Category Archives: BOD Fiduciary Duties

2026-05-20 Online Voting – By Joe Coyle

Our member Joe Coyle asked me to circulate the following posting on his behalf.

Dear Indian Hammock Members,

I wanted to share an important update regarding online voting for our annual elections. At the Board of Directors meeting on Sunday, May 17, 2026, a statement was made that Survey & Ballot Systems (SBS), the platform I had previously researched and recommended — is not compliant with Florida Statute 720. This information is not accurate.
Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the meeting due to a last-minute scheduling conﬂict. Below is the email I sent directly to President Barbara Roberts on this matter. I have not yet received a reply.
Here is the actual email sent on 5/19/26 at 6:49 AM

Good morning, Barbara,

I’m writing regarding feedback I received about yesterday’s Board meeting. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend due to a last-minute scheduling conﬂict. I was particularly interested in the discussion on online voting.

I understand that concerns were raised about HOA Start’s system, and I fully agree it is not the right solution for us. However, I was also told that when Survey & Ballot Systems (SBS) was mentioned, the response was that it is not compliant with Florida Statute 720. If that was the statement made, I believe it is not accurate.

SBS is actively used by multiple Florida HOAs and fully supports the requirements under

§720.317. I personally voted through their system as a member in Florida for several years and continue to use it now in Tennessee. They also maintain a dedicated Florida HOA program and marketing materials speciﬁcally addressing compliance with our state’s statutes.

Could you please conﬁrm whether that was your response during the meeting? If so, I would respectfully request that we correct the record in the meeting minutes and communicate the accurate information to the membership. Many members are eager for a hybrid online voting option, and an incorrect statement about compliance could unnecessarily delay or discourage progress on this important initiative.

If the comment was taken out of context or not made, that’s wonderful and no further action needed. Either way, I’m happy to hop on a quick call to discuss details or share additional information about SBS.

Thank you.
Best regards, Joe Coyle

Note: This email was written by me, not AI.

For newer members who may not be familiar with the background: In 2024, while serving on the Board, I was asked to research options for adding online/hybrid voting as an additional method for members who cannot attend the annual meeting in person. My research focused on solutions that meet these key requirements:

Full compliance with Florida Statute §720.317 and HOA governing documents.
Additive option (not replacing our current in-person/proxies system).
Secure, SOC 2 compliant, with TLS encryption — accessible from any device, anywhere.
Fully anonymous ballots.
Ability for Indian Hammock to manage elections internally or engage an independent administrator.

I previously published a detailed document on our website outlining these ﬁndings, which remain available for review on this website.
See Upcoming Vote to Allow Online Voting in IH | Indian Hammock Owners’ Voice

Following that, we held open meetings with members, and the Elections Committee conducted successful live tests. Members’ support for the hybrid option was very strong.

I am sharing this because online voting is an important issue for many of us. I encourage everyone to review the information, form your own opinion, and share your thoughts respectfully with the Board. Our goal should be to ﬁnd a solution that works for the majority while respecting all members’ preferences.

Democracy works best when all voices are heard. I welcome any questions or discussion on this topic, privately or publicly.

Thank you for your time and continued engagement in our community. Best regards,

Joseph Coyle

2026-05-13 From the desk of Barbara Roberts, President

1 Reply

Hi Neighbors.

We all received today’s monthly email, “From the desk of Barbara Roberts, President.”
The monthly report includes a paragraph that many of us have an issue with:
“We would like to bring you up to date on the ongoing lawsuit involving Dixon, Houlihan, Kennemer, and Ward.
On May 29, Indian Hammock will be returning to court. Mr. Dixon believes that Indian Hammock is in contempt of the Judge’s Order and clarification regarding the 2024 Hunt SOP. We want to assure all members that Indian Hammock has followed the Judge’s Order.
Mr. Dixon is also asking the Judge to allow him to place his equipment in the covered area of the Indian Hammock Quail Barn. As a reminder, the parking of equipment and other items in the RV parking area is reserved for members who pay a fee for designated parking spaces. There are no designated parking spaces in the covered area of the Quail Barn.“

I believe David Bass, our president prior to Barbara Roberts, covered this issue beautifully in his email.
Please see David Bass response

Hi Barbara,

Just read your Presidents letter dated today. I speak for a large number of members who have some concern about how you have communicated on the Dixon et al legal case.

The quail barn in its entirety is a “hunting facility” as defined by our declaration of restriction. It is not an RV parking lot. Your president letter has mis-informed the membership by claiming that it is an RV lot when it is a “hunting facility”. Is the tack room a pool? Can we store engines in the tack room? The hunt committee advises the board and has primary usage privileges of the quail barn in its entirety for hunting usage. Where are the minutes where the board has changed the primary usage of the quail barn?

The quail barn was built and approved for its intended purpose…a hunting facility in compliance with the donation letter and prior board’s properly noticed open board meeting motion(s). None of those prior motions have been modified by subsequent board motions. If you want to change that you need a motion to change the covered portion to something other than “a hunting facility”.

Your attempt to re-define the usage of the quail barn covered area is in contempt of the injunction and I ask the board to reconsider. Your position is going to cost all of the membership more in legal fees for what? Because of semantics? Fiduciaries should not act on emotions but instead act solely on the best interest of logic for the membership. Fighting over and spending legal fees to defend if a hunt buggy can stay or not stay at the quail barn or how many guests can join in on a paid bird hunt (even though FL720 clearly defines the reasonable application of that guests), makes absolutely no common sense and violates the board’s fiduciary duty to act prudently and in our best interest. I am sorry that there may be “feelings” otherwise, but feelings don’t support doing the right thing for the membership.

The board’s position on the covered area makes no fiduciary sense (just a quick read of the Club’s governing documents clearly states that game areas and hunting facilities are authorized as a primary usage of common land) and there are many members who are concerned that the legal fees will escalate with no benefit for the community and run against the Club’s covenants.

The Temporary Injunction, page 4, section 2, states, “…and provide all facilities required to fulfill the findings herein.” What part of that court order authorizes the board to deny facility usage? I was at the re-hearing and when Sarah asked Judge Wallace to explain what that reference meant, he clearly stated that he used the broad language, instead of naming specific hunting assets, because he wanted to make sure that the Club and the plaintiff don’t have to fight over what is or isn’t named in the injunction, but rather to promote resolution and move forward by allowing his injunction to be broad and not subject to further debate. I add this because there were no board members present to hear him say this, other than you and you have a history of interpreting facts differently than I do.

If the board wants to continue to disallow Hunt equipment to stay in the covered area then the board needs to motion to do that at a properly noticed open board meeting.

I have cc’d Ron and the board. I am a neighbor and always happy to discuss or debate. I hope that my concerns shared here foster some level of discussion. I look forward to any outreach. If I have missed something, as a past President and serving on the board for almost a decade, I would be the first to acknowledge and favor support.

I am just trying to help you and the board move forward with reason and respect for all members. That doesn’t mean listening to special interest groups (I have always hated that stereotype. We are a community of members who all bought here and agreed to live by our covenants. The only special interest are those that want to change those covenants.). If there is any doubt about what “all members” mean….read the Declaration of Restrictions.

Barbara, as you and I have done for 17 years, I look forward to discussing this further with you.

Dave

The President 17/02/2026 Email: What It Says and What It Avoids Saying

2 Replies

The President’s February 17, 2026, email informs members that the litigation filed by Ward, Houlihan, Kennemer, and Dixon has cost the membership $9,700 to date.

What the email does not explain is far more important than the number it highlights.

The lawsuit (Ward, Houlihan, Kennemer, Dixon v. Indian Hammock Hunt & Riding Club Inc.) concerns governance issues, including:

Whether the Board and its Architectural Committee are acting consistently with the Declaration and governing documents
Whether the enforcement authority has been expanded beyond what the documents authorize
Whether certain rules conflict with recorded covenants
Whether property owners’ rights are being restricted without proper amendment procedures

This lawsuit is not a personal grievance. It is a dispute about document compliance and fiduciary duty.

The President’s message presents only one fact:
The case has cost the membership $9,700.

It does not:

Describe the legal issues raised
Explain the alleged document inconsistencies
Acknowledge that members have a legal right to seek judicial clarification
State whether a settlement or mediation was attempted
Disclose how legal strategy decisions were made

Instead, it highlights a dollar amount and names the members involved.
That approach risks signaling to uninformed members that:
“These four individuals are costing you money.”
That is not responsible governance communication.

Board members have fiduciary duties of loyalty and care to all members, including those who disagree with them.

When leadership communications single out members and attach financial cost to their names without explaining the underlying governance dispute, it creates unnecessary division.

Litigation expenses are not “caused” by members who file suit. They are the result of:

The underlying dispute,
The Board’s decisions in response,
And the strategy chosen to defend the case.

If the Board believes it is correct, it can say so — and explain why.
If it believes clarification is needed, it can pursue resolution.
What it should not do is communicate in a way that appears designed to isolate or pressure fellow property owners.

A communication made in good faith would have included:

A neutral summary of the issues in dispute
A commitment to transparency
A statement reaffirming respect for members’ rights
An explanation of the steps taken to resolve the matter

Instead, the focus was placed on cost and names.
That is not a sign of constructive intent.

Reasonable people may disagree about how documents should be interpreted. That is why courts exist.
But framing a governance dispute as a financial burden imposed by specific neighbors risks damaging the community fabric. Indian Hammock deserves better.

Get informed, see: https://ihmyhome.com/violations-reported/2025-05-20-ward-houlihan-kennemer-dixon-vs-indian-hammock-club/

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.

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.

Matthew Rector Lot 256 complaint – Indian Hammock BOD violations.

2 Replies

This is a complaint submitted under Article XIII, Section 2 of the Indian Hammock Declaration of Restrictions. I expect to receive a written response within 30 days of the date of this letter in accordance with the Declaration of Restrictions.

Dear Barbara Roberts,

I heard that the “Special Members Meeting” was cancelled by the BOD:

Please identify the time, date and attending BOD Members when they met to vote on this cancellation.

2. Please provide when and where notification of this meeting was posted on the website as required by FS720303 (4) OFFICIAL RECORDS (m), and how it complied with FS720.303 (2) BOARD MEETINGS (a) (b) and (c) 1.

3. I am hereby officially requesting the minutes of that meeting as per FS720.3032 (3) MINUTES. As per FS720.303 (5) (a) I will expect to receive these documents within 10 days.

While on the subject, please provide the same information for the BOD meeting that occurred with a Burn Boss in the outback immediately after the last BOD meeting at the lodge. That burn meeting was conducting Hammock business, had witnesses including law enforcement, and was NOT disclosed at the BOD meeting held earlier. As you are well aware, per FS720.202 (2) BOARD MEETINGS (a) A meeting of the board of directors of an association occurs whenever a quorum of the board gathers to conduct association business.

At the BOD meeting held at the lodge, I spoke before the BOD and officially notified them of the Rule Violation committed by one of the Hunt Committee Co-Chairs. The Hunt Committee Co-Chair admitted his violation freely while speaking about this matter to the BOD. Please disclose what steps have been taken so far regarding that rule violation, and if as stated in the Meeting one or more Members of the BOD encouraged him to violate the IH rules in this matter. At that meeting, I also asked about the meeting that you, Albert Rossodivita, and Carla Sapp held with the Manager in his office. It seems you three IH officers apparently made him stay after normal working hours and had a meeting to inform him of new work requirements not stated on his original contract. He resigned shortly thereafter. Since such modifications of the Manager’s contract can only be a BOD decision, I request the same information referenced above regarding that meeting.

Furthermore, I hereby request per the same information cited above regarding when the BOD met to appoint Ron Sapp, the Vice-President’s husband, as the new IH Manager. I question why that information has not been posted on the website as required. Additionally, as per HB1203 the following information should have already have been posted on the website regarding Association Managers:

· Provide the members of the homeowners’ association the following information, post the information on the homeowner association’s website or application as required by section 720.303(4)(b), Florida Statutes, and update the information within 14 business days of any changes:

Name and contact information for each community association manager or representative assigned to the homeowners’ association.
Hours of availability.
Summary of the duties performed by the community association manager or representative.

· Provide a copy of the contract between the community association manager or firm and the homeowners’ association to any member upon request. The contract must be included with the homeowners’ association’s official records.

Finally, yesterday you fired the current Manager Matt Doherty, who gave a 60 day notice as per his contract, five weeks before he was scheduled to leave. You took his access card, keys and had Ron Sapp drive him home, seemingly in an attempt to humiliate him. I challenge your authority to do so, as that is necessarily a BOD decision. I find it to be a despicable act by you and anyone else involved. I demand you provide when that BOD meeting occurred. I am hereby officially requesting the minutes of that meeting as per FS720 as cited previously, and have that information posted on the website. The entire Membership needs to be informed of your actions, and how each and every BOD Member voted. You swore an oath to uphold our rules and Florida statues, as did every other BOD member. Violations of the Statutes in FS720 are criminal, and I believe they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. To whit:

FS720.3033 (5)(d) Any director or member of the board or association or a community association manager who knowingly, willfully, and repeatedly violates paragraph (a), with the intent of causing harm to the association or one or more of its members, commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “repeatedly” means two or more violations within a 12-month period.

FS720.3033 (5)(f) Any person who willfully and knowingly refuses to release or otherwise produce association records with the intent to avoid or escape detection, arrest, trial, or punishment for the commission of a crime, or to assist another person with such avoidance or escape, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

It is very unfortunate that it seems the current BOD has been acting in a manner inconsistent with the intent of our documents, Florida Law, and the best interest of the Community. I personally consider your actions regarding our Manager Matt Doherty, including his firing yesterday, to be absolutely and completely unconscionable. By all appearances, you have acted in a grossly negligent manner on multiple occasions. It seems you have not considered the ramifications of your actions, and their negative effect on all Members of the Club and the Indian Hammock Community.

Sincerely,
Matthew Rector
Lot 256

The Good, The Bad, and the UGLY

1 Reply

I love Western movies. One of my favorites is The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly.
Like most of you, I did not pay attention to who was on the board of directors for years.
I came to Indian Hammock to enjoy the best place to call home, relax, and not get involved in local politics. I have great neighbors, and I thought nothing could go wrong.
In 2019, I discovered that many things could go wrong when people become board members and have the power to enforce their agendas on others.

Few board members will try to control themselves, but they will not be perfect – Those are the Good.
Most will enforce their agendas, “doing it for the community” – Those are the Bad.
Very few will deceive, lie, and do bad things to win and control – Those are the Ugly.

This grading system is comparative. Good can be distant from Perfect, and Ugly doesn’t necessarily warrant banishment from Indian Hammock.

People will transform, for 12 months, from GOOD to BAD and sometimes to UGLY.
The Good and the Bad: When they stop being board members, they “see the light” and sometimes apologize for their wrongdoings.
The UGLY may continue to lie and cheat.

For 12 months, the BAD and the UGLY will cause damage and suffering.
The GOOD will become BAD if it is found out that they don’t have the skills to manage and govern.

I have experienced seven boards of directors led by four Presidents.
Two of the presidents earned my grade of BAD.
One President can even be considered UGLY.
Only one President deserves the grade GOOD – David Bass.

As always, this is my opinion and grading. Other members may think differently.
It was painful to lose the service of the only Good President and Board of Directors we have had in the last seven years.

Don’t miss the action.
Click the following button on the top of this page under the search window.

2025 BOD Election – Rumors Campaign Part 4

Why am I running for the 2025 IH BOD?

1 Reply

From David Etzion Lot 246

I bought lot 246 in June 2017.
I did not pay much attention to the club documents and did not check or have any idea how the Club is operating.
I built our new home in IH and moved Full-time in September 2018.

On December 15, 2019, during the club’s BOD meeting, the BOD stunned my wife Gloria and me, bringing Gloria to tears.
Without following any procedures set up in the Club’s documents, without any notice or warning, the BOD announced that I had committed a violation, Issued a Fine on the spot, canceled my scheduled membership service for a second entrance, and disapproved a Building Application Packet that followed all requirements.

The following month was undeserved hell inflicted on my wife and me by the Club’s BOD. Hours of pleading, repleading, and arguing our case with the 2019 BOD led nowhere.

On January 19, 2020, the newly elected BOD reversed the ruling of the 2019 BOD, acknowledging that it was wrong and not in compliance with the Declaration of Restrictions or the By-Laws.

I realized the damage and abuse any BOD can bring to the property owner.

I made it my mission in IH to protect property owners from abuse by members of the board of directors.

In January 2020, I started a website, Indian Hammock Owners’ Voice, and a Facebook group, Indian Hammock Owners’ Rights.
For over four years, I have been a crusader against BOD violation of property owner rights.

I am fully transparent and say what I think. What I stand for is published on my website and the Facebook group page. Some members love it, and some hate it. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

If elected to the board, my Goal will be to protect the property owners’ rights to sole responsibility and control over their 299 Lots.
We bought all of these lots from the club, and these 299 lots can only be restricted by Federal regulations, Florida State Regulations, Okeechobee Regulations, and the IH Declaration of Restrictions.

My second goal will be to promote ways for individuals to use their lots and for the Club to utilize common ground to increase sustainability in Indian Hammock.

My third goal is to convince the BOD members to follow “Live and Let Live,” not just say it. This golden rule governs everyone and requires a lot of tolerance.

I am not a Hunter; I don’t hunt or shoot birds, but I will support the hunter’s community in improving their facilities as long as they finance such improvements.
I regretfully don’t own a horse and don’t ride, but I will support the equestrian community in improving their facilities as long as they finance such improvements.
Members with conflicting interests must compromise on using and developing the Club’s common ground and facilities.

In short, MY AGENDA:
Property Owners’ rights
Sustainability
Live and Let Live

Respectfully
David Etzion
Lot 246

	Terry Dinnen on 2026-05-20 Online Voting…
	2026-05-20 Online Vo… on Upcoming Vote to Allow Online…
	sweetlyjovial8f321af… on 2026-05-13 From the desk of Ba…
	Kathy Davis on An update about “The Pre…
	myself313 on An update about “The Pre…

Note: This email was written by me, not AI.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: