MEETING MINUTES JULY 2005

 

(Download Rich Text Printable Version)

 

On July 28, 2005, there was a special meeting of the Drayton Place Home Owner Association (“DPHOA”) as duly noticed regarding covenant violations and needed corrective steps. Present at the meeting were the following board members, officers, and/or directors: Dave Tagliaferri, Sandra Tagliaferri, Sandy Taylor, Barbara McNeal, and Jessie  Smith. With quorum present and noted, the meeting was called to order by DPHOA President Dave Tagliaferri at approximately 7:30.

 

Mr. Tagliaferri began by discussing the growing number of homes in the neighborhood that were in violation of the covenants, and correspondingly, the growing number of complaints from members demanding these violations be corrected. Incidental thereto, there was substantial discussion of the exterior maintenance problems of many yards, including burned grass, overgrown weeds, brown spots, fungus, bugs, etc, the proliferation of tool sheds,  boats, commercial vehicles, trailers, trash, debris, broken fences, multi-family occupancy, and most regrettably, how many members have refused to work with the board to correct these problems to the detriment of those members who follow the covenants. In addition, membership suspension was discussed for those members who were delinquent in dues, and for which liens had been and/or were being filed within the next few weeks.  As for these members, the Board recommended, and members present unanimously agreed, that all association rights and privileges, be immediately suspended without further notice. 

 

To correct the growing number of covenant violations, the Board then discussed the legal remedies that could be pursued in light of past discussions with its previous attorney Dale Westling, who had previously stated that separate injunctive lawsuits would have to be filed for each violation at a minimal price of $2000 per lawsuit with additional legal fees accruing throughout enforcement. Conservatively, the Board estimated there were in excess of twenty homes in violation in addition to those members who refused to pay their dues. 

 

With so many violations, the Board expressed grave concern as to the amount of legal fees and the possibility that the entire budget may have to be earmarked for legal fees to correct the violations as demanded by the home owners, and even the possibility of increasing the annual assessment and or special assessment just to pay for the legal fees. At this point, there was also general discussion as to the budget, with copies provided, and open questions as to whether the Board had funds to improve entry into neighborhood, make other community improvements, or even take care of lakes, in light of funds needed to pay for the litigation to correct the violations as being demanded by the members. 

 

To alleviate these concerns, Daniel A. Nicholas, esq., who resides at 4316 Ripken Circle West offered to “volunteer” his time and that of his law firm Gray Robinson P.A.  in representing the Association. Mr. Nicholas, who has 15 years of commercial litigation legal experience involving substantially similar matters, suggested that covenant compliance may be more easily and economically obtained by utilizing all statutory procedures currently available, including the levying of fines, as an alternative and/or in conjunction with litigation only as last resort and if  absolutely necessary to correct the more blatant violations and refusals. As part thereof, one such specific recommendation was for the Board to appoint a “Violation Committee” to confirm and/or identify covenant violations for which fines could be levied (subject to committee approval) against the offending property owner after notice and at least a 14 day (two week) opportunity to correct the violation and/or for hearing by the Violation Committee as required by Florida Statute. In this regard, Mr. Nicholas recommended the sending of “Violation Notices” to offending members identified by the Board and/or confirmed and/or identified by the Violation Committee, who would be given opportunity to correct or face the levy of fine after opportunity for hearing. All members unanimously  approved the taking of such action for the betterment of the neighborhood. 

 

The Board inquired if Mr. Nicholas and his firm could represent its interest on all such matters, and if so, would there be any conflict of interest. Mr. Nicholas explained why there was no conflict of interest in light of the rules of professional conduct, and to alleviate even the slightest appearance of impropriety, he affirmatively stated he would abstain from membership on the board and service as director, officer, and committee member, and would charge the association no legal fee in connection with his legal services, which would be on a volunteer basis. The Board then engaged Mr. Nicholas and his firm to represent its interest with full authority incidental thereto as was duly and unanimously approved by motion of the members present.   

 

The Board then requested volunteers for appointment to the “Violation Committee” who could investigate  and confirm the violations, including those already identified by the Board, and then, send out “Notice of Violation” allowing the owner opportunity to correct the violation and/or for hearing before a majority of the Violation Committee members. Several members volunteered and were duly appointed and publicly identified as members of the Violation Committee However, because several members the Violation Committee feared reprisal by owners who were notified and/or already on notice of violations, they requested their names not be included in these minutes, and only disclosed if written request for such names was made to the Association pursuant to law. With the “Violation Committee” being formed, it was then instructed by the Board to confirm and/or identify violations, and where appropriate, send out the  notices of violation, provide right to hearing, and if the violation is not corrected, levy fines, all through Mr. Nicholas and his law firm on behalf of the DPHOA.  In conjunction therewith, the Board discussed that those members of Association that had been refusing to correct violations for more than a year despite numerous request be immediately and legally enjoined from further violations and that foreclosure be commenced to recover unpaid dues as reflected in claims of lien. Agreement was unanimous, and Mr. Nicholas was instructed to proceed as necessary without charging the Association any legal fee. Next, there was general discussion as to the neighborhood watch program, the appointment of block captains and the scheduling of a community garage sale, and need to purchase a community signs.

 

Thereafter the meeting was adjourned.