HOA Justice Now

Exhibit Q2 – Austro Construction: Destruction & Harassment Events

Last Updated

Introduction

This exhibit supplements Exhibit Q1 (Contract Review – Austro Contract vs. Reality) by documenting on-site conduct by Austro Construction and related vendors that resulted in property destruction, harassment of contractors and residents, concealment of defective work, and unauthorized access to private property. These incidents show a pattern of defective workmanship, intimidation, and disregard for owner rights.

Timeline of Events & Evidence

  • October 11, 2024 – Unit damage reports compiled into a PDF exhibit documenting Austro damages across Phases 3 & 4. Includes photos of cracked stucco, water intrusion, and additional damage after construction began in Phases 1–3. (Evidence: “Exhibits of Austro Construction Damages to Units.pdf”)
  • 2024 (Multiple Dates) – WhatsApp group discussions among owners documenting Austro/Levy damages and poor workmanship. Screenshots show owner concerns and attempts to raise issues.
  • 2024–2025 – Harassment and interference with emergency contractors (Aztec Roofing, J&A, Walters). Documented in videos and letters. Contractors were intimidated, police were called, and certified letters were issued to protect access.
  • September 2025 – Stucco “repairs” discovered to be cosmetic only. Instead of removing damaged stucco, Austro painted over cracks and deterioration. Photos confirm concealment rather than proper remediation. (Evidence: Sept. 12, 2025 photo series)
  • September 29, 2025 – Austro Construction crews accessed Shawn Martin’s roof without notice or consent. Photos and video confirm presence of workers and foot traffic. Surfaces show scuffs, patchy coating, uneven seams, and evidence of cosmetic cover-ups. (Evidence: Sept. 29, 2025 photo series + video footage)

2024 Progress/Project Reports vs. Reality

Report (Date/File) & LinkProperties Referenced (Building # / Unit #)Scope of Work (as stated in report)Why this should be reviewed for possible fraud
2/9/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings onlyRemoval of deteriorated plywood; roofing work in progressEarly “in-progress” roof tasks appear again in later reports → timeline inflation risk
2/16/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings onlyBlack paper, skylights, vents, fasciaRepetition of staging tasks across weeks → progress padding
2/23/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings onlyTPO sheets; stucco slope/adjustmentsTPO and slope work re-appear in later reports → duplicate/serial reporting risk
3/1/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings onlyPlywood removal & replacementConflicts with earlier “removal” language → sequencing inconsistency
3/8/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings onlyShingles & drip edge installationRoofing materials listed inconsistent with later TPO reports; possible misrepresentation of system installed.
3/15/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings only — Buildings 16–24 (Phase 3–4); Unit 1741; Unit 1737; Unit 1764; Unit 1713Counter-flashing; stucco workRecycled descriptions appear again throughout spring; progress overstated.
3/22/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings —
Buildings 19–24 (Phase 4)
Wood filler at fascia boards
Cosmetic patchwork listed as progress → overstatement of deliverables
3/27/24 – Summary of RepairsPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings —
Buildings 16–24 (Phase 3–4); Unit 1741; Unit 1737; Unit 1764; Unit 1713 		Roofs 16–24 “completed”; fascia filler/paint; foundation failure (1741); water intrusion (1737/1764); unpermitted structure (1713)“Completed” language conflicts with later 2024 activity; serious items deferred
3/29/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildingsFascia/gutter paint; fillerCosmetics framed as closeout → misclassification risk
4/12/24 – Project ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings —
Buildings 19–24; Units 1737 & 1764		Roofs 19–24 “complete”; trenching/waterproofing plans (1737/1764)“Complete” claim conflicts with continuing roof/stucco work later
4/19/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings“New stucco” on exterior walls; crack repairsIdentical phrasing appears repeatedly → templated progress
4/26/24 – Project ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings — Buildings 19–24 (Phase 4)Crack repairs using Sika VOH; stucco & paint applicationFiller/paint emphasis may conceal structural defects
5/3/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildingsCaulking/filler at exterior surfacesMinimal tasks used as progress markers → billing/valuation risk
5/10/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildingsStucco around windows; primer & paintPaves way for window charges despite later guidance that replacements weren’t mandatory
5/17/24 – Project ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings —
Buildings 19–21
“New stucco” noted; window assessments/pricing		“Complete” roof status reused; continuing remedial items → contradiction
5/20/24 – Project ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings –Buildings 19–24; Unit 1737Roofs 19–24 “complete”; stucco repairs; water test 1737“Complete” roof status reused; continuing remedial items → contradiction
5/24/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildingsRoofs 19–24 “complete”; stucco repairs; water test 1737Scope drift to non-critical items while core repairs unresolved
5/31/24 – Project ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings — Building 21 – Units 1741, 1745, 1749; window work PhasesFoundation proposals/permits pending; window assessments continueCritical foundation work delayed while cosmetic/assessment work advances
6/14/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildingsOngoing stucco removal; primer/paint“Ongoing” after earlier “complete” claims → cycle/boilerplate risk
6/21/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings 1737/1764 wall repairs “completed”; water test scheduled; window assessmentsCombines water-intrusion fixes & window pricing; unclear closure of prior
7/12/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings –Building 24
Stucco application; wooden fences		Decorative/fencing work foregrounded; safety-critical repairs backgrounded
7/19/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings –Building 24New stucco” + paint“New stucco” repeats after earlier “completed” status → duplication
7/26/24 – Project ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings –Buildings 16–24Roofs 16–24 listed as “complete”; foundation permits pendingRoof “complete” status contradicts later active roof/foundation entries
8/16/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings Bonding agent + “new stucco”Standardized phrasing recycled from spring → authenticity risk
8/23/24 – Project ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings –Phase 4 overall“All structural works completed”; continued fence work“All completed” conflicts with December activity → premature closeout indicator
9/6/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings Wood filler at fascia; primer & paint
Cosmetics recurring as “progress” → value inflation risk
9/13/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings Caulking; paint; fence installation
Minimal work extended over weeks → progress padding
10/4/24 – Project ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings –Phase 4 overall
“Final inspection complete; all punch-list items corrected		Later defects contradict “all corrected” → certification risk
11/15/24 – Progress ReportPhases 3 & 4(subdivisions) — concrete buildings
Wood filler + paint; Hardie board touch-ups		Cosmetic closure steps in place of structural fixes
11/22/24 – Progress ReportPhases 1, 2 & 3(subdivisions) — frame and concrete construction — Building 1Roof plywood replacement; insulation sheetsSimilar tasks previously marked “complete” → duplicate reporting risk
11/29/24 – Progress ReportPhases 1, 2 & 3(subdivisions) — frame and concrete construction — Buildings 1–2; windows (unspecified units)Re-installation of existing good windows; plywood/Hardie replacementContradicts “mandatory window replacement” narrative to owners
12/13/24 – Project ReportPhases 1, 2 & 3(subdivisions) — frame and concrete construction — Buildings 19–24; Building 21 – Unit 1741; Buildings 1–2, 6, 12, 15–20“All structural works complete”; records helical piles (1741); notes roof/permit statuses across multiple buildings
12/13/24 – Progress ReportPhases 1, 2 & 3(subdivisions) — frame and concrete construction — Buildings 1–2, 15, 20
TPO sheets; new plywood; beams; helical piles (activity)		Conflicts with same-day “all structural works complete” claim in project report

🚩 Major Red Flags Detected in 2024 Omega Villas Progress & Project Reports

1️⃣ Recycled “Completion” Claims

  • Multiple reports (Mar → Aug → Dec 2024) repeat identical statements such as “Roofs 19–24 complete” or “All structural works completed.”
  • These “completed” scopes reappear months later under different report dates.
  • May indicate possible false completion reporting or duplicate billing.
    (Examples: 4/12/24, 5/20/24, 7/26/24, 8/23/24, 12/13/24.)

2️⃣ Contradictory Same-Day Reports

  • The 12/13/24 Project Report declares “all structural works complete.”
  • The 12/13/24 Progress Report—issued the same day—lists active work: TPO sheets, plywood, beams, and helical piles.
  • This is a direct contradiction and a prime candidate for fraud review.

3️⃣ 🕵️‍♂️Repeated “Roof Completion” With Ongoing Roof Activity

  • “Roofs 16–24 complete” appears as early as March 2024 yet roof, fascia, and plywood work continues through November–December 2024.
  • Suggests phantom completion entries used to justify draws or sign-offs.

4️⃣ 🕵️‍♂️Cosmetic Work Reported as Structural Progress

  • Dozens of reports highlight wood filler, paint, caulking, and fence installation as primary “progress.”
  • Real structural repairs (foundations, waterproofing) remain “pending.”
  • Pattern implies scope substitution—low-cost aesthetic work billed under major repair categories.
  • The following images document visible examples of cosmetic-only work—painted-over damage, wood filler patches, and fence installations—reported in official progress logs as major “structural” accomplishments.
  • Photos of the “cosmetic” stucco repairs that don’t appear to be structural in nature:
Shoddy Stucco Work
  • Photos of the wood filler repairs that don’t appear to be structural in nature:
Wood Filler on Buildings

5️⃣ Foundation “Pending” Narrative Across 10 Months

  • Building 21 (Units 1741, 1745, 1749) listed for “foundation failure” in March.
  • Reappears repeatedly as “pending” until December 2024 when suddenly marked “complete.”
  • Either serious delay or falsified milestone completion without verifiable remediation.

6️⃣ 🕵️‍♂️Window Assessment / Replacement Conflicts

  • Early reports: “re-install old windows if in good condition.”
  • Later: “window assessments and pricing” → sets up owner billing.
  • Contradictory language used to justify unauthorized window costs; may breach F.S. 718 fiduciary and notice requirements.
  • Letter 1, Letter 2, & Letter 3

7️⃣ Copy-Paste Boilerplate Language

  • Terms like “new stucco,” “bonding agent applied,” and “Sika VOH crack repair” recur nearly word-for-word in different months.
  • Strong sign of templated progress reports rather than field-verified updates.

8️⃣ Phase & Building References Shift Without Clear Boundaries

  • Phase 4 (Buildings 19–24) repeatedly cited while Phase 3 items appear intermixed.
  • Confusion over which phases are “in progress” or “complete” obscures accountability.
  • May indicate report padding across phases to show artificial progress.

9️⃣ Certification / Inspection Integrity Concerns

  • 10/4/24 Project Report: “Final inspection complete; all punch-list items corrected.”
  • Later reports (Nov–Dec) list fresh work on those same buildings.
  • Raises potential false certification and permit closure fraud with the City.

🔟 Permit & Procurement Inconsistencies

  • Reports cite deposits and permits for Solid Foundations months before any “work complete” notes.
  • Suggests funds advanced prior to approval or incomplete permit linkage.
  • Violates basic procurement and recertification oversight norms.

1️⃣1️⃣ Chronological Scope Inflation

  • Early reports show roofing and stucco; later ones reintroduce those same items alongside new categories (fencing, landscaping).
  • Pattern indicates scope creep to absorb remaining funds without documented change orders.

1️⃣2️⃣ “All Works Complete” While Defect Evidence Exists

  • Owner videos and photos (e.g., September 2025 roof photos, stucco paint-overs) contradict “finalized” report language.
  • Supports allegation of fraud by certification—claiming completion with visible defects.

⚖️ Summary of Concern

Together these patterns point toward:

  • Systemic misrepresentation of construction progress.
  • Possible falsification of official certifications.
  • Improper re-use of identical language across multiple billing cycles.
  • Negligent or complicit oversight by management and engineering vendors.

2025 S&D Engineering “Scope of Works” Audit Table

Report (Date/File)Properties Referenced (Building / Phase)Scope of Work (quoted or summarized)Why this should be reviewed for possible fraud / overreach
Progress Report 1/10/2025BLDG 07, BLDG 02“Laying down the insulation sheets… adding the tin caps, BLDG 07… laying down the TPO Sheets, BLDG 07… Installation of the new shingles and fascia board, BLDG 02.”Mixed systems reported (TPO and shingles) across buildings; verify roofing system specifications and permitting sequencing on 7 vs. 2.
Progress Report 2/7/2025Phase 4 (BLDG 19–24); Phase 3 (16–18, 13–15); Phase 2 (7–12); Phase 1 (1–6)“Removal of the deteriorated plywood and… new plywood, BLDG 8… waterproofing black sheets… insulation… BLDG 8… new roofing shingles/metal drip edges, BLDG 7… Hardie Board over the wooden strips, BLDG 14.Extensive “removal/replacement” roof work still ongoing in 2025 despite multiple 2024 “completed” claims in project summaries; check for duplicate milestones.
Project Progress Report 2/7/2025Phase 4 (BLDG 19–24); Phase 3 (16–18, 13–15); Phase 2 (7–12); Phase 1 (1–6)“All roofs on buildings 19 to 24… Painting works complete… Currently all structural works are completed… Roofing schedule for balance of buildings… (lists Bldgs 1–10, 11, 14–15 with finish dates).”Declares Phase-wide “all roofs… completed” and “all structural works… completed” while also listing many roofs still to be finished into spring 2025; internal contradiction.
Project Progress Report 4/4/2025Phase 4 (19–24); Phase 3 (16–18, 13–15); Phase 2 (7–12); Phase 1 (1–6)Again: “All roofs on buildings 19 to 24… Currently all structural works are completed… Roofing works are on schedule: ongoing on buildings 9 and 11.”States “all structural works completed” while simultaneously reporting ongoing roofing on BLDG 9 & 11; contradicts itself within same report family.
Roof Work Notice 4/12/2025BLDG 10: “1740-1744-1748-1752-1756-1760 NW 73 Ave – Bldg 10”“We are notifying you of upcoming roof work on your property/building within a few days.” Plus instructions to remove attachments, address electrical/cable/AC items.Confirms fresh roof work scheduled on Building 10 in April 2025, inconsistent with broad “all structural works completed” statements repeated in project reports.
Progress Report 5/9/2025BLDG 11, BLDG 10, BLDG 09
“Laying down the roofing insulation… BLDG 11… replacement of bad plywood/wood beams, BLDG 10… waterproof sheets/furring strips/drip edges BLDG 10/09… laying down the TPO sheets and welding, BLDG 10.”		Active structural roof work in May 2025 on 9–11 undermines earlier “completed” declarations; check for false progress certification.
Progress Report 5/16/2025BLDG 10, BLDG 11, BLDG 09“Laying down… insulation… / TPO sheets, BLDG 10/11/09… installation of waterproof sheets, wooden furring strips and TPO Sheets, BLDG 10/11… shingles/fascia/drip edges BLDG 10… welding TPO BLDG 09.”Repeats roofing/TPO tasks week-over-week after “structural works completed” assertions; potential padded progress cycles.
Progress Report 5/23/2025BLDG 09, BLDG 11, BLDG 10“Installation of the furring strips on Hardie board, BLDG 09… roofing shingles and TPO Sheets, BLDG 09… roofing shingles/skylights, BLDG 11… shingles + furring strips, BLDG 10.”Simultaneous reporting of shingles + TPO on same report cycle; verify roofing design (mixed systems) and NOA compliance per building.
Project Progress Report 5/28/2025Phase 4 (19–24); Phase 3 (16–18, 13–15); Phase 2 (7–12); Phase 1 (1–6)“All roofs on buildings 19 to 24… Currently all structural works are completed… Phase 2/1: ‘Installation of new roof… completed, City inspection passed, permit closed…’ New developments: ‘Roofing works are completed on all buildings to date.’”Says “roofing works are completed on all buildings” on 5/28/25 while weekly progress reports in May still show active roofing on BLDG 9–11; strong contradiction.
Scope of Works – Internet & Cable Boxes (7/8/25)Phases 1, 2 & 3 (99 boxes total)“Removal and replacement of internet and cable boxes to facilitate installation of new Hardie board side panels… verify transmission signals and validate all services.”Expands project scope into telecom infrastructure, not part of original recertification or façade repair; could represent non-essential upselling or double charging under “Hardie board” justification.
Scope of Works – Plumbing Outlets (7/8/25)Phases 1, 2 & 3 (152 outlets total)“Removal and replacement of existing plumbing outlets… turning off water supply, disconnecting, extending pipelines if necessary, installing new outlets, testing for leaks.”Broad plumbing replacement unrelated to façade panels; risks of scope inflation and improper permitting if work performed under a façade permit rather than plumbing permit.
Scope of Works – Air-Condition Units (7/8/25)Phases 1, 2 & 3 (64 units total)“Removal and replacement of air-condition units… disconnect/recover refrigerant, mount new units, reconnect power and plumbing, issue Certificate of Compliance.”Full AC replacement across three phases exceeds façade interface work; could represent non-budgeted capital project disguised as “Hardie board facilitation.”
Scope of Works – Electrical Outlets / Fixtures / Meter Panels (7/8/25)Phases 1, 2 & 3 (54 meter panels, 234 fixtures, 176 outlets)“Removal and replacement of electrical outlets, light fixtures, and main meter panels… reconnect feeders, run new conduits, issue testing verification.”Large-scale electrical overhaul labeled as façade-related; potential misuse of funds and unauthorized alteration of building infrastructure under recertification pretext.
Windows Evaluation (7/23/25)Complex-wide (Phases 1-3)Assessment of lower windows; identifies “cracked glass, fogging, damaged caulking,” recommends full replacement rather than selective repair.Reinforces window-replacement narrative despite City’s earlier written guidance that replacements were “not mandatory unless hazardous”; supports financial coercion pattern.
Scope of Works – Plumbing, Electrical, AC, Internet Sets Combined (July 2025 batch)Phases 1–3 aggregateEach letter uses identical structure and disclaimer: “Nothing in this letter shall be construed as guarantee… accurate appraisal of present condition.”Repetition of identical boilerplate across trades, all dated July 8 2025, indicates mass-produced documentation to formalize “expanded” scopes after initial construction controversy.
Common Traits Across All DS&S LettersPhases 1–3Each assigns new tasks (AC, electrical, plumbing, cable) “to facilitate installation of new Hardie board panels.”None of these mechanical/electrical/plumbing replacements are shown in original Austro Contract (2023–24). Collectively suggest scope laundering—adding unrelated items under a recertification umbrella without own
Lower Window Inspection Letter 7/29/25
Phases I–III (complex-wide)
“Windows not mandatory unless broken / hazardous; recommend Board disallow re-installation of existing units.”
Reverses earlier City guidance → potential policy manipulation.
Phases 1–3
“Cracked glass, fogging, damaged frames — recommend full replacement.”		Aligns with replacement push despite no code requirement → financial coercion risk
Windows Evaluation 7/23/25 (DS&S)
Phases 1–3
“Cracked glass, fogging, damaged frames — recommend full replacement.”
Aligns with replacement push despite no code requirement → financial coercion risk.		Assessment of lower windows; identifies “cracked glass, fogging, damaged caulking,” recommends full replacement rather than selective repair.Reinforces window-replacement narrative despite City’s earlier written guidance that replacements were “not mandatory unless hazardous”; supports financial coercion pattern.
11.17.25 Sliders Letter.pdfComing Soon!

🧩 Manipulated Construction Schedule & Timeline Alterations

Beginning in late 2024 and continuing into 2025, the project schedule appears to have been quietly rewritten without any formal Board motion or owner notification:

Original intent (2023–2024): A risk-based, cross-phase triage, prioritizing the worst roofs across Phases 1–4 first (life-safety/active leaks), then moving to the next-most critical buildings.
What changed in 2025: Reports quietly shift to a “rolling” everything-is-on-schedule narrative while blending phases, adding new scopes (MEP/windows/telecom) into the “roofing” timeline, and pushing dates without any recorded vote.

How the flip shows up:

  • Triage → Blur: Worst-roof-first becomes phase blending with vague “on schedule” language—even while fresh roof notices go out (e.g., 4/12/25 Bldg 10) after prior “complete” claims.
  • Schedule edits without votes: 90–120 day “estimated completion” pushes appear in spring 2025 with no Board motion or minutes approving changes.
  • Scope laundering: July 8, 2025 “Scope of Works” letters (AC, plumbing, electrical, cable) get folded into the construction timeline as if they were part of the original roof triage—they weren’t.
  • Cosmetic milestones = progress: Paint/filler/fencing logged as “milestones,” while structural items remain “pending,” padding percentage-complete metrics.

Why it matters (legal):

  • F.S. 718.3026 (contracts/bids) requires open approval for material scope/schedule changes—not silent rewrites.
  • F.S. 718.111(1)(d) (fiduciary duty): concealing delays/adding unfunded scope without owner notice breaches duty of care and loyalty.
  • City recertification integrity: false “complete/on schedule” statements risk improper permit closures/certifications.

Quick comparison (use on page):

Plan ElementOriginal Triage Plan (2023–24)What Happened in 2025Why It’s a Problem
Work orderWorst roofs across all phases first (life-safety triage)Blended phases; vague “rolling schedule”Obscures priority + masks delays
MilestonesStructural closures per buildingCosmetic tasks counted as milestonesInflates progress/justifies draws
ScopeRoofing/structural repairsMEP, windows, telecom folded inUnauthorized scope expansion
DatesRisk-based sequence w/ clear targetsQuiet 90–120 day pushesNo Board vote / owner notice
RecordsBid/schedule + minutes alignReports contradict notices/photosDue-process + certification risk

Evidence cross-refs to cite under this section:

  • Original schedule/bid: Original schedule and 2023–24 board discussion notes quoting “worst roofs first.”
  • Context: design & proxy manipulation (color fight evidence)
    • At the same time the “rolling schedule” narrative emerged, the Board and management were mired in disputes over building colors, optional façade features, and proxy-based voting.
    • Phase 2 owners successfully resisted proxy pushes to impose the new color scheme and retained the original gray/neutral palette, while Phases 1, 3, and 4 were repainted with pushed or forced to unapproved “modernized” tones.
    • These design fights delayed legitimate work sequencing, yet later reports pretended the delays never happened, labeling everything “on schedule.”
    • Proxy tallies and color-choice polls were conducted outside of properly noticed meetings, suggesting the same pattern of off-record decision-making used to justify the timeline rewrites.
    • Why it matters:
      • The color-proxy episode proves the project’s schedule and scope were being weaponized to reward compliance and penalize dissenting phases—mirroring the governance control issues described throughout Exhibit Q2. It reinforces that “progress” in 2025 was political, not procedural, and that data in S&D’s progress logs must be audited against minutes and proxy records for manipulation.
  • Contradictions: Project/Progress Reports 2/7/25, 4/4/25, 5/28/25 (“all structural works completed” vs. active roofing on Bldgs 9–11).
  • Fresh roof notice: 4/12/25 Bldg 10 notice after “completed” language.
  • Scope add-ons: 7/8/25 S&D letters (AC/electrical/plumbing/cable) appearing midstream without voted change orders.
  • Minutes gap: June 17 → Aug 28 → (no Sept meeting) → Oct 9 agendas show no approved schedule amendment despite expanded work.

📆 Revised Completion Dates Without Vote

  • Several mid-2025 reports show “new estimated completion” dates pushed by 90–120 days with no meeting minutes or email votes explaining the extensions.
  • These rolling extensions coincide with newly issued Scope of Work letters (dated July 8, 2025) for AC, plumbing, and electrical — signaling that the schedule itself was expanded to accommodate new, non-contracted tasks.

🧱 Shift From Structural to Cosmetic “Milestones”

  • By summer 2025, progress reports label painting, fence work, and window assessments as “milestones reached,” effectively replacing core structural deliverables with aesthetic checkmarks.
  • This manipulation inflates progress metrics and allows partial draws or “percentage complete” payments despite unaddressed defects.

🚨 Why It Matters

  • Altering a published construction schedule without open Board authorization violates F.S. 718.3026 (Contracts and bids) and F.S. 718.111 (1)(d) (failure of fiduciary duty).
  • It also undermines the City’s ability to audit true project progress for recertification purposes, exposing both owners and lenders to false-certification risk.

📎 Evidence Cross-References

  • Compare the original Austro schedule in Exhibit Q1 (Appendix B) with S&D Engineering’s April and May 2025 “rolling completion” reports.
  • Review Project Progress Report 2/7/25, Project Progress Report 4/4/25, and Project Progress Report 5/28/25 for timeline compression and phase overlap.
  • Verify against Board agendas (June 17 → Aug 28 → Oct 9 2025): no agenda item records any formal schedule amendment or extension vote.

🚩 Major Red Flags Detected in 2025 Omega Villas Progress & Project Reports

⚠️ Self-Contradiction within 2025 Project Reports

Declaring “all structural works completed” and “roofing works are completed on all buildings” (Apr–May) while weekly progress reports in Jan–May show active roof removal/replacement on BLDG 7–11.

⚠️ System Inconsistency (TPO vs. Shingles) and Repetition

Same buildings reported with TPO application AND shingles work across adjacent weeks — suggesting inconsistent materials and inspection reporting.
👉 Design intent, NOAs, and final inspections per building must be reviewed for compliance.

⚠️ Fresh Roof Work Notices vs. “All Complete” Claims

April 12 notice to BLDG 10 addresses (1740–1760 NW 73 Ave) announces upcoming roof work, contradicting the “completed” language already appearing in April/May progress reports.

🕵️‍♂️ Window Stance Shift

The July 29 letter restates “windows not mandatory unless broken/hazardous” but then recommends disallowing reinstallation — functionally steering toward replacement across phases.
📎 Letter – Lower Window Inspection 7.29.25 (PDF)

Within days, removed windows were collected and stockpiled on the property — a visible and intimidating display implying owners would be forced to replace them or lose reinstallation rights.
📎 Photo – Window Evaluation 7.23.25 (PDF)

These photos demonstrate that the “inspection” process quickly evolved into an act of coercion in my strong opinion.
Owners were shown piles of their own windows as physical evidence that reinstallation was being disallowed — even though S&D’s own letter (and the City’s prior guidance) confirmed replacement was not required by code.

This conduct supports a pattern of retaliation and financial pressure, using property staging to create a false sense of urgency and loss.

💰 Emerging Special Assessment & Contract Scope Gaps

Recent Board communications and vendor activity suggest preparations for a new special assessment to fund “additional work” — specifically mechanical, electrical, and plumbing scopes now surfacing across Phases 1–3.

🔍 Key Questions Raised:

  • Why were these elements not included in the original $4.85 million construction contract with Austro Construction and S&D Engineering?
  • Were these omissions intentional, setting up a second assessment once owners were financially cornered?
  • If Phase 1 buildings (including Unit 1700) and the clubhouse A/C systems are already being replaced without Board votes or budget authorization, does this indicate the special assessment is being quietly implemented in advance of owner notification?

💣 Red Flag Summary:

This new pattern mirrors prior behavior seen in 2024–2025 — post-hoc ratification of work, vendor favoritism, and budgetary concealment until costs balloon into “emergency assessments.”
Such actions may constitute contract misrepresentation and fiduciary breaches under F.S. 718.111(1)(a) and 718.3026.

📎 Supporting References: