SB 417

Enrolled and delivered to Governor. 

Click here to leave an opinion on NELIS and get stats for the bill

Click here for the full bill text

 

I and many homeowners strongly OPPOSED this bill.  SB 417 crosses a long held red line.  The legislation sought to reverse action over a decade old, that protected owners from potential abuse by deep pockets and “bully” association boards. As proposed SB 417 would have discouraged many people from questioning or commenting on the activities, or actions of their community manager, or actions of their board of directors. If it had passed as originally proposed, rouge HOA boards and/or their proxies would have been able to target and chill the voices of owner opposition using litigation. This immense power proposed in the hands of volunteer community boards offended first amendment rights, election rights and more. The side effects of this legislation, if it has passed as proposed were far more dangerous than the nominal red herring problem the industry lobbyists' (in this case CAI) claimed it would target. When your board or its proxies start levying litigation, not just annoying fines, targeting you for exercising your rights, things will change dramatically. 

 

The bill was amendment. Fortunately, a small handful of individuals became aware of the proposed changes and through an informal network acted. Public testimony followed at the State Senate Judiciary Committee meeting. While on the Senate side the bill was passed out of committee, before the bill was forwarded to the Assembly counterpart major changes were made. But the issue will resurface. With owners lacking a real voice, the proposals advanced by special interests will no doubt try again after its unsuccessful effort this session. Read my full op-ed by clicking here. 

 

The bill as now enrolled deleted most objectionable and damaging changes proposed.   

​

• Communication made in connection with an issue of public interest in a forum open to the public will remain immune from civil liability. Owner appropriately seeking transparency from their HOA will remain immune from litigation as the Nevada Supreme Court found (see Kosor v Olympia).

• HOA board's will not be able allowed, as initially proposed, to unilaterally and nefariously mischaracterization an owner's lawful efforts seeking transparency, into actionable violations, like "retaliation" and others. This would have been used to silence owners and serve a blatant side step of Nevada's current anti-SLAPP laws. 

• However, the bill does aid HOA boards so inclined to stonewall owners’ seeking transparency. Owners have a right to inspect association records both under the law and through their declarations (CC&Rs). However, enforcing this right, especially where a board sees your record inspection as adverse to their interests and/or business model obtaining what is rightly yours, will continue to no small feat. 

• It will also allow our sole HAO regulator, Nevada Real Estate Division (NRED) to simply ignore complaints it desires with no accountability. Frankly, NRED is already doing a good job turning a blind eye'. 

​