By laws meeting in 1 day.

Isn't it in your own docs that something from the declaration cannot be changed without massive, perhaps even 100% owner approval?

Well in the 70s it said 75% but the lousy 2004 version say "a clear majority"

the moron ruining my neighborhood said at one of the earlier meeting 51% is a majority.

i hope a mob of people show up to stop this maniac , but yea you make a good point, if they look back to the 1991 verison it said 70% to match the 1970s one.

so he can't do squat without running it by the community and I found the other legal answers.

in the 720 it says

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0720/Sections/0720.3035.html

(2) If the declaration of covenants or other published guidelines and standards authorized by the declaration of covenants provides options for the use of material, the size of the structure or improvement, the design of the structure or improvement, or the location of the structure or improvement on the parcel, neither the association nor any architectural, construction improvement, or other such similar committee of the association shall restrict the right of a parcel owner to select from the options provided in the declaration of covenants or other published guidelines and standards authorized by the declaration of covenants.

it clearly says that the ACC regulations are to be listed in the declarations of covenants i.e. deed restrictions

if he cant understand that you cant take something that MUST be in the deed restrictions cant be removed from them and put in the bylaws for his own silly way of trying to be a control freak.

Place was made in the 1970s, and a vote of 98% voted in a change for 1991, and the deed restrictons were udpated to reflect larger HOUSE minimum side in 2004 by a lawyer.

this new psycho that was never voting in can barely read and comprehend hes 69 going on 90.

he wants to isntead of undertand things, just do a massive rewrite to what he would LIKE it to say ,......typical moron.

so the good news is he did not give any of these "changes at the last regular meeting" so by or own bylaws it is not allowed.

ARTICLE XI - AMENDMENTS
The Constitution and Bylaws of the @#$#head Homeowners/Civic Association, Inc. may
be amended at a regular or special meeting by a two-thirds vote of the members present,
provided the notice of intent is given and the proposed amendment read at the previous regular
meeting. All proposed amendments must be presented in writing to the President or Secretary
and must be signed by not less than five paid members.

WTF is going on here. this is a VOLUTNARY HOA....where none of the board memebers are to be paid, our 1991 bylaws always has "paid members" on the last line, this shows how unprofessional this place is!!! some on this form think my posts are jokes but this i not a joke, just a very #@$#@ HOA that was never ran right.

5 PAID member's? how is PAID member's even possible?

ALSO he never
also he never ADDRESSED these cahnges at the last "regular meeting" which was on DEC 2017

so he cant even try to vote on anything at these silly non advertised meetings. there also breaking the 720 by having the meeting without giving the 14 day notice.

also they must be presdented in writing, and also the fact that it says PAID memebers

hmm whats going on here. the 1991 bylaws also say PAID memebers!!!

Get ready to laugh, they do not have a attorney on retainer.

but those bozos spent 500.00 for a sit down consultation of which they learned nothing.

I found out how the process works by rereading it.

ARTICLE XI - AMENDMENTS
The Constitution and Bylaws of the Oak Forest Homeowners/Civic Association, Inc. may
be amended at a regular or special meeting by a two-thirds vote of the members present,
provided the notice of intent is given and the proposed amendment read at the previous regular
meeting. All proposed amendments must be presented in writing to the President or Secretary
and must be signed by not less than five paid members.

The real process would be.

Have a normal meeting of which a change would be submitted in writing and have no less than 5 paid community members.

then have a next meeting of which can be special or regular of which at that meeting they would vote and have 2/3s or more vote for it to go into effect.

that means all the b..s they have done since the absent minded mr. magoo has bene in charge is all NULL and VOID as this process was not followed.

Yes I do go to all the board meetings and otherwise so I can says hat as a absolute fact, just wish I caught this bylaw rule faster.

get read to laugh agian.

they never recorded ANY version of the bylaws with the county lol

None of this makes any sense. Good luck to you but you reap what you sow. Your board is responsible for letting a president run amok and the homeowners are ultimately responsible for allowing a rogue president and board to run amok.

I would say your first priority is to become an expert yourself on your docs and your state laws. Then you can make very reasoned arguments citing them.

Is this different for HOAs than COAs? For COAs in Texas, the 67% is a minimum in the state law, but it doesn't supersede our docs that require 75% or in some cases 100%.

Summary of meeting.

The presdient told multiple people to "shut up"

said that they are don't care what the state statutes 720 says at the state WONT enforce anything but presidental election disputes.

Told everyone at the meeting that they could ONLY talk at the end for UP to 3 mins.

Said that non NON board memebers would talk at all. (Yet he let 2 of his friends that are not on the board talk for over 10 mins)

This HOA is disgusting and I hope that someone in teh community sues the board or board memebers personally as nothing seems to stop this dictatorship.

Comments at the end from the community memebers , which the presdient called "audience", he said "now its time for the audicne to speak"

of which at NO poitn , every complaint that was made, was not wrote down by the secretary at all.

this is why I've been on this hoatalk.com for along as this is just madness.

A baord meeting of which was only put on a billboard 6 days before the meeting, was talking about ripping out DEED RESTRION VERBAGE about the ACC......removed to be put in the by-alws to give our dictoator the finaly say on everything.

I know if htey hired a lawer to do this , he would laugh and say you cant do that, but this @#$@#$$#@ paid a lawyer 5 days ago 500.00 for consultaiton, and could not go thru tongihts metting wtihtout breaking the 720 rules about a dozen times.

The only upside was he said he would resign at the end of the year, but since his election was illegal he shoudl of stepepd down TNIGHT or the 8 months ago when I poitned it out.

Hes such a conrol freak he siad he made a "new rule that the next presdient will only be able to be presidnet for 1 year" as hes steppign down prematurely ......

this is not even legal to "adjust the normal term of 2 years.......but hes now trying to control the board post-dictatorship

good news we had 7 smart peopel to try to combat this psycho, but sicne we were limtied to talking at the end he was in a rush to hurry up ....as hes dont care about anthing hes not trying to do

i wish this was all a joke, but this is our reality here..............

NoahA at my HOA we have three board members. Two are decent enough people while the third is an utter loco weed. The stories you tell about your dictator are tame by comparison. Our bad board member suffers from narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) and is a fantastic liar who has been able to convince several weak and ignorant homeowner minds that she is their friend. At the end of the day it's very frustrating to deal with but if you are unwilling to sue the HOA then you can simply ignore any illegal things they do (for the most part). For example let's say a bad president illegally tries to move your ACC control into the by-laws then goes after you for some violation. Ignore it. Let the HOA sue you and you'll win. Heck, it's HIGHLY unlikely it will ever go to court! But what if the hoa member starts committing fraud like ours tries to do? For example our bad board member wanted to use HOA funds to repair the home of an individual who owes us 18k in past due amounts because that bad homeowner votes for her... oh and that's after voting AGAINST collecting that past due money! That's just one story. Well if something like that happens the gloves come off and it's outright war because that affects the finances of the HOA and all homeowners. AT that point it's time to play dirty, very dirty. Just sayin.