Category Archives: The Duty of Care

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:

  1. 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

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

HOA Board’s Fiduciary Duties Under Corporate Law

Leave a reply

The fiduciary duties of HOA Board members mainly arise from state corporate law. Most HOAs are nonprofit corporations, typically formed by filing articles of incorporation in the state where the development is located. Recognizing that a corporation’s board members serve in a position of trust, every state’s corporation law imposes a fiduciary duty on the corporation’s board of directors, requiring them to act in the best interest of the corporation.

Subject to some limitations, this fiduciary duty applies to HOAs even though they are typically nonprofit corporations, and even though HOA board members are usually volunteers.

A Board member’s fiduciary duties involve three basic components: the duty of care, the duty of loyalty and the duty to act within the scope of its authority.

THE DUTY OF CARE

To meet the duty of care, an HOA Board member must make informed decisions, which might require a bit of research before you act or vote on an HOA matter. For example, before finning a homeowner for a rule violation, you must familiarize yourself with the association’s CC&Rs, and the details of the situation, such as by talking with the homeowner. HOA Board members must also act in a prudent and reasonable manner, basically using sound business judgment, and avoiding arbitrary or capricious actions. For example, you can’t fine a homeowner for painting his or her home red just because you don’t like that color, if this is not a violation of association rules.

THE DUTY OF LOYALTY

The duty of loyalty requires that HOA Board members act fairly, in good faith, in the interest of, and for the benefit of, the HOA as a whole, rather than make decisions based on any personal interest or gain. HOA Board members should also avoid acting where there is a conflict of interest. For example, a Board member who is helping select landscapers for the property should not steer contracts for landscaping to family members. Or a Board member who owns a purple house should not participate in a Board vote on whether or not to allow pink and purple homes in the development.

Additionally, an HOA Board member must protect members’ confidentiality, and not divulge information provided in confidence. For example, if a home owner confides in a Board member about his impending home foreclosure in order to arrange a payment plan for HOA dues, the Board member should not disclose the information to a friend or neighbor

THE DUTY TO ACT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF AUTHORITY

This duty requires the HOA Board to perform the duties it’s obligated to carry out, but prohibits the Board from making decisions or acting on matters without the authority to do so.The authority of an HOA comes from its obligations under state laws, as well as the authority granted to it in the development’s governing documents.

To ensure you meet your obligations as a Board member, you must know what duties are required. Review your state law and HOA’s governing documents, specifically the articles of incorporation and bylaws, and your development’s CC&Rs to determine the HOA’s obligations, and the extent of its authority. For example, if the laws or governing documents do not grant your HOA Board the authority to adopt new rules and regulations, any restrictions the HOA adopts about home colors might be invalid.