ICRC Complaint Filed by OAG Complainants Betty and Don Cantrell

Approximately ten years ago, The Harbours Condominiums was contacted by the Indiana Civil Rights Commission (ICRC).  Elizabeth “Betty” and Donald Cantrell filed a complaint against the HOA claiming that their civil rights had been violated when they were refused a handicapped parking space.  Parking was at issue in the lawsuit filed by the Indiana Office of the Attorney General (OAG), and it continues to be debated by Betty Cantrell despite the outcomes of both the OAG suit and her ICRC complaint which is the subject here.

The Cantrells’ complaint was filed on January 30, 2008, and The Harbours received notification shortly thereafter. (LINK)  Their complaint alleged that they were denied the use of one of two handicapped parking spaces in a location they preferred.  One (#18) of the two spaces was still under the control of the HOA and assigned to homeowners as needed on a short term basis, e.g., illness, injury and/or recovery.  The second space they wanted, referred to as “#17”, had been transferred to another owner in a private transaction prior to Developer turnover and had never been under HOA control.  The Harbours response to the Cantrell complaint followed on February 19, 2008. (LINK)

Betty Cantrell has long contested the transfer of parking spaces by the Developer even prior to turnover.  She references a parking diagram shown as Exhibit C to the 2nd Amendment recorded by the Developer in 2001. (LINK)  This was the last parking plan recorded for The Harbours and shows the current location of parking spaces including handicapped spaces reserved at that time marked “HC”.  Subsequent to the 2nd Amendment, the Developer sold parking spaces 17, 101, and 102 to homeowners along with the condo purchased by each buyer.

At that point, the Developer recognized that he would sell out of handicapped spaces long before his inventory of condos were sold.  So, a plan was put in place where an owner with special needs could do a “reciprocal exchange” of a parking space sold with his/her condo for one of the spaces held by the HOA.  This plan is still in use today, and it was presented by the HOA in their response to the ICRC complaint as Attachment 1.  One or more of the owners who bought spaces 17, 101, and 102 would have qualified for reciprocal exchanges, but those spaces had already been deeded to those owners and were no longer under Developer control.

Betty Cantrell could have obtained one of the available parking spaces that the Harbours had for reciprocal exchange: #18, 103, 104, 531, or 601A.  (See Attachment 2 to the Harbours response.)  But she turned down those choices and wanted either #17 or 18 indefinitely, and The Harbours had no choice but to refuse her request.  Several months of mediation and back-and-forth resulted in the “Finding” by the ICRC on June 13, 2008 that “[no] unlawful discriminatory practice has occurred” by The Harbours. (LINK)  The Cantrells appealed the ICRC decision (LINK), and the complaint was finally dismissed after nearly a year of investigation and procedural steps on October 28, 2008. (LINK)

Outside counsel was pursued in anticipation of the Cantrells escalating their parking issues, and the HOA lawyer agreed with the Board’s positions. (LINK)

Other Allegations

The Cantrell complaint of January 30, 2008 alleges that Ms. Cantrell received “numerous disparaging emails from [OAG Defendant] Kevin Zipperle” as well as a “threatening letter” from another Board member.  A file was maintained in the property manager’s office where these correspondences were stored in hard-copy form; most were ten years old.  The emails have been compiled and uploaded in logical threads. (LINK)  They are presented in reverse chronological order as normal on this site and with email generally.  Messages sent from Mr. Zipperle to Ms. Cantrell are presented as emails 006-008 in the linked file.  She describes these emails as “disparaging”.

The Board contacted Betty Cantrell along with a handful of owners about spaces in the”surface parking” area on page 7 of the file linked earlier for the 2nd Amendment.  Ms. Cantrell responded to that letter, and she objected to the way the Board was handling the matter. (LINK)  One of the Board members made a follow-up contact with her, explaining why Cantrell was contacted, and counseling her not to park again in a space that she didn’t have permission to park in.  Betty Cantrell called the personal letter she received “threatening”.

HOA Parking Issues

At the root her parking problems is that Betty Cantrell has never accepted the validity of parking spaces that the Developer transferred to the HOA when he handed over control in 2004.  Not coincidentally, parking spaces were a central focus of the OAG in their investigation.  She believes that spaces were designated for handicapped parking with the recording of the 2nd Amendment in 2001 and never legitimately changed by the Developer or HOA.

What Ms. Cantrell will not believe is that the Developer owned and controlled all assets including parking spaces until he formally sold or transferred those assets to someone else.  She’s even used the expression that “he goofed” meaning that the Developer lost control/ownership of parking spaces that he didn’t intend to–as if a professional property developer who records his own governing documents didn’t account for these routine events procedurally.  It had nothing to do with recording documents and operational control.  When the HOA was established, the Developer owned all assets until he formally relinquished them.  And there’s nothing in Harbours governing documents that says otherwise.  The Developer wasn’t even obligated by law to leave behind handicapped or HOA common parking spaces.  If Betty Cantrell believed otherwise, she should have gotten that in writing when she bought property at The Harbours.  It is not nor was it ever the Association’s job to, in her mind, make her whole.