Hill & Weatherbee - not Legitimate Board Members

William Hill and Noel Weatherbee are not legitimate, duly-elected Board Members of The Summit's HOA, and Weatherbee cannot be Vice-President.

None of the other directors or officers is a legitimate, duly-elected director or officer.

The process of their appointments to the Board was never clear. The Minutes of the July 1, 2025 Board Meeting carry this line on Page 2: "The new board members were introduced: William Hill, Treasurer and Noel Weatherbee, Secretary."

Two vacancies on the Board arose in May 2025, when LaToya Adams and Ciara Bates resigned from the Board. Adams had been Treasurer, and Bates had been Secretary. The HOA had no Treasurer or Secretary for approximately 45 days, even though both officers are required by State law. (Did anyone on the Board move money around during those 45 days? Was it done with Board approval and by Resolution?)

How did Hill and Weatherbee come to be appointed? When were they appointed? They should have been appointed at a Regular or Special Board Meeting. Then there should have been an election of the Secretary and the Treasurer. All of that should have been documented in Minutes. Danny Trapp was Board President at the time, and he should have known the procedure. 

But why aren't Hill and Weatherbee legitimate Board Members? Because there were no legitimate Board Members to appoint them!

Who was on the Board at that time? Danny Trapp, Tanisha Holmes, Patricia Pollin, Brenda Bryant, Linda Potter.

Pollin had been appointed to the Board in November 2023, but she was never eligible to be a Board Member. She wasn't a Member (homeowner) of the HOA, and she wasn't the spouse of a Member. She was allowed to sit on the Board for two years!

When the other four (Trapp, Holmes, Bryant, Potter) were "elected", they were elected by people who were not eligible to vote. They were voted for by people who were "recognized" as Voting Members but who themselves were not legitimate, duly-elected Voting Members. A legitimate Voting Member is one of three members of a Neighborhood Committee that was elected by homeowners at a Neighborhood Meeting where a quorum was present, in-person or by proxy. 

This has been an ongoing problem for The Summit's HOA for years. Boards began "conveniently" disregarding the By-Laws and conducting elections that did not comply with the By-Laws. Boards allowed people to vote for Directors who were not entitled to vote. Boards allowed homeowners to "get signatures" to be recognized as Voting Members, rather than being elected in compliance with the By-Laws.

None of the Directors elected at Annual Meetings of Voting Members in 2022, 2023, 2024, or 2025 was ever a legitimate, duly-elected Director. Those who became officers were not elected by directors who had been duly-elected, so they were not duly-elected, legitimate officers. 

I called myself a "hypocrite" in 2023 and again in 2025. I knew the elections were fraudulent, but I liked the result. (I quickly disliked the result of the 2023 election.) 

The elections were invalid. However, the HOA continued on its merry way, instead of getting solid legal advice. They didn't really need legal advice. All they had to do was read the By-laws and then follow them. In other words, comply with the By-Laws.

Because of the refusal of Boards to comply with the By-Laws, I believe the State of South Carolina should swoop in and place the HOA in receivership to protect the assets and interests of 2,480 property owners.

Elections have been fraudulent. There is only one legitimate, duly-elected Voting Member (Barony Place). There should be 28 legitimate Voting Members. The HOA will be unable to amend the CC&Rs or the By-Laws. The HOA will be unable to increase the Assessment for safety or any other reason. The HOA should be unable to hold the 2026 Annual Meeting of Voting Members, where a quorum is needed to convene.

The HOA will be unable to sue to recover the $25,-$30,000 spent on the illegal litigation against resident Gus Philpott ("illegal", which the CC&Rs prohibited and which the Board never approved). Payments from HOA funds for legal fees were illegal disbursements of funds of a South Carolina non-profit corporation, because the Board never approved the litigation (because it couldn't).

The Minutes of the January 6, 2026 Board Meeting alluded to the problems with the HOA's election process. At the end of the Minutes, in New Business, the Minutes read: 

"A Board member acknowledged concerns regarding the recent election process. Legal counsel advised that while the process was not ideal, the Board may continue as seated and correct procedures in the next election cycle."

Frankly, I believe the lawyer's advice is wrong. It wasn't just "not ideal"; it wasn't anywhere close to ideal. How much will the lawyer charge to tell them that they are wrong, when they fail to comply with the By-Laws?

And the failure is worse, because they aren't even trying to comply!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

June 3rd BOD Meeting now Closed to Members

The HOA office sent out an email at 3:29PM that read, in part, Due to Brookland Baptist Church being unavailable to accommodate the scheduled Board of Directors meeting on June 3rd, the meeting will now be held at the Summit Association office. Please note that space is limited at this location; therefore, only Voting Members and Committee Chairs will be invited to attend in person. One would think they would splash a message on the homepage of the HOA's website and change the location in the Calendar on the website; but No to both.  This last-minute change is highly adverse to the interests of the Members of the Association. The HOA must have some deal with Brookland Baptist Church Northeast for the rental of the meeting room. The dates must be arranged for the year. The HOA makes a "donation" to the Church for the use of the room. It's actually not a "donation", because the HOA receives something of value in exchange; i.e., the use of the meeting room.  Wh...
Read more

What Story Do the Financials Tell?

At the May 6, 2025 Board of Directors meeting, the March Financial Operating Results were available. Did you pick up a copy? Was there any discussion of them? Usually there is not. Do board members examine them before the meeting? Does anyone on the Board really understand them?  Look at the page for the Operating Expenses - Variances. Twelve Line Items are shown. No totals are shown. Big mistake. But are the totals intentionally omitted? For these 12 Items the total of "YTD Variances" is $61,784.93. As of the end of March, the HOA has over-spent the 2025 Budget by $61,784.93. Look at the reason given for the over-spending in Line Item GL-5111 Irrigation Contract. "This is over budget and will remain over budget due to the 2025 budget is $75,000 and the monthly contracted cost is $10,140." Is this worded to intentionally confuse any reader by stating the annual amount in the budget, but the monthly amount for the contracted cost? If the yearly contract for Irrigat...
Read more

About Fines in The Summit's HOA

Do you bother to inspect the Budget when it is proposed for the following year? Do you ever examine the monthly financial reports of the HOA? How much do you think the HOA will collect in fines this year? How much do you think the HOA collected in Fines last year? The Line in the Budget that you'll want to look at is Line 4600 Fines - Violations. Sitting down? In 2024 the HOA collected $57,446.91 in Fines. The amount budgeted in 2024 was $20,000. In 2025 the HOA expects to collect $50,000. As of June 30, 2025 the HOA has collected $38,670. At this pace the HOA will collect $77,340 in the full year, or $27,340 (55%) more than estimated in the Budget. Why are fines running so high? Should the Board just grin and rub their hands together in glee, or should the Board create an ad hoc Committee to examine the Fines category and determine what can be done to reduce the penalties on its Members? If you were the Board President, what would you do? Just smile and spend the money, or invest...
Read more