The age overlay in layman's terms...

Discussion in 'Sun City General Discussions' started by BPearson, Jan 31, 2023.

  1. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    I'm going to be brutally blunt and somewhat harsh on myself: Explaining the federal age overlay and how it works isn't my job or even my place to do it. I'm no expert on it and frankly this discussion belongs in the laps of those who administer it. I'm in over my head, but someone needs to step up and give the community's bickering some context.

    On the Facebook Sun City Chat Arizona page i help out as an administrator and on several other social media sites i don't participate in, the comments have gotten ugly. The keyboard warriors are out in force as they weigh in on underage people who are applying for variances to be allowed to stay in Sun City with children under the legal age to live here of 19. In many ways, it has become toxic; from both sides.

    The first two were pretty cut and dried, as their applications with the county for variances were either denied or put on hold for short periods of time. In all likelihood both will be resolved with the home owners moving. Both caused a shit-storm of controversy and Sun City residents came out in force calling for the county to deny the variance.

    The third is more difficult because of ADA claims made in conjunction with the application for a variance. It is a complicated case and i have zero interest in getting into the nuances of it. The county will render a decision as they have the ultimate authority to do that. While SCHOA and our governing documents (CC&R's and deed restrictions) give them (SCHOA) the obligation to provide the necessary documentation to both the state and federal bodies on a yearly basis, the County can grant a variance and i see no way or reason for SCHOA to fight them over it. SCHOA (and all of Sun City) relies too heavily on the county for services.

    My goal/purpose here is to provide readers with the history and some background and then ultimately cuts from the pertinent statutes and the links where they can do what i have done numerous times over the years...go read what it says rather than just saying stuff that isn't true. Amazing how once you take the mystery out of the equation, everything becomes less frightening.

    When Sun City opened, the "recommended age" was 50. There were no legal statutes granting age protected status. The Del E Webb Development Corporation (DEVCO) knew that and it was why they never said you had to be 50, they sort of encouraged it as a new active way of life for seniors. From the very beginning everyone buying here assumed it was just for seniors 50 and older.

    So much so that when DEVCO needed a doctor, they hired Dr. Robert Stump who had a 10 year old son living with him in Sun City. Residents were up in arms over his being here. The company mailed out letters to every household and told residents how important it was he be allowed to stay. The story goes when Stump saved the life of one of the most vocal residents during a heart attack, the furor died down. Stump stayed and when he retired became just another resident.

    The issues of young people came to another head in the early 70's. There were some 50 school age children living in Sun City. Peoria was the school district they belonged to and with their growth they kept trying to pass school bonds. Sun City residents kept voting them down. By 1973 the community infighting was so bad legal actions were flying and the anger was all consuming.

    In 1974 an arrangement where Sun City and Youngtown were removed from the Peoria school district was worked out. In fact, they weren't in any school district, though both paid into the state general fund for schooling. If memory serves me, those with children in schools paid for their kids to attend. As a footnote, if you ever get a chance to take one of Ben Roloff's classes on the school battles, you won't regret it.

    The angst over young people has always been a heated and controversial issue. It wasn't until the Fair Housing Act: Housing For seniors was passed (i think 1983). It gave legal standing for seniors to "discriminate" in who could live in their community and at what age.

    Two senior communities in the East Valley quickly applied for protections under the law, collected signatures on petitions and were granted it. Sun City residents saw what had happened and called for SCHOA to do the same. They were hesitant and Sun City residents started a petition drive themselves which prompted SCHOA to get involved and push it over the threshold.

    At that point it was legally added to our deed restrictions and to our CC&R's. At least one person living in the household had to be 55 and no children for more than 90 days could live there per year. The law allows for up to 20% of the residents be under 55, but 80% has to be over. Ownership can be at any age. the criteria to live here is what matters when doing the yearly count.

    So we are really, REALLY clear, Youngtown never did this and it is why they lost their age overlay. Had Sun City residents not been so diligent, we would be in jeopardy as well. WE ARE NOT!

    I cannot emphasize that point enough. We have roughly 40,000 residents living in Sun City. That includes both attached and detached housing. The roughly 27,500 rooftops all are included in the percentages sent to both the state and the feds on a yearly basis by SCHOA. We historically are well over 90% and the last figures i heard was 95%.

    A single case will not force us to lose our age overlay, not even close. It will not force us to pay school taxes, nor will it force us to become incorporated and have to pay higher taxes. That said, there is a reason for Sun City residents to pay attention to these cases that come up before the county commissioners and speak out when they overstep their bounds.

    Sun City residents have always been protective of their "way of life." We are unique and most of us living here love what we have and don't want to lose it. Speaking out is their right, just as it is the right of a home buyer who applies for a variance. Civility should be the cornerstone of every discussion, debate or argument.

    Let me be clear, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Opinions are best served when you know the facts. When you add the history and understand the outcomes when decisions are rendered, it becomes much easier to accept whatever is decided. Nothing the county does will impact us in the immediate future. We need to stay involved and committed, but i will tell you point blank, i haven't lost a moments sleep over any of the requests for a variance.

    Hope that helps, in the next post i will copy some language and attach links so you can read them yourself.
     
    Janet Curry and SC Phx GenXer like this.
  2. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    First up let me cut and paste this section from The Fair Housing Act: Housing For Older Persons:
    The 55 or older exemption is the most common of the three.

    How to Qualify for the “55 or Older” Exemption
    In order to qualify for the "55 or older" housing exemption, a facility or community must satisfy each of the following requirements:

    • At least 80 percent of the units must have at least one occupant who is 55 years of age or older; and
    • The facility or community must publish and adhere to policies and procedures that demonstrate the intent to operate as "55 or older" housing; and
    • The facility or community must comply with HUD's regulatory requirements for age verification of residents.
    The "housing for older persons" exemption does not protect such housing facilities or communities from liability for housing discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, or national origin.

    You can find the link to the full article here.
     
    Janet Curry and SC Phx GenXer like this.
  3. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    This one is from the law firm of K&S (Krupnik and Speas).
    For an association to be able to prohibit children from living within its community, it must follow the rules and guidelines established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). The following is a summary of those guidelines:

    1. At least 80% of the units must be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older.

    (A) The association can be more restrictive than the HUD requirements, even requiring up to 100% of its units to be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older. However, the association must, at a minimum, comply with the 80% requirement.

    (B) HUD looks at occupancy, not ownership. Therefore, it does not matter if a unit is owned by a person under 55, so long as at least one of the people occupying the unit is 55 years of age or older.

    (C) HUD allows for certain units to be exempt from this requirement, such as a unit for an employee, or a unit occupied by individuals under 55 as a reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities.

    2. The association must intend and operate its facilities for persons 55 years of age or older, and must publish and adhere to policies and procedures demonstrating this intent.

    (A) HUD looks to various factors to determine whether the association has complied with this requirement, including the manner in which the community is described to prospective residents, any advertising designed to attract prospective residents, written rules, regulations, covenants, deed or other restrictions, actual practices of the community, and public posting in common areas of statements describing the community as housing for persons 55 years of age or older.

    (B) Avoid phrases like “adult living” or “adult community”.

    (C) The association should try to provide all occupants with its rules regarding age restriction, and inform realtors of this restriction.

    3. The association must verify that it complies with the occupancy requirement.

    (A) The association must have a procedure of routinely determining this information, such as at the time of sale or lease of a unit.

    (B) In addition, the association must perform regular updates of this information, by surveys or other reasonable means, to confirm that this information is still accurate. Such updates must be performed at least once every two (2) years.

    (C) A summary of this information must be made available for inspection by any person. However, the actual information gathered does not need to be made available.

    You can find the link here
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2023
    Janet Curry and SC Phx GenXer like this.
  4. SC Phx GenXer

    SC Phx GenXer New Member

    BPearson - Thank you for compiling and sharing all of this. The historical context and further legal clarity is helpful and appreciated. Personally, I couldn’t agree more with how essential facts and civility are during these types of contentious battles (And, yes, both sides). After all, we all want to emerge with a strong community.
     
  5. SnowBirdies

    SnowBirdies New Member

    Thank you for the history Bill!
    A concern that has not been addressed is one of precedent. Does it weaken our ability to enforce our CCRs if SCHOA or Condo HOAs give variances to the 19 year old age limit? In other words, if a variance is given for one child, what is the reason it wouldn’t be granted for the next child, and next child, and next child…
     
    Janet Curry likes this.
  6. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    It's a great question SB and welcome to TOSC. One of the reason we quit agreeing to requests for variances is all of them are attached to a legitimate story (sometimes sad, sometimes not), was just for that reason. Why was one better or worse than the next. Before 2006 SCHOA used to get the occasional request and from time to time would okay it. We just found it more fair to just say no. The more committed person found they could apply for a variance to the county and they most often, in conjunction with SCHOA, would deny it. This latest case will play out differently simply because of the circumstances (my best guest).

    The bigger issue you raised is precedent in condos. I have voiced my opinion to several SCHOA board members; the law can't tell you/us every housing unit has to be counted in the 80/20 calculations but you have no jurisdiction over detached housing (roughly 9000 units). It's illogical. Many condo associations (of the 384 of them in Sun City) have language specifying SCHOA as their governing body. Some belong to SCHOA as a body and so you understand, any effort to change their documents takes a vote of the membership (by state statute under Title 33) to do so. I'm more concerned by the answer it was okay by the condo board and apparently the answer that came from SCHOA.

    The bigger concern for me is this one case may be precedent for parents 55 and above with handicapped kids under 19 see Sun City as a cheap place to live. That said, obviously that number is very small and more importantly Sun City isn't what i would call "kid friendly" from an amenities of social standpoint. Ultimately this one case will not be the end of the world or have any real impact on those of us living here.
     
  7. IndependentCynic

    IndependentCynic Active Member

    How is this accomplished in SC? I've lived in my home here for 20+ years and don't recall ever being surveyed/questioned about the ages of those who live in my home other than via the 10-year federal census. My wife and I are both 70+, so there's no issue other than the curiosity of how the SCHOA performs this function in a manner that would hold up in a challenge by HUD or a court. EG, there used to be a rental home near us that was occupied for roughly 5-years by 3 people who appeared to be under 40. They were good neighbors and kept the house/grounds tidy. Supposedly their parent was the renter, but never lived there as far as I could tell.
     
  8. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    The RCSC yearly provides SCHOA with the data to send to the state and feds.
     
    Janet Curry likes this.
  9. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Let me clarify yet again, i profess to be no expert on the age overlay and how it is administered. I have a better than passing knowledge than most from my years on the SCHOA board (2006-2008) and the various assistance i have given them over the years (primarily committees and writing). When i answered IC above regarding where they get the data, i was speaking from the years i was on the board. I have no reason to believe any of that has changed.

    As i was thinking about his question and the information i posted and have read online, i was struck by something i may have misunderstood. I always believed it was the population (roughly 40,000) in Sun City that needed to meet the 80% threshold to maintain our age restricted status. However in the court case posted on social media and in the links i posted above, it appears as if the determining factor is actual units/rooftops. Interesting because that number is roughly 27,500.

    The reason i say this is because everything i have read indicates anyone 55 or older living in a "unit" qualifies it as satisfying the criteria. For example, i have known 3 generations of a family living in a three bedroom home. The grandmother was obviously over 55, but both the second and third generation were under 55 but over 19. My assumption was they had done a count of the 4 non-55 in determining the percentage, but following what i read and was posted, it appears as if that "unit" was counted as a single qualified home.

    All of which takes me back to a point i made last week: SCHOA should hold an informational meeting with their attorney present to answer these types of questions. It's always the fear of the unknown that triggers the angst. Putting it to bed will make life easier for everyone.
     
    Linda McIntyre likes this.
  10. Janet Curry

    Janet Curry Well-Known Member

    Also, what about snowbirds? Since we are not Arizona residents, do they count us?
     
    Enigma likes this.
  11. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    Wow, that's interesting!

    If I got this right then here are the hypothetical numbers:

    Using 80% of 40,000 population, (32,000) means there can be 8,000 under age residents allowed.
    Using 80% of 27,500 rooftops (22,000) means there can be 5,500 under age residents allowed.

    That means that there would need to be an additional 2,500 uncounted under age residents living in homes with more than one under age occupant to meet the same standard based on population (8,000)!

    Not really sure what all that means, but interesting to see actual numbers.

    If the percentage is, in fact, based on rooftops, I think that would put us in a little better position because an additional 2,500 uncounted occupants seems a bit large to me but you never know!
     
    Linda McIntyre likes this.
  12. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    Interesting question and one of the reasons i suspect they use data from the RCSC. As a snowbird, you are a member in good standing and living in the home a portion of the time. That information would be reflected in the information they provide. Compare that to an underage buyer (like we were when we bought at the age of 51), we owned it but we couldn't live here or be members. My best guess is this isn't a perfect science but an effort to reflect who is actually living in the house. Still, all the more reason to hold an informational meeting.

    If you really want to get a headache, imagine Sun City Grand (soon to be just Grand). They opened in the late 90's and had a provision that allowed 20% new construction homes could be sold to buyers 45 and older. When the company reached build out the board changed their CC&R's to allow resales of existing homes to 45 and older as long as the percentage remained above 80% being 55 and older. The one saving grace is the recreation board and the home owners association is one and the same. I would guess it's easier to monitor, but what a mess in collecting that yearly data.
     
  13. IndependentCynic

    IndependentCynic Active Member

    I guess I am having a mental block here. If, hypothetically, a house in SC is owned by an investor who is over 55 and resides outside SC, how does the RCSC, or the SCHOA for that matter, know the age of the person that rents the house and/or the age(s) of those who actually live in the house? Would they know the ages of the people snowbirds might "rent" their home to while they're away?
     
  14. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    No mental block at all IC, the reality is compiling the data is one thing, it's accuracy another. The easy answer is when a renter is in the house and buys a privilege card, the RCSC has the information. The hard answer is when they don't buy, just rent, who actually knows? It was one of the reasons we asked home owners to be vigilant. We know property owners sometimes could care less who they rent to and so reporting underage people living in a home they know is a rental unit is important.

    I know there are ways to gather the information beyond the RCSC, i don't know how much effort SCHOA puts into it. I've long lamented the lack of educating the community (new buyers especially) about how and why Sun City works. We are different, unique from wherever they came. Anyone who thinks a one and done works is foolish. Anyone familiar with our history knows DEVCO invested a fortune is shaping a community that took the responsibilities of ownership seriously.

    While everyone loves having fun, the push away from an ownership mentality has hurt us across the board as organizations struggle with a shortage of volunteers and worse yet, a community where its values and tenets have been lost. Restoring them won't be easy.
     
  15. eyesopen

    eyesopen Well-Known Member

    Regarding, As i was thinking about his question and the information i posted and have read online, i was struck by something i may have misunderstood. I always believed it was the population (roughly 40,000) in Sun City that needed to meet the 80% threshold to maintain our age restricted status. However in the court case posted on social media and in the links i posted above, it appears as if the determining factor is actual units/rooftops. Interesting because that number is roughly 27,500.”

    RCSC uses approximately the rooftop count for annual assessment fees.
    They use the greater roughly population count to determine quotas required annual membership meeting, petitions and bylaw motions.
    RCSC should be consistent with one or the other count in their formulas?? Seems they’re using whichever is to “their” best advantage.
    Pick one and use for both!



     
    Janet Curry likes this.
  16. IndependentCynic

    IndependentCynic Active Member

    That's absurd -- bordering on fraud, IMO, if they're doing that.
     
  17. BPearson

    BPearson Well-Known Member

    They're not. When there was a discussion relative to the recall a member wanted to file, 10% of the membership was 32,500 or so. Of course the bigger problem was they wouldn't issue him a petition number to even get started.
     
  18. eyesopen

    eyesopen Well-Known Member

    Rooftops…Population, consistency?
    Fees- Rooftops
    All others- Population

    Data provided by Bill Pearson
    “ I cannot emphasize that point enough. We have roughly 40,000 residents living in Sun City. That includes both attached and detached housing. The roughly 27,500 rooftops all are included in the percentages sent to both the state and the feds on a yearly basis by SCHOA. We historically are well over 90% and the last figures i heard was 95%”
    https://talkofsuncity.com/threads/the-age-overlay-in-laymans-terms.4534/

    Assessments are based on
    lots/rooftops/deeded property.
    RCSC membership is by population which should not equal Sun City census population data. Not all Sun City residents are RCSC members.

    • Fees Annual Property Assessment – $496/year/property; $525/year/property (as of February 1, 2023)**
    Every Deeded Real Estate Owner of a Sun City property, or their successor, has signed a Facilities Agreement that obligates them to pay an annual property assessment whether or not they occupy the property or use the recreational facilities.
    https://suncityaz.org/rcsc/cardholder-information/fees/
    Per the Restated Articles of Incorporation, any initiative, referendum, or recall petition must have a total number of signers not less than ten percent (10%) of the voting Members of the Corporation as of the preceding July 1st.
    https://suncityaz.org/rcsc-board-policy-resolution-no-5/

    • Annual Membership Meeting
    Found no fixed formula in the bylaws. The quota is the number of members in attendance and by proxy required to hold the meeting.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2023
    jeb and Janet Curry like this.
  19. FYI

    FYI Well-Known Member

    Now that it appears the underage ADA person will be allowed to live in Sun City, I'm just curious about the rules allowing him to participate in Clubs?

    Will he be allowed to join Clubs or will this be another point of contention?

    Just curious!
     
    Enigma and Janet Curry like this.
  20. Tom McClain

    Tom McClain Member

    According to Nextdoor the exemption for the Hogan ADA was recommended to be approved by the planning commission to the Maricopa Board of Supervisors. Is this true?
     

Share This Page