I would like to add clarity to the conversation, as there is a lot of confusion, and I have hired someone to outline the points in question as suggested to me.
If the GPMA Administrator is unable, or unwilling, to explain legalities I will be happy to. These items should ALWAYS be made clear to home / property owners and not vieled in deception. If there are problems, your HPR Administrator should clarify with proven votes, legalities, and proof of the general assemblies wishes to be in the HPR presented. In general, these regulations MUST be made clear before home purchase, AND accepted by the general assembly of home / property owners by MAJORITY VOTE. An HPR cannot be forced on a community who in mass, do not agree to it.
1) The GPMA Administrator, who is voted in by the general assembly of home / property owners, cannot add rules, regulations, taxes, or fees, unless expressly voted on by the HPR general assembly (owners of the lots) by a vote of 2/3rds, or majority vote. see Article XX
2) The HPR Administrator cannot add a board of directors, or other positions of power, unless also voted on and agreed to by the general assembly by special provision, according to Article 22. 
3) Home or land owners in an HPR, cannot be forced into signing onto an HPR unless there is community sentiment with a full legal vote of the assembly of home and property owners, including 2/3rds majority (see 1909, Article XX). Otherwise, the HPR is unauhorized, and can be technically viewed as illegal.
4) All general rules or regulations in an HPR must be voted on, and agreed to, by the general assembly of HPR owners, or it is null and void, and can be viewed as technically illegal.
5) Any additions to the HPR without due process in majority votes, can be viewed as techinically illegal, and any abuses of this rule legally falls to the voted in Administrator.
6) According to Article 22 of the Nicaraguan laws, a board can be elected for special positions but only if agreed to by the general assembly of owners in the HPR by vote.
7) Items, such as the golf course, cannot be added to the HPR unless the general assembly approves by vote to take on the burden and the items are included on the book of items OWNED by the HPR according to Article XX. Adding items to the HPR without general assembly HPR vote, can be viewed technically as illegal according to the written law. 
8) Any HPR, or Administrator can be voted out by 2/3rds vote, or in cases of special provision, majority rules if all property owners cannot arrive to vote according to tort law, see Article 24 of Nicaraguan HPR.
9) Any Administrator who does not follow public sentiment by majority vote, such as replacing the bridge, according to Article XX, can be seen as technically operating illegally, and out of line as General Manager, according to Nicaraguan tort law. As stated, The Administrator is only a General Manager according to Article XX of Nicaraguan law and does not have authority in a capacity to reject community sentiment.
If what Jason says, that there is only 33 people on the HPR, and that is gauging total community sentiment as a percentage, then even if there is a registered HPR, it does not seem to reflect those in most of Gran Pacifica resort.
Also, is Jason operating, and speaking, as the legal entity of Entity A "Pre HPR Financial Advisor", or Entity B "Current HPR Administrator", or both?
The exisitng HPR that is being pushed, looks to be illegitimate with 33 signed owners. The pre existing HPR seems to have been run by GP, but needs to be legalized to be legitimate, and have majority vote. We need paperwork to verify who is paying what entity, which should be provided in full by BOTH GP the developer, and GPMA the HPR, and made VERY CLEAR to existing HRP property and home owners. Unless of course, they are about veiled, and intentional, deception?