The Progress of a Lawsuit and Interrogatories

The Residents we talked to today, when circulating the Meeting Invitations, thanked us, and are Hungry for truthful information. It was a positive experience for us. J&J 16RC

Just Amazing, SLR's Attorneys may attend Town H all Meeting, More Billable Hrs. on the Members Dime.  Let us Hope SLR's Attorneys are volunteering their time.
 
But it could the most "well spent Money in recent history"

 "Hopefully they will "Listen and Learn" !

Mediation is not an option  That's the latest legal maneuver SLohA  is requesting.  Mediation already went nowhere  on the S u e Tg  lawsuit so it is a moot point..  This is a legal issue that must be decided in a court of law.  Besides we have a well endowed war  chest.  Let's just get to the courts.

Sunday, January 25, 2015 the MRTA (Marketable Records Title Act) informational meeting will be held. Starting time is 4:00 PM.

This meeting will include information about the lawsuits. Your questions will be answered. Mr. Frd O'N eel (Attny), Esq. (attorney in both legal action against SLohA) will be the presenter.

Multiple handouts will be available. The meeting will be recorded so that misunderstandings and misquoting will not be an issue.

However, I find it interesting that one nighttime Security guard has taken it upon himself to pull down the notices that have been placed in the proper notification areas. His continued harassment is so predictable. Yet, even with police complaints filed against he is allowed to be the henchman for this Board and manager.

Here is the photo of Melonknee admitting the doublewide to 66SS on Feb 18, 2014 during daylight hours:

Attachment Deleted

The first ever resident town H all style forum initiated by residents had a standing room only crowd at the Club House. The meeting moderator Gngr Astn helped to keep the dialog flowing interspersed with the most notable quote of the evening: "We must get out of junior high thinking and start working together for the S-bag we all love".
Pastor Tom's eloquent Invocation set a very positive mood that carried through most of the meeting.
Questions, concerns, problem - solving ideas were listened to by all.
The SLohA attorney, Mr. Kestenbaum and his associate were properly greeted and welcomed by me. Special attention was taken to make sure that he along with the wives of Board members were given all handouts. Unfortunately, handouts were at a premium as a crowd of 350+ was not anticipated. The sheer numbers showed that people are hungry for the truth and clarity.
The only discourse that occurred was when Mr. Brnd went up to speak, Gngr Astn asked him not to as he was a Board member and his position on the Board trumped his status as a homeowner. Her position offended others, but as moderator it was her call to make. For the same reason, Mr. Kestenbaum was not asked to speak either.
We hope there will be some on - going dialog and I am truly looking forward to the February 2, 2015, Revitalization meeting.
If you wish to have copies of the handouts given at the end of the program, please feel free to stop by 66 Silversides.
The most important two are the Home Owners Opt - Out and SNAP (S-bag Neighbors Assistance Program.
A special thank you to all who attended. No matter what your position is on these issues YOU took the time to be there.

lra posted:
Well stated.  The membership should educate itself on this point.  The revived Covenants and associated corporate documents must be submitted to DEO exactly as they are now.   It is a contract and cannot be retroactively changed by one party.

Rules of the Road:

1. There are two and only two provisions that can be added--the Florida mandated gift of an amendment provision if none was in the original--as is the case with S-bag's covenants--and an amending voting threshhold of 66%.  That's it.

2. Florida also allows any defunct or archaic language in the expired document to be updated with statutory changes.  THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO SUBSTANTIVE OR MATERIAL CHANGES--only to administrative ones. 

Thus, our revived documents can be updated to reflect the Florida law that requires 30% members for a meeting quorum (Saddebag's requires 50%) but SLohA cannot retroactively add substantive property use restrictions such as the one enabling associations to enter into telecommunications contracts.  It also cannot retroactively add material changes such as the one permitting associations to establish a fining process for violations where the original authority was not specifically granted in the Declaration (as is the case with S-bag).

3.  The revived document can be altered to be LESS RESTRICTIVE than the original.  Thus, if SLohA wants to eliminate useless, senseless provisions that are relevant only to a campground subdivision, it can do that.  Elimination of that language, however, does not change the underlying scheme of the development as one that is a "recreational vehicle subdivision" which appears on every single deed and and the PUD recorded with Polk County.

4. S-bag can never have enforcement powers under revitalized Declarations.  Doing that would constitute an impairment of property rights vested in the original Declarations.  If it tries to do this i.e. adding a property restriction not already agreed to by both parties in the original contract/Declaration--another lawsuit will not be far behind!

S-bag's currently expired Covenants only permit the association to recover damages secondary to a violation of Rules & Regs.  That is, SLohA has to go to sm all Claims Court and get a judgement just like any individual does when someone trashes their property.

The only way enforcement power can happen is to start over with a new set of documents which specifies that the HOA can enforce restrictions with fines, liens and foreclosures.  In my opinion, a Declaration which included that provision would never be passed.  Why would anyone in their right mind voluntarily agree to be ruthlessly attacked and savaged the way 66SS has been?

Finally, all the alterations and state-permitted provisions will only serve those owners who must be bound by a revived Declaration within their subdivision.  Homesteaded property cannot be retroactively re-encumbered by the revitalized document unless the owner agrees and records consent. 

In a NEW set of covenants, only those parcels that "sign on" to the new restrictions will be encumbered.  This would give EVERYONE an opt-out privilege. 

As Frd said, he knows of one subdivision that is successfully operating on a Very Light Footprint as a New Covenant Association.  Presumably, a very light footprint means that the HOA stays out of everyone's business except to managing common property--which was the original purpose of an HOA until overtaken with egomaniac boards, greedy management companies, fee-seeking attorneys, hungry vendors and a political climate in Florida conducive to enabling hostile consumer HOA laws to be legislated.

Disclaimer:  You know the drill "I am not an attorney and this is my opinion and for informational and entertainment purposes only.  If you need legal advice, seek out a licensed professional etc...)

This message is here to clarify an on - the - spot decision made by our moderator, Gngr Astn made during the town H all style meeting regarding declining a member of the Board, specifically Mr. Brnd access to the mic.
1. There are two (2) law firms involved in suing 66 Silversides. Mr. Kestenbaum was at the meeting representing Tower Hill Insurance.
2. Gngr was aware of that information, as was our attorney, prior to the beginning of the meeting.
3. Mr. Brnd has in the past led a smear campaign against 66 Silversides residents by writing slanderous information on this forum and putting out flyers on "evil people" as harassment and intimidation techniques.
4. Mr. Brnd has used the S-bag Lake Resort official website to slander Ms. S u e Tg with false information.
5. Mr. Brnd has participated in "PRIVATE, PRIVILEGED " meetings against us.
6. Mr. Brnd has a history of making inappropriate comments (example this past Board meeting, etc.).
Gngr made a decision that kept the meeting Owner centered, not Board centered.
His going to the mic was seen as a set-up and a possible flash point to the otherwise well meaning statements and questions asked by all.
This was after all a time for home owners to come together and share.
The Board canceled their workshops. So why can't we just the home owners come together periodically to discuss issues?

DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER.

If MS. Tg'S lawsuit would have been addressed back in September of 2013, the informed Board would never HAVE Filed a lawsuit against 66 Silversides. Instead, the Board acted in a capricious and arrogant style without legal authority against us. Thus, squandering thousands of dollars, causing undue harm and in inciting others to act out against fellow neighbors.

Righting this terrible wrong must come now. If the Board had any modicum of decency they would call for and immediate halt to it all instead of using legal stall tactics that will put these lawsuits off until next year at this time.

Do you as residents want to come back to this mess next year?