Why did BHHAI not simply file for a new association?

[Khan]

BHHAI knew well before 2014 that its 50-year term was expiring. All HOAs know about the vital importance of a legal term of existence.

1. After BHHAI expired on 2014 December 29 according to its own articles of incorporation, why did the 2015 board not file for a new association?

2023 May 24 : DHSUD letter reminded BHHAI of their expiration and suggested that BHHAI apply for a new Certificate of Incorporation

"On a more important matter ..., we noticed from [your submitted documents] that [the existence of the association expired]. Please apply for the issuance of a new Certificate of Incorporation...."

2. After receiving this advice from the government authority overseeing them, why did the 2023 board not file for a new association?

3. DHSUD already told them that BHHAI corporation expired. So why did the 2023 board still do this ⬇️?

2023 June 21 : BHHAI filed Amended Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws

2023 November 24 : DHSUD Region IV-A "denied outright" BHHAI's 2023 June filing and specifically cited the law. "Associations whose term of existence as provided in its Articles of Incorporation has expired shall be deemed dissolved without need of any proceedings."

Why did the BHHAI board not simply register a new association in 2023 or even in the preceding eight years? They had all the time in the world and they had all the advantage.

Had the BHHAI board followed this friendly advice from DHSUD, they would have obviated the November 2023 Order and saved the community the trouble of all this discord, and money and time wasted. The BHHAI board simply had to pay nominal fees for incorporation and registration, wind up the old corporation, done a proper accounting and audit, settle obligations, and return the funds to their respective owners. May be tedious but far less contentious and expensive than divisive litigation that predictably confirmed the plain-to-see fact of their dissolution. Besides, that's what the law and their fiduciary duty obligate them to do.

Who made these decisions? Why did they choose this option? How did they figure that litigation was the better path for the good of the community when no one was standing in their way to incorporate again?