CHAT MESSAGES RECEIVED FROM BARRY CHAPPELL, PROGRAM OFFICER FOR THE OMBUDSMAN'S OFFICE

---

On April 4, 2025 a Program Officer from the Nevada Ombudsman's Office reached out via the chat on this website attempting to determine the owners of this website.  It is unclear for what purpose.  

Our response on behalf of this website was:

A group of homeowners who believe in transparency and honest management. More importantly, who are you and why is the Ombudsman involved as NRS116 is not being violated.

Our response obviously struck a nerve. Mr. Chappell replied: 

Good morning,

Thank you for your response. Our office received an anonymous inquiry that referenced this website. We were hoping to have a conversation with the person that sent the letter. My question was purely for information purposes and in no way was an accusation of wrongdoing nor was an accusation from the Ombudsman’s office.

Once again, thank you for your response and have a great day.

Thank You, Barry Chappell Program Officer I Ombudsman Office 3300 W Sahara Ave Ste 325 Las Vegas, NV 89102 Phone 702-486-4487 Fax 702-486-4520 

The response from this website was:

Since when does the ombudsman’s office start investigating anonymous inquiries and what letter are you referencing?

We are happy to respond to questions but our identity is not important. Nobody here wants to be the subject of the harassment, intimidation or threats.

There was no further responses from Mr. Chappell.

It is interesting that the Office of the Ombudsman of Nevada is responding to an "anonymous inquiry" when Form 530 Intervention Affidavit requires a Complainant, Respondent and Alleged Violation to be named before they will take action. 

1. Since when does the Ombudsman office respond to "anonymous inquiries"?  
2. Was this done as a professional courtesy for an HOA Attorney?  
3. Was this a favor for a Homeowners Association?  
4. Is this even above board for the Real Estate Division to be potentially challenging homeowners constitutional rights to Freedom of Speech? 

This appears to be a personal favor where this employee is acting outside the scope of their responsibilities.

A similar matter was previously addressed by the Supreme Court in Olympia Companies, LLC et al. v. Michael Kosor, JR. (A-17-765257-C), where a developer-controlled HOA board attempted to silence a homeowner—much like the Northern Terrace Homeowners Association Board, along with its attorneys and agents, continues to try to suppress this website for exposing their alleged corruption, mismanagement, and unlawful behavior.

The court awarded in favor of the homeowner in this case:

"Olympia’s intimidating and intentionally speech-chilling claims lack merit and are barred by Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute."   None of Olympia’s claims survived under the Court’s 25-page order.

For more information, refer to : https://www.mikekosor.com/response-to-olympia-letter

Homeowners are strongly encouraged to become informed and engaged—this does not mean blindly accepting the statements or claims made by the Board of Directors or its representatives. On numerous occasions, through both meetings and written communications, the Board has misled and deceived members of the community. These five individuals, who are themselves homeowners, have repeatedly abused their positions and, in some cases, acted beyond the scope of their authority.

At the March 2025 Board Meeting, Mr James Klosty made several concerning statements that reflected a blatant disregard for NRS 116, explicitly declaring that he does not care about the statute’s provisions. Nevertheless, he proposed implementing a new election process that not only contradicts NRS 116 but also violates our community’s governing documents. His actions appear designed to intimidate and shame homeowners who attempt to hold the Board accountable.  Mr Klosty has been subject to previous NRED complaints which the investigations found substantiated that he and his fellow board members violated state law.

Mr. Klosty’s attempt to require a "Candidate Statement Form" with his proposed mandatory questions is unlawful. Moreover, he has once again refused to accept responsibility for his overreach, instead asserting that CAMCO will enforce eligibility based on his improper and unauthorized criteria.

This conduct represents a serious threat to democratic governance within our community. It is, quite simply, unlawful and unacceptable.

We caution homeowners who are looking at the Community Manager (CAMCO) as a resource to gain information as they represent the interests of the HOA and not the Homeowner.  We also caution education from advocacy groups such as CAI Nevada (Community Associations Institute Nevada Chapter) as they are a lobbyist group representing HOA Lawyers and Management Companies and not Homeowner rights.

We recommend looking and joining the Nevada HOA Reform Coalition which was started by Mike Kosor to educate and bring change to a "captured" HOA industry in Nevada.  The Ombudsman, as the regulators for the HOA industry in Nevada do not represent homeowner rights and are "captured" by HOA attorneys who are dictating outcomes.  

In most cases, those outcomes are decided behind closed doors by the HOA attorneys and Ombudsman staff and due process is not afforded to the homeowner when the division staff hide behind a confidentiality clause in NRS116.

Recommended readings:

• Nevada HOA Laws
• How to file a NRED Complaint
• Law Reform Needed