A cloud has been lifted from 31 homes in a subdivision just outside of Ridgefield that has been at the center of a legal fight between a developer and a homeowners association.
In August of last year, the Helen’s View Homeowners Association filed a lawsuit against the Holt Opportunity Fund. Holt is pursuing a development in the same subdivision as the Helen’s View HOA. The suit argues that the development would violate density requirements in existing covenants, conditions and restrictions that govern the subdivision.
In November, attorneys representing Holt responded with “lis pendens” actions against all 31 homeowners in the association, a legal action that’s meant to alert potential buyers of a property that there is a lawsuit concerning it.
Kelly Smith, who works as a sales executive, tried to sell her house after the action was taken. The legal action clouds a property’s title and she said the sale fell through after title companies became leery, causing her to lose thousands of dollars and delay her move. But on Friday, Clark County Superior Court Judge Daniel Stahnke ordered that the action be removed.
“I’m happy about it,” said Smith of the order. “I just feel like it took too long and wasted too much of people’s time and money.”
Zachary Stoumbos, attorney for Holt, told The Columbian that the lis pendens action was proper in this situation because potential buyers of a property should be aware of any litigation that could affect it. He said that before the lis pendens action was taken at least one home in the subdivision was sold to an unwitting buyer.
Mark Erickson, the attorney for the HOA, has argued that the development would violate CCRs that were amended by the association to require a minimum lot size of 31,798 square feet in the subdivision. Holt owns a 103-acre lot in the subdivision that is subject to an annexation agreement with the city of Ridgefield that calls for a density requirement of six residential units per acre.
Erickson argued that the lis pendens should be removed because the lawsuit wouldn’t cause problems for a potential homebuyer.
In December, Stahnke ruled that the amended CCRs were void and unenforceable.
There will be at least one more hearing on the case scheduled for March 31. Stoumbos said he expects the case to be settled. But Erickson said he will argue the development by Holt would violate a conservation easement on the property.
Erickson said the outcome of the case could have broader consequences.
“Cities are expanding and are coming into these cluster developments and don’t know what to do with them,” he said. “Cities want higher density because they want a bigger tax base.”
