Thursday, October 19, 2006
A Tale of two Villages
Watercolor just had a vote at their annual meeting to nullify the Special Assessment $$$ they were going to collect from the owners and use for ProTektoTubes IF they got approval (permit). Since they Could not get a DEP permit They had to vote to undo the Assessment vote since their was a vote to assess.
So at WaterColor :
1. They voted to assess and Watercolor (St. Joe) voted with the majority after the owners voted.
2. They would not ask for that assessment money unless and until they got approval to install tubes
3. They did not get that approval
4. They voted to undo the assessment
At the Retreat:
1. The assessment was sent demanding money from owners before (not contingent) on any permit or approval.
2. Owners who did not pay assessments had liens placed on their property
3. The board did not get approval or permits
4. The board then attempted to proceed without a permit and was stopped by the county
5. According to the board as of July 5, 2006 they have spent $339,589.20 of owners assessment money*
6. The board has not offered to refund assessment money to owners (if they have I would like to see it)
7. I have not heard if a vote to undo this assessment is under discussion for the November 4 owners meeting.
Which of the above scenarios do you think is most likely to create a lawsuit?
* these minutes (JULY 5, 2005?) were just posted to the Retreat website . There is mention of a approved invoice for added expense : ECAM Additional Services Jim Restor moved to approve the submitted invoice for additional services with regard to the lawsuit and dune remediation, Blake Morris seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Does not give any amount $$$$ though.
And we don't know how much may have been added to this amount from July 5th to October 19th 2006 either.
So at WaterColor :
1. They voted to assess and Watercolor (St. Joe) voted with the majority after the owners voted.
2. They would not ask for that assessment money unless and until they got approval to install tubes
3. They did not get that approval
4. They voted to undo the assessment
At the Retreat:
1. The assessment was sent demanding money from owners before (not contingent) on any permit or approval.
2. Owners who did not pay assessments had liens placed on their property
3. The board did not get approval or permits
4. The board then attempted to proceed without a permit and was stopped by the county
5. According to the board as of July 5, 2006 they have spent $339,589.20 of owners assessment money*
6. The board has not offered to refund assessment money to owners (if they have I would like to see it)
7. I have not heard if a vote to undo this assessment is under discussion for the November 4 owners meeting.
Which of the above scenarios do you think is most likely to create a lawsuit?
* these minutes (JULY 5, 2005?) were just posted to the Retreat website . There is mention of a approved invoice for added expense : ECAM Additional Services Jim Restor moved to approve the submitted invoice for additional services with regard to the lawsuit and dune remediation, Blake Morris seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Does not give any amount $$$$ though.
And we don't know how much may have been added to this amount from July 5th to October 19th 2006 either.
