Why did a homeowner enter a homeowner association meeting with guns blazing?

April 22, 2000

By AHRC News Services
Copyright 2000 AHRC News Services

At about 2p.m. on April 19, a former homeowner went to a homeowner association meeting in Peoria, Arizona and opened fire. 2 people were killed, and three were injured.

Did these people have to die? What happened to cause a 61 year old law-abiding citizen to amass an arsenal of weapons and enter a meeting of his former homeowner association with guns blazing?

As the facts come to light, a familiar pattern begins to emerge, which is replicated in countless homeowner associations from California to Florida. A homeowner's complaints go unaddressed, boards treat homeowners unequally, boards employ lawyers to hound homeowners and financially bankrupt them with threatening letters, injunctions and law suits, scavenger neighbors ignore the abuse and keep selling their votes to corrupt boards and vendors - "we do not want to get involved", "he's disgruntled", "we love our community".

Mr. Glassel bought his retirement home in 1994 for $84,000. He apparently had problems with his air-conditioner from the beginning. It would freeze up in summer, allegedly because the unit was too small for the home. The developer refused to replace it with a larger unit. He wanted to install an awning, but the association refused because it was not from an "approved vendor". (Why were there "approved vendors" - was somebody getting a kickback?).

The association refused to give him a variance for his property, but gave one to a board member. ( Double standards are a cause of significant problems in homeowner associations). In 1998, Mr. Glassel was upset that the associations new gardening company was scalping the vegetation in the entire association. When they came to his property, he refused to allow them to do the same. They allegedly came while he was out and scalped his bushes anyway. (Vandalism by abusive vendors). The association manager hired a CAI lawyer to get an injunction against Mr. Glassel to put him under their dictatorial control over his home.

The lawyer obtained a 5 year injunction stopping any contact between the maintenence workers and the senior who still had to pay their services. In addition Mr. Glassel was required to pay the lawyers fees for the injunction. The lawyer then garnished Mr. Glassel's bank account for his legal fees of $1,081 in legal fees and interest - Glassel only had $39.00 in his bank account.

There is no doubt that the end result was very tragic. But two haunting questions remain. Was Mr. Glassel treated fairly, and is the current structure of homeowner associations such that, similar acts may occur in other associations across the country ? A full answer to the first question may have to wait till further facts are brought to light, but a clearer answer can be given to the second question.

Homeowner associations intrude into people's lives to an extent that no other level of government does. What city, county or state government tells you what flowers you can plant, what color you can paint your house, how much your bushes should be trimmed, who you can buy an awning from? The answer of course is none, but homeowner association governments can do that. The more a governmental body touches the core of a citizen's every day life, the more some citizens are going to react. Americans do not like the heavy hand of government telling them what they can and cannot do in areas which traditionally have been their own. When corrupt boards and corrupt lawyers are added to the mix, the result can be explosive.

Homeowner associations have burst on the American scene without many realizing where they have come from. However, their genesis is quite simple. Working largely removed from public scrutiny, developers of mass produced housing since World War II have bought legislators and governors to pass legislation which strips homeowners of many of their traditional rights. Under the dubious guise of protecting property values, developers were allowed to erect a vast superstructure of rules and regulations which restricted a homeowner at every turn. In addition, iron-clad enforcement mechanism ensured that homeowners were forced to comply.

A group of lawyers, ever with an eye to their own enrichment, quickly realized that there was significant money to be made by jumping on the homeowner association wagon and seizing the reins. They have ridden it for all it was worth ever since. It is ironic but not surprising that the lawyer who secured the 5 year injunction against Mr. Glassel, announced just 4 days before the shooting that he had secured $12 million in settlements for alleged construction defects in 2 other associations. He announced that two thirds would go to the associations, and the rest, approximately, $4 million to "court costs". (Some observers have wondered why Mr. Ekmark characterized the $4 million as "court costs", when it was money going into his own pocket.)

But these lawyers have not only been busy on the local scene, but they have erected a national network of lobby groups which unite all the vendors to homeowner associations into a cohesive, disciplined force, which contributes heavily to politicians in all states. This trade/lobby group, as is customary among such entities, gives itself a nice, pleasant name, - Community Associations Institute (CAI). The iimpression which the name creates is of a benevolent educational institution devoted to the impartial, objective pursuit of the truth. The truth, of course, is radically different.

In state after state, it strenuously lobbies for legislation which favors its own members interests, and which is generally against the interest of homeowners. For example, in California, CAI wined and dined the chairman of the Assembly Housing Committee, and secured passage of a law which allowed association reserves to be used for lawyer's fees and impose taxes with no caps on homeowners to pay lawyers fees.

It is against this backdrop that 40 million Americans now find themselves trapped in a gargantuan swaddle of rules, laws and special interests, with no effective recourse except to file an expensive lawsuit. But when they file a suit, they generally find themselves before hostile courts. Research shows that many judges in one form or another have social and financial ties to the lawyers who defend the association. Time and again, homeowners suffer much frustration and anger when judges inexplicably rule against them. In those few cases where homeowners win, the association lawyer wins handsomely also as his fees are paid by the association members - including the one who won against the lawyer.

Americans now find themselves yoked with an institution which has for all intents and purposes abolished the American home. Instead of a country of free and independent citizens, one seventh of the population finds themselves imprisoned in their own homes. Instead of being their castle, their home has become their prison. And, if CAI has its way, the entire country is on its way to similar prisons.

The violence in Peoria is cause for great sadness on all counts - for the victims naturally, but also because a law-abiding citizen was driven to a desperate act because oppressive institutions and their agents crossed that threshold of a person's freedom and integrity. Homeowner associations of all governmental agencies impinge most into the personal lives of each citizen. The deaths in Peoria should send a profound warning signal to all associations that something is structurally amiss.

The surprise is that there have not been even more instances. Across the country, homeowners cry in pain and anguish at what they have to endure in homeowner associations.

In California, one such person, Jim Troutman, committed suicide. In another case in Arizona, one homeowner was so harrassed at an association meeting that he had a heart attack and died. Some
homeowners have to defend themselves against foreclosure due to a fraudulent $5 late charge. Some have to endure persecution from boards who do not provide any service. Some lose their homes due to false charges. A few specific instances will illustrate some of the things which are happening:

Margie Cochran was trying to her roof repaired - the association lawyer got a TRO for "harassment" and garnished her bank account for legal fees.

Vera Armstrong Cherry, a POW wife wanted to get access to the records after her fees went up too much. The association lawyer got a TRO against her and $79,000 in legal fees. She was also 5150'd, a device in California to put people in mental hospitals for 72 hours against their will. Her teenage children were home alone, unaware of their mother's whereabouts for days. When she appeared in court, the lawyer asked the judge for security , a device used over and over to descredit homeowners in court. (CAI lawyers training brochures tell managers and boards to control "difficult homeowners" with neighborhood watches, police reports, 5150's and TROs)

Maureen Aschoff , an Orange County School Board Member sued the association lawyer saying he told her tenants that they should not make the rental payments to her.

Mary Lindsey, a single mother, and grandmother fell behind in her $70 a month dues and asked for a payment plan . The association lawyer filed suit instead and charged legal fees of $33,000 to collect $787.00 in dues, late charges and other costs. She lost her home. She said that as those lawyers got shot in San Francisco, so it will not be surprising if something similar happens in homeowner associations.

In another case, the association sought a TRO to force an owner to allow the association to continue watering her property, even though the house was sliding down a hill.

Dr Melahoures, put in a satellite dish in his sideyard in compliance with FCC regulations. The association lawyers have collected over $250,000 from the homeowners by suing and losing in court. The same association spent a similar amount suing another homeowner and losing .

Jim Abrahams , a 66 year old retiree was fined and sued for parking his motorhome in his own motor home parking lot with his tenants permission. The association lawyer collected $28,000. in legal fees. Jim lost his home

In human affairs, there is always a day of reckoning. The murders in Arizona may portend that this day is approaching a lot faster than some would have thought. An even greater tragedy than the deaths in Arizona would be not to learn from the mistakes, corruption and legal violence that led to this violent outburst.

Violence breeds violence, whether that violence be physical, legal, or otherwise. The human spirit can only endure so much, and associations by their very nature and some of the players in them, walk that very thin line which separates life from death. Vast and profound reforms are needed in all associations to protect homeowners from the corrupt and arbitrary exercise of power, and from the predations of lawyers. If such a Homeowners Bill of Rights had existed in Peoria, maybe two people would not be dead, and Mr. Glassel would not be in prison.

Notes:
Many of the association homeowners, experts and victims, including several of the victims mentioned in the above AHRC article, are available for broadcast interviews, government hearings and investigations. Please call, write or email requests to the American Homeowners Resource Center.