures as required by the Guide; and

(6) The following unaudited supplementary information:

(I) Any reserve disclosures as required by the Guide and NRS 116.31152; and

(II) An accompanying schedule which compares details of the actual expenses of the association to the budgeted amounts of the association.

(b) Be prepared and completed not later than 210 days after the end of the fiscal year for the association.

(c) Be made available to the Division not later than 30 days after requested by the Division.

(d) Include on the annual registration form with the Division the following information:

(1) The amount of budgeted revenues;

(2) Whether the financial statements were audited or reviewed and, if so, the date on which the audit or review of the financial statements was completed; and

(3) Whether the audit opinion is qualified or unqualified or whether the review report is modified or unmodifed.

2.  An auditor performing the annual audit for an association must:

(a) Be a certified public accountant licensed pursuant to chapter 628 of NRS.

(b) Be independent of the association as set forth in Section 100, “Independence, Integrity, and Objectivity,” of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

REVISER’S NOTE.

The regulation of the Commission for Common-Interest Communities filed with the Secretary of State on September 18, 2006 (LCB File No. R205-05), the source of this section, contains the following provisions not included in NAC:

“1.  If an association has not previously caused the financial statements of the association to be audited on an annual basis, the association must cause the financial statements of the association to be audited pursuant to NRS 116.31144 for the first fiscal year that begins on or after July 1, 2006.

2.  If an association which is required to cause the financial statements of the association to be audited at lease once every 4 years pursuant to NRS 116.31144 has caused the financial statements of the association to be audited for the fiscal year immediately preceding the first fiscal year that begins on or after July 1, 2006, the association is not required to cause the financial statements of the association to be audited for another 4 years.”

NAC 116.459  Inclusion of additional funds in financial statements. (NRS 116.31142, 116.31144, 116.615)  The financial statements of an association described in NAC 116.451, 116.453 and 116.457 may provide for such other funds as the association deems appropriate to report the transactions of separate business activities, special assessments and contingency or other restricted funds.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.461  Review of financial statements; qualifications of auditor. (NRS 116.31144, 116.615)

1.  The review of the financial statements of an association must be performed in accordance with the AICPA’s Statement on Standards for Accounting and Review Services as referenced in the Guide. The financial statements must include a full presentation of accrual-basis accounting prepared pursuant to subsection 1 of NAC 116.457. The supplementary information may be compiled or reviewed.

2.  An auditor performing the annual review for an association must:

(a) Be a certified public accountant licensed pursuant to chapter 628 of NRS.

(b) Be independent of the association as set forth in Section 100, “Independence, Integrity, and Objectivity,” of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.465  Fee for preparation of certificate for resale of unit. (NRS 116.4109, 116.615)

1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, an association may not charge more than $160 for preparing the certificate furnished pursuant to NRS 116.4109.

2.  If a unit’s owner or his authorized agent requests that the certificate be furnished sooner than 3 business days after the date of the request, the association may charge a fee not to exceed $125 to expedite the preparation of the certificate.

3.  Nothing in this section is to be construed to prohibit an association from requiring a fee for any other copy, form or service.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

RECEIPT OF GIFTS, INCENTIVES, GRATUITIES, REWARDS OR OTHER ITEMS OF VALUE

NAC 116.480  Restriction on and statements by members of executive boards and officers of associations. (NRS 116.31185, 116.615)

1.  No member of an executive board or officer of an association shall receive, in the aggregate, any gift, incentive, gratuity, reward or other item of value pursuant to subsection 2 of NRS 116.31185 in any calendar year which exceeds the sum of $100.

2.  On or before the annual distribution to each unit’s owner of the budgets of the association pursuant to subsection 1 of NRS 116.31151, each member of an executive board and officer of an association shall deliver to the executive board for inclusion in the annual distribution of the budgets a statement of any gifts, incentives, gratuities, rewards or other items of value which exceed $15 received pursuant to subsection 2 of NRS 116.31185.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.482  Restriction on and statements by community managers and employees of community managers. (NRS 116.31185, 116.615)

1.  No community manager or employee of the community manager shall receive, in the aggregate, any gift, incentive, gratuity, reward or other item of value pursuant to subsection 2 of NRS 116.31185 in any calendar year which exceeds the sum of $500.

2.  On or before the date of renewal of a license for a community manager, each community manager shall disclose to the Division, in the renewal form, a statement of any gifts, incentives, gratuities, rewards or other items of value which exceed $15 received pursuant to subsection 2 of NRS 116.31185 during each of the years following the last renewal.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.484  Attendance of or participation in approved class. (NRS 116.31185, 116.615)

1.  As used in NRS 116.31185, the term “gifts, incentives, gratuities, rewards or other items of value” does not include:

(a) Any prepaid tuition for an approved class within the State for members of an executive board, officers of an association, community managers or employees of the community manager;

(b) The cost or value of an approved class that is offered free of charge; and

(c) The cost or value of any breakfast, lunch, snack or hot or cold nonalcoholic beverage provided at an approved class or during the breaks of an approved class.

2.  A member of the executive board or an officer of the association who attends or participates in an approved class must disclose his attendance or participation in the approved class to the executive board at the next meeting of the executive board after the date of the approved class.

3.  As used in this section, “approved class” means a course which has been approved pursuant to the provisions of this chapter and which at all times satisfies the requirements of this chapter.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

NAC 116.486  Compliance with statutory prohibition. (NRS 116.31185, 116.615)  Nothing in NAC 116.480, 116.482 and 116.484 is to be construed as permitting a member of an executive board, an officer of an association, a community manager or an employee of the community manager to solicit or accept any form of compensation, gratuity or other remuneration in violation of the provisions of subsection 1 of NRS 116.31185.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R205-05, eff. 9-18-2006)

ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT

General Provisions

NAC 116.500  Public inspection of records maintained by Division. (NRS 116.615)  Records kept in the office of the Division under authority of this chapter are open to public inspection in the same manner as records are available for inspection pursuant to chapters 645 of NRS and NAC, except that the Division may refuse to make public, unless ordered to do so by a court:

1.  Examinations;

2.  Files compiled by the Division while investigating possible violations of this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS;

3.  The criminal and financial records of community managers and of applicants for a certificate;

4.  Social security numbers;

5.  The home addresses and telephone numbers of community managers, unless such information is used for business purposes by a community manager; and

6.  The home addresses and telephone numbers of members of the executive boards.

(Added to NAC by Real Estate Comm’n by R136-99, eff. 4-3-2000; A by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, 4-14-2005)—(Substituted in revision for NAC 116.390)

NAC 116.505  Fees of Division. (NRS 116.615, 116.665, 116A.200, 116A.410)  The Division shall charge and collect the following fees:

For application for a certificate …………………………………………………………. $175

For issuance of a certificate ………………………………………………………………….. 25

For examination of an applicant for a certificate …………………………………… 100

For biennial renewal of a certificate ……………………………………………………. 100

For late renewal of a certificate …………………………………………………………….. 50

For reinstatement of an inactive certificate ……………………………………………. 20

For issuance of a duplicate certificate ……………………………………………………. 20

For change of name or address on a certificate ……………………………………….. 20

For change of status as a community manager, provisional community manager or supervising community manager on a certificate……………….. 20

For change of association with a supervising community manager …………… 20

For approval of courses to meet the requirements for original certification 100

For approval of a course for continuing education ………………………………… 100

For renewal of an approval of a course for continuing education ……………… 50

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.510  Check or draft returned to Division for lack of payment. (NRS 116.615)

1.  If a person submits a check or draft to the Division to obtain a certificate, approval, accreditation or other type of authorization to engage in an activity for which authorization is required pursuant to this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS, and the check or draft is returned to the Division because the person had insufficient money or credit with the drawee to pay the check or draft or because the person stopped payment on the check or draft:

(a) The certificate, approval, accreditation or other type of authorization obtained by the person from the Division is involuntarily inactivated; or

(b) If the person has not obtained the certificate, approval, accreditation or other type of authorization from the Division, the Division may refuse to issue or reinstate the authorization.

2.  In accordance with NRS 353C.115 and NAC 353C.400, the Division shall charge a person, for each check or draft returned to the Division because the person had insufficient money or credit with the drawee to pay the check or draft or because the person stopped payment on the check or draft, a fee of $25 or such other amount as may subsequently be required by NRS 353C.115 and NAC 353C.400.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.515  Fee for background investigation. (NRS 116.615, 116A.200, 116A.410)  The fee for conducting a background investigation must not exceed the administrative costs charged to the Division. All payments for such investigations must be in the form of a cashier’s check or money order made payable to the agency conducting the investigation.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.520  Subsidization of proceedings for binding arbitration. (NRS 116.615, 116.670)

1.  The Division may subsidize proceedings for binding arbitration conducted pursuant to NRS 38.300 to 38.360, inclusive:

(a) For the parties that agree to binding arbitration; and

(b) To the extent that funds are available in the Account for Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels in the State General Fund for that purpose.

2.  A party who wishes to have a proceeding for arbitration subsidized must:

(a) Submit an application to the Division on a form prescribed by the Division;

(b) File a claim for binding arbitration within 1 year after the date of discovery of the alleged violation; and

(c) If the applicant is an association, be registered and in good standing with the Office of the Ombudsman for Owners in Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels.

3.  A unit’s owner is eligible to have one proceeding for arbitration subsidized per fiscal year for each unit that he owns.

4.  An association is eligible to have one proceeding for arbitration subsidized per fiscal year against the same unit’s owner for each unit that he owns.

5.  The funds used to subsidize a proceeding for arbitration pursuant to this section:

(a) Must not be applied to the fee required when filing a written claim pursuant to NRS 38.320 or any attorneys’ costs or fees associated with the claim; and

(b) Must be the lesser of 50 percent of the fees owed by a party to the arbitrator or $500.

6.  The Division shall provide notice to an arbitrator that a proceeding for arbitration may be subsidized by forwarding to the arbitrator a copy of the application received pursuant to subsection 2.

7.  If an application for subsidy is approved by the Division, the arbitrator shall, within 10 business days after his final decision, submit to the Division:

(a) On a form prescribed by the Division, a request for payment of the cost of arbitration; and

(b) A copy of the final decision.

8.  The Division shall pay the cost of arbitration pursuant to this section at the time the Division receives a copy of the final decision from the arbitrator and issues a certificate pursuant to NAC 38.350.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.525  Duties of Ombudsman for Owners in Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels: “Annual assessment” interpreted. (NRS 116.615, 116.625)  As used in NRS 116.625, “annual assessment” means both the per unit assessments and the total budget revenues for the association.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

Administrative Proceedings

NAC 116.550  Investigation and audit of financial accounts of association; remedial and disciplinary action. (NRS 116.615)

1.  The Division may investigate and audit all financial accounts related to an association if the Division has reasonable cause to believe that the accounts or records of the association have not been properly maintained and the Division:

(a) Has reasonable cause to believe or has received a credible complaint that the association is insolvent or is in any financial condition or has engaged in any financial practice which creates a substantial risk of insolvency; or

(b) Determines that the investigation and audit are reasonably necessary to assist the Division in administering or enforcing any other provision of this chapter, chapter 116 of NRS or any other statute that the Division is charged with administering or enforcing.

2.  The Commission may, after notice and hearing, take action pursuant to NRS 116.785 if the Division finds that a person has committed a violation of this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS.

3.  As used in this section, “insolvent” or “insolvency” means a condition in which an association is unable to meet its, or a community manager is unable to meet his, liabilities as those liabilities become due in the regular course of the association’s or community manager’s business and which creates a substantial risk of harm to the association.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.553  Hearing panels: Powers; qualifications of independent hearing officers. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  A hearing panel appointed by the Commission has the power of the Commission to conduct hearings and other proceedings, determine violations, impose fines and penalties and take other disciplinary action authorized by the provisions of this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS.

2.  An independent hearing officer appointed to a hearing panel must be a licensed member, in good standing, of the State Bar of Nevada.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.555  Informality of proceedings; rules of evidence. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  In conducting any investigation, inquiry or hearing, the Commission and its members, each hearing panel and its members, and the employees of the Division are not bound by the technical rules of evidence, and any informality in a proceeding or in the manner of taking testimony does not invalidate any order, decision, rule or regulation made, approved or confirmed by the Commission or a hearing panel. The rules of evidence of courts of this State will be followed generally but may be relaxed at the discretion of the Commission or a hearing panel if deviation from the technical rules of evidence will aid in determining the facts.

2.  Any evidence offered at a hearing must be material and relevant to the issues of the hearing.

3.  The Commission or a hearing panel may exclude inadmissible, incompetent, repetitious or irrelevant evidence or order that presentation of that evidence be discontinued.

4.  A party who objects to the introduction of evidence shall briefly state the grounds of the objection at the time the evidence is offered. The party who offers the evidence may present a rebuttal argument to the objection.

5.  If an objection is made to the admissibility of evidence, the Commission or a hearing panel may:

(a) Note the objection and admit the evidence;

(b) Sustain the objection and refuse to admit the evidence; or

(c) Receive the evidence subject to a subsequent ruling by the Commission or a hearing panel.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.557  Prehearing conferences. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  The Commission or a hearing panel may, upon its own motion or a motion made by a party of record, hold a prehearing conference to accomplish one or more of the following purposes:

(a) Formulate or simplify the issues involved in the hearing.

(b) Obtain admissions of fact or any stipulation of the parties.

(c) Arrange for the exchange of proposed exhibits or prepared expert testimony.

(d) Identify the witnesses and the subject matter of their expected testimony and limit the number of witnesses, if necessary.

(e) Rule on any pending prehearing motions or matters.

(f) Establish a schedule for the completion of discovery.

(g) Establish any other procedure that may expedite the orderly conduct and disposition of the proceedings or settlements thereof.

2.  Notice of any prehearing conference must be provided to all parties of record. Unless otherwise ordered for good cause shown, the failure of a party of record to attend a prehearing conference constitutes a waiver of any objection to the agreements reached or rulings made at the conference.

3.  The action taken and the agreements made at a prehearing conference:

(a) Must be made a part of the record.

(b) Control the course of subsequent proceedings unless modified at the hearing by the Commission or hearing panel.

(c) Are binding upon all parties of record and persons who subsequently become parties of record.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.560  Motions. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  All motions, unless made during a hearing, must be in writing.

2.  A written motion must be served on the opposing party and the Commission or a hearing panel at least 10 working days before the time set for the hearing on the motion.

3.  An opposing party may file a written response to a motion within 7 working days after the receipt of the motion by serving the written response on all parties and the Commission or a hearing panel, except that a written response may be filed less than 3 working days before the time set for the hearing on the motion only with the permission of the Commission or a hearing panel upon good cause shown.

4.  The Commission or a hearing panel may require oral argument or the submission of additional information or evidence to decide the motion.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.565  Amendment and withdrawal of complaints; continuances. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  A complaint may be amended at any time.

2.  The Commission or a hearing panel may grant a continuance if the amendment materially alters the complaint or a respondent demonstrates an inability to prepare for the case in a timely manner.

3.  A complaint may be withdrawn at any time before the hearing begins.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.570  Complaint or disciplinary hearing concerning provisional community manager. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  The Division shall provide a copy of any complaint filed against, or a disciplinary hearing or other proceeding commenced against, a provisional community manager to the supervising community manager with whom the provisional community manager is associated.

2.  The supervising community manager with whom the provisional community manager is associated shall attend any disciplinary hearing before the Commission or a hearing panel concerning that provisional community manager.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.575  Responsibilities of respondent. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  Not less than 5 working days before a hearing before the Commission or a hearing panel, the respondent must provide to the Division:

(a) A copy of all documents that are reasonably available to the respondent which the respondent reasonably anticipates will be used in support of his position; and

(b) A list of witnesses whom the respondent intends to call at the time of the hearing, which must include for each witness:

(1) The name of the witness;

(2) The company for whom the witness works and the title of the witness; and

(3) A brief summary of the expected testimony of the witness.

2.  The respondent shall promptly supplement and update any documents and lists provided to the Division pursuant to this section.

3.  The respondent shall provide, at the time of the hearing, 10 copies of each document he wishes to have admitted into evidence at the hearing.

4.  If the respondent fails to provide any document required to be provided by the provisions of this section, the Commission or a hearing panel may exclude the document.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.580  Failure of party to appear. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)  If a party fails to appear at a hearing scheduled by the Commission or a hearing panel and a continuance has not been requested or granted, upon an offer of proof by the other party that the absent party was given proper notice and upon a determination by the Commission or a hearing panel that proper notice was given, the Commission or a hearing panel may proceed to consider the case without the participation of the absent party and may dispose of the matter on the basis of the evidence before it. If a party fails to appear at the hearing or fails to reply to the notice, the charges specified in the complaint may be considered as true.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.585  Procedure for hearings; date of decision. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  The presiding officer of a hearing shall:

(a) Ascertain whether all persons commanded to appear under subpoena are present and whether all documents, books, records and other evidence under subpoena are present in the hearing room.

(b) Administer the oath to the reporter as follows:

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will report this hearing to the best of your stenographic ability?

(c) Administer the oath to all persons whose testimony will be taken:

Do you and each of you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth and nothing but the truth in these proceedings?

(d) Ascertain whether either party wishes to have a witness excluded from the hearing except during the testimony of the witness. A witness may be excluded upon the motion of the Commission or a hearing panel or upon the motion of either party. If a witness is excluded, he will be instructed not to discuss the case during the pendency of the proceeding. The respondent will be allowed to remain present at the hearing. The Division may designate a person who is a member of the staff of the Division and who may also be a witness to act as its representative. Such a representative will be allowed to remain present at the hearing.

(e) Ascertain whether a copy of the complaint or decision to deny has been filed and whether an answer has been filed as part of the record in the proceedings.

(f) Hear any preliminary motions, stipulations or orders upon which the parties agree and address any administrative details.

(g) Request the Division to proceed with the presentation of its case.

2.  The Division may not submit any evidence to the Commission or a hearing panel before the hearing except for the complaint and answer.

3.  The respondent may cross-examine witnesses in the order that the Division presents them.

4.  Witnesses or counsel may be questioned by the members of the Commission or a hearing panel at any time during the proceeding.

5.  Evidence which is to be introduced:

(a) Must first be marked for identification; and

(b) May be received by the Commission or a hearing panel at any point during the proceeding.

6.  When the Division has completed its presentation, the presiding officer shall request the respondent to proceed with the introduction of evidence and calling of witnesses on his behalf.

7.  The Division may cross-examine witnesses in the order that the respondent presents them.

8.  When the respondent has completed his presentation, the Division may call any rebuttal witnesses.

9.  When all testimony for the Division and respondent has been given and all evidence submitted, the presiding officer may request the Division and the respondent to summarize their presentations.

10.  The Commission or a hearing panel may waive any provision of this section if necessary to expedite or ensure the fairness of the hearing.

11.  The date of decision is the date the written decision is signed by a commissioner or a member of a hearing panel or filed with the Commission, whichever occurs later.

12.  In the absence of the Chairman of the Commission, any matter which must be acted upon may be submitted to the Vice Chairman or, if the Vice Chairman is unavailable, to the Secretary.

13.  Upon the presentation of evidence that the respondent received notice of the hearing and has not filed an answer within the time prescribed pursuant to NRS 116.770, his default may be entered and a decision may be issued based upon the allegations of the complaint.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.586  Recess of hearing for conference. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)  In any hearing, the Commission or hearing panel may recess the hearing for a conference in order to discuss matters relating to the testimony about to be given by a witness or for any other purpose that may expedite the orderly conduct and disposition of the proceedings or settlements thereof. The Commission or hearing panel will state on the record the results of such a conference.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.588  Preparation and dissemination of final decision after hearing. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)  After a hearing, the Commission or hearing panel will, within 30 days:

1.  Prepare findings of fact, conclusions of law and a final decision on the issues presented at the hearing; and

2.  Provide a copy of the findings of fact, conclusions of law and final decision to the Division, which will then serve the parties of record and the Commission.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.590  Voluntary surrender of certificate in lieu of disciplinary action. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)  The Commission or a hearing panel may accept the voluntary surrender of a certificate in lieu of imposing any other disciplinary action set forth in this chapter or chapter 116 of NRS.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.595  Reporting of disciplinary action or denial of certificate. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)  The Division, Commission or a hearing panel may report any disciplinary action it takes against a holder of a certificate or any denial of an application for a certificate to:

1.  An association managed by the holder of a certificate;

2.  Any national repository which records disciplinary actions taken against community managers;

3.  Any agency of another jurisdiction that regulates the practice of management of a common-interest community; and

4.  Any other agency or board of the State of Nevada.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R129-04, eff. 4-14-2005)

NAC 116.600  Appeal of final order of hearing panel; filing of briefs. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  Pursuant to NRS 116.675, a final order of a hearing panel may be appealed and a review hearing held by the Commission. If a final order of a hearing panel is appealed, the order is stayed until the Commission issues its ruling, order or decision after the review hearing.

2.  A written notice of appeal filed pursuant to NRS 116.675 must be accompanied by an appellant’s brief which must describe the basis for the appeal, cite any supporting authorities and designate any part of the record which was before the hearing panel and is relevant to the appeal.

3.  A respondent may file a respondent’s brief within 20 days after service of the appellant’s brief.

4.  An appellant may then file a reply brief within 12 days after service of a respondent’s brief. The reply brief may only respond to issues raised in a respondent’s brief. Any issues raised for the first time which are contained in the reply brief will not be considered by the Commission.

5.  The Division may file an amicus brief which describes the Division’s position on any issue raised by a final order of a hearing panel. The Division’s brief must be filed within 20 days after the filing of the appellant’s brief.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.605  Review hearings: Setting; notice. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  After the date for the filing of a reply brief has passed, the Commission will set the matter for a review hearing to be conducted as soon as practicable.

2.  The review hearing must be held at such time and place as the Commission prescribes. At least 15 days before the date set for the review hearing, the Commission will notify in writing each party of record of the date. Written notice of the review hearing may be served by delivery personally to each party or by mailing the notice by certified mail to the last known address of each party.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.610  Review hearings: Oral argument. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  The Commission may, in the written notice described in NAC 116.605, provide for oral argument at the review hearing. The written notice must state whether the oral argument is limited to a particular issue or inquiry.

2.  Unless extended by the Commission, an oral argument will be limited to 10 minutes.

3.  The Commission may allow the Division to participate as an amicus party at oral argument.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.615  Review hearings: Issuance of written decision. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  The Commission will render a written decision on any appeal within 30 days after the review hearing and will notify the parties to the proceedings, in writing, of its ruling, order or decision within 15 days after it is made.

2.  The Commission may affirm, reverse or modify a decision of the hearing panel.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.620  Review of final order of hearing panel not appealed by party. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  If a final order of a hearing panel is not appealed to the Commission by a party and if:

(a) The Chairman determines that the Commission should review the final order; or

(b) A member of the Commission makes a written or oral request to the Chairman that the Commission review the final order,

Ê the Chairman of the Commission shall, not later than 7 days after the date that a final order may be appealed by a party pursuant to NRS 116.675, direct the Division to provide written notice to all parties that the Commission will review the final order at the next meeting of the Commission.

2.  Any final order by a hearing panel which is under review by the Commission pursuant to this section is stayed until the Commission issues its ruling, order or decision.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.625  Payment of costs for transcript of hearing. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)

1.  Except as otherwise provided in this section, a party which seeks a transcript of its hearing must pay the reasonable costs of transcription.

2.  If the Commission determines that a transcript is reasonably necessary for a party for a review hearing, the Commission will pay the costs of transcription.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.630  Request for hearing prohibited after initiation of civil action or submission for mediation or arbitration. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)  A party may not request a hearing before the Commission or a hearing panel if a civil action based upon the same claim has already been initiated in any court in this State or has already been submitted to mediation or arbitration pursuant to the provisions of NRS 38.300 to 38.360, inclusive.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

NAC 116.635  Request for hearing prohibited for improper purpose. (NRS 116.615, 116.675)  A party shall not request a review hearing for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation.

(Added to NAC by Comm’n for Common-Interest Communities by R142-06, eff. 12-7-2006)

May 23, 2010

CHAPTER 53 Message to the Neighbors from Jim Burneson. This Message will be inserted In the June Dam East Newsletter

To: my neighbors in the Dam East Homeowner Association

I am solely responsible for the content in this message. The Dam East HOA is not responsibility for the information in this publication.      From: Jim Burneson 12641 E Bates Cir

This letter is to clear up past slander and bring to your attention violations against you by past and present Board of Directors of this HOA. You as a member are personally responsible for the actions of your Board of Directors past and present.

1. I am not a crook nor have I stolen money from anyone.  Lawyers and board members who keep the books of our HOA from being inspected by you the membership and me have circulated lies about me to control this HOA.

2. Over in excess of $300,000 has been stolen from this HOA but can’t be confirmed without an open inspection of the books. I have fought for 10 years to inspect the books as required by our Bylaws and the boards with lawyer’s help have denied this right. Without open inspection with no restrictions to see the books the crooks will continue to empty your treasury.

3. The recession has been hard on all home values. Some prices have dropped 20% or more. This loss is not just due to the recession.  Most realtors in our area will not show homes in the Dam East HOA because of its past and present reputation. Realtors don’t want an unhappy buyer due to the dictatorial attitude of the present board who are still hiding the books. Who wants to live in an HOA where the Lawyer president put a HOA member in jail for calling him a tort twister? Answer no one. If our HOA is not shown to buyers it reduces the chances of a sale. It will take years to overcome this denial of an open market value of your homes. The members must demand all books open for inspection by any member can help reverse this problem. The first step in becoming a slum is we now have Section 8 housing in the Dam HOA allowing renters to pay $60.00 a mouth and Obama pays the balance. The acclaimed wall on Yale and Peoria will do nothing to increase our values except houses on the fence line. Interior houses get no benefit in value from this wall.

4. I have been denied my rights to Freedom of Speech since Jake Hummel lawyer became president in 2001. I was sentenced to a 60-day jail term to shut me up.  It didn’t work. It has now spawned an $8 million pending lawsuit against the Association.  You as members of this HOA are personally liable for everything the Board of Directors approves or does without approval.  Jake Hummel and Finn Larson Treasurer sign all checks from 2001 to 2007 without Board of Directors approval. Jake Hummel as a lawyer claimed he didn’t need board approval to sign checks as required by our Bylaws. He ruled as a lawyer not by our Covenants and Bylaws.

5. Issuing checks not approved by the board is theft for the Officers and especially the lawyers who were paid for court hearings and collections against the membership.  Hide checks paid to lawyers and it is not listed in the minutes of the monthly board meeting. Ask the board what is the entry of “Receivables”   $81,611.45 in the newsletter?  Open the books and we will find why this secret hasn’t been answered. This money may not be collectable that’s why it grows every year.

6. I won an election to the Board of Directors but was denied being seated because Jake Hummel and Finn Larsen decided to leave Finn on the board an extra year beyond his elected term. When this was proven Jake Hummel removed Finn and appointed another director in place of me.  The next election I am already elected to my past term because Jake Hummel and the board of director illegally denied me my right to be seated as a Director.

7. Jake Hummel continues to control the Current Board of Directors to keep the books away from any inspection by the membership. That’s why Mrs. Hummel is a director to protect her husband Jake Hummel from being exposed as a crook. Directors are supposed to represent the interest of the membership. From my observations none of the board members represent you while trying to keep the truth from coming out about the past and present board actions.

8. I filed a complaint with the Attorney General against David Kinney and company Cherry Creek HOA Professionals.  It is for Theft, and Extortion. This complaint is posted on my website at www.court-house.com go to Chapter 50 to review the complaint. The Attorney General recently told me they would not accept complaints about HOAs because there are no laws that protect HOAs. That’s why the crooks know they can steal our money and nothing will happen.

9. Board of Directors of this HOA have misrepresented their actions and hid the books to prevent the membership from knowing what is going on. I tried to stop this misrepresentation for over 10 years and been defeated by lies and slander by members of this HOA who will be charged for their lies in court. Almost all actions taken by the Board of Directors from 2001 to the present was not approved by a vote of the board in a schedule board meeting and entered in the minutes of the meeting. Right now the board has without any board approval of record authorized James Wilder HOA attorney to foreclose on my home not for any money owed this association but for money owed Jeffrey Lane. The membership is paying for this lawsuit and it’s not for your money but an outside lawyer. Now you see why the books are closed. This lawsuit will cost you the members $50,000 or more in damages because the money claimed in the lawsuit was never approved by a motion and vote of the board. That’s how crooked your Board of Directors are. This is how you can stop this abuse.

10. Call a Realtor for an appraisal of your home if you haven’t had one within the last 3 years. You might be in for a real surprise. Values of the past are not the case now!  Be brave ask for your rights.

CUT ALONG THE LINE HAND DELIVER TO  12641 E BATES CIR.

PROXY

First step to correcting The Loss Of Equity In Your Sale Price Problem By Filling Out The Following Demand To The Board Of Directors. It Doesn’t Cost You Anything.  The answers are in the books hidden since 2000.

Date _________ 2010

I ___________________________________     _____________________________________

Print  Name                                                                  HOA Address

By means of this proxy, I demand all members of this HOA including James Burneson have the right to review our HOA books from 2001 to the present as allowed by our Bylaws. The books to be on display in the basement of the clubhouse with arrangements for a posted”Open for inspection four hours each day.”  If records are missing, they are to be replaced or acquired by this Board to include bank statements for past years. This OPEN BOOKS action is to be completed within one month of the date of this proxy. Members have this right of inspection of all records without restriction by the Board. Read the Bylaws.

Do Not Send This Proxy To The Board Or Management Company. The Proxy can get lost.  Please Hand Deliver TO 12641 E BATES CIR. An envelop will hang on the front door for deposit after June 15, 2010

By___________________________________ Date _______________2010

April 5, 2010

CHAPTER 55. ATTORNEY R.L. STEENROD DENVER COLORADO

Filed under: Denver Court System,LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 9:27 am

Coming soon a review of Mr. Steerod’s litigation in Denver Probate Court and his collection of properties from the Probate Courts.

October 29, 2009

LETTER TO MR. GARY TOBEY

Filed under: LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 12:55 am

April 15, 2009

Mr. Gary Tobey

Tobey & Toro, P.C.

6855 S. Havana St, Suite 630

Centennial, CO 80112-3813

Printed on the Internet www.court-house.com Chapter 33.

Re: April 9, 2009 the Crooked Election of Woodstream Falls Condos approved and managed by Mr. Tobey.

I had the unfortunate experience of attending the elections for the Board of Directors of the subject condos. Mr. Tobey’s action since the first of the year has been to deny a fair election which would remove the present Board of Directors and his position as attorney for the HOA.

With a change in the Board, a complete audit of the books will occur and Mr. Tobey and the Board of Directors (Mr. Barry McConnell, Professor at University of Colorado at Denver and Pansy Morris) will be held accountable for their theft of funds from the HOA.

Mr. Tobey, information about your actions has been received you have been paying yourself $10,000 a month from the General Funds. There is no record of the Board’s approval for these payments. Mr. McConnell and Ms. Morris also are receiving payments of $7,890 and $3,500 respectfully. The Board of Directors isn’t allowed to receive payments from an HOA as Property Manager and Maintenance Manager.  But if your HOA attorney is Mr. Tobey and all three of you are sucking money out of the HOA – anything goes.  These three have to stick together to keep the books hidden from the membership.

Under the control of you Mr. Tobey, the Board refused the member’s request to see the books and to verify the proxies they claimed they had for the second election presented at the the first election where this board cancelled the election because the board lost.

To help hide the books and proxies from the membership the standard trick of crooked Board of Directors is to hire a CPA firm who will for a fee hold off requests from the membership while they as CPAs claim to be neutral in the election.

This honor went to a firm named:

Saltzman Hamma Nelson Massaro LLP CPA

1660 Lincoln Street Suite 2000

Denver, CO 80264

This firm received a retainer of $5,000 to answer and hide all information Mr. Tobey told them not to allow out of the office.  Can anyone imagine why this service costs $5,000?  Well for this fee a CPA firm will prove that 2+2 = 5. A Mr. White of the CPA firm proceeded to stop providing any information until the day of the election.  The Board had all the phone numbers and names of owners to pressure them for their proxies in order to elect the same three above. (Mr. McConnell’s term as a director had not expired).

During the election Mr. White while acting as Election Chairman was presented with a Motion by Jim Kreutz Esq. (lawyer for the candidates Forrest Group) to reject certain proxies which had not been proven to be valid.  After an embarrassing moment the motion was rejected by Mr. White who had no authority to reject anything. I objected and Mr. Tobey claimed the law allowed Mr. White to reject motions from the floor, I then demanded he cite the law.  Naturally Mr. Tobey tried to do so verbally but I made him provide the Statute in writing.  He quoted “CRS 38-33.3-310. There is no reference in the CPA’s Commitment Letter that outlines their duties of this assignment beyond counting the votes of the election and answering request for records from the membership. I have a copy of the Commitment letter. They as a CPA firm has no authority to deny anything from the membership from the floor offered in a Special Meeting and seconded by the multiple Proxy holders.

In addition, the $5,000 payment to Mr. White of Salitzman, Hamma, Nelson, Massaro LLP did not provide an honest election.  The entire staff of this CPA firm collected the ballots and went to a closed room to count the ballots. There was no member of the association in the room as a witness to the counting.  The CPA staff also had blank ballets with them during the counting of member’s ballots.  That makes the entire election illegal and has to be voided by the Association.  A new election without any contamination by you, McConnell or Pansy Moore must be held to make it honest without a $5,000 bribe to the CPAs.

But according to Tobey’s law you can railroad any election to protect yourself from self incrimination which means you are not representing the HOA who is paying you $10,000-$20,000 a month without approval by an independent Board of Directors.  Statute on theft says “Anything received of value without authorization”. Mr. Tobey is working to hide his illegal actions which he has been doing for years claiming to represent the Association of an HOA.  This is one of the few representations by a lawyer where he can legally screw his contracted client, the membership of the HOA while paying himself any fees he wants.

WARNING:   Any HOA who has Tobey & Toro hired as their law firm needs to audit their books for as long as this law firm has been involved. An Audit of an HOA does not have to be by a CPA but can be done by a Public Accountant.  The audit is to check the balance of the books and whether or not the Board of Directors approve all the checks written in payment for expenses to include the Lawyer, Property Manager, and CPA.   The books of an HOA are not complicated unless the Treasurer is writing checks on the Bad Debit account or other accounts not used for expenses.

This is an example of what happens when the State Legislature passed a law without reading it by Morgan Carroll 06-89. This law was written by the local CAI chapter which Mr. Tobey is a long term member.  Most of the lawyers and property managers in the HOA business are crooks and need to be put in Jail.  The rape and plunder of HOAs can only be stopped when HOAs are put under the protection of the Real Estate Commission and get the abuse controlled by a State Agency instead of lawyers in County Court. All property managers must be licensed by the Real Estate Commission just like Real Estate Brokers. There is too much money involved to allow individuals to manage these funds without State oversight.

Mr. Tobey I am asking that you resign from this HOA; if you do not, you will be in court defending yourself and not Woodstream Falls Condos.

I am forwarding this letter via the internet to the Attorney General requesting he open a Grand Jury investigation starting with the leader of license law abusers Tobey and Toro law firm.

Jim Burneson

burnesonj@msn.com

October 28, 2009

RATE THE COURTS NEW WEBSITE

Filed under: LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 9:40 pm

RATE THE COURTS IS A NEW WEBSITE THAT ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO GIVE A RATING TO JUDGES ACROSS ALL STATE COURTS.  Go to following site:

www.ratethecourts.com

RATE YOUR HOA

Filed under: LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 9:34 pm

An HOA MEMBER can list his/her HOA and give it a rating.  If the ratings prove poor the buyers will not purchase in those HOAs whose Board of Directors forgot who they represent as Directors. Many Directors don’t represent the membership but they let lawyers and property managers abuse the members for their profit.  The Courts and State Legislature also forgot who they represent.  IT’S THE MEMBERSHIP WHO OWNS THE HOA THAT ARE TO BENEFIT NOT THE LAWYERS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS.

Go to www.rateyourhoa.com  click on demo to  view how the rating works.

SAKTZMAN HAMMA NELSON MASSARO LLP CPA

Filed under: LATEST NEW POSTINGS — Tags: — admin @ 10:31 pm

Saltzman Hamma Nelson Massaro LLP CPA

1660 Lincoln Street Suite 2000

Denver, CO 80264

This firm received a retainer of $5,000 to answer and hide all information Mr. Tobey told them not to allow out of the office.  Can anyone imagine why this service costs $5,000?  Well for this fee a CPA firm will prove that 2+2 = 5. A Mr. White of the CPA firm proceeded to stop providing any information until the day of the election.  The Board had all the phone numbers and names of owners to pressure them for their proxies in order to elect the same three above. (Mr. McConnell’s term as a director had not expired).

During the election Mr. White while acting as Election Chairman was presented with a Motion by Jim Kreutz Esq. (lawyer for the candidates Forrest Group) to reject certain proxies which had not been proven to be valid.  After an embarrassing moment the motion was rejected by Mr. White who had no authority to reject anything. I objected and Mr. Tobey claimed the law allowed Mr. White to reject motions from the floor, I then demanded he cite the law.  Naturally Mr. Tobey tried to do so verbally but I made him provide the Statute in writing.  He quoted “CRS 38-33.3-310. There is no reference in the CPA’s Commitment Letter that outlines their duties of this assignment beyond counting the votes of the election and answering request for records from the membership. I have a copy of the Commitment letter. They as a CPA firm has no authority to deny anything from the membership from the floor offered in a Special Meeting and seconded by the multiple Proxy holders.

In addition, the $5,000 payment to Mr. White of Salitzman, Hamma, Nelson, Massaro LLP did not provide an honest election.  The entire staff of this CPA firm collected the ballots and went to a closed room to count the ballots. There was no member of the association in the room as a witness to the counting.  The CPA staff also had blank ballets with them during the counting of member’s ballots.  That makes the entire election illegal and has to be voided by the Association.  A new election without any contamination by you, McConnell or Pansy Moore must be held to make it honest without a $5,000 bribe to the CPAs.

But according to Tobey’s law you can railroad any election to protect yourself from self incrimination which means you are not representing the HOA who is paying you $10,000-$20,000 a month without approval by an independent Board of Directors.  Statute on theft says “Anything received of value without authorization”. Mr. Tobey is working to hide his illegal actions which he has been doing for years claiming to represent the Association of an HOA.  This is one of the few representations by a lawyer where he can legally screw his contracted client, the membership of the HOA while paying himself any fees he wants.

WARNING:   Any HOA who has Tobey & Toro hired as their law firm needs to audit their books for as long as this law firm has been involved. An Audit of an HOA does not have to be by a CPA but can be done by a Public Accountant.  The audit is to check the balance of the books and whether or not the Board of Directors approve all the checks written in payment for expenses to include the Lawyer, Property Manager, and CPA.   The books of an HOA are not complicated unless the Treasurer is writing checks on the Bad Debit account or other accounts not used for expenses.

This is an example of what happens when the State Legislature passed a law without reading it by Morgan Carroll 06-89. This law was written by the local CAI chapter which Mr. Tobey is a long term member.  Most of the lawyers and property managers in the HOA business are crooks and need to be put in Jail.  The rape and plunder of HOAs can only be stopped when HOAs are put under the protection of the Real Estate Commission and get the abuse controlled by a State Agency instead of lawyers in County Court. All property managers must be licensed by the Real Estate Commission just like Real Estate Brokers. There is too much money involved to allow individuals to manage these funds without State oversight.

Mr. Tobey I am asking that you resign from this HOA; if you do not, you will be in court defending yourself and not Woodstream Falls Condos.

I am forwarding this letter via the internet to the Attorney General requesting he open a Grand Jury investigation starting with the leader of license law abusers Tobey and Toro law firm.

Jim Burneson

burnesonj@msn.com

Powered by WordPress