Homeowners’ association managers want rules fine-tuned

Brian Seals

Tuesday, May 12, 1998 | 10:17 a.m.

New regulations requiring licensing of Nevada homeowners' association managers have many asking an age-old question: Which comes first, the experience or the license?

The state Division of Real Estate held hearings on the new regulations Monday as it fine-tunes them before they become effective July 1.

Among the hot topics was the question of who can apply for the license. As written, the regulations require applicants for a license to have been engaged in association management the immediate previous year -- or during two of the four years immediately preceding the application.

But how do people gain experience to have standing to apply for a licence?

The regulations include a provision saying the Real Estate Commission would consider other background and education that may be deemed equivalent to the education requirements in the new rules when considering whether to grant a license. But that was not enough to satisfy some of the roughly 50 people at the hearing who said that provision was subjective.

Many feared the experience requirement would be an obstacle to new people trying to get into the profession.

"I truly do not believe they have adequately addressed the chicken before the egg problem," said Pamela Scott-Olson.

Kevin Ruth of Thoroughbred Management suggested a two-tier system similar to engineering licenses in some states, where there is an intermediate apprentice-like license and a regular license.

Another much-mentioned concern had to do with simple wording of the regulations. The regulations refer to association managers as persons "engaged in property management for a common-interest community."

Property managers and association managers are two distinct vocations and many at the hearing wanted the regulations to reflect that distinction. Property managers work in all kinds of real estate management while association mangers deal generally deal with home and condominium owners.

"Those are two different worlds," said Don Barry of EBMC Management. "The new definition is clearly that of a property manager."

Another area of concern was an assessment that would fund an ombudsman's office, a new state position. As written, the law mandates that associations that charges an annual assessment of $500 would be subject to a $3 fee per household to fund the office. Those that charge less would not pay the state fee.

"I'm concerned about the fee not being charged to all associations," said David Causey. "It doesn't seem fair that they (those that charge less) would be getting a free ride."

This will mark the first time association managers have had to get certified by the state, though many already have special designations through private education programs. A separate measure for property mangers would require them to get a property management license on top of a real estate license.

Both require continuing education of 24 hours for property managers and 30 hours for association managers. A hearing on new regulations for property managers is set for May 18.

While the state finishes the regulations, it's also scrambling to fill the ombudsman post, which is to be filled the same day the regulations take effect. The post would work to resolve complaints from the approximately 1,000 homeowner associations in the state.