August 2025 BOD Minutes Published - a Mess!

The Minutes of the August 5, 2025 Board of Directors Meeting have been published on the HOA's website.

Who took notes at the meeting? The recording secretary's name should be shown. 

Who wrote the Minutes? If someone other than the Property Manager recorded the notes and/or wrote the Minutes, did the Property Manager review them? 

Did the "recognized" Board Secretary review the Minutes before they were sent to the rest of the Board?

Did any of the seven Directors actually read the draft of the Minutes? 

Were the Minutes published only after they had been reviewed and approved?

Why would I ask such silly questions?

Under Homeowner Concerns, "A homeowner asked how to make a change to the Covenants that would allow vinyl fences. A referendum would be sent to the homeowners for a vote."

Who answered that question? Why wasn't it answered correctly? There are many steps before a Referendum is sent out for a vote! A brief summary should have been given, and the homeowner should have been referred to the office or the Covenants Committee.

Under Law Enforcement, "Deputy Gillespie reported that during a traffic stop and arrest was vain in 28 g of marijuana or seized." Didn't 7-to-9 adults see anything wrong in that sentence? (Hint: read it out loud.)

"Fake/ false Cole [sic] is reporting a crime at a property that is not actually happening." Who or what is "Cole"? Did the author mean "caller"? "is reporting" or "reported"?  That's called "swatting", and it's very dangerous for residents and for law enforcement!

"Lt. Gallegos Ask [sic] if anyone sees kids that should be in school to report it." Comments, anyone?

Covenants Committee. Jamie Burke, committee member, stated that the board initiated litigation against a Summit resident in December 2024, which violates the CC&Rs, Article 13 [sic], Section 10. This action would need to be approved with a vote of 75% of the voting members."

I don't know Jamie Burke. We've never met. I appreciate her statement to the Board. It's too bad William Hill, now recognized as Treasurer, wasn't at the meeting to hear it.

There is a huge problem with this reporting of her statement. I wish I could have been there to hear it or that I could get a copy of any remarks she might have read. 

It is true that "the board initiated litigation against a Summit resident in December 2024, which violates the CC&Rs, Article 13 [sic], Section 10."

The problem is with the next sentence, "This action would need to be approved with a vote of 75% of the voting members."

It is too late to approve that action (the filing of the lawsuit). It needed the approval of 75% of the Voting Members before the Board could even vote on it.

The Board never voted to approve the lawsuit or to authorize Danny Trapp to give a green light to the lawyers to file it. By what authority did Trapp do so?

What William Hill needed to hear is that all payments to Turner Padget are illegal disbursements of HOA funds. Hill should be concerned about 1) authorizing or permitting payments of invoices for the lawsuit AND 2) acting as Board Treasurer when he, in fact, is not a duly-appointed Director or duly-elected Treasurer!

The executive session on July 1, 2025 was invalid. The actions attempted by the Board (appointment of two directors and selections of two officers (Treasurer and Secretary)) in the "executive session" were invalid. It wasn't an "executive session". It was a pre-board meeting.

For an executive session to be valid, it needed to be on the agenda. The Board needed to start the Regular Board Meeting, then, after a vote, adjourn to Executive Session. And for a legitimate and state purpose. Appointment of Directors and Election of Officers are not legitimate reasons for an executive session.

The HOA acts like a middle-school, after-school club, not ike a South Carolina non-profit corporation with a large budget and a lot of cash on hand.

A discussion of Minutes will continue in another article.