Marty Haley Emails to the OAG

Martin Dale “Marty” Haley (above center) is the son of Betty (left) and Earl (right) Haley, all of whom live or lived at The Harbours.  Earl is now deceased.  They were also in the group photo in the prior blog entry, Complainants’ Legal Counsel.  All of the Haleys submitted complaints to the Indiana Office of the Attorney General (OAG).  Betty and Marty Haley have also been involved in criminal prosecutions at The Harbours, the details for which were linked in the previous blog entry.  Marty launched an unprovoked attack on an office staff member in 2012 that was reported on WAVE 3 news with their cameras present.  Here is a clip from the televised portion of their news video.

While all three of them sent complaints to the OAG, only Marty sent emails to the OAG according to discovery records.  His emails (linked here) were limited to a handful, and most of the content was in fact someone else’s comments.  His own remarks are in GREEN.

Marty Haley was elected to the Harbours Board of Directors on two different occasions.  He was a member of the first elected Board that took office on April 27, 2004, and he served eight months for the balance of 2004 choosing not to run for a new three-year term at his term expiration.  He then ran for a new three-year term and began serving on January 1, 2007.  However, he resigned his position on April 2, 2009.  To date, Marty is believed to be the only Board member who has served in multiple nonconsecutive terms.  He has since run for a Board seat but has been defeated.

As far as his emails are concerned, of much greater interest are those that never made it to the OAG.  While serving on the Board, Marty participated in all of the decisions and actions that the Board took.  He was also once Chair of the Building & Grounds Committee.  And in his communications, he commented extensively on issues that ranged from elections to bird droppings on cars.  Here is a file of supplemental emails that Marty authored as a Board or committee member.  His more significant comments are quoted at the end of this blog entry, arranged by subject, and worth reading.

Ironically, Marty Haley was once a very outspoken critic of Harbours residents comprised today of complainants and disgruntled homeowners.  Today, he exemplifies that group.  He rationalizes his complete metamorphosis as once being unaware of  what was going on and now being enlightened.  When you read his comments below, ask yourself if these are the words of someone who was unsure and indecisive.  How likely is it that someone who once referred to complainants as “these bastards”–two of whom were his own parents–could so misjudge them?  Or is it more likely that there’s another explanation?

Enjoy the read.

---

♦  Marty Haley on Harbours property management and policy making…

“From my point of view it shows we have faith in our procedures and they have served us well through past lawsuits, emergencies, and the more repetitive tasks of running this building.   …I don’t feel it is unreasonable to ask that you observe something in action that has worked in the past before you insist on changing it.”  (February 08, 2008)

“I feel we should stick with the improvement and upgrade schedule as planned.” (October 16, 2008)

“[Complainant] Thom [Pike] I don’t know if that was for me but if it was my answer is this. I will continue to send each board member and [former property manager] a copy of anything I have to say regarding this building. If you say you want honesty and transparency then go and stick your head in the sand because you don’t like the point of view being expressed we are never going to have an honest open discussion of policies and procedures. Why we have them, how we formed them and why we haven’t changed them.

“I truly get the feeling Thom that you and [former Board member] are mad because we didn’t make you two president, vice president, secretary and treasurer at our first meeting after you two were elected. I don’t believe in a two person mandate for drastic changes.  …I don’t hide my email address on anything I send out. If asked I will give a clear reason why I take a stance on any issue. If you don’t want to read it delete it. As an elected member of this board you have a right to be included in meetings and board correspondence. I am not going to let it be said I conspired to keep someone out of the loop on any issue that this board addresses.”  (March 12, 2009)

---

♦  Marty Haley on parking…

“[Complainant] Thom [Pike], I think the biggest problem we have with parking in this building is the free parking mentality.  There would be no cars to tow if people would park in the space they own.”  (June 09, 2008)

“…the ideal (sic) that this is an ongoing problem and we need special parking spaces people can write their own pass for is B.S.  A cart of groceries will go through any door connected to the parking garage.  The fact you must first take an elevator from the garage to the first floor, get a cart, and return to an automobile parked in a space you own for them does not seem like a hellish strain on the elderly and infirmed to me.  This is not an assisted living center.”  (June 10, 2008)

“People should park in their parking space and not in the driveway. We have ask (sic) and warned now it’s tow time.”  (January 31, 2009)

“As chair of B&G I am done with the [Complainant Betty] Cantrell bird crap issue.  Any swapping of [parking] spaces falls under resolution or some other committee. Please don’t email me on this issue again.”  (June 16, 2008)

“I agree this action should stop all negotiations with [Complainant] Betty [Cantrell] immediately.  Despite the excellent work of Gary [Davis] and the committee to come up with a space swap solution to her problem, she insists on pursuing meritless lawsuits that eat up meeting time and association resources.  Fill my email box with gibberish.  And make me want to put a bird feeder filled with white castles in the tree in front of her car.  Maybe that isn’t bird poop on her windshield, just the manifestation of her own bad karma.

“On an unrelated issue, can we blow up the I-65 bridge?  The birds from it poop on my red truck in my outdoor space on the corner of the fifth floor.  The developer sold it to me without a written estimate of average annual bird poop accumulation.  This is clearly someone else’s fault, and I deserve relief.”  (July 16, 2008)

“Who said we have to tow it and make the towing company rich.  Since it is association property that is being misused by these folks I feel we should keep the revenue. Everyone check out www.tirelock.com.  It shouldn’t take too long to recoup our purchase price for one of these. I think a fifty dollar fine for an unclamping during regular business hours, and one hundred bucks for evenings, weekends and holidays is very reasonable. And as always, if the offender is in an owner’s space, not an association space, they get towed. Really obstinate people can even be charged a daily fee for parking space and wheel clamp rental after 48 hours.”  (July 21, 2008)

---

♦  Marty Haley on complainants and disgruntled homeowners…

“Why don’t these folks the current board is supposedly blacklisting from committees…seek a board spot using an honest, out in the open, written agenda. Not a bunch of mudslinging, and secret unsigned innuendo letters as has been their campaign strategy in the past.  If I read [Complainant Tom Pike’s] e-mail correctly, they already claim to have the support of ten percent or more of the membership. All they need is a little more than a third of the remaining ninety percent and they should be a lock. I guarantee their (sic) will be at least 1 seat in the next two elections without a running incumbent. I also don’t plan to publicly endorse anyone. That fair enough for them.”  (July 02, 2008)

…It’s the constant repeating of a message the majority think is B.S.  They have been spewing this stuff since before the developer turned over the building, and will continue until the last shovel of dirt covers their casket.  Funnier still, they seem offended that those of us who ran openly supporting [former property manager]  and Kevin and the current staff have not now abandoned them.  Why would I or anyone else for that matter, loose (sic) their integrity, abandon their principles and forget a promise to make this a better place to live for everyone, just to make these few miserable malcontents happy.   These are the same old ideals (sic) that have been loosing (sic) elections for many years now.  I have no intention of presenting them as my platform even though I’m a lame duck.  Because the ideals (sic) and the changes this group wants benefits them more than the owners as a whole.  I truly believe, and this keeps me going and makes it all worthwhile, that the majority of owners think this group is hateful, nuts or at best just plain wrong anyway.”  (July 03, 2008)

“We are not a corporation and our survival does not depend on the whimsical forces of the invisible hand. We are here to serve the residents of this building and as long as it stands there will be a board. If they don’t like us they can get rid of us…  In the end, your books are only as good as the integrity of the person keeping them. I feel we are well covered in this regard. Our residents are better served by consistent accounting principles that have been explained in detail at past budget meetings.”  (October 30, 2008)

“…Pursuing loosing (sic) causes and petty stuff with no tangible payout should be left [to] the domain of the [Complainants] Cantrells and Rudders of the world.  I see no sense in dragging out something that costs us credibility, and isn’t going to result in some real federal prison, breaking rocks time for these bastards.”  (October 30, 2008)

[From Complainant Betty Cantrell on November 15, 2008: “And FYI malicious threats from Marty Haley will not cause me to run me from my home.”  See email S-014.]

“…if we don’t start calling this ‘The [Complainants] Hackruder Film’ we are taking ourselves way too seriously.”  (December 16, 2008)

“I’m afraid that what ever happens friday will only be a prequel to a civil suit or another round of mudslinging against the entire board.”  (December 16, 2008)

“…anything I actually email has been toned down at least twice from my original draft.

“Agendas are good it’s what you want to accomplish. HIDDEN AGENDAS are where I have a problem. Just tell me what the end goal is, and you may have an ally, maybe not…  Don’t piecemeal out a bunch of the same old disjointed complaints I have heard since the turnover [by the Developer] and think I’m going to take you seriously. Especially if your largest and most vocal supporters are all absentee landlords that only materialize for board meetings, and people who have sued this association and slandered it’s (sic) board members.”  (March 12, 2009)

---

♦  Marty Haley on Harbours elections…

“What is [Complainant] Betty’s [Cantrell’s] point? That since the board didn’t elect officers at the first meeting after the annual meeting, we are forbidden to do it in the future. Fine with me, the officers can stand from the previous board, or we could just not have officers and adopt a more parliamentary structure. Although I doubt either outcome would please Betty.”  (December 27, 2008)

“I have no problem with neutral observers either as long as they are neutral. Having one of the most vocal and unwavering critics [Complainant Betty Cantrell] of all things done by this board hovering over a person while they prepare election packets is a lot to ask. Too much I would say.  …I’m tired of living in a building that feels like a company being raided in a hostile proxy battle. Especially when the raiders [Complainants et al.] have never made a positive suggestion for change I can recall. They have only criticized what has been done and the people who did it.  …If you want something painted blue, ask the painter to paint it blue. Don’t tell the painter yellow and orange suck then leave him to figure it out.”  (January 25, 2009)

“I feel it is the job of the board to encourage owners and residents to learn about the issues in our home and be involved in the process. But you have a right to be stupid, and disenfranchise yourself if you want. You are free to let someone else think for you.”  (March 06, 2009)

“…the feeling I’m getting here is that people [Complainants et al.] who have not had a great deal of success winning elections on a platform of their issues want to tweak the process to gain an edge. Yes everyone has a right to be heard. Not everyone has the right to make policy. You have to win elections for that. Letting people make election rules that plan to run for election gives us no transparency, no true critique of past issues. It merely continues a partisan fight over turf. And special elections only require a 10% owners group to call and cost no more than a regular election which Tom says we can have for no cost to the association anyway. Viva democracy. However the last time this was tried it didn’t go so well for the people that called for it. Are they really stupid enough to think doing it again would make them seem like heroes. That would be a whole new level of stupid there.

“Let me state as clearly as I can. I will not seek reelection on this board. I have seen organizations stagnate and feel smart people with fresh ideals (sic) are the only way to keep that from happening here. There are previous candidates for this board I would never under any circumstance vote for because I feel they have hidden agendas and lack the basic integrity to do what they know is right. Some of them won’t park in their own spaces that came with the condo the bought. Others resort to smear campaigns and mud slinging innuendo. But they never state an actual ideal (sic) or reveal the things they can do better and how they would do them. For crying out loud, open the curtain a bit wizard. I’m already on my way back to Kansas.

“I will continue to serve on any committee the board may ask me to for as long as I’m needed. But I’m not singing Kum Ba Yah, and we already know I do not suffer fools well. But unless you really want to turn the asylum over to the inmates I may be able to help.”  (March 09, 2009)

---

♦  Marty Haley on owners’ rights to privacy and related issues…

“Folks I’m an Iron worker if I think it I say it. Blame my mom and dad too. I plan on making the motion I put forth in a previous post at our next meeting. The one about releasing all records to any member that asks…  Funny how full disclosure sounds like a good idea until you are the one bent over the table with your drawers on the floor while the doctor lubes up the scope.”  (March 12, 2009)

“The privacy policy is to protect people’s right to privacy.  Nothing more.  If an owner is paying their fair share of common expenses and not creating a problem why would another owner or third party be entitled to the information this policy would protect.  I would like anyone seeking this information on their neighbors to explain to me how having it will ease their mind.

“I think the majority want more privacy for themselves.  My proposal just makes it official policy.  The people who can’t live without these details about their neighbor are not good neighbors in my opinion and should consider a detached single family dwelling to comfort them.  As long as my co owners are paying their fair share of common expenses that is all the info I need about them.  I don’t care what deal they made with the developer or past owner of their condo or their current landlord for that matter.

“I’m also tired of having the fact I favor privacy rights of owners and residents spun to look like I’m part of some conspiracy.  If future candidates for the board feel so strongly that this info is community property and should be freely distributed they can clearly say so in their campaign and run on it.  It would be a nice change of pace from the past elections with campaigns full of job resumes and broad nonspecific feel good stuff about getting along, saving money and whatever else is popular at the time.  A candidate could stand up and say ‘I want to release all the records in the office for any owner to look at and that includes personal info about you and me.’

“Funny thing is there is one public disclosure I have fought for and been soundly defeated on by the board at every turn.  I wanted a Wall of Shame in the mail room.  Here the association could post the name and unit number of any owner 30 days late on their HOA dues.  The board has always opted for a more private means of encouraging payment.  Wimps.”  (March 24, 2009)