|
|
|
|
| Phoenix, Arizona -
The jury in the Richard Glassel murder trial took approximately 12 hours to vote for the death penalty. There is a question of undue influence on one juror to "go along". In Arizona, the 12 member jury, must determine any mitigating circumstances in order for a defendant to get Life rather than Death. Their decision is final and is not a recommendation.
In the March 7, 1999 episode of the X-Files, "The Falls of Arcadia", agents Mulder and Skully investigate the disappearance of homeowners from a top-rated homeowners association. Mulder quickly learns of the board's obsession with homeowner conformity to and compliance with the association's CC&Rs and rules and regulations.
Just over 1 year later, a tragic real-life incident occurred in Arizona when two Ventana Lakes HOA board members were killed during a meeting by a former association homeowner, Richard Glassel. At his murder trial, the prosecutor referred to problems with the association and that "he (Glassel) sought revenge against the HOA".
The events leading to the shooting in April 2000 apparently began back in 1995. Mr. and Mrs. Glassel had purchased their home in Ventana Lakes in 1994. The homeowner association was responsible for the landscaping around their home.
By 1995, Mr. Glassel had become unhappy about the way the landscapers were trimming his bushes. He claims that he asked the association for permission to trim his own bushes, and that he was granted permission to do so.
By 1998, the association sought to use its own landscapers to trim his bushes, apparently not because his landscaping was ugly, but to enforce conformity on him. It filed suit to obtain an injunction to do so, and prevailed. Mr. Glassel then stopped making payments on his mortgage. In the ABC 20/20 segment on April 19, 2002, a Ventana Lakes spokesman said, "He(Glassel)wanted to prune his shrubs to his liking. The HOA brought suit and won a $1,000 judgment. His home was foreclosed on and he left town, only to return 5 months later and shoot 2 board members.
The tragic events leave some major questions unanswered.
1. Why would a person decide not to pay his mortgage and go into foreclosure over a $1,000 debt to the HOA, especially when the court granted the Ventana Lakes HOA a garnishment order instead of a writ of execution against his property?
2. Mr. Glassel had sufficient equity in his home to pay off the $1000 debt. Why didn't he?
3. Why did he not pay the mortgage anyway until he could sell the house in a few months?
4. Why would someone kill HOA board members over a mortgage foreclosure - a Trustee's Sale, not an HOA judgment Sheriff's sale?
5. Were there other factors that influenced their attitude and mental outlook? Could it have something to do with perhaps the HOA wanting to remove Mr. Glassel, but could not unless he failed to pay his assessments? Foreclosure as a result of the nonpayment of fines is not permitted under the HOA's CC&Rs.
6. Could the HOA board obtain an award of attorney fees from a judgment and then use that to remove him in the event of nonpayment?
7. Why did the HOA attorney, Ekmark/Koepke, seek $7,441 as fees and provide some 3 pages of supporting arguments to justify the award?
8. Were the Glassels informed that the judgment award was $1054 instead of $7,441? There is a legitimate question as to whether the Glassels were so informed. Would this have made a difference? It appears that their attorney, Kathleen Coughenour, petitioned to be removed from the case after the conclusion of the trial, but before the award of attorney fees was made. Just three days after the award was granted for the $1,054, her request for removal was accepted by the judge.
9. If they were not informed, then could his action could be viewed as "What the hell? We can't pay the judgment so let's not pay the mortgage?" Apparently a decision was made as early as June not to make mortgage payments in view of a misguided belief that the HOA attorney was due some $7,441.
If he was informed, then his subsequent actions and failures to act reflect an even more confusing and possibly unstable mental attitude. He also may not have been aware of an August notice of the impending Trustee's Sale set for November 9th. (These notices are usually taped to the front door or garage door, and are not hand delivered or mailed. This archaic system allows for an absentee owner not to be notified).
10. A further perplexity is that in October, Mrs. Glassel received a judgment award in the amount of some $11,000 as a result of another civil suit. Why was this not used to make payments on the mortgage until they could sell their home at market prices and stop the foreclosure?
As with the Marie Brown foreclosure incident, who was there to help? Not any state agency, that's for sure.
11. Could this tragic act have been prevented if a disclosure notice had been provided homeowners informing them of the true nature of living in a homeowners association? Or a bill of rights had been required to be included in the CC&Rs? Or HOAs had been required to be under the supervision of some state agency that would protect the very weak party in the contract, the homeowner?
12. What responsibility must the state of Arizona bear when for 2 years it refused any such reforms? Just 5 months after the Ventana Lakes shooting, an Arizona state senator told homeowners - who wished to inform the HOA committee of their abuse at the hands of unregulated HOA boards - that "We don't want to hear any more horror stories. We will proceed slowly so we do not cause problems to the 95% of the associations that are good." It seems that the killings of Nyla Lynn and Esther LaPlante fall within an acceptable zone of tolerance for that senator.
Additional Research
First, Ventana Lakes CC&Rs does not permit foreclosure relating to fines. In order to remove Glassel, they would need to get a judgment and attempt to get a Sheriff's sale for the judgment. The Court did not allow the $7,441 attorney's fees claimed by association attorneys Ekmark/Koepke. After the award for just $1000, the HOA filed for a garnishment, not a move to take the house.
Second, the trial dragged out due to Mr. Glassel's filing to remove the default judgment in 1998, claiming that his wife Susan Glassel was not properly served since she was in California at the time.
At the hearing the HOA showed that Richard Glassel was properly served. It called a witness, who was the property manager, who claimed not to be aware of any agreement that Glassel could take care of his landscaping, which he had done for some 3 years. She stated that after he went away the HOA landscapers always took care of his grounds, Lot 47.
Third, attorney Curtis Ekmark is currently the Arizona Central CAI chapter president (CAI is Community Associations Institute - the nationwide lobbying organization for the homeowner association vendors, including lawyers.) He was a member of the Arizona Legislature's HOA Interim Committee that met in 2000-2001. This committee refused to hear further horror stories by homeowner attendees at the third and subsequent meetings, and produced neither meaningful proposals for reforms, nor proposals that addressed the substantive homeowner grievances.
For the past two years, as CAI State Legislative Action Committee Chair, Ekmark continued to regard homeowners as "disgruntled troublemakers" and opposed reforms to bring justice and the equal protection of the laws to homeowners living in HOAs. (CAI lawyers live off fees they charge homeowners for conflicts, collections, lawsuits, and foreclosures.)
TIMELINE
Nov 1994 -- Glassels buy home in Ventana Lakes
1999 --
Apr 26th -- Judge declines to set aside default judgment of 1998
May 17th -- Motion to withdraw by Kathleen Coughenour, Glassel attorney, stating that she had advised Glassels accordingly a few months ago, citing "no longer doing litigation work". Glassel's object.
May 18th -- Ekmark/Koepke seek $7441 in attorney fees (a request for some $3,430.63 from Sept 1998 has not been awarded as it was part of the above amount).
Jun 23rd -- Atty fees awarded in the amount of only $1,054, including $54 to HOA. County Clerk shows this date as Aug 20th.
Jun 27th -- Coughenour withdrawal approved. Glassels are pro per.
Jul 2nd -- Susan Glassel awarded some $11,176 in trial CV1997-013287
Aug 4th -- Notice of Nov 9th auction sale
Aug 20th -- Jun 23rd award for attorney fees filed with county records
Oct 5th -- Garnishment order, after move to quash fails
Oct 13th -- Award to Susan showed as "satisfied"
Nov 19th -- House sold at auction
Apr 2000 -- Shooting incident
|
|
| |
|
View Comments (8) | Post a comment |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
