Advocate for homeowners files ethics complaint

Somebody’s got to fight for the little guy, and when it comes to homeowners’ rights, Jonathan Friedrich looks like Superman — just a little on the short and thin side, and without the muscle.

The outspoken lobbyist for homeowners’ rights on June 27 filed an ethics complaint against the Common Interest Community Commission, and on Tuesday served Real Estate Division administrator Gail Anderson with a summons.

Friedrich alleges that Michael Buckley, chairman of the commission, has a conflict of interest because he’s a partner in the Las Vegas law firm Jones Vargas, which lobbies on behalf of Red Rock Financial, the collection division of RMI property management.

Buckley had a pecuniary interest in writing and voting for adoption of R199-09, a regulation that deals with collection fees on delinquent homeowner association assessments, the complaint with the Nevada Commission on Ethics stated.

He should have recused himself from voting and his vote should be nullified, Friedrich said Thursday in the office of his Rancho Bel Air home, which was stacked with legal documents and books on NRS 116, the Nevada Revised Statute governing common-interest communities, or HOAs.

"This thing is an incestuous relationship," Friedrich said. "Buckley voted in favor of this regulation. If that ain’t a conflict of interest, I don’t know what is."

Before the regulation was adopted, Buckley added 600 words without approval of the Legislative Counsel Bureau, Friedrich alleges. Buckley recessed the item at a Dec. 7 adoptions hearing to give the commission time to review the changed language, the minutes of the meeting showed.

Among the proposed changes to the regulation was a section that states the amount charged by collection agencies shall not exceed $1,950. Also, no collection fees would be charged for 15 days following a request for payoff from the unit’s owner or agent.

Buckley said he’s aware of Friedrich’s allegations, but declined comment on them.

The petition, filed on behalf of Friedrich by Liberty Law Foundation attorney James Adams, was heard by the commission on Tuesday, which basically denied Friedrich’s request to repeal R199-09, Buckley said.

"The fees were agreed on at the March (2010) meeting based on meetings with collection agency representatives in October 2009," Buckley said Friday. "All of those amounts were agreed to by the commissioners. One of the arguments was the commission sets collection fees and charges from the HOA. That’s not true. The HOA sets the charges. The statute says the commission regulates reasonable collection fees that homeowners can be charged."

Real Estate Division administrator Anderson told the Review-Journal she could not comment on any of several lawsuits filed by Friedrich in which she is named as a party.

She said the commission heard Friedrich’s request to appeal the regulation Tuesday, and the commission’s counsel opined that any complaint should be filed with the state ethics commission.

The HOA regulatory commission voted not to repeal the regulation, but in the next agenda item that also concerned R199-09, agreed to revisit the regulation through the workshop process, which involves public hearings, Anderson said.

She would not comment on Friedrich’s ethics complaint.

"I have three commissions and I understand clearly everyone’s role and what my role is," Anderson said. "They don’t hire me and they don’t fire me I don’t report to them. I report to the Department of Business and Industry."

Caren Jenkins, executive director of the Commission on Ethics, said Friedrich’s complaint will be investigated and referred to the commission panel to determine if there is just and sufficient cause to hold a hearing.

Contact reporter Hubble Smith at hsmith@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0491.