Can HOA use radar guns to catch speeders?

Q: Our homeowners association notified us they bought a radar gun and are going to have board members randomly set up to catch speeders. The posted speed limit is 15 miles per hour (Henderson speed signs). If someone is caught speeding, the HOA will impose fines in accordance with the Henderson Municipal Court fees (they attached the Henderson schedule, 1-10 miles is over $160 fine). If someone speeds and they are visitors of an HOA member, the HOA member will be assessed, even though they were not the speeder.

Our recourse is to attend the next board meeting to appeal. The board members are the people issuing the fines so what chance do we stand.

It seems a violation of the fifth and 14th amendments that our due process of having a motor vehicle violation (which is what it really is!) is not being heard in a court of law and an impartial judge hearing the matter. We should be given the opportunity to have viable evidence presented and given the right to defend ourselves. Also, in a court of law, there is the opportunity to have the case tossed, dismissed or negotiated. The HOA does not have the legal right to stop or detain so how can they prove who was driving (we are required to register our license plates with the HOA). We should not be liable for the actions of someone else who might be driving our car or visiting us. I believe that is illegal.

A: This is so not a good idea on so many levels. I would highly recommend you contact the Henderson Police Department to find out what the association can and cannot do as to the use of a radar gun.

A number of legislative years ago, there was a proposed Nevada Revised Statutes 116 law which would have allowed homeowner associations to utilize radar guns as a means of documenting speeders within their communities, with the ultimate goal of reducing speeding. This proposed law was defeated. You raise many of the same issues the opponents of this proposed law brought to the legislative hearings. Although NRS 116 does not specifically address radar guns, the fact that the proposed law was defeated should be taken into consideration.

NRS 459.920 pertains to prerequisites for the operation or display of radar guns or similar devices of which I have included follows:

A person or governmental entity shall not operate or display or cause to be operated or displayed a radar gun or similar device unless it is:

(a) Or was at the time of purchase, on the Conforming Product List of the International Association of Chiefs of Police; and

(b) Inspected at least every 3 years to determine whether its level of power and structural integrity comply with the minimum performance specifications for that model established by the United States Department of Transportation.

Any person or governmental entity that causes to be operated or displayed a radar gun or similar device that emits nonionizing radiation shall adopt procedures for its use that protect the health and safety of the operator of the radar gun or device.

A peace officer must successfully complete a course of training in the proper use of a radar gun or similar device approved by the Peace Officers’ Standards and Training Commission before the peace officer may be authorized to operate a radar gun or similar device. If a peace officer of the state of Nevada must successfully complete a training course in the proper use of a radar gun, it would only seem logical that a board member of an association (assuming it is legal for a board member who is not a peace officer to use a radar gun) would also be required to complete such a training course.

Q: I still do not understand how the board can make decisions without homeowners approval. My thinking is that the board should work for the homeowners not for themselves. The board should have some oversight from the homeowners and not just voting board members into office. There is so much room for board members to abuse their positions through conflict of interest, kickbacks and fraud with no watchdog in place.

We have a three-member board that does not send out summaries of agenda items, only makes homeowners aware of agenda topics just prior to board meeting when they vote on those items. The worst part is only three to four homeowners show up at these meetings, which gives the board more freedom. After one such meeting where two homeowners questioned agency items at length trying to understand the details and how it affects homeowners, the board limited the time that each homeowner could speak to three minutes total on agenda items! If there are seven agenda items homeowners may not be able to speak on all of the items. Is this the norm for HOA boards? Should we just go along with the board’s actions to get along with the board?

A: Association government is mirrored after our state and federal governments; it is a republic form of government whereby the homeowners vote for directors who are allowed by state law and by the association’s governing documents to make certain decisions on behalf of the membership. There are specific state laws that place restrictions on spending, from the ratification of the budget and the bidding process. Governing documents can also restrict associations as to the spending of capital expenditures and obtaining loans, which would require homeowner vote. Under the law, both the board of directors, as well as the community manager have fiduciary responsibilities to the membership which is the highest form of legal relationships between two parties. There are definitely consequences for abuse.

There are “watchdogs” in place, that of the Nevada Real Estate Division, the Commission for Common-Interest Communities and Condominium Hotels and the homeowners. Homeowners have the right to receive financial information from the association, such as the income and expense statements, the check registers, copies of the invoices and copies of contracts. Homeowners have the ultimate power of removing abusive directors through the recall process or through the election process. When you state that only a few homeowners attend board meetings, it shows that part of the problem is the apathy of your membership. It only takes one member to “raise the red flag” with specific documentation for the Division and the Commission to become involved in possible conflicts of interest and kickbacks.

Agendas are supposed to be specific as to any decisions that are to be made at the board meeting, such as review and approve the proposed some contract or expense.

There are two homeowner forums, the first one pertaining to the agenda and the second one on issues that homeowners want to bring to the attention of the board. There are associations that have town hall meetings prior to the board meetings to review items that will be discussed at the meeting. Some associations have detailed information in their newsletters pertaining to upcoming issues to be placed on board agendas.

There are time limits for participation by the membership at a board of director’s meeting in the same manner if you were to attend a session of the city or county commission meetings. For many associations, there is a legitimate time constraint due to the length of items on the agenda and the renting of their meeting space, which may be only for a two hour session. Common sense is needed in the conducting meetings. There are legitimate issues on both sides, a controlling board which strictly limits the time of each member who wants to address the board and a homeowner who looses control when addressing the board.

I realize that the system is not perfect and often times is frustrating for both board members as well as homeowners. Open communication can help resolve your concerns and it all starts with membership participation.