[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Thank you for your response.

Technically, the BOD was within their rights to vote on the issue since it was regarding a ‘capital expense’ item, which according to our CC&Rs and Bylaws which states that a vote is only needed ‘if it requires a special assessment to pay for it. There is/was money in the budget without needing a special assessment. BUT, and yes there is a BUT, it was pay for a new ‘amenity’ to be built in a ‘common area’ which according to our documents, are for the ‘enjoyment of owners’. The underlying recommendation for the new amenity was to ‘improve summertime occupancy of rental guests. It should be noted, that there has been no formal survey, ROI business case, to justify the expense.

As stated in my post, no owner vote was taken yet is had been brought up at a previous Annual Owners meeting that a ‘vote of owners’ would be taken under consideration and at one point the BOD did agree to let the owners vote (as documented in Meeting Minutes BUT, at the next meeting, that decision was ‘rescinded’ due to the clause in our by-laws about only need a vote if a capital expense required a special assessment.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

I understand that Motorcoach Country Club did a conversion. Here is the contact information for Ron: Ron Tatti
rontatti47@gmail.com

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

thank you for your recommendation. I understand a couple of people are looking at a product called SIMPLY VOTING but they should definitely compare both products

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

thank you for your recommendation, I will forward the information to the owners who are looking for the software. I understand that they are looking at another product called SIMPLY VOTING I do like your pricing comment!

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Sorry for the late response. I appreciate your comments and insights. Sadly, BOD meetings have not been ‘open’ to owners but with the anticipated results of the re-run election which will be announced today, that will soon change.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Thank you for your reply. Considering one of the BOD members who was up for election opted to ‘retire’ it would make sense to have had
the newly elected BOD member to assume that position right away. The re-run election is now over and we are awaiting the voting results.
The process itself was plagued with missteps given a short 15-day turn-around time and issues with members not receiving their ‘2-day’ USPS voting packages after 6 days or more. Sadly, there were ‘potential’ improprieties due to ‘sloppy’ administration. The new proxy statement referred to the original meeting held in January versus the new day/time of when the re-run votes would be counted. Unless you received the new voting package or had attended the original meeting, owners were not made aware of the names of the 4 run-off candidates, which caused confusion with one proxy vote. When asked if that proxy vote had been returned – the response was ‘I don’t know’. Luckily, if the election turns out the way the majority hopes, this issue will be resolved by looking into an on-line voting system.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

I appreciate all of your input. I actually did what you suggest regarding proxy’s earlier this year when I was running for the BOD. It was a decision made only 5 days prior to the
annual POA meeting and I did get a good number of votes. I ran using a ‘pledge code of ethics’ which was being proposed as an alternative to seeking remedies to pursuing ongoing
violations. Several years ago, I also ran for the BOD but was a new owner and did not get any real ‘traction’. I was, however offered the position as a ‘non-voting’ member
of the BOD to assume the ‘Secretary’ position about a year later, which I turned down due to the ‘non-voting’ issue. (The secretary resigned but remained on the BOD). This year
I have received HOA Management Certification. I am a ‘ready, willing and able’ owner trying to diffuse conflict and do what is right for the owners. My concern about the VP position
was due to ‘health’ issues of the President and the need to have someone in the ‘wings’ to step in if something did happen before the election.

I have learned so much from this forum, have received excellent advice and support.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Not sure how many since they are also reviewing and approving the budget for next year and there are other things going on which will require some immediate attention as you mentioned. I am running for the BOD in January 2023. The President is presiding. The appointed VP resigned recently and the BOD appointed another owner to backfill the ‘opening’ since we are supposed to have 7 members but as I wrote, they did not appoint a VP. I would like to point out that this is the third appointment this year due to two owners selling and now one resigning. I did run for the BOD earlier this year (wink) and when they sent out the notice of which positions were up for election – it was Person A, Person B and Person OPEN. Now they
have Person A, B, C and should be announcing shortly the list of all the candidates running for the 2023 BOD. My personal belief is that if you are on the BOD you should be willing to backfill a key position. And yes we are in a state where Board meetings must be open for owners but that request continues to be ‘nixed’.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Well aware of what is needed for capital funding. Right now, we are getting a new road put in and anxiously awaiting the special assessment we will have have to pay. There should have been $ put in reserves for this project. I recently asked about $100,000 which was just put into an ’emergency reserve fund’ this year and never got a response back from the BOD. We were all given copies of the proposed budget prior to our annual POA meeting this year, but other ‘hot’ topics took over the meeting and we never had a chance to ask about items in the budget. We were also told that the new road was ‘considered’ a repair vs. a capital improvement as a way to ‘skirt’ having the owners vote on it. Not a major problem since the road had been
an issue for 20 years but still we should follow our bylaws.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Thank you for confirming.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

The proposal to see about getting more $ for other capital improvement projects. I am sure our $5,000 a year annual assessment will go up as well. I think we will be a bit ‘late to the
gate’ with a capital funding fee but if it is based off of a % of the sales price, that is a different story. Current listed property for sale is $850K to $1.5M

[Janet]

Up

1

Down

::

Yes, it sure does. Ironically, we were just at Mountain Falls Luxury RV Resort and and owner was telling me how much they are collecting from the sale of lots. There is an onsite
Real Estate Broker but it was unclear what % of the sales the Association is getting. A one-time capital funding fee, in addition to paying an annual assessment seems the way to go.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Just want to update all of you and thank you for your helpful suggestions regarding the Petition for a Pledge Code of Ethics. The good news is
that I did get our BOD to commit to developing a Code of Ethics by mid-year by making a motion at our POA meeting last week and having someone
second the motion. On the ‘flip’ side of things, when the BOD got wind of what I was doing with a Petition, I received an email basically claiming that there was no way any of them could sign such a document and that they would consider taking action against any signatories on the petition. I challenged
to ‘run for the BOD’ so that is what I did. I made the Pledge Code of Ethics my campaign platform and announced myself as a ‘write in candidate’. That way I got the Pledge in front of ALL the OWNERS. I became a ‘write-in’ the week before the election. Many owners had already mailed in their ballots (4 incumbents were running for re election. I received 16 votes, the incumbents 34 each (you could vote for up to 4 people). Not bad for a ‘late to the
gate’ candidate.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Just an update to all. I have the petition and am gathering the signatures needed.

Cover letter sent out to owners with the proposed pledge:

I am in the process of contacting individual lot owners asking for their support in signing
the petition I plan on presenting to the BOD at the Annual POA meeting to be held later this month.

The intent of the petition is to gather enough signatures to have the BOD take action to consider using
this pledge for any owner running, appointed or elected to the XXXXXX XXXXX BOD.

This pledge is nothing more than to serve as a reminder of the ethical manner in which candidates or Board Members
should carry out their duties and responsibilities in support of our Restrictions and Protective Covenants
which were established in 19XX, including By-laws. In 20XX these were ‘reinstated’ (including amendments) required by
Florida Statute 712 which allowed them to be renewed and updated prior to the 30-year expiration date.

By gathering enough signatures, we are asking that the owners be allowed to vote on this proposal. To ensure this
happens, we need to get 20% percent of owners to sign the petition and the 2 additional votes for your lots would help
achieve that goal.

One way to put this into perspective is to ask this question of owners.

“If two candidates were running to fill one vacancy due to term expiration, and only one candidate
was willing to sign the pledge, which candidate would you vote for?

Please show your support by reading the attachment in its entirety and printing off page 3. Fill out the
first spot (or more depending on # lots owned) on the signature page, printing the names of all owners, with signatures, lot number,
and date. Scan or take a picture of that page and email it back to me so it can be attached to the formal petition.

If you have any questions, please reach out.

Sincerely,

Comments: Now please note that I have suggested that the BOD ‘consider using it’. Will update you all after the POA meeting. Some ‘interesting’ feedback for lack of a better term after our BOD was notified as to what I am doing.

[Janet]

Up

0

Down

::

Thank you for your suggestion. I am going with the old fashioned real signature petition. Those who cannot sign in person, signed a signature page and scanned, or took a picture which I am attaching to the petition.

I tried an online petition and they were asking for donations. Did not know that until someone told me about it when they signed it.

[Author]

Posts