Letters

Vitez: SCHOA, county not doing their jobs in Sun City

Posted 1/18/23

Would you feel comfortable if you had assets worth millions of dollars and the responsibility for protecting them were elected non-legal, volunteer, do-gooders?

This story requires a subscription for $5.99/month.

Already have an account? Log in to continue.

Current print subscribers can create a free account by clicking here.

Otherwise, click here to subscribe.

To Our Valued Readers –

Visitors to our website will be limited to five stories per month unless they opt to subscribe. The five stories do not include our exclusive content written by our journalists.

For $5.99, less than 20 cents a day, digital subscribers will receive unlimited access to YourValley.net, including exclusive content from our newsroom and access to our Daily Independent e-edition.

Our commitment to balanced, fair reporting and local coverage provides insight and perspective not found anywhere else.

Your financial commitment will help to preserve the kind of honest journalism produced by our reporters and editors. We trust you agree that independent journalism is an essential component of our democracy. Please click here to subscribe.

Sincerely,
Charlene Bisson, Publisher, Independent Newsmedia

Please log in to continue

Log in
I am anchor
Letters

Vitez: SCHOA, county not doing their jobs in Sun City

Posted

Would you feel comfortable if you had assets worth millions of dollars and the responsibility for protecting them were elected non-legal, volunteer, do-gooders?

Well, that’s what we currently have in Sun City, they are the Sun City Home Owners Association. SCHOA has nine elected directors a hand full of employees for administration and compliance, plus general and marketing managers. They are held responsible for ensuring that the restrictions and requirements set forth in the Sun City covenants, conditions and restrictions are adhered to. Their operating budget is derived from $25 annual dues from about 7,000 members and income from their business and contractor advertising.

Sun City has collected many millions of dollars since day one, paid to Recreation Centers of Sun City. RCSC is not related to SCHOA and has no duties or authority regarding the CC&Rs. The money is used for recreation center areas.

There’s a lack of coordination between Maricopa County and SCHOA regarding permits. Maricopa County does not understand that CC&R’s overrule the county. The problem is the current SCHOA board of directors are not doing anything to solve the problem. Why are they not doing anything? They owe Sun City residents an answer for why this is not being done.

As a result, we now have an apparent building violation that occurred because SCHOA says that some of our requirements and regulations are not enforceable and nothing seems to be done to correct this problem. They should look into “implied consent.” The following paragraphs addresses implied consent.                                                         

When a property is sold, the buyer is given a document that identifies Sun City covenants, conditions and restrictions. They are also given a document that talks about Luke Air Force base and the noise the planes make. A buyer has the opportunity to object to these documents. If they do not, there is an implied consent, meaning that they will abide with the contents. Implied consent is a legal term that is defined as an agreement that is inferred from signs, actions or facts. It can also be inferred by inaction or silence. The term is very broad and widely applicable when dealing with criminal law.

A huge warehouse-like garage was built in the backyard of a home on West Manzanita Drive. The buyer apparently ignored the requirements and restrictions stated in the documents they were given to review at closing. The new home buyer apparently did not object to these documents and therefore legally gave their implied consent that they would abide with the contents.

Maricopa County has its own set of restrictions and requirements. Some of them are identified by development standards listed below.

In Table 18.80.020.B Development Standards — Detached Accessory Buildings, Specific Criteria states all buildings are limited to 15 feet in height; must have a setback of three feet for buildings 120 square feet or less, five feet for more than 120 square feet and the same for the main building per zoning district’s development standards; and a rear yard area 30% of the rear setback area.

The buyer apparently ignored these requirements. Why didn’t Maricopa County building inspectors address these apparent violations? Why doesn’t SCHOA address these apparent violations? Why is SCHOA not held accountable for their lack of action?

It’s time for Sun City to wake up and see what is happening to our community.

Editor’s Note: The Independent welcomes all points of view. Email your opinions, pro or con, to AzOpinions@iniusa.org.

SCHOA, county, jobs, Sun City