Declarant control in a homeowners association (HOA) under the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act (UCIOA) refers to the period during which the developer (called the “declarant”) retains certain rights to manage or control the community before full governance is turned over to the homeowners. This concept is foundational in common-interest communities and is governed primarily by UCIOA § 3-103.
Nevada adopted a version of the UCIOA in NRS Chapter 116, and NRS 116.31032–116.31038 mirror these declarant control provisions. Nevada law also places additional disclosure and accountability obligations on declarants to prevent overreach during the control period.
Definition and Purpose
• The declarant is typically the developer who creates the common-interest community.
• Declarant control allows the developer to maintain control over the HOA's governing body (e.g., board of directors) during the initial phases of development and sales. The rationale is that the developer has a vested interest in maintaining order, completing construction, and marketing the project.
By Nevada law, a declarant (developer) can appoint board members during a specified period of time. This is casually referred to as the "declarant's control" period.
Where misunderstanding typically exits is the fiduciary duties of declarant-appointed directors
• During the control period, the declarant “…may appoint and remove the officers of the association and members of the executive board.” NRS 116.31032(1)
• While a declarant retains “special declarant rights” it can “Appoint or remove any officer of the association or any master association or any member of an executive board during any period of declarant’s control.” NRS 116.089
• Nonetheless, even during the control period, directors appointed by the declarant owe fiduciary duties to the association and its members. They cannot act solely in the declarant's interest.
• This is intended to prevent abuse and aligns with broader principles of corporate and fiduciary governance.
Policy Rationale
• Pros: Gives the developer time and authority to complete infrastructure, set community standards, and stabilize finances.
• Cons: If not properly limited, it can lead to abuses of power, especially regarding budget manipulation, improper reserves, or conflicts of interest in contract approvals.
Key implications:
• Declarant-appointed directors have heightened fiduciary duties equivalent to trustees, not merely the duty of ordinary corporate officers.
• These duties are owed to the association as a whole, meaning all unit owners—not just the declarant.
So when you hear a declaran in control, that simply means he/she gets to appoint directors- who then must act in the best interest of the association. Which may or may not be in the declarant's best interest.
The legal requirement that appointed directors owe fiduciary duties to the HOA is often undermined in practice when those directors have employment or financial ties to the declarant. This disconnect between legal form and practical control is a significant governance vulnerability in common-interest communities and merits deeper analysis. See the post on this site titled Legal vs. Practical Control: A Core Tension in HOAs prior to developer termination for more.
The declarants authority over an HOA rests in the declarant and special declarant rights as defined by NRS 116 and typically contained in the contract (CC&RS). See the post on this site titled Developer control even after "control termination"- Dark secret #2 for more.
**We are not attorneys and any written or electronic communications is provided here or on this site as a service to the internet community. Any advice that is provided on this site is based on our experience. Consult an attorney for legal advice..
