Boycott the upcoming members’ meeting

2 Replies

A call to boycott the upcoming members’ meeting

At the January 2025 members’ meeting, the 2024 Board of Directors made a motion to add Online Voting.
We were led to believe that this requires 200 YES votes from members.
It was a mistake of the 2024 Board of Directors.

Adding Online Voting could have been done by the Board of Directors; it did not require members to vote at all, for sure, nor to obtain support of 200 votes or more.

All this is water under the bridge, but what is extremely important is the results of the members’ voting and the 2025 Board of Directors’ resistance to adding the Online Voting option.

The established quorum at the beginning of the January 2025 members meeting was 247 votes.
104 came from members present on the floor.
143 by proxies.

The results were
150 voted YES for adding Online Voting.
97 voted NO.

Simply put.
61% voted to add the Online Voting.
39% voted against adding it.

During 2025, Barbara, the 2025 Board of Directors’ president, and other board members were advised about their legal authority to add Online Voting without members voting.

I communicated it and added that it is their duty to acknowledge that the majority of the members (61%) voted for Online Voting.

Unfortunately, for reasons which I am not going to argue now, the 2025 Board of Directors chose not to do it.

Further, this board of directors and others in their “camp” are still spreading misinformation, trying to delay the inevitable addition of Online Voting.

I believe that the way to get the Board of Directors to add Online Voting is to boycott the upcoming members meeting and any future ones until the Board of Directors fulfills its fiduciary duty and adds Online Voting.

Who can add Electronic/Online Voting?

2 Replies

It seems that some members (including board members) are misinformed about who can add Electronic/Online voting in Florida and how.
I hope this information helps.

1. Statutory Authority for Electronic/Online Voting in Florida Associations

Homeowners’ Associations — Chapter 720

  • Florida Statutes §720.317 permits a homeowners’ association to conduct elections and other votes through an Internet-based online voting system if a member consents to online voting and applicable technical and procedural requirements are met.
  • The statute does not require a member vote to authorize online voting; instead, a board resolution is sufficient to authorize and implement the system and to establish consent and opt-out procedures.

Condominium Associations — Chapter 718

  • Florida Statutes §718.128 similarly permits a condominium association to conduct elections and votes by Internet-based online voting if a unit owner consents to vote electronically.
  • Importantly, this statute expressly allows the board to authorize online voting by resolution. Once adopted by the board, the resolution must set out notice, consent, and opt-out procedures.

Cooperative Associations — Chapter 719

  • A similar provision (§719.129) exists for cooperative associations that permits online voting under comparable terms (board authorization plus member/owner consent).

2. What This Change Means in Practice

Board Authority

  • Under these statutes, the board of directors can adopt online voting by passing a board resolution that authorizes an Internet-based voting system, establishes procedures, and obtains member consent.
  • A formal membership vote to adopt online voting is not required if the board acts within the statutory framework and complies with notice, consent, authentication, and procedural requirements.

Added on 2026-01-17 11:40 AM
And for those who still refuse to accept it and leave misinformation in comments on our Facebook page, see one of my replies to our board member, Steven Olsen.

“Given that membership is mandatory and assessments are lien-capable, Indian Hammock Hunt and Riding Club, Inc. meets the statutory definition of a Florida homeowners’ association under Chapter 720, even though it is incorporated under Chapter 617.

That point is decisive.

Bottom line (clear answer)

Yes. Under current Florida law, the Board of Directors may add an online (electronic) voting option without a membership vote, provided it follows the requirements of §720.317, Florida Statutes.

A member vote to “approve” online voting is not required.

Why this is legally correct

1. Chapter 720 controls

Because the Club is:

  • a Florida corporation,
  • with mandatory membership, and
  • lien-capable assessments,

it is a Chapter 720 HOA by definition, regardless of being styled as a “club” or incorporated under Chapter 617.

When Chapter 720 applies, it supersedes contrary bylaw provisions on voting methods to the extent of any conflict.

2. §720.317 expressly authorizes board action

Section 720.317, Florida Statutes (Electronic voting) provides that:

  • The association may conduct elections and membership votes using an Internet-based online voting system
  • “If the board of directors authorizes online voting by resolution” There is no requirement in the statute for a membership vote to adopt online voting.

What the Board must do (and must not do)

The Board must:

  1. Adopt a board resolution authorizing online voting
    • At a properly noticed board meeting
    • With at least 14 days’ notice
    • File an affidavit of notice in the official records
  2. Ensure consistency with the bylaws
    • Online voting must follow existing election rules (quorum, notice, secret ballot if required, etc.)
    • The board cannot change substantive voting rights—only the method
  3. Obtain individual member consent
    • Members must opt in (electronically or in writing)
    • Members must be allowed to opt out and vote by traditional means
  4. Use a compliant system
    • Secure authentication
    • Vote confirmation receipts
    • Ballot secrecy where required
    • Record retention for inspection and recounts

The Board does not need to:

  • Amend the bylaws to add online voting
  • Put the question to a membership vote
  • Obtain unanimous or majority member approval to authorize the system

Common misconceptions (and why they are wrong)

  • “We’re a club, not an HOA”
    → Incorrect. Chapter 720 applies based on function, not the name.
  • “Bylaws don’t allow online voting”
    → Chapter 720 authorizes it by statute; bylaws cannot prohibit what the statute permits.
  • “Members must vote to allow online voting”
    → Not under §720.317. Member consent to use online voting is required; member approval to authorize it is not.

Practical risk note

If the board implements online voting without strictly following the statutory steps (notice, affidavit, consent, system compliance), the vote can be challenged. But the authority to do it by board action is settled law.

Conclusion

Because Indian Hammock Hunt and Riding Club, Inc. is a mandatory-membership, lien-capable community, the Board of Directors is legally authorized under Florida law to implement online voting by board resolution alone, subject to §720.317’s procedural safeguards.

I HOPE THIS MAKES IT ALL VERY CLEAR
David Rtzion
Lot 246

Online Voting

Leave a reply

The current Indian Hammock’s Board of Directors resists requests to adopt online voting.
It is not my intention to debate why this BOD chose to do it.

My goal is to add online voting, not replace any of the existing voting methods.

I believe the only way to get Indian Hammock’s Board of Directors to adopt online voting is to boycott all general meetings and elections, including the upcoming one, until it is added.

I am going to do just this and call on any member who understands what’s going on and insist on adding the option of online voting to join me and to the same.

David Etzion Lot 246.

Autocycle War Instead of Online Voting

Leave a reply


Indian Hammock is now a thriving Residential Community with many Full-Time Residents.
 
I rode motorcycles for some 55 years and gave up before moving to Indian Hammock.

I applauded the A Team 2024 BOD for their work, as presented in the current Book of Rules Chapter 6. Driving Privilege (I still object to driving in IH being considered a “Privilege“)

I am too old to ride a two-wheel motorcycle, but I am considering an Autocycle, a Slingshot, which is currently allowed in Indian Hammock.

The B Team 2025 BOD seems ready to ignite a new war, the Autocycle War.
They are trying to amend Rule 6.4 Prohibited Vehicles to ban Autocycles like the SlingShot.

The B Team received repeated requests to put Online Voting on the BOD agenda.
Most members want Online Voting; see the last membership meeting numbers.

The B Team BOD is bent over dismantling the good work the A Team has done.
They devote their time and efforts to an Autocycle War and procrastinate on Online Voting. The B Team BOD doesn’t give a hoot about what the members want, the Online Voting.

Why does the B Team not expedite Online Voting? This is a breach of  BOD Fiduciary Duties, and I challenge members to explain where I am wrong in pointing this out.

And to those who still don’t know what an Autocycle is, please check out my favorite, the Slingshot. Two wheels in the front and a steering wheel, not a handlebar, require a regular driver’s license; no motorcycle endorsement is needed. It can not be driven on a dirt trail without being destroyed.

Governing and Managing Indian Hammock.

Leave a reply

What is Governing

Governing and Individualism are two opposing philosophies.
Governing is controlling Individualism.
Governing makes us live according to what the Governing one thinks is right.
Anything Governing is a “Beast” hungry for more power, laws, regulations, and control.

What is my Agenda

Governing is a necessary evil, but we should minimize Governing.
I campaign for changes leading to less governing by the Club BOD.
IH Members should strip the Club BOD governing to the bare minimum.
There must be a Club BOD in IH.
There must be a Professional Management Office in IH.

What should the Club BOD handle:

  • Hire a Professional General Manager to run the Management Office.
  • Sign contracts on behalf of IH.
  • Manage the Member’s Meetings.
  • Communicate with and Report to members.

The Management Office’s duties:

  • Ensure compliance with Florida Status 720 and all laws and regulations.
  • Guard the Club’s interests and ensure the Club BOD doesn’t fail to keep its Fiduciary Duties.
  • Carry out the daily administration and maintenance of the common areas.
  • Provide Membership Services.
  • Report to the Club BOD.
  • Report to the Members in Members Meetings.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly – Part Two.

Leave a reply

How I choose a GOOD one.

Members become candidates for the BOD to get something they want.
No one will serve on the board and “fight” for something I want unless they also want it.

Before voting for a candidate, I consider two things:

A.             What skills does the candidate possess?

I research the candidate’s management experience and business history. I don’t wholly rely on the candidates’ resumes; some will write what they believe will get them elected.
I consider my experience with any candidate who has already served on the board.
I also check two available sources.
1. For background check: https://www.truthfinder.com/dashboard
2. For further verification of skills:
https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/ByOfficerOrRegisteredAgent 

B.             What is the Candidate’s current Agenda?

For candidates who already serve on the board and any long-time residents, I rely on how the candidate acted and his interests.
Agendas may be fluid and can change or be traded on a dime.
Candidates avoid declaring their current Agenda and use generic, politically correct phrases.  A candidate may say he doesn’t have an Agenda and runs only to serve the community; I see that as a red flag and a warning.

Choosing the GOOD one.

Usually, the lineup of candidates is a dozen or more, and I am asked to choose seven.
I never managed to find seven skillful candidates.
If elected, a candidate who lacks the required skills will be a BAD board member.
Acquiring the required skills will take longer than the twelve months on the board.
Next, I eliminate skillful candidates with agendas I can not live with.

The GOOD one is a Candidate with the required skills and one whose agenda I can live with.

Since joining IH in 2017, I have never found more than four GOOD ones to vote for in any yearly election.

For more entertainment, please see                The GOOD, The BAD, and the UGLY.

Meet the A Team

1 Reply

The 2024 Board Members who gave IH the Quail Barn and were placed on IH’s “Bad Boys” list.

David Bass.
Articulate professional David Bass led the IH BODs in 2023 and 2024.
The best president and BODs I have experienced in IH.   

Joe Coyle.
Master of valuable technologies, a great asset to IH.
Until his retirement, Joe held high executive positions in various corporations that appreciated his skills and contribution.
Joe served on several previous BODs under different Presidents, bringing IH to the “Internet age.”

Corey Miller.
The cool-headed, devoted Indian Hammock ex-Treasurer was probably the longest-serving BOD member.
Corey was a candidate for the 2025 BOD. Corey got elected but immediately gave up his seat.

Matt Rector.
Business Owner who served on many of the BODs and has experience as a board member.
Matt contributes a lot to IH, especially to the hunting community.

Tim Ward.
Business Owner. Indian Hammock’s own Gunsmith.

Meet the B Team.

1 Reply

The governing body of Indian Hammock (IH) is the Board of Directors (BOD). 
Every type and size of government must be watched by the governed.

Barbara Roberts – 2025 BOD (IH Government) President.
Barbara’s governing style: “The new board can do whatever they decide.”
(Declared on 2025-02-15 Saturday morning Hunting Committee Meeting.)

Carla Sapp – 2025 BOD (IH Government) First Vice President. 
Carla’s governing style: “Go ahead and sue us; we are insured.”
(Declared on 2025-02-15 Saturday morning Hunting Committee Meeting.)
Carla’s known conflict of interests:
Carla’s husband, Ron Sapp. – Indian Hammock’s property manager.
Carla’s brother, Danny Brewer. – Indian Hammock’s Maintenance Contractor.

The B Team’s controlled BOD – 2025 first three months report.

  • Lost the long-standing services of IH’s trusted treasurer, Corey Miller.
  • Complaints about Forced resignation/dismissal of IH manager Matt Dorriety.
  • The Quail Barn Special Members Meeting fiasco.
  • Complaints about concealing, deceiving, and lack of transparency.
  • Complaints about self-serving and conflict of interests.
  • Complaints about violating Florida statute 720.
  • A “painful to watch” Search Committee Zoom meeting.
  • Ignore requests to put the online voting on BOD’s Agenda.
  • Complaints about secret BOD meetings and destroying incriminating documents.

Anyone observing the situation should recognize the damage done to the Club’s reputation. Enlighten yourself, please follow the links:

The Quail Barn War
The Quail Barn War – Comments
Matthew Rector reporting BOD violations
March 10 Ad Hoc Search Committee Zoom Meeting
March 10 Ad Hoc Search Committee Zoom Meeting – Comments
Mike Dixon reporting BOD violations and the destruction of incriminating records.

Your comments and suggestions are welcome and needed.

Adding Online Voting.

4 Replies

Florida statute 720 gives the BOD the power to add online voting.
It does not require members to vote by 2/3 (200 votes).
It does not require any special member meeting to vote on.
The BOD can add it to the agenda and vote on it in a regular board meeting.

In the last members meeting, the 2024 BOD unnecessarily motioned to amend the Deed of Restrictions to add Online Voting, a mission impossible since it requires 200 votes.

The established quorum was 247 votes.
150 (61%) voted YES for adding Online Voting, while 97 (39%) voted NO.

I call on the 2025 BOD to include a motion to add online voting to the agenda for their next meeting.

If you agree, please get in touch with the board’s members and help me with this task.

March 10 Ad Hoc Search Committee Zoom Meeting.

9 Replies

I watched the meeting, and seeing what was happening was painful.

I ask from members who watched the Zoom meeting to share their feelings and comments.

I presume Sandra Steinruck, who ran the meeting, is the Committee Chair.
Sandra and others have many questions and sought advice and guidance from Mike Dixon, David Bass, and Joe Coyle. 
The three were helpful and knowledgeable, sharing their highly regarded and sought-after experience. Yet, none of them is on the current Search Committee.

My questions are:
1.             Was any of the three, Mike, David, or Joe, asked to be on the 2025 Search Committee?
2.             Why was Sandra appointed to chair this committee when it is clear she is far less suitable for the position than Mike, David, or Joe?

Indian Hammock Members, a lot is happening, and not everything is positive.
Please join in and make your voice heard.

To the members who attended the Zoom meeting, am I missing anything?

David Etzion.
Lot 246