The below derogatory letter was received by Mr. Duncan, leader of the Concerned Neighbors of ArrowCreek (CNA), restricting the First Amendment right of freedom of speech to provide counter-arguments towards the purchase of the golf course/land or any other board issues.
The onerous restrictions being imposed by the ACHOA Board Of Directors applies to all owners within ArrowCreek. If we want property values to remain stable, actions needed to counter this policy/directive will definitely get the attention of local media.
Back in March CNA got the reading on this from the State of Nevada – The law is silent. There are no legal steps to prove existence of an organization under NRS-116. Please reread Speed Bumps and the Fog of Battle. So, the ACHOA believes it has pushed the issue back. We’ll just have to wait and see…..
ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY.
AC 7-22-15 RON DUNCAN – Response to Equal Time
July 22, 2015
RE: Nevada Revised Statute Section 116.31035 (Request for Equal Time)
Dear Mr. Duncan,
The Board of Directors for the ArrowCreek Homeowners Association, Inc. (ACHOA) have reviewed your numerous assertions concerning access to “Equal Space Communications” as detailed within Section 116.31035 of the Nevada Revised Statutes. As such, the ACHOA Board has determined that it is necessary to clearly state its position concerning the publication of written communications “under the same terms and conditions” and limited to the same “equal space”.
Despite your claims to the contrary, neither you nor anyone else has established that Concerned Citizens (“CNA”) is an organization of any kind recognized by any authority. At this time, the ACHOA Board has not recognized CNA as an organization under Nevada law. Therefore, there is no entity that qualifies to request any action to be taken by the Board under NRS § 116.31035. Furthermore, even if such an organization can be established, you will have to establish that you are, in fact, a representative of the organization and are authorized to act on its behalf. Unless, and until those two requirements have been met, your equal space written communications will not be published pursuant to subsection (1) of NRS §116.31035.
If you do eventually establish that such an organization exists to the satisfaction of the ACHOA Board and under Nevada law, and that you are its authorized representative, you must then provide the language you desire to have inserted or separately published in any ACHOA “official communication”. As unequivocally stated and required by NRS §116.31035, such language must be “. . . under the same terms and conditions” and is limited to “equal space”. There is NO PROVISION of Nevada law that allows you, even as a designated representative of an organization, to make any presentation at any meeting. The only remedy this section allows is that “…the official publication must, upon request and under the same terms and conditions, provide equal SPACE…” This request must be in writing and forwarded to the ACHOA Board for separate publication or inclusion in the ACHOA Official Communication. Proper vetting of the written request will occur prior to publication by the ACHOA Board. As a member, you are limited to member comments before or after a duly noticed meeting.
In addition, paragraph 2 of NRS § 116.31035 states that any ACHOA member may, if an official ACHOA Official Communication or Publication contains perceived views or opinions of the association that are contrary to the requesting ACHOA member’s views, request that the official publication provide the ACHOA member “EQUAL SPACE” under the same terms and conditions. The ACHOA member must cite, in writing, the specific view’s or opinion’s language from the Official Communication that the requesting member believes expresses a view or opinion that is contrary to the requesting member’s view or opinion. The ACHOA member must state in their written document the precise relief requested and detail the language under the same terms and conditions and within equal space as within the ACHOA Official Publication terminology. After proper vetting, the ACHOA Board will determine if the written request will be included within the Official Communication or Publication document or if the written document will be separately published as limited by the “EQUAL SPACE” requirements. The above is the current position of the ACHOA Board on these Official Communication or Publication issues pursuant to NRS § 116.31035, and as consistently cited by you in your direct communications to the ACHOA Board.
ArrowCreek Homeowners Association, Inc, Board of Directors
Although not an Arrow Creek resident, I completely empathize with your concern about BOD’s not recognizing, or supporting, the “equal space requirements” of NRS 116. Most homeowners are not even aware of its existence. Here in Somerset we faced a similar situation, which in the process of a court order, the judge opined:
“there is a reasonable probability that the plaintiffs will prevail on most of their claims for relief since it is apparent that the Board did not follow the requirements of NRS 116.31035 nor NRS.311(9) as they pertained to the vote on the CC&Rs amendment” and that “The response of the Board to the plaintiffs’ repeated requests for equal time to present their positions, in the Courts opinion, was disingenuous.”
The net result of homeowner complaints was that the Somersett BOD finally issued a policy defining the process for organizations and owners to exercise their rights under NRS 116.31035. Perhaps your BOD should do the same.
Great, so what this means in plain English is: we, the AC residents remain muzzled, being force fed propaganda speech by the board and their speakers, except for the three minutes we are allowed to speak. For enforcement, the board sics their lawyers on us. And all this in the best interest of our community? There must be a reason the board fears free speech and transparency. Yes, this website is good to have, but does it reach everyone, and should it have to replace a free discussion? Reading the last entries on this website I need to know: what can we do?
Thank goodness there are alternative forums like this one. Thanks, Ron.
Ron, Guess you are making a “difference”! I’d say unsigned letters are not valid. Ask Jeanne to re-send with all ACHOA BoD member signatures. Otherwise, how do you know it’s a valid communication?? I bet you don’t send out unsigned letters? Best Regards,
Funny you should ask. I received an ‘official’ hard copy with the same salutation. Guess nobody wanted to put their name to it or perhaps it was just a pass thru from the legal people.