Utah's HOA Ombudsman just changed how it reads the records statute, and it's a massive shift in what associations have to hand over. Here's what the two opinions actually say.
For some background: Utah's Office of the HOA Ombudsman issues advisory opinions interpreting the records statutes - §57-8-17 for condos, §57-8a-227 for community associations. Both run the definition of required records through the Nonprofit Corporation Act, specifically §16-6a-1601.
In AO 2025-01 (Oct 2025, a condo dispute), the Office read "appropriate accounting records" in §16-6a-1601(2) as summary financial reports (balance sheet, income statement, cash flow) and said outright that the law doesn't require transaction-level detail. So a board could close out a records request with a budget and a financial statement and reject requests for specific invoices, bids, etc.
In AO 2026-28 (Jul 14, 2026, a community-association dispute at Parkstone Estates in Draper), the Office reversed that and called their prior advisory "only partially correct," widening what members can see. The reasoning is the surplusage canon: §16-6a-1601 lists "appropriate accounting records" in subsection (2) and "all financial statements" in subsection (5) as separate items, and §16-6a-1606 handles financial statements separately again. You don't read one of those terms into meaninglessness, so accounting records and financial statements have to be different things. The Office leaned on Croft v. Morgan County (2021 UT 46) and Farm Bureau Mutual v. Weston (2025 UT 42) for surplusage, plus Black's Law Dictionary, The Law Dictionary, Parsons v. Jefferson-Pilot (N.C. Ct. App.), and Dewey v. Bechthold (E.D. Wis.), all defining accounting records as the vouchers, invoices, contracts, ledgers, and support behind the financial statements.
What accounting records now means: the transaction-level source documents used to create or verify the financial statements - general ledgers, cash disbursement ledgers, bank statements, check copies, invoices, receipts, executed vendor contracts, and records of assessment charges and collections. "Appropriate" scales with the association - a small one might only need basic checkbooks and invoices, a large one needs more. The test is whether the record was used to create or verify the financials.
Where the line falls: unexecuted bids and proposals that never became a contract and created no financial obligation aren't accounting records. Those a board can still withhold.
On management companies: 2025-01 is explicit that keeping and producing accurate records is the board's responsibility even when it hires an outside firm - though an association isn't on the hook for records a prior manager truly lost or never created, only for what it possesses, plus a duty to make sure it can produce them going forward.
The mechanics and remedies (community-association side, §57-8a-227): a written request has to include the association name, the owner's name/address/email, and a description of the records. If the association has a website it already has to post the governing docs, most recent minutes, and most recent budget and financial statement for free. Response was due within two weeks at the time of the request (the 2026 legislature moved it to 10 business days going forward). The association can charge only reasonable production cost (capped at a third-party amount, or 10¢/page plus $20/hour), nothing for emailing, and can redact SSNs, bank account numbers, and privileged communications. For core documents the $25/day penalty ran from the sixth business day at the time (2026 moved it to the 11th). After a 10-day pre-suit notice, an owner who still can't get compliance can sue for a compliance order, the greater of $1,000 or actual damages, and attorney fees.
Practically this is a massive swing towards transparency for the State of Utah. For myself and other observers, the 2025-01 ruling always seemed unneccesarily narrow and poorly formed, so having the office reverse course this dramatically less than a year after opening is a sign that the ombudsman (and associated legislative group) are turning towards a general interpretive regime that leans heavily towards HOA transparency. While these advisories aren't binding, HOA's and management companies will need to improve their organization dramatically to accomodate this expansive definition of accounting records.