Judge rules Mariposa must hold HOA board election for resident seat

RIO RANCHO — Mariposa, a community in the far reaches of Rio Rancho, will get a resident to sit on the Community Association board soon.

Judge Christopher Perez, with the 13th Judicial District Court in Sandoval County, granted a motion June 4 for the Mariposa Community Association to hold an election for a lot owner in Mariposa to sit on the association board within the next 60 days.

Residential lot owners and Mariposa Community Association members John Karris and Cassandra D’Antonio filed a civil complaint March 27 requesting relief in the form of a ruling.

The argument started in 2012, according to the complaint, when the High Desert, the original founder of the Mariposa East development, abandoned the development and filed for bankruptcy. High Desert subsequently sold Mariposa East to Arizona-based master developer, Harvard Investments.

The complaint states that Mariposa East was deannexed from the single Mariposa master-planned development, forming two separate and independent development agreements. One governed the development of Mariposa East, and another governed Mariposa West and Mariposa Preserve.

D’Antonio claimed that close to 50% of the 2,500 residential lots permitted for Mariposa East by the city of Rio Rancho are no longer owned Harvard Investments, noting that the 25% owned lot requirement for a local board member was met.

“The residents still have no representation on its HOA board, the Mariposa Community Association,” she stated.

Currently, the board is comprised of Harvard Investments employees who live in Arizona, according to D’Antonio.

“That all changed when Judge Christopher Perez of the 13th Judicial District Court ruled in our favor and gave the Mariposa Community Association (our HOA) 60 days to hold an election so that a private lot owner could be seated on our HOA board in accordance with the New Mexico HOA Act,” she said.

“This is a major victory for Mariposa lot owners who will finally be able to run for a seat on the board and vote for someone to represent their interests,” Karris said.

D’Antonio said not all residents were happy with the filing because the defendants were allegedly passing on their legal expenses to HOA members “and many wondered what we would gain if we won because the residents would still hold a minority one seat on a three-seat board.”

“Our response was always access, transparency and input,” she said.

Additionally, D’Antonio said if they didn’t get one seat now, they wouldn’t have a chance to get another seat when the 50% threshold is reached.

“We have many new residents who have lived in HOA communities before and who are surprised when they move in that our HOA isn’t run by residents,” she said.

She added that some buying homes say they would have “thought twice” about buying if they knew about the HOA.

Part of the complaint also references a letter from Attorney General Raul Torrez in response to an opinion request by the HOA and the NM HOA Act.

In that letter, Torrez concluded that as long as the 25% threshold is met for a board seat, Mariposa is entitled to an election within 60 days.

Mariposa Community Association and Mariposa East, both named in the suit as defendants, filed an answer to the complaint Feb. 19. The response calls D’Antonio and Karris’s filing “erroneous in its legal basis.”

Under the arguments and authorities portion of the response, the defendant argues that the 25% threshold hasn’t been met. They add that the 2,500 lots mentioned in the complaint is “legally and factually incorrect.”

The defense also claims that the attorney general opinion has “de minimis usefulness” in the case. In other words, because the AG cannot determine if the threshold is met, it is a moot point. Their response also included a similar letter from previous AG Hector Balderas in 2021.

“Determining whether a sufficient percentage of lots have been sold to someone other than the declarant, must take into account the total number of lots planned for the community, and is not restricted only those lots that have been developed, or lots that are owned by non-declarants,” it reads.

The defense states that the number of lots is 6,825 and that the numbers provided by Karris and D’Antonio do not meet 25%.

D’Antonio stated the threshold was met in 2021 and has surpassed that requirement to date.

Even though some residents speculated on the filing, D’Antonio says now people are celebrating the ruling.

“Because the judge ruled in our favor, many residents are celebrating this victory, which was a long time coming. There is much relief,” she said.

The Mariposa Community Association (HOA) did not respond to request for comment June 6.