If You Were the Judge, ...

... would you dismiss the case against Gus Philpott on February 11?

Read Section 10 Litigation in Article XIII of the CC&Rs of The Summit's HOA.

"Section 10. Litigation. No judicial or administrative proceeding shall be commenced or prosecuted by the Association unless approved by a vote of seventy-five (75%) percent of the Voting Members. In the case of such a vote, and notwithstanding anything contained in this Declaration or the Articles of Incorporation or By-Laws of the Association to the contrary, a Voting Member shall not vote in favor of bringing or prosecuting any such proceeding unless authorized to do so by a ‘vote of seventy-five (75%) percent of all Members of the Neighborhood represented by the Voting Member. This Section shall not apply, however, to (a) actions brought by the Association to enforce the provisions of this Declaration (including, without limitation, the foreclosure of liens), (b) the imposition and collection of assessments as provided in Article X hereof, (c) proceedings involving challenges to ad valorem taxation, or (d) counterclaims brought by the Association in proceedings instituted against it. This Section shall not be amended unless such amendment is made by the Declarant or is approved by the percentage votes, and pursuant to the same procedures, necessary to institute proceedings as provided above." [emphasis added]

The HOA was prohibited from commencing a judicial proceeding against me without the approval of the Voting Members.

There is only one legitimate Voting Member, duly-elected in compliance with the By-Laws. Was she contacted? Did she get approval from 75% of the homeowners in her 78-home neighborhood?

Where is the legal record of the votes of the Voting Members? Where is the record that each Voting Member got the approval of 75% of their homeowners?

Was it done?

There aren't even enough legitimate Voting Members to approve this judicial proceeding. 19.6% of the homeowners aren't represented by any Voting Member, legitimate or not. 

The rest are represented by someone who purports to be a "Voting Member" and is recognized by the Board as one, but they are not. Their communities did not have Annual Neighborhood Meetings, elections of three-member Neighborhood Committees, and elections of a Voting Member who was to serve for one year or until a successor was elected.

Why did the HOA commence this proceeding against me?

When did the Board of Directors approve that?

There is nothing in the Minutes of any Board meeting that records its approval.


Please share this blogpost with everyone in The Summit. Use the Share icon at the top-right or the bottom-left of this page.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Annual Meeting, Barony Place Neighborhood - continued to 5/4/2024

Barony Place Neighborhood (Barony Place I and Barony Place II attempted to hold a Neighborhood Meeting this afternoon. Of the 78 homes, seventeen (17) homes were represented, and that was not sufficient to meet the quorum requirement of 26. The meeting was continued to Saturday, May 4, 2024, 1:00PM, at 44 Barony Place Circle. An effort will be made to have at least 26 homes represented in-person or by proxy. Three homeowners have volunteered to be on the Neighborhood Committee: Tracy Manderino (Barony Place II), Della Glynn (Barony Place II) and Gwen Hayes (Barony Place I). If a quorum is present on May 4th, those present, including by proxy, will elect the Neighborhood Committee. Once the Committee has been elected, it will select one of its three committee members to be the Voting Member for the next 12 months. The other two members will be Alternates. A new announcement will be distributed to your newspaper box, along with a proxy. If you will not attend Saturday's meeting, plea...
Read more

Open Letter to Barony Place "Voting Member"

An open letter to the "Voting Member" of Barony Place Neighborhood. Good morning, Billie, If you and/or an Alternate attended last night's board of directors meeting, will you please send out a recap of the meeting to Ann Stirlen and me (and to all the homeowners and residents in Barony Place)? About a dozen homeowners from throughout The Summit showed up for the board meeting  at the church  last night, only to learn from one person that it had been switched to Zoom, which allowed the board to meet in secret. Many of them had not received the email from the office that the board was (illegitimately) closing the meeting to homeowners. There are only about 1,800 (73%) email addresses of the 2,480 Members in the website database. I attempted to join the meeting on Zoom, as I am Attorney-in-Fact for Ann Stirlen, but I was not admitted to the meeting. The HOA's attorney has quoted a section in the By-Laws that she believes allows the Board to close the meetings. That spec...
Read more

Special Assessment Possible?

How would you feel about a $3,000 Special Assessment levied by the HOA against you and every other HOA Member (homeowner)? Article X, Section 4 in the CC&Rs allows this. Are you aware of that? Should the Board do everything possible to eliminate the possibility of such a Special Assessment? What is the Board doing that might just lead directly to such an Assessment? The HOA, by actions of the President (Justin Martin), the Treasurer (Vernell Butler, and the Safety Committee Chair (Dennis Rybicki) entered into a contact with the Richland County Sheriff's Department, effective February 1, 2023. They arranged for special patrols in the Summit at a cost of $48.00/hour. In the Special Duty Agreement is a Liability clause. It reads,  "The Requestor will hold harmless the Richland County Sheriff's Department from any and all claims or liabilities resulting from service and indemnify RCSD for any loss due to any injury of its employee unless there is a determination of neglige...
Read more