B u l l e t i n

Arizona Department of Real Estate

T h e

Advisory Board Welcomes
Three New Members

July 2003
Volume 29, Issue 2

From left: Felipe Zubia, Commissioner Elaine Richardson,
Lisa Suarez, and Gary Brasher.

Governor Janet Napolitano
recently appointed three new members to
fill vacancies on the Real Estate Advisory
Board: Gary Brasher from Santa Cruz
County, Lisa Suarez from Pima County and
Felipe Zubia from Maricopa County.

The Real Estate Advisory
Board is comprised of nine members,
which represent different facets of the
real estate industry: brokers,
subdividers, residential licensees and
the public at-large per ARS 32-2104.
The purpose of the Advisory Board is
to provide the Commissioner with
recommendations as necessary and
beneficial to the best interests of the
public, provide recommendations on
specific questions or proposals as
requested by the Commissioner, and
shall annually present to the Governor
an evaluation of the performance of
(Continued on page 6)

Rise in Hispanic Victim Complaints Spurs ADRE Employee to Action
By Liz Carrasco

Department Investigator Henry
Soza, in his years of experience as an
investigator, has recently seen an increase
in the number of complaints involving
Hispanics and Hispanic licensees. Without
compromising the confidentiality of any
individual pending cases, Soza describes a
recent phenomenon of cases where some
licensees are taking advantage of their
Hispanic clients’ limited English skills and
lack of understanding of the home-buying
process.

ADRE Investigator Henry Soza

“Some licensees have gone
so far as to take earnest money and
(Continued on page 8)

Inside this issue:
Advisory Board Welcomes Three New Members

1

Rise in Hispanic Victim Complaints Spurs ADRE...

1

Advertising Rules Address More Than Just Hanging...

2

Commissioner’s Corner

3

Commissioner Kicks Off Outreach Effort in Yuma...

3

What Subdividers Should Know About Groundwater...

4

Should We Have A Specialized Business Broker...

5

AZ/ Mexico Commission’s Real Estate Task Force...

7

John Gerard, Deputy Director of Subdivisions, Leaves..

7

Administrative Actions

9

Our Mission
The purpose of the
Department is to protect
the public interest
through licensure and
regulation of the real
estate profession in the
State of Arizona.

Advertising Rules Address More Than Just Hanging a Shingle
By Cindy Ferrin

Our Department receives many inquiries
regarding advertising requirements by licensees.
Following is a breakdown of specific advertising rules
that should be of concern to licensees:
Blind Advertisements -- R4-28-502(A) states “A
salesperson or broker acting as an agent shall not
advertise property in a manner which implies that no
salesperson or broker is taking part in the offer for sale,
lease or exchange.” Blind advertisements are not
allowed!
Owner/Agent Advertisements -- R4-28-502(B)
states “Any salesperson or broker advertising the
salesperson’s or broker’s own property for sale, lease, or
exchange shall disclose the salesperson’s or broker’s
status as a salesperson or broker, and as the property
owner in the advertisement.” The licensee may
accomplish this by placing ‘owner/agent’ in the
advertisement. Please note that ‘owner/agent’cannot be
abbreviated.
Accurate Claims and Representations -- R4-28502(C) states “A salesperson or broker shall ensure that
all advertising contains accurate claims and
representations, and fully states factual material. A
salesperson or broker shall not misrepresent the facts or
create misleading impressions.”
Examples of misleading advertising would be:
• The loan is advertised as being assumable,
when in actuality it isn’t.
• The house is advertised as having a 25-year

•
•
•

home warranty, when in actuality it doesn’t.
The zoning is not as portrayed in the
advertisement.
The property is advertised as being in Sun City,
when it is actually in Surprise.
The roof is being advertised as 1 year old, when
in fact it is 10 years old.

The department usually receives these types of
complaints in conjunction with other allegations of statute
or rule violations. Whether the misleading advertisement
is intentional or by neglect, if the Department receives a
complaint, the Investigation Division will prepare a case
to be forwarded to the Administrative Actions Division,
regardless of intent.
Broker/Firm Name in Advertisements -- R4-28502(E) states “All advertising shall include either the
name in which the employing broker’s license is held or
the fictitious name contained on the license certificate.
The lettering used for the name of the employing broker
shall appear in a clear and conspicuous manner.” This
means you must have either the entity name or the dba
(“Doing Business As”) name of your firm in all
advertisements. The entity or dba names may not be
abbreviated. They must be spelled out in full as they are
on the license!
Broker Supervision of Advertising –R4-28-502(F)
states “The designated broker or the school owner shall
supervise all advertising, as applicable.” This is
(Continued on page 6)

Is my advertising
legal?

VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

Page 2

By Commissioner Elaine Richardson

In the late 70’s and most of the 80’s, we could
often hear stories of Mayor Ed Koch walking through
neighborhoods in New York City and asking folks
“How’m I doin?” Logistically I cannot walk though our
state, but we are traveling around our state in order to
ask a very similar question, “How are we doing?”
To date we have traveled and met with real estate professionals in Tubac, Yuma, Scottsdale, Tucson,
Mesa and Phoenix. Our next trip will include Douglas,
Bisbee, Green Valley, Santa Cruz County and Sierra
Vista.
Everyone has been very responsive to our visits
and have thanked us for taking the time to visit their respective communities—the truth of the matter is we, as a
Department, have gained more from our visits and it is

we who should thank the communities for being so responsive. By listening to concerns, we have been able
to compile a list of suggested subcommittees that were
addressed at our Stakeholders meeting on June 26th.
Some of the issues addressed were review of
subdivision, cemetery, timeshare and condominium statutes; property management trust accounts; VOW’s
(Virtual Office Websites); illegal license activity; business
broker licensure; suggested fee review; and increasing
professionalism. We will report on the results of these
subcommittees’ recommendations in future Bulletins.
Whether we are traveling throughout the state
via automobile, via website or via the Bulletin, I will continue to ask, “How are we doing?” and I look forward to
your continued input.Œ

Commissioner Kicks Off Outreach Effort in Yuma, then Tucson
By Liz Carrasco

When Commissioner Elaine Richardson
promised that the Arizona Department of Real Estate
was going to be available in providing information to all
areas in Arizona, and not just the proverbial “state of
Maricopa,” she meant business. Making good on her
promise to reach outlying parts of the state,
Commissioner Elaine Richardson kicked off her
statewide outreach program with a visit to Yuma on May
22. She first spoke at a professional training that the
Department provided for the Yuma County Planning and
Zoning Department staff.
Cindy Ferrin, Director of Investigations, and Roy
Tanney, Director of Subdivisions, facilitated a training for
roughly 25 people. They discussed information that
county staff would need when preparing and reviewing
allegations of illegal subdividing, to forward to the
Department.
“I want to thank Monty Stansbury, Director of the
Yuma County Planning and Zoning Department, for
inviting us to come and talk about these very important
issues, ” said Tanney.
VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

From left: Supervisor Lenore Stuart, Monsignor O’Keefe, Supervisor Bob McLendon, Supervisor
Lucy Shipp, Commissioner Elaine Richardson, and Mayor Larry Nelson.

Ferrin added, “It is very important to have an
open dialogue between the Department and county staff.
We want the counties to know that we are very
sympathetic to the problems that illegal subdivisions
create and we are willing to come out and help.”
Commissioner Richardson also addressed
community leaders, licensees, and professionals in the
real estate industry at a luncheon at the Yuma Golf and
Country Club. She discussed the state of current affairs
at the Department and her plans for improvements as the
(Continued on page 8)

Page 3

What Subdividers Should Know About Groundwater Law
By Roy Tanney

When Arizona’s groundwater law was written
and adopted in 1980, enforcement provisions were
included in subdivision law, A.R.S. 32-2181(C) and 322183(F). These provisions provide that no public report
can be issued on land located within a groundwater
active management area (AMA) without a demonstration
of assured water supply. In fact, groundwater law
provisions prohibit the recordation of a subdivision plat
without an assured water supply.

The Arizona Department of Water Resources
(ADWR) administers the groundwater law. For
subdivisions located within an AMA, a Certificate of
Assured Water Supply (CAWS) is required, unless water
service is committed to the subdivision by a city, town or
private water company designated as having an assured
water supply. The CAWS issued by ADWR specifies the
subdivision name, number of lots included in the assured
water supply designation, and the subdivider’s name.
Certificates are not transferable between
subdividers.
In summary, the application for subdivision
public report must contain a CAWS issued in the name
of the subdivider who is the applicant for public report,
unless there is a designated provider. This requirement
also applies to the issuance of Conditional Sales
Exemptions and Subsequent Owner Exemption Notices.
Applications should not be filed without satisfaction of
the assured water supply requirements.Œ

WHAT IS THE 10-DAY RULE?
Arizona Administrative Rule R4-28-301 (F) states that every licensee shall, within 10
days of each occurrence, notify the Commissioner, in writing, of any change in information
contained in their license certification questionnaire, specifically for:
•
•
•
•

•

Any conviction, deferral of a judgment, or sentencing for a misdemeanor or felony.
Any order, judgment, or adverse decision entered against the license involving fraud or
dishonesty.
Any restriction, suspension, civil penalty imposed under a license, denial, or revocation of any
professional or occupational license.
Any order, judgment, or decree permanently or temporarily preventing the licensee from
engaging in the sale or purchase of real estate or cemetery property, time-share intervals
membership camping contracts, campgrounds, or securities.
Any order, judgment, or decree issued involving consumer fraud or racketeering laws.

Failure to timely notify the Department within the 10-day period of any of the above
occurrences could result in disciplinary action, including, license revocation or suspension, the
denial of the renewal of the license, and a civil penalty.Œ

VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

Page 4

Should We Have a Specialized Business Broker License?
Guest Column By Keith McLeod, Broker, Certified Business Intermediary, and IBBA Fellow.

Owning your own business is the American
dream. There are 651,317 small business owners living
their dream in Arizona – 62% reside in Maricopa County
and 17% reside in Pima County. These statistics from a
May 2002 Department of Commerce/Arizona State
University study define small businesses as those with
fewer than 100 employees.
What avenue exists for business buyers and for
owners transferring these businesses? Allowing real
estate licensees to handle the sale of a business is no
different than allowing the general public to handle the
sale. Currently, the Arizona Department of Real Estate
does not require, and Arizona real estate schools do not
teach, train or test licensees in the area of business
sales. The lack of a proper education, and managers’
failure to shut down incompetent licensees in this area
falls short of protecting the public. Some could argue
malfeasance or liability exists from institutional inaction.
There are numerous, significant differences
between selling businesses, and selling land, buildings,
or houses:
• Many emotional, psychological and practical
business issues exist in a sales transaction. Just
remember, many business owners spend more
waking hours at their business than with their
loved ones.
• Confidentiality is crucial to a selling business
owner. Fear of suppliers requiring all cash,
employees dusting off their resumes, worried
customers, and competition making inroads on
company sales forbids prominent signs
advertising the business for sale. Confidentiality
agreements are required.
• Determining a value is markedly different as well.
Whereas cost and market comparables weigh
heavily in homes and buildings - an income

VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

•

•

approach dominates the value of business.
Generally a multiple of the adjusted earnings
provides a selling price.
Ownership of businesses varies greatly; C or S
corporations, partnerships, sole proprietors and
limited liability companies exist in the
marketplace.
Each variety of ownership creates different tax
issues for the seller. In addition, the allocation of
the selling price’s tangible and intangible assets
will tend to be a burden for either the buyer or the
seller. Further negotiations are required.

A business brokerage license should be
restrictive. It should require mandated courses, tests
and a comprehensive examination within a limited time
period to obtain the designation. Continuing education
and recertification should also be a requirement.
Such rules, regulations and administrative
governing already exist with the International Business
Broker Association (IBBA). Upon completion of IBBA
requirements, candidates earn the Certified Business
Intermediary (CBI) designation.
I recommend the following change: Once
Broker and CBI status are obtained; the Department
should replace our current license with a State of
Arizona Business Broker license. Every two years
thereafter, the Business Broker licensee may satisfy the
Department’s 18 required credit hours for renewal. The
remaining 6 optional credit hours should be IBBA
courses.
Requiring the CBI designation to obtain an
Arizona Department of Real Estate Business Broker
license protects the public. This new symbol provides
credibility, a professional standard, peace of mind and a
trust factor to the unsuspecting public.Œ

Page 5

Advertising Rules Address More Than Just Hanging a Shingle (continued …)
(Continued from page 2)

extremely important to keep in mind, because when a
complaint is filed, the Department holds accountable
both the designated broker and the salesperson for any
violations of state law or Commissioner’s Rules.
Use of the Term ‘Acre’ -- R4-28-502(G) states “A
licensee shall not use the term acre, either alone or
modified, unless referring to an area of land representing
43,560 square feet.” This term should only be used
when there is a verifiable acre or acres for sale.
Placing a For Sale Sign -- R4-28-502(H) states
“Before placing or erecting a sign giving notice that
specific property is being offered for sale, lease, rent, or
exchange, a salesperson or broker shall secure the
written consent of the property owner, and the sign shall
be promptly removed upon request of the property
owner.”
Web Site Advertising -- R4-28-502(L) states “The
use of electronic media, such as the Internet or web site
technology, which targets Arizona residents with the
offering of a property interest constitutes the
dissemination of advertising as defined in A.R.S. §322101(2).” If advertising on the Internet, the web site must

comply with all applicable state statutes and
Commissioner’s Rules. If it does not, the Department will
require that the advertising be modified to remove the
target for Arizona residents. Also, in the event that an
out-of-state person is hosting a site that targets Arizona
residents, the Department will require that the agent
obtain an Arizona license.
Contests and Drawings -- R4-28-503(C) reads
“Unless otherwise provided by law, a person shall not
solicit, sell, or offer to sell an interest in a development by
conducting a lottery contest, drawing, or game of chance
to influence a purchaser or prospective purchaser.” This
means that if you are a licensed salesperson or broker,
you cannot conduct a contest or lottery with current, past
or prospective clients.
Business Phone Number -- Lastly the
Department receives many phone calls asking us if we
require that the business phone number be placed in
advertisements. Our rules do not require that the
business phone number be placed in advertisements.
We leave this up to the individual employing/designated
broker to decide for his/her firm.Œ

Advisory Board Welcomes Three New Members (continued…)
(Continued from page 1)

the Commissioner and the Real Estate Department.
Gary Brasher is the newest subdivision member,
hailing from the beautiful city of Tubac. A fourth
generation Arizonan and single father of two daughters,
Brasher obtained his B.A. from Arizona State University
after attending the University of Colorado on a football
scholarship. A man of many talents, Brasher is president
of Brasher Real Estate Incorporated and is responsible
for developing the beautiful master-planned community
called Barrio de Tubac. In addition, he has been a
licensed real estate salesperson for 22 years, a broker
for 19 years and has a pilot’s license.
Lisa Suarez is the newest residential member,
hailing from Tucson. Suarez is the owner of EMS Realty,
one of Southern Arizona’s leading property management
companies. She has been a residential real estate
salesperson for the past 17 years and has been very
active in various professional organizations in the real
estate industry.
Felipe Zubia is the newest public member of the
Advisory Board. A planning consultant with the law firm
VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

of Beus Gilbert, Zubia was the former Director of
Development Services for the City of Avondale and a
previous planner for the City of Peoria. He obtained his
B.A. from the University of Arizona. Zubia prides himself
on volunteering for a number of different non-profit
organizations, is happily married to his wife Emily, and is
the proud father of three children.
The Department is thrilled to have the opportunity to
work with these new members.Œ

Page 6

Arizona-Mexico Commission’s Real Estate Task Force a Hit!
Guest Column By Mitch Creekmore, Stewart Title Guaranty de México

In 2002, former Arizona Governor Jane Hull
created the first ever Real Estate Task Force in
participation with the Arizona-Mexico Commission and
the Comisión Sonora-Arizona. New Governor Janet
Napolitano has reinstated the task force to continue their
work in developing and implementing bilateral initiatives
and creating greater public awareness concerning the
real estate industry in the state of Sonora, Mexico.
The committee is comprised of professionals
from the legal, development, appraisal, tax, title
insurance and real estate salesperson sectors as well as
Arizona’s Department of Real Estate, Association of
Realtors®, Office of Tourism, and the National Law
Center for Inter-American Free Trade. During a tenmonth period of joint effort and work, the task force
produced the largest and most comprehensive body of
information to date concerning the acquisition and
disclosure of realty in Mexico. All of the information can
be found on the internet at www.azmc.org/realestate.
All of the members of the Task Force are
appointees of Governor Napolitano.
Your new
Commissioner for the Arizona Department of Real
Estate, former State Senator Elaine Richardson, has
been appointed Co-Chair of the task force along with
myself, being from the Houston Office of Stewart Title
Guaranty de Mexico.

The Task Force has
prepared a wealth of
information on this site for U.
S. citizens interested in buying
real estate in Mexico and has
assisted in improving the
current legal and regulatory
framework in Sonora. The
Task Force will continue to
refine and enhance these
Mitch Creekmore of Stewart Title
educational tools and promote Guaranty de México, and Co-Chair
for the Arizona Mexico Commission’s
regulatory reform throughout
Real Estate Task Force
2003 and beyond, in support
of Governor Napolitano's vision for Arizona-Mexico
relations. This is all for one simple reason: buying real
estate in Mexico involves complexities of which most
buyers are simply unaware. As a result, it is critically
important that buyers have access to current information
at all stages of real estate transactions. It is also critical
that local lawmakers provide a regulatory framework
designed to protect foreign investments and foster sound
economic growth. Owning a home or condo on the
beach in Mexico should be an enjoyable, safe, secure
and potentially profitable acquisition. The Task Force
will continue to strive for reform and transparency as well
as to create greater public awareness about the issues
concerning Mexican real estate.Œ

John Gerard, Deputy Director of Subdivisions, Leaves ADRE
John S. Gerard, Deputy Director of
Subdivisions, has announced his plans to leave the
Arizona Department of Real Estate to accept a new
position of Builder Services Manager with LandAmerica
Title Company. A native of Arizona, Gerard began his
real estate career in 1978, working for over 12 years in
the title insurance industry for such companies as
Minnesota Title & Trust and Stewart Title Agency.
In 1990, Gerard left the title insurance field to
pursue a career in state regulatory investigations and
was hired by the Department first as an Investigator and
later promoted several times until becoming the current
Deputy Director of Subdivisions. Gerard’s current duties
include the direct supervision of subdivision staff and
overseeing the regulation of subdivided lands, unsubdivided lands, and timeshare, campground and
VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

cemetery properties.
Gerard is also
considered one of the
Department’s specialists
in the area of timeshare
and international land
registration. Gerard
served on the Arizona
Mexico Commission’s
Real Estate Task Force.
Gerard will be
John Gerard, Deputy Director of Subdivisions
missed and Department
staff wishes him the best of luck in his new endeavor.Œ

Page 7

Rise in Hispanic Victim Complaints Spurs ADRE Employee to Action (continued…)
(Continued from page 1)

not deposit it in escrow or trust accounts, and some fail
to submit offers or contracts,” stated Soza.
He also describes a rise in the area of
unlicensed activity, where many unsuspecting persons
believe they are purchasing a home, when in reality the
paperwork they have signed says otherwise. Soza
maintains that predatory licensees as well as some
predatory lenders are primarily targeting Mexican
immigrants.
Due to his knowledge in this area, Soza received
a call to action and was asked to participate as a panelist
for a seminar that will address issues relating to the
multi-cultural consumer and the real estate industry, with
a focus on fraud. The conference was held in Phoenix in
late June, and included invited national keynote speaker
Henry Cisneros, former Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development under President Bill Clinton.
Henry Soza has also been part of an ongoing
dialogue with other agencies at the state, federal and
local levels to find ways to address the increasing
problem of real estate fraud, especially with new citizens

who emigrate from other countries. There is a lack of
public awareness, especially among those immigrants
who are following the American dream by becoming US
citizens and wanting to buy a home, only to have their
dreams turn into a nightmare at the hands of an
unscrupulous licensee engaging in illegal activity.
“Our job as investigators is to try to protect the
public by investigating sound allegations, and educating
the public by providing information about how to file a
complaint for an issue that falls within our jurisdiction,”
says Soza.
Undaunted, Soza continues, “Although I want to
help anyone that walks through my door, regardless of
ethnicity, it troubles me that I have seen an increase in
the number of Hispanic victims. They are being targeted
because they are vulnerable.”
The Department continues to investigate all
complaints filed against licensees or unlicensed
individuals and continually works with the Arizona
Attorney General’s Office to prosecute substantiated
cases.Œ

Commissioner Kicks Off Outreach Effort in Yuma, then Tucson (continued…)
(Continued from page 3)

new Commissioner. She announced the creation of an
online licensing renewal process that the Department
currently is creating. She also mentioned the formation
of various stakeholders’ committees to give various
players within the real estate industry the opportunity to
sit at the same table and address numerous issues. This
was Commissioner Richardson’s first visit to Yuma since
she was confirmed by a Senate vote on May 8, 2003.
Richardson also saved taxpayers’ money by
taking advantage of her trip to Yuma not only to train
county staff and speak with community leaders, but to
also perform several subdivision inspections while on the
road.
“I decided it would be better for us to do as much
work as we could all at once, so that we could get more
bang for our buck and save taxpayers’ money by having
one trip instead of three separate ones,” Richardson
stated.
Richardson also headed to Tucson in June to attend
VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

a special roundtable meeting with the local Tucson
Association of Realtors, while also attending the ArizonaMexico Commission’s Summer Plenary Session.
Richardson plans on continuing her visits to outlying areas to
speak with real estate professionals, to gather information
from the industry and to educate different communities about
the services available in the Department. She is planning her
next trip in August to southeastern Arizona.Œ

Page 8

Administrative Actions
COMMISSIONER’S FINAL ORDERS
Disciplinary Actions
Patrick Joseph Logue (Scottsdale)
No. 01A-145, Order March 12, 2003, and Amended
Order April 15, 2003
Logue, designated broker for Urban Investment
Corporation, was found to have converted and
commingled client funds, and performed specified
licensed activities in an incompetent manner, in violation
of A.R.S. § 32-2153 (A)(16) and (B)(8). Logue is subject
to audits with specified terms, required to surrender his
current broker’s license and shall be issued a two-year
provisional license whereby he is prohibited from being a
manager, partner, owner, co-owner, or officer of any
licensed entity; shall only be licensed as an associate
broker and not as a designated broker; shall not act as a
branch manager for any licensed entity; and is prohibited
from being a signatory on or having access to any
account that contains client funds.
Bob M. Snyder, doing business as Advanced Broker
Services (Prescott)
No. 00A-124, Order dated March 25,2003, amended
March 26, 2003
Snyder, a self-employed broker, was found to have
violated A.R.S. §§ 32-2151 (A), (B)(1) and (2), 32-2153
(A)(3), (16), and (B)(7), 32-2174, 32-2175, R4-28-1101
(A) and (C), when he converted and commingled trust
funds, violated his fiduciary duties, failed to immediately
deposit all funds held in trust into a trust account, used
trust funds for other than the purpose for which they were
deposited, and failed to keep his journals and ledgers in
balance. The Commissioner denied Snyder’s Motion for
Reconsideration or Rehearing on May 23, 2003. Snyder
is assessed a civil penalty of $1,500, and shall be issued
a three-year provisional license, subject to specified
terms and conditions, including, without limitation, that he
is prohibited from being a designated broker; that he not
be a manager, partner, owner, co-owner or officer of any
licensed entity; may not be a branch manager for a
licensed entity, is prohibited from being a signatory to or
having access to or authority over any account that
contains client funds; and requiring a $5,000 surety
bond.

VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

Appealable Agency Actions
Cynthia Herr (Scottsdale)
No. 02A-172-REL, Order dated May 2, 2003
Herr’s original application for salesperson’s license was
denied pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-2153 (B)(7) and (10),
based on a February, 2001 conviction for Aggravated
Assault, a class 6 undesignated offense which was
designated a misdemeanor in August, 2002, and the
Department’s August, 2001 denial of her April 2001
license renewal application.
SETTLEMENTS BY CONSENT ORDERS
Disciplinary Actions
William G. Anastopoulos (Tucson)
No. 03A-022-REL, consolidated with The Estate of
Carter D. Wertheim; Gus Dussias; George S.
Petropoulos; ARC Development Group, L.L.C., The City
Group, Ltd., Peyton Taylor Realty, L.L.C., formerly
known as Arizona Real Estate Club; and Retract Funding
Group, L.L.C. (Tucson)
No. 02A-161, Consent Order May 28, 2003
Respondents were the subjects of a prior Consent Order,
No. 99A-145, for violations of the subdivision laws. In the
instant Consent Order, Respondents were found to have
violated statutory provisions, including A.R.S. §§ 32-2153
(A)(3), (24), and (B)(9), and 32-2185.09, as a result of
their failure to comply with the terms of the prior Consent
Order. This disciplinary proceeding was initiated and
consolidated with Anastopoulos’s appeal of the
Department’s denial of his application for license
(Continued on page 10)

Page 9

Administrative Actions
(Continued from page 9)

renewal. Respondents are assessed a civil penalty of
$5,000, Anastopoulos’s renewal application is denied,
and Respondents are ordered to comply with the prior
Consent Order including, among other things, to: bring
the subdivided lots into compliance with county planning
and zoning statutes, including plat approval, easements,
engineering of roads and building sites, and meeting
county standards for road construction, water, and
utilities; provide financial assurances for the
improvements; obtain a certificate of assured water
supply; and apply for and obtain a public report before
transferring/selling any interests or lots in the subdivision.
Lawrence Russell Chapman (Tucson)
No. 03A-060, Consent Order June 3, 2003
Chapman violated statutory provisions, including A.R.S.
§ 32-2153 (A)(3), (B)(2), (5), (7), and (10) and A.A.C. R428-301 (F) based on his felony convictions for Taking the
Identity of Another, and Forgery, and his failure to notify
the Department of these convictions. Chapman’s
salesperson’s license is revoked.
William L. Conaway, doing business as Conaway
Land & Cattle Co. (Elfrida)
No. 00A-120, Consent Order May 16, 2003
Conaway, a self-employed broker, was found to have
violated statutory provisions including A.R.S. § 32-2153
(A)(3) and A.A.C. R4-28-1101 (C) when he failed to
expeditiously perform all acts authorized by his holding of
a real estate license. Conaway is assessed a $1,000 civil
penalty, and required to complete 6 additional hours of
approved continuing education courses.

32-2153 (A)(3) and (25), and A.A.C. R4-28-802 (A) and
R4-28-1101 (C) when he failed to obtain the buyer’s
express written consent to sign her name to a contract
addendum, failed to provide a copy of the signed
contract addendum to all parties, and did not
expeditiously perform acts authorized by his holding of a
real estate license. Hatton was assessed a civil penalty
of $1,500 and required to attend 12 additional hours of
continuing education classes.
Richard R. Holcomb (Scottsdale)
No. 03A-061, Consent Order May 29, 2003
Holcomb filed a false and misleading application for
licensure and violated statutory provisions, including A.R.
S. § 32-2153 (A)(3) and (B)(1), and A.A.C. R4-28-301 (F)
based on his failure to disclose his 1996 misdemeanor
conviction for Theft. His salesperson’s license is
suspended for 90 days, he is assessed a civil penalty of
$1,000, and issued a 2-year provisional license, subject
to specified terms and conditions, including that he shall
not be a branch manager or supervise any licensees,
and shall not be a manager, partner, owner, co-owner or
officer of any licensed entity.
Martin Luther Massengale (Tucson)
No. 03A-037, Consent Order May 22, 2003
Massengale filed a false and misleading application for
licensure and violated statutory provisions including A.R.
(Continued on page 11)

Craig Engen (Phoenix)
No. 03A-040, Consent Order June 10, 2003
Engen filed a false and misleading application for
licensure and violated statutory provisions, including A.R.
S. § 32-2153 (A)(3) and (B)(1) and A.A.C. R4-28-301(F),
based on his failure to disclose his 1996 misdemeanor
conviction for Theft. His real estate salesperson’s license
is revoked.
Homer “Steve” Hatton (Chandler)
No. 03A-024, Consent Order June 10, 2003
Hatton violated statutory provisions, including A.R.S. §
VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

Page 10

Administrative Actions
(Continued from page 10)

S. § 32-2153 (A)(3), (B)(1), (3), (7), and (10), and A.A.C.
R4-28-301 (F) based on his failure to disclose his 1992
misdemeanor convictions for Assault-Intent/Reckless/
Injure, and Assault; 1995 misdemeanor conviction
involving possession of a controlled substance; 1997
misdemeanor conviction for Driving While Suspended;
1998 misdemeanor conviction for Driving with License
Suspended for Failure to Appear; and 1998
misdemeanor convictions for Assault-Intent/Reckless/
Injure and Disorderly Conduct-Fighting. Massengale’s
salesperson’s license is revoked.
Gene R. Monteleone (Phoenix)
No. 03A-027, Consent Order June 10, 2003
Monteleone filed a false and misleading application for
licensure and violated statutory provisions including A.R.
S. § 32-2153 (B)(1), (5), (7), and (10) based on his failure
to disclose his 1990 misdemeanor conviction for
Unlawful Failure To Return Rental Property. Monteleone
is issued a 2 year provisional license, subject to specified
terms and conditions, including without limitation, that he
not be a manager, partner, owner, co-owner or officer of
any licensed entity and may not be a branch manager for
a licensed entity; his license is suspended for 120 days,
and he is assessed a civil penalty of $1,500.

Do you have an article idea?
If you would like to submit an article to be
considered for inclusion in The Bulletin,
please send your article to the Editor via
email at lcarrasco@re.state.az.us.
Submissions must be in MS Word format and
less than 500 word
words.
s.
Submissions of guest writers may not
necessarily reflect the opinion of the
Department.

VO L U ME 29 , I S S U E 2

Edward Robert Sodeman (Phoenix)
No. 03A-044, Consent Order May 28, 2003
Sodeman filed a false and misleading application for
licensure and violated statutory provisions including A.R.
S. § 32-2153 (A)(3), (B)(1), (5), (7), and (10) and A.A.C.
R4-28-301 (F) when he failed to disclose his 1983 felony
conviction for Robbery and the Court’s revocation of his
probation in 1985 when he was found to have
intentionally struck a person with a hammer and caused
injury to the person while committing theft of property.
His salesperson’s license is revoked.
Appealable Agency Actions
(See Anastopoulos, consolidated, under Disciplinary Actions, above)
Sylvia Guillen, doing business as Rontori Realty and
Development (Tucson)
No. 02A-125, Order Summarily Suspending Real Estate
Broker’s License, June 6, 2003
The Department summarily suspended the real estate
broker's license of Sylvia Guillen, a self-employed
broker. The order alleged that files were incomplete,
contained documents that had not been initialed and
dated by Guillen to reflect her review, were not properly
maintained, and were not retained in her principal office
or a designated off-site location; that she failed to
properly supervise her licensed salesperson; and that
Guillen is currently unable to meet her responsibilities as
and perform the tasks of a real estate broker. The
Department determined it was necessary and
appropriate to issue this order to protect the public. The
order is an appealable agency action, and Guillen may
file a request for hearing within 30 days of the order. Œ
Page 11

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF
REAL ESTATE
Main Office:
2910 North 44th Street, Suite 100
Phoenix, Arizona 85018
Phone: 602.468.1414
Fax: 602.468.0562
Southern Arizona Office:
400 W. Congress, Suite 523
Tucson, Arizona 85701
Phone 520.628.6940
Fax 520.628.6941

We are on the web:
http: //www.re.state.az.us

The Bulletin
An official publication of the State of
Arizona, Department of Real Estate.
Main Office:
2910 N. 44th Street, Ste 100
Phoenix, Arizona 85018
Phone (602) 468-1414
Fax (602) 468-0562
Southern Arizona Office:
400 W. Congress, Ste 523
Tucson, Arizona 85701
Phone (520) 628-6940
Fax (520) 628-6941

Janet Napolitano
Governor
Elaine Richardson
Commissioner
Ronald Passarelli
Deputy Commissioner
Liz Carrasco
Editor

© 2003, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE. THE ARIZONA REAL ESTATE BULLETIN, OR “THE
BULLETIN,” IS SCHEDULED TO BE PUBLISHED 6 TIMES A YEAR AND IS AVAILABLE FROM THE WEB SITE
ABOVE. FIRST-CLASS MAIL SUBSCRIPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE FOR $10 PER YEAR.
ARTICLES REPRINTED FROM OTHER PUBLICATIONS DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE POLICIES OR
INTERPRETATIONS OF LAW BY THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE.
THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE IS AN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY , REASONABLE
ACCOMMODATION AGENCY.

Real Estate Advisory Board
R.L. Brown, Chair
Richard C. Allen, Vice-Chair
Gary Patrick Brasher
Eugene E. Cox
Vicki L. Cox-Golder
Gary Lee
Vince Pellerito
Lisa A. Suarez
Felipe Andres Zubia