COLLECTIVE FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST GLA DIR CHARLOTTE MIZZI

Covenant 12.01 allows the board to forgive infractions of the Covenants. Paul’s minor setback issue is not realistically injurious to his neighbors or the rest of the community.  It has been in full view for 18 years and there were NO complaints until some of our current board members took office.  The GLA should not bar fault nor should it bar any landowners for participating in the Glastonbury Landowners Association because of an infraction made 18 years ago.  This was unbeknownst to the landlord and GLA board.  Paul has served faithfully on the board and on various committees for many years.  Nevertheless, a petty and ungrateful group of board members do not want to forgive a small, unintentional mistake in this incidence.  Some board members want to permanently remove Paul from participation in the landowner’s association and remove him from upcoming election ballot and take away his right to run for reelection.  Do landowners of good will really want to unmercifully and tyrannically, tyrannical directors to represent them and be in charge of their landowner’s association?

The statement that Paul’s lot line setback violations do not create realistic harm is an opinion that flies in the face of mainstream land use planning where lot line setbacks are a fundamental basic tenant and tool of reasoned development. To overlook the enforcement of lot line setbacks is to violate Sec. 6.02 of the Covenants, which establishes lot line setbacks for the protection of property values in Glastonbury.

The statement that the lot line setbacks have been in full view for 18 years is false. Dated aerial photos found on Google Earth show that the foundation for one of the buildings was started in 2005 and that another of the Ranttalo buildings was expanded in 2013. Those dates are also confirmed by the collective memory of neighbors.

The implication that Board service exonerates a Director from being accountable for compliance with the Covenants is a false conclusion. To not hold a Member accountable to the Covenants violates Article VI Sec. 9 B, which requires directors to “Enforce obligations of the Members to the Association as provided in the Covenants.”

The subjective words “petty” and “ungrateful” violate Sec. 2.3 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads “all comments must be delivered in a businesslike and professional manner.”

To write, without proof, that some Directors want to permanently remove Paul from participation in the landowner’s association is an opinion, not a basis for any Board action.

Mizzi’s closing question to her fellow board members, “Do landowners of good will really want to unmercifully and tyrannically, tyrannical directors to represent them and be in charge of their landowner’s association?” shows a disdain and disregard for board members (some with long professional backgrounds) who differ with her. Her letter violates Sec. 1.2 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads, “…assume goodwill on the part of everyone.” Her letter violates Sec. 2.3 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads, “Personal attack or inflammatory comments will not be permitted.” Further, Mizzi acted outside of her director authority by bringing her letter to the meeting without first requesting that it be added to the agenda.

2. In a separate paper, titled the same as the one cited above, and distributed to the Board on March 9, 2018, Mizzi described those who want the Governing Documents to be strictly adhered to as “legalists” while arguing there is room to deliberate enforcement issues based on intent, history, potential injury to others, etc. To argue against the strict interpretation of the Covenants is to violate Article VI Sec. B 9 of the Bylaws. It reads that the duty and power of the Board of Directors is to “Enforce obligations of the Members to the Association as provided in the Covenants.”

3. Mizzi fails to understand that lot line setbacks are a key, integral, and mainstream tool used in the protection of property values in land use policies across the country. Though Mizzi writes that Sec. 12.01 of the Covenants grants the Board the right to waive any provision of the Covenants, she fails to note that waivers can only be granted if they are not injurious to the rest of the Community. Failing to enforce setbacks causes harm to property values.

4. At the March 12, 2018 Board Meeting, Mizzi contended that GLA should maintain two access roads so that she could have a choice about how to reach her home. Her statement violated Section 1 of the Conflict of Interest Policy which says Directors and Officers are “…to protect the GLA interests when it is contemplating entering into a transaction or arrangement that might benefit the private interests of a GLA Director or Officer, …”

5. At the March 12, 2018 Board Meeting, Mizzi supported the following proposal by Board Member and Project Review Co-Chair, Gerald Dubiel:

"All projects approved by the majority of the GLA Board prior to March 12, 2018 (going back 21 years) are recognized to be in compliance with the applicable rules and regulations of the GLA without further GLA review."

If the board adopted this proposal, and all past projects were determined to be in compliance, the right of landowners to seek relief for (former) Covenant violations through the judicial system would be eliminated. Mizzi’s support of Dubiel’s proposal violated Sec. 10.02 of the Covenants, which reads “landowners may enforce the Covenants through proceedings at law such as seeking relief in the Park County District Court.”

6. At the March 21, 2018 Communication and Technology Committee Meeting, Mizzi, a member of that committee, suddenly interrupted the discussion, turned and began yelling at three non-committee attendees, saying that she would sue all of them if they did not stop harassing her. Her threat violated Sec. 3.1 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which promotes “… creating an atmosphere where everyone can speak freely and without fear or reprisal.” Her statement also violated Sec. 2.3 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads “All comments must be delivered in a businesslike and professional manner. Personal attacks or inflammatory comments will not be permitted.”

January 2018

7. At the January 8, 2018 Board Meeting, Mizzi repeatedly insisted by phone that those who did not share her opinions were liars. Such comments violate Conduct of Meeting Policy, Sec 2.3, which reads, “All comments must be delivered in a businesslike and professional manner. Personal attacks or inflammatory comments will not be permitted.”

8. At the January 8, 2018 Board Meeting, Mizzi voted against enforcing the Covenant 5.08 which states that “Cottage Industries and Light Manufacturing operations cannot make noise such as to be a nuisance to others.” This action violated Bylaws, Article VI B.9, which requires Directors to enforce the Covenants.

9. At the January 8, 2018 Board Meeting, after the Board found a fellow board member, Paul Ranttalo, to be guilty of four Covenant violations, Mizzi failed to vote to find him NOT in good standing. This action violated Bylaws, Article VI B.9 which requires the directors to enforce the Covenants. Mizzi’s vote in favor of Ranttalo’s position smacked of a Conflict of Interest due to their personal friendship.


November 2017

10. At the November 6, 2017 Board Meeting, Mizzi announced that she would not stand with the Board in their request for a Temporary Restraining Order against the O’Connells but would instead appear as a witness for them at the TRO Hearing. This unilateral departure from a board decision violated the Bylaws Article VI Section B, which requires the board to act as a whole. It also violated the Conflict of Interest Policy, which requires Mizzi to place the interests of the Association ahead of her own.

11. As Chair of the Community Property Committee, Mizzi called the Committee Members liars. This violated Section 2.3 of Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads that “comments must be delivered in a businesslike and professional manner.”

12. Mizzi insisted that interest and penalties need not be paid to be current with one’s assessments, and thus in good standing and eligible to vote at the Annual Election Meeting. This position runs counter to all mainstream bookkeeping practices and corporate accounting standards, plus it violates Cov. 3.19 and Cov. 3.20, which define “good standing” and establishes voting rights.


13. At the November 16, 2017 Communication and Technology Committee Meeting, Mizzi stated very clearly that she did not have to enforce the Covenants, and that she knew of many violations that she would not be taking any action on. This position violated Bylaws Article VI Sec. B 9, which reads that directors are to “Enforce obligations of the Members to the Association as provided in the Covenants.”

October 2017

14. At the October 9, 2017 Board Meeting, Mizzi voted against enforcing Covenant 10.04 which establishes the October 31 deadline for the payment of assessments if a member wishes to vote at the annual election meeting. The vote to support Cov.10.04 ended a long-standing practice that allowed members to pay delinquent dues at the door and thus be eligible to vote at the annual election meeting. Mizzi violated Bylaws Article VI Sec. B 9 which requires her to enforce the Covenants.

15. A Formal Complaint was filed against Mizzi at the October 9, 2017 Board Meeting for unprofessional conduct as Chair of the Community Property Committee. Items enumerated were her alleged personal agendas and goals, the fact that she wrote minutes to reflect her perspective rather than what actually happened, plus over-riding, dismissing, ignoring, and fighting with fellow Committee Members. Such behavior violated Sec. 2.3 Conduct of Meeting Policy.

16. At the October 9, 2017 Board Meeting, Mizzi moved to accept Kathleen Rakela as a board candidate even though the Board had already disqualified Rakela as a candidate for violating Cov. 10.04. Mizzi’s actions violated Bylaws Article VI Sec. B 9, which requires the board to enforce the Covenants. Mizzi’s motion to accept Rakela as a candidate also directly contradicted both (a) Cov. 3.19, which defines “a member in good standing” who thereby is qualified to vote and (b) Bylaws Article VI Sec C, which requires that a Landowner be “in good standing” in order to qualify as a candidate for the Board of Directors.

17. As Chair of the Community Property Committee, Mizzi unilaterally spent funds to mow the soccer field without Committee or Board knowledge or approval. The decision violated Bylaws Article VI Section B, which requires the Board to act as a whole.

June 2017

18. Mizzi was censured by a board vote at June 12, 2017 Board Meeting for violating the Conflict of Interest Policy, which requires her to protect the property rights of GLA members. It was determined that, as a party of interest in one of her non-GLA endeavors, she had supported that endeavor instead of acting to protect the property rights of a GLA landowner.

May 2017

19. On May 8, 2017 the Board received a Formal Complaint, which charged Mizzi with trespassing and damage to a landowner property in North Glastonbury. As a Director, Mizzi violated the Conflict of Interest Policy, which requires that each Director give first and utmost loyalty to their duties on behalf of the Association. In this case, Mizzi favored one of her non-board interests in a situation that involved the construction of a greenhouse built upon non-GLA property. This greenhouse was built so close to the property line that it would necessitate trespassing onto the adjacent GLA landowner’s parcel to access the greenhouse’s proposed driveway and parking lot. This issue remains unresolved.

20. Mizzi expressed her difference of opinion after hearing Board Member Kevin Newby review his experiences of personal attacks and character assassinations by her during his tenure as a Board Member. Her response to Newby’s account violated Sec. 2.3 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads, “All comments must be delivered in a businesslike and professional manner. Personal attacks and inflammatory comments will not be permitted.”

March 2017

21. At the March 13, 2017 Board Meeting, Mizzi accused fellow Board Member Leo Keeler for what she called his biased research into the history of the GLA maintenance of the private subdivision roads in Golden Age Village. Mizzi also mistakenly claimed that Keeler uses a private subdivision road to access his property and thus had a Conflict of Interest which biased his research. Mizzi violated Sec. 2.3 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which states, “All comments must be delivered in a businesslike and professional manner.”

October 2016

22. At the October 3, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi repeatedly interrupted, cut short, and shut down all landowner-generated questions and input. The behavior violated Section 3.1 Conduct of Meeting Policy, which requires the Chair to “create an atmosphere where everyone can speak without fear or reprisal.”

23. At the October 3, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi failed to curtail BOARD MEMBER over talk and interruptions during the discussion of past due assessments. This violated Section 1.5 Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads, “There should be no side conversations…Whoever is speaking is addressing the entire group.”

24. At the same meeting, Mizzi proposed the reversal of the landowner vote to uphold the 18% interest rate as established in the Governing Docs. Mizzi’s attempt to undermine a membership vote violated the basic operational rules of the GLA. In a democracy, the Board cannot overrule a membership vote.

25. At the October 3, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi refused to answer the question of whether the continued assessment discounts were a Board decision. Her action as President to allow assessment discounts violated Sec II 11.02 of the Covenants, which lists the approved uses for the assessments. Discounts are not listed.

September 2016

26. Mizzi circumvented the Project Review Committee’s “Review and Recommendation” process by calling on the Board to review and act upon a new project application at a board meeting and thereby extended the length of the September 12, 2016 Board Meeting by at least an hour and a half. Her action violated the due process of the board, which establishes that standing committees are to bring recommendations to the board.

27. At the September 12, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi refused to answer questions about or end Treasurer Rudy Parker’s unilateral reinstatement of assessment discounts. Mizzi violated Covenant 11.02, which details the purposes for which assessments can be used. Discounts are not listed.

28. Though Mizzi pounded away with her (new) gavel throughout the September 12, 2016 Board Meeting, she failed to maintain order as she had pledged in the January 2016 Newsletter. The cross-talk and over talk among Board Members, which she allowed as President, violated Conduct of Meeting Policy Section 1, Section 1.5 which reads that there shall be no side conversations.

29. Mizzi wrote in Fall 2016 Newsletter—unbeknownst to the fellow members of the Community Property Committee, which she chaired—that there would be neighborhood meetings to discuss future development of the soccer field property (GLA community property) even though there was a standing Board decision to resolve the encumbered title status of the property before taking any other actions. This announcement violated Article VI Section B of the Bylaws, which requires the Board to act as a whole.

30. At the September 12, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi unilaterally ruled that landowner input during the Landowner Comment Period would be limited to comments only—NO QUESTIONS ALLOWED. Mizzi violated Article VI Section B of the Bylaws require the Board to act as a whole.

31. Mizzi knowingly allowed the Board to accept inaccurate financial reports and ignored landowner calls for an audit at the September 12, 2016 Board Meeting. Note: this acceptance of inaccurate financial records was part of a pattern, which characterized her tenure as GLA President. Her action violated VI Section B-13 of the Bylaws which requires the board to “Keep records in a good and businesslike manner …”

August 2016

32. At the August 2016 Election Committee Meeting, Mizzi chose not to support the committee’s work to establish a secret ballot procedure for the Annual Election Meeting. This violated Montana Code 13-1-102, which reads, “All elections shall be by secret Ballot.”

33. At the August 8, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi failed to stop illegal assessment discounts when it became known that Treasurer Rudy Parker had reinstated the discounts. Mizzi violated Article VI Section B.9, which outlines the power of duties of Directors and reads, “Enforce obligations of the Members to the Association as provided in the Covenants.” Mizzi also failed to understand and enforce Section II, Chapter 11.02 of the Covenants that establishes that uses of the assessments “...shall be used for the operation, maintenance, repair and improvement of roads, trails, easements…” Discounts are not sanctioned anywhere in the Covenants.

34. Mizzi voted against resuming open board meetings as landowners in attendance watched in disbelief. By voting against open board meetings, Mizzi violated Article VI Section F of the Bylaws, which calls for open meetings.

35. By email vote, Mizzi abstained from voting for the petition to obtain a Restraining Order in District Court against the O’Connells. She reasoned that the Board needed to be consistent, and that because she had not been protected when ‘threatened’ by the landowner who had reclaimed his gavel, there was no need to protect the Board from the O’Connells. This violated the “The Duty of Loyalty” which calls for unselfish behavior as outlined in the Montana Non-Profit manual “Principles and Practices for Non-Profit Excellence in MT p. 23.

July 2016

36. Under Mizzi’s leadership at the July 11, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi unilaterally curtailed board discussion on nearly twenty suggestions from landowners that had come from the first two “Board Listens” Meetings. Unilateral actions violate Article VI Section B Bylaws, which requires that the board “... shall in all cases act as a Board…”

June 2016

37. At the June 11, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi claimed that board meetings in her home were safer and more productive than when landowners were physically present. At a Finance Meeting in the same month, Mizzi said she feared that if landowners were allowed to attend board meetings, someone would bring a gun. Mizzi’s comment violated Sec. 2.3 Conduct of Meeting Policy, which states that “…inflammatory comments will not be permitted.”

May 2016

38. At the May 16, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi explained there had been email conversations, but no vote taken, to move the location of board meetings to her home. Mizzi’s failure to call for a vote to hold closed meetings violated Article VI Section of the Bylaws, which requires the board to act as a whole.

39. Mizzi’s action to exclude landowners from physical presence at board meetings violated Article 6 Section F of the Bylaws, which reads, “All business of the Board, other than confidential matters (in the discretion of the Board) shall be conducted in an open meeting.”

40. Mizzi took no initiative to end the side-talk and over talk between Board Members that made it all but impossible for “phone-in landowner/members to hear. Further, though the phone connection ended shortly after 9 pm, the meeting continued until midnight. This violated Article 6 Section F of the Bylaws which calls for open meetings. It also violated Section 1 Part 1.5 of Conduct of Meeting Policy which reads “There should be no side conversations…Whoever is speaking is addressing the entire group.”

April 2016

41. At April 11, 2016 Board Meeting, when Board Member Dennis Riley asked how the board would address the issues landowners discussed at the April 2, 2016 Board Listens Meeting, Mizzi ruled, without Board input, that any Board Member involvement in any further Board Listens Meetings would be on a voluntary basis. This meeting was sponsored by the Communication and Technology Committee, which Riley chaired. This virtually ended the committee’s efforts to form a working relationship with landowners. This action also violated Article VI Section B Bylaws which reads “...Such Directors shall in all cases act as a Board …”

Administrator's Note: Point 42 not included in the latest copy.

43. Mizzi characterized the landowner recommendations from the April 2, 2016 Board Listens Meeting as “unsubstantiated allegations” from a minority of landowners. This violated Section 1.10 GLA’s Conduct of Meeting Policy, which calls all to “Accept the fact that there will be differences of opinion. Be willing to see all sides and not rush to draw “right versus wrong” positions.” Her statement also violated Sec. 2.3 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy which reads “All comments must be delivered in a businesslike and professional manner. Personal attacks and inflammatory comments will not be permitted.” It further violated Sec. 1.8 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads, “Do not interrupt the person who is speaking.”

March 2016

44. Mizzi screamed at a landowner that “all Board Members were volunteers and no criticism would be allowed” when, during the landowner’s three minutes to speak, the landowner discussed the subject of a Shadow Board. Pounding her gavel, Mizzi told the landowner to get up and follow her (to the door.) The landowner ignored Mizzi’s demands, and with her three minutes still ticking, stated that “we still live in a country of free speech.” Mizzi then called forth the son of a director, whom she had asked to be the “Sergeant at Arms,” to remove the landowner from her seat. The heat of the moment was released when an ex-board member in attendance ordered the teenager to “stand down.” With no support from Board Members, Mizzi returned to conducting the meeting. Such behavior violated Section 1.10 Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads, “Accept that there will be differences of opinion. Be willing to see all sides and not rush to draw “right versus wrong” positions.”

45. Mizzi wrote in the President’s column of the Spring 2016 Newsletter that GLA was banned from meeting at St. John’s. The truth is that GLA decided not to meet again at St. John’s after being warned that if the GLA Board did not conduct more respectful meetings, GLA would no longer be welcome. Distorting the facts does not meet the businesslike and professional standards of Section 2.3 Conduct of Meeting Policy.

February 2016

46. At the February 8, 2016 Board Meeting, when a landowner interrupted the call for a prayer at the beginning of the meeting, and others joined in to chant that they objected to “the introduction of religion at this meeting,” Mizzi immediately called the sheriff. Her action violated the due process procedure outlined in Sec 4 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which calls for an oral warning, a recess which would allow the President to speak directly to the landowner(s), and lastly a vote of those present as to whether to adjourn the meeting, ask the disruptive landowner(s) to leave, or call law enforcement.

47. Mizzi has publicly claimed, after the fact, that she had been attacked, and even assaulted, at the February 8, 2016 Board Meeting when a constituent (with his infant son sleeping on his chest in a baby carrier) reclaimed the gavel which Mizzi was using. The gavel belonged to the constituent and was his to reclaim. This behavior violated Section 3.4 of the Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads, “Personal attacks or inflammatory comments will not be permitted.”

48. Mizzi failed to address issues at the February 8, 2016 Board Meeting, which she said she’d take under advisement during the January 2016 Meeting. When pressed at the February Meeting for not following through on her January commitments, she then responded that she would consult with the Board on these matters by email after the meeting. No follow through occurred. While this may not be an actual violation of any law, it is a Gross Abuse of Position.

January 2016

49. Mizzi imposed her Meeting Decorum Policy at her first meeting as Board President on January 11, 2016. Her unilateral action violated Article VI Section B of GLA Bylaws which reads “...Such Directors shall in all cases act as a Board …”

50. Mizzi used her Decorum Policy to manipulate a favorable outcome for a Project Review applicant, a landowner known to support Mizzi’s personal fundraising interests, by refusing to allow Project Review Members to speak of the project during the board meeting. This apparent “Gag order” violated Section 3.1 of GLA’s Conduct of Meeting Policy which reads the President “…is responsible to facilitate a meeting in a way as to balance allowing sufficient time for as many landowners as possible to comment.”

51. A Formal Complaint about Mizzi’s failure to recuse herself from voting on the above member’s project has never been addressed. By definition, Mizzi was “an interested party,” as defined in Part 2, Definitions of GLA Conflict of Interest Policy. Mizzi, as an interested party, violated Part 3, GLA Conflict of Interest Policy, when she failed to recuse herself from voting to approve this project.

52. Mizzi opened the January 11, 2016 Board Meeting with a prayer, despite a Board decision in December 2015 to begin Board Meetings with a Moment of Silence. The unilateral overturn of a standing board decision violated Article VI Section B of GLA Bylaws, which reads “…Such Directors shall in all cases act as a Board…”

53. At the January 11, 2016 Board Meeting, Mizzi ordered a member to “sit down and shut up!” Such a comment violated Section 2.3 Conduct of Meeting Policy, which reads, “All comments must be delivered in a businesslike and professional manner.”

54. In the January 2016 GLA Newsletter, Mizzi wrote “fewer than 5% of landowner interests attend meetings and that the board regularly receives input from the same minority on a regular basis,” and that “the business of the board can be more effectively handled when a full spectrum of ideas is presented.” In the same newsletter, Mizzi credits the board with paying off the road loan and thus freeing funds for more roadwork. The truth is that the referenced 5% pushed and pushed until the Board relented and paid off the loan ahead of schedule, saving considerable interest charges. This behavior violated Fiduciary Duties with regard to being trustworthy.