HOA Needs a Second Opinion

Six members of the Board of Directors of The Summit's HOA should get a second legal opinion regarding the lawsuit that was filed on December 30, 2024 in the name of the HOA.

There is a problem. If they put it to a vote, it will fail. If a motion is made to seek a second opinion on the CC&Rs (Art. XIII, §10 Litigation), the vote might be 2-5 (Trapp, Holmes, Pollin, Hill, Weatherbee) or it could be 3-4 (Trapp, Holmes, Pollin, Hill).

I don't know anything about Noel Weatherbee. Is she clearly on Team Danny or could she, as Secretary (if she is), hold herself to a higher standard as the Secretary of a South Carolina non-profit corporation and fulfill her fiduciary responsibility to the Members? She should be in favor of seeking a second legal opinion on the HOA's authority to launch a lawsuit in violation of the CC&Rs.

And William Hill? Clearly, a friend of Danny Trapp. He is the one who, as chair of the Safety Committee, wouldn't even answer my emails and explain why parking is not allowed on the streets. Will he, as Treasurer of the HOA, approve the continued payments of illegally-disbursed HOA funds for legal fees connected to an unauthorized, prohibited lawsuit?

Is The Summit's HOA risking a take-over by the State of South Carolina? A Receivership would protect the interests of 2,480 property owners.

Then proper elections of Voting Members, Directors, and Officers would take place, and the HOA would eventually be returned to the control of the HOA. But how long would that take? Two years? Three years? And at what (unnecessary) expense to the Members?

If the Board of Directors won't quickly get a second opinion about the validity of the lawsuit, then the Voting Members should get that opinion. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

June 3rd BOD Meeting now Closed to Members

What? No trampolines?

What Story Do the Financials Tell?