Last Updated
Board Appointments, Officer Changes, or Irregular Election Docs
📅 2018
- Dec 20, 2018 – Appointment: Eric Richards appointed to the Board by motion/second; all in favor.
📅 2019
- (Routine board business; no owner-election detail beyond project scheduling and RFP work.)
📅 2020 (context leading into 2021 set)
- Multiple meetings held; board continued budgeting and special assessment actions by majority vote.
📅 2022 – Annual Meeting (Mar 14, 2022): Irregular-election pattern continues
- No homeowner quorum. Four applications for four seats → all four automatically seated (Patty, Blaire, Eric, Renata). Officers confirmed by the Board (Patty–President; Eric–VP; Blaire–Sec/Treas; Renata–MAL (Member-at-Large)).
📅 2023
- Standard meetings; no owner election logged in the packets reviewed.
🚨Documented Officer Record (2018–2023)🚨
| Year | President | Vice President | Secretary | Treasurer | Notes / Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | Patty Sabates | Blaire Lapides | Eric Richards | Renata Sayeed | December 2018 minutes list officers after organizational meeting. |
| 2019 | Patty Sabates | Blaire Lapides | Eric Richards | Renata Sayeed | No change recorded; carried forward per January 2019 meeting. |
| 2020 | Patty Sabates | Blaire Lapides | Eric Richards | Renata Sayeed | Same slate; all four active through loan discussions. |
| 2021 | Patty Sabates | Blaire Lapides | Eric Richards | Renata Sayeed | Continuity confirmed in 2021 header. |
| 2022 | Patty Sabates | Eric Richards | Blaire Lapides | Renata Sayeed | March 14 2022: four applications, four seats → automatically seated. |
| 2023 | Patty Sabates | Eric Richards | Blaire Lapides | Renata Sayeed | Confirmed across July 18 and Oct 24 2023 minutes. |
💰 Vendor Approvals & Financial Authorizations (with Month/Year)
| Month & Year | Vendor / Contractor | Purpose / Project | Amount / Decision | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2018 | S&D Engineering & Construction | Phase 1 40-Year Certification assessment | Approved | Selected after board review. |
| 🚨Jul 2018 | 🚨Rules & Regs (legal) | 🚨Policy update | 🚨To attorney review | 🚨Forwarded to Lloyd Procton. |
| Jul 2018 | BBM Services | Pressure wash sidewalks | Approved | Board reviewed 4 bids. |
| 🚨Jul 2018 | 🚨Ray’s Paving | 🚨Fill gaps: sidewalk ↔ paving | 🚨Approved | 🚨Motion/second; all in favor. |
| Jul 2018 | ProScapes | Lawn fertilization | Approved | Contract accepted. |
| 🚨Dec 2018 | 🚨Stanley N. Schachne, Architect, P.A. | 🚨Test-building drawings | 🚨Approved | 🚨Step toward scoping hidden damage. |
| 🚨Dec 2018 | 🚨Special Assessment (2019) | 🚨Continue SA until loan repayments begin | 🚨Approved (3–1) | 🚨Juda Eskew to send coupon books. |
| 🚨Oct 2020 | 🚨S&D Engineering (attending) | 🚨Scope/roofing approach | 🚨Proceed | 🚨Board/engineer walk-through; loan financing prep. |
| Sep 2022 | Cavaliere Electric & Sons, LLC | Electrical (40-Year) | Present | Attended board; permits in flight. |
| 🚨Jul 2023 | 🚨Austro Construction | 🚨Community-wide roof/structural project | 🚨Approved | 🚨Contract approved by counsel (Hollander); awaiting engineer exhibits for bank. |
| 🚨Jul 2023 | 🚨Special Assessment (Insurance) | 🚨4-month insurance SA (per-unit rates) | 🚨Approved | 🚨2024 increase to roll into budget. |
| 🚨Oct 2023 | 🚨Popular Bank (loan) | 🚨$4.6M restoration loan | 🚨Approved | 🚨24-mo LOC @ 6.75% → 20-yr term @ 7.46%. |
🔨 Structural Alteration Arc (2023–2025)
🚨Including Narrative Patterns of Selective Blame Targeting Owners Who Raised Concerns
🚨Patterns of Targeted Attribution Toward Whistleblower Owners (Appears Across 2023–2025 Minutes)
Across multiple meetings from at least 2023 to 2025, the minutes show a recurring pattern where operational delays, increased legal costs, and insurance-related pressures were repeatedly attributed to:
- 🚨one or two specific owners,
- 🚨select insurance claimants,
- 🚨or those who raised questions in WhatsApp, emails, or DBPR filings.
1. 🚨Legal Costs Were Allegedly Repeatedly Referenced in the Context of Your DBPR Case
The minutes do not show:
- 🚨any similar references to legal expenses related to other owners,
- 🚨any clarification that association counsel’s actions were Board-directed,
- 🚨or any neutral explanation of why legal costs rose.
However, your DBPR matter was specifically read into the record.
🚨“Minutes repeatedly connected legal expenses to a single DBPR case involving a Whistleblower Board Member, without equivalent context for other legal expenditures documented elsewhere.”
🚨This creates a perception in the minutes that legal fees increased because of one whistleblower owner, despite the 2024–2025 Budget showing $37k–$46k in legal costs, far beyond anything related to your DBPR filing.
2. 🚨Insurance Claims Were Allegedly Listed by Name — Only for Certain Owners
This only happened in 2024 and only for:
- 🚨Whistleblower, Owner & Director
- 🚨A few select neighbors who filed insurance claims or lawsuits
- 🚨Not all claimants
This creates a selective narrative that makes the claims appear unusual or problematic, despite:
- 🚨water intrusion being a community-wide structural issue
- 🚨multiple buildings having roof failures, foundation problems, and mold
- 🚨15+ years of documented City correspondence showing water-related deterioration
🚨“The minutes list individual insurance claimants by name, despite water intrusion being documented across multiple phases. This selective identification creates an impression of unusual or isolated activity where broader structural causes were also present.”
3. 🚨Window Delays Were Allegedly Referenced in a Way That Implied Owner-caused Holdups
Even though:
- 🚨window removal appears to have became mandatory only after wall-depth changes,
- 🚨engineering changes originated from S&D, Austro, CAM, to HOA counsel sequencing,
- 🚨many owners could not afford impact windows on short notice,
- 🚨and the 2023 signed Austro 40-year recertification construction contract never appears to have disclosed furring strips or window compatibility issues…
…the minutes repeatedly framed delays as related to:
- 🚨“owners needing to get windows done,”
- 🚨“owners not informing management,”
- 🚨“specific windows holding up the roof.”
- 🚨“Minutes regularly referenced owner window preparedness as a cause of construction delays, even though engineering notes and contract deviations (e.g., substrate and wall-depth changes) contributed to the need for unexpected window removal.”🚨
4. WhatsApp Discussions Were Allegedly Framed as Disruptive — Rather Than a Transparency Response
The entire community WhatsApp thread emerged because:
- 🚨budget uploads were missing,
- 🚨engineering updates were delayed,
- 🚨owners were confused about windows and phases,
- 🚨and Sunrise appeared to have multiple documentation gaps.
Yet the minutes often characterized owner inquiries as:
- 🚨“complaints,”
- 🚨“chatter,”
- 🚨“misinformation,”
- 🚨“negativity.”
“Several minutes describe community WhatsApp discussions as disruptive or problematic without acknowledging the transparency concerns or missing documentation that prompted those discussions.”
🚨 April 2025 Audit Request – Construction Expenses Still Allegedly Omitted
🚨During the April 2025 Board Meeting, the whistleblower formally requested that the Association’s independent auditor include construction-related expense classifications in the upcoming 2024 Year-End Audit Report. The request was made again by email following the meeting.
🚨Despite the clarity of the question, the Board’s response pattern reflected:
- 🚨Gaslighting (“those questions don’t apply here”)
- 🚨Deflection (“we’ll address that later / that’s not part of this discussion”)
- 🚨Non-response (no reply to the trailing audit-request email)
🚨To date, no confirmation has been provided that the auditor was ever instructed to:
- 🚨Review construction-related expenses
- 🚨Evaluate whether any construction costs were booked as operating expenses
- 🚨Assess if Special Assessment revenue was redirected to cover project shortfalls
- 🚨Determine accuracy of cost allocation under GAAP, F.S. § 718.111(12), or audit standards
🚨This omission allegedly reinforces the broader transparency gap:
🚨Owners have never been provided a construction budget or an audit review that includes 40-Year Recertification financial activity, despite repeated written and verbal requests.
Pattern of Selective Attribution to Whistleblower Owners (2023–2025)
The minutes repeatedly attribute increases in legal costs, insurance pressures, and construction delays to select owners — particularly those who raised concerns or participated in WhatsApp transparency efforts. Legal expenses were referenced in connection with a single DBPR case, insurance claims were listed by name only for certain individuals, and window delays were often framed as owner-related despite engineering and scope-based causes. This creates a narrative pattern where structural or operational issues appear tied to specific owners rather than the broader project conditions documented across phases.
🚨Why This All Matters
Because these official records of evidence establishes:
- 🚨a documented narrative technique used across different meetings,
- 🚨a selective framing that portrays whistleblower owners as sources of cost or delay,
- 🚨a continuity of response rather than isolated incidents,
- 🚨context for how conflicts escalated,
- 🚨patterns relevant to DBPR IG review and your arbitration,
🚨This gives investigators (DBPR IG, arbitration, banks, media) the surrounding context the minutes alone don’t show.
Sunrise Management – Repairs & Maintenance Mentions (2018–2023 Minutes)
| Month & Year | Repair or Construction Item Mentioned | Speaker / Context | Notes or Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🚨March 19, 2018 | 🚨“Repairs being completed by Sunrise vendors – roof leaks, broken fences, and damaged soffit.” | 🚨Property Manager report. | 🚨Routine maintenance listed, but no vendor names or dollar amounts – appears to be a lack of transparency. |
| 🚨August 20, 2018 | 🚨“Sunrise to schedule roof leak inspections for Phase 3 buildings.” | 🚨Manager follow-up item. | 🚨Roof leaks repeatedly cited with no mention of engineer or long-term plan. |
| 🚨December 17, 2018 | 🚨“Sunrise Management reviewing bids for repairs from storm damage and wood rot.” | 🚨Management update. | 🚨Matches period when Austro invoices appear in Whistleblower’s financial Juda Eskew Ledger records but aren’t mentioned in the minutes. |
| 🚨March 18, 2019 | 🚨“Roof repairs and fence replacements ongoing.” | 🚨Report by Sunrise. | 🚨No vendor listed; this is the same quarter Schachne Architects started working on the Phase 1 drawings (May 2019). |
| 🚨June 17, 2019 | 🚨“Roof leak repairs completed.” | 🚨Report by Patty / Sunrise. | 🚨Consistent with your Austro invoices (2017–2019 period). No City permit mention. |
| 🚨October 21, 2019 | 🚨“Sunrise coordinating repairs for cracked sidewalks and foundation areas.” | 🚨Property Manager. | 🚨No bid or funding source noted; this is one month before the 2019 RFP set was issued. |
| 🚨February 17, 2020 | 🚨“Sunrise to oversee additional roof repairs.” | 🚨Management summary. | 🚨Confirms ongoing leak work before the 40-Year RFP (S&D issued Nov 2020). |
| 🚨July 20, 2020 | 🚨“Sunrise reports completion of fence gate repair.” | 🚨Management report. | 🚨No details, possibly a placeholder for post-COVID maintenance. |
| 🚨March 15, 2021 | 🚨“Sunrise to schedule gutter and fascia repairs.” | 🚨Property Manager report. | 🚨“Gutter & fascia” continues the same repair categories as earlier years. |
| 🚨June 21, 2021 | 🚨“Sunrise coordinating repair of perimeter fencing.” | 🚨Meeting minutes. | 🚨No mention of City permits despite prior citations. |
| 🚨September 20, 2021 | 🚨“Sunrise to get roof repair quotes.” | 🚨Property Manager. | 🚨Quotes requested months before the Austro reappearance (2021 invoice set). |
| 🚨March 14, 2022 | 🚨“Sunrise to monitor roof leaks and issue maintenance notices.” | 🚨Property Manager. | 🚨Same repetitive phrase as 2018–2020 — no record of formal engineering reports. |
| 🚨July 18, 2022 | 🚨“Sunrise Management coordinating minor roof and gutter repairs.” | 🚨Management report. | 🚨No vendor identified; this is the last Sunrise year before the transition to YMS. |
| 🚨October 17, 2022 | 🚨“Sunrise coordinating inspection of buildings for upcoming 40-Year recertification.” | 🚨Property Manager statement. | 🚨Appears to be a direct bridge to the 2023 Austro engagement. Sunrise essentially functions as a handoff point into YMS + S&D/Austro activity, per minutes in 2024. |
| 🚨March 7, 2023 | 🚨“Austro Construction completed repairs to several roofs.” | 🚨Engineer report to Board. | 🚨Minutes indicate a progression from earlier Sunrise-reported repairs to 2023 Austro work. |
Owner / Structural Complaint Log (2018–2023) — Building-Only
| Month & Year | Issue | Unit/Phase | Board Action / City Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2018 | Water pooling outside unit | 1745 / Ph 2 | Logged; part of drainage/sidewalk attention. |
| Apr 2018 | Blue tarp covering upper windows | 1740 / Ph 1 | Logged for enforcement/repair planning. |
| 🚨Aug 2019 | 🚨City extensions for 40-Year | 🚨Community | 🚨Management “keeping communication open” with City. |
| 🚨Jul 2023 | 🚨Insurance shock SA (structural risk context) | 🚨Community | 🚨Per-unit SA amounts published; 2024 baked into budget. |
| Jul–Oct 2023 | Tree roots in pipe; pool permits | Individual + common | City responsibility for certain trees; pool permits being pulled. |
Sunrise Management Pattern Observations Summary
- 🚨2018–2022: Sunrise reported “repairs” in nearly every quarterly or biannual meeting, yet no vendors or permits are listed in any minutes.
- 🚨The scope categories (roof, fascia, gutters, fences, soffits) match the 2019 RFP and 2023 40-Year project scopes exactly — indicating continuous work without new authorization.
- 🚨Austro’s invoices line up directly with these unrecorded repair mentions — confirming that paid work was happening while the official minutes stayed generic.
- 🚨By October 2022, Sunrise was already referencing “40-Year inspection preparation,” which transitioned into S&D Engineering’s formal engagement (Nov 2020 RFP → 2023 contract).
Interpretive Note
🚨This timeline appears to show Sunrise acted as the operational continuity between earlier Schachne RFP activity and later S&D/Austro work, based on minutes and packet excerpts.
🚨Their minutes appear to demonstrate:
- 🚨A pattern of routine, undocumented repairs matching contractor invoices.
- 🚨Competitive bidding and detailed vendor disclosures are not reflected in the minutes reviewed.
- 🚨Vendor identities and costs are largely absent from the minutes reviewed.
Contractor & Permit Record (2018–2023)
| Month & Year | Contractor / Pro | Scope | City/Permit Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🚨Apr 2018 | 🚨S&D Engineering | 🚨40-Year assessment (Phase 1) | 🚨Board acceptance; begins formal 40-Year path. |
| 🚨2018 (multiple) | 🚨Sunrise Mgmt / vendors | 🚨Pool/sewer, sidewalks, fences | 🚨City refund request on pool sewer charge; sidewalk bid cycle. |
| 🚨Aug 2019 | 🚨Architect firms (list) | 🚨Phases 2–4 scope | 🚨Bids solicited; Phase 2 “on the clock” with City. |
| 🚨Oct 2020 | 🚨S&D + Sunrise | 🚨Top-down restoration plan (roofs, gutters, TPO, etc.) | 🚨Homeowners reminded City permits needed for owner work. |
| Sep 2022 | Cavaliere Electric | Electrical replacement | Permits out; City clock at 180 days. |
| 🚨Jul–Oct 2023 | 🚨Austro Construction | 🚨Full roof/structural; windows; exterior | 🚨Permits for pool; tree removal permit pending; City to be petitioned on fines after completion. |
City of Plantation & Legal Activity Summary (2018–2023)
2018
- 🚨40-Year Certification: Engineer’s report provided to the City of Plantation; board moves to architect drawings/test building.
- City pool/sewer credit: Florida Leak Locator letter to the City verifying pool leak; requesting sewer-charge refund.
- 🚨40-Year vendor selection: S&D Engineering accepted for Phase 1 40-Year assessment work.
2019
- City notifications: Formal notice that Phase 2 is “on the clock”; Phase 3 report queued; Phase 4 targeted for early 2020.
- City Notifications
Source: 2019 YE BOD Meeting Minutes
Date/Context: Mid-to-late 2019
🚨“Patty Sabates reported on the meeting with Carol Eskew (accountant), Steve Weinberg (attorney), and Stan Schachne (architect) concerning the financing for the restoration project. Patty said that financial institutions would need a scope of work for each of the phases to determine the lending amount.”
“Project Updates – Community presented by Jay Pietrafetta … Phase 2 is on the clock, Phase 3 report is in queue, and Phase 4 will begin early 2020.”
- City Notifications
2020
- 🚨Engineering & financing: S&D and management prep project/loan package; note that institutions have money to lend for 40-Year work.
2021 (in 2020-dated packet)
- City coordination + off-duty Plantation police for security detail windows; management to “work with the City” on scheduling.
2022
- City clock running: 🚨City has the Association on 180-day time to begin work; electrical portion out for permits; 🚨question posed if City will allow “roof-only” scope.
- ⚡ 2022 – City Clock Running
Source: 2022 YE BOD Meeting Minutes
Date: April–September 2022- “Electrical permits by unit for Phase 1 and Phase 2 have been issued by the City of Plantation.”
- “The City requires all units to have smoke detectors – either hard wired or 10-year lithium battery – and will require inspection in each unit to insure smoke detectors are in place.”
- “The City will not allow the electrical boxes to be placed on rotted wood on the buildings.”
- 🚨“Jay Pietrafetta reported that individual drawings have been provided to the Plan Review Committee at the City of Plantation who have indicated that the plans are out of review.”
- “The City is requiring an updated Emergency Light Safety System (ELSS) and smoke detectors in every unit near the front door or hallway.”
- 🚨(These confirm the “City’s 180-day clock,” active permitting, and City coordination.)
- ⚡ 2022 – City Clock Running
2023
- Fines & recertification: Minutes explicitly discuss fines levied by the City for failure to complete 40-Year items; plan is to petition for elimination/reduction after project completion.
- 🏗️ 2023 – Fines & Recertification
Source: 2023 YE BOD Meeting Minutes
Date: October 24, 2023 (Special Meeting)- Direct Quote from the Minutes:
- 🚨“There was a discussion of fines levied by the City for failure to complete items from the 40-Year certification. Unfortunately, due to the homeowners waiving the reserves every year … banks would not approve a loan to Omega until recently. This impacted the ability to start the 40-Year restoration and subsequently caused the fines to be levied. Omega has not paid any fines and will not until the restoration project is completed. At that time, Omega will petition for the fines to be eliminated or reduced.”
- Whistleblower City Fines Confrontation on Video 10.24.23:
- In this video clip, you’re pressing the Board about the City of Plantation’s $144,000 in fines/liens tied to the 40-year recertification mess. You demand to know when they intended to tell owners, pointing out that the Board has a legal duty to disclose hazards that affect property value and safety.
- Video Link: https://youtu.be/NtC8G7HSG00?si=Mt-QwpSGeFStScaf
- Video of 6-8 Police at Meeting (Optics and/or Silencing Dissent??): https://youtube.com/shorts/f3FaFpCgkRk
- 🚨Contextual Note:
- This was the same meeting where Shawn Martin publicly questioned the Board regarding its failure to disclose the existence, amount, or timing of City-imposed fines related to the 40-Year Recertification process.
- Significance:
- 🚨The statement marks the first on-record acknowledgment by the Board that fines had been issued by the City of Plantation.
- 🚨No correspondence, homeowner notification, or prior budgetary reference to these fines appears in the minutes between 2019–2023, indicating no prior mention located in the minutes reviewed of the existence, amount, or timing of City-imposed fines.
- 🚨The Board’s explanation — blaming reserve waivers and delayed loan approval — attributes the situation to reserve waivers and loan timing.
- Direct Quote from the Minutes:
- 🏗️ 2023 – Fines & Recertification
- Permits: Tree removal and pool work permits noted; City responsible for Sunrise Blvd trees.
- 🌳 2023 – Permits: Tree Removal & Pool Work
Source: 2023 YE BOD Meeting Minutes
Date: July 2023 (Regular Meeting)- “Tree removal is still pending receipt of the permit from the City of Plantation. Notices will be posted on the front doors of the units that are affected when work begins.”
- “Trees on Sunrise Blvd. that are encroaching are the responsibility of the City of Plantation.”
- “Permits for the pool work are being pulled. Repairs should begin within the month.”
- 🌳 2023 – Permits: Tree Removal & Pool Work
Attorney & Legal References (2018–2023)
| Month & Year | Attorney / Firm | Matter | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🚨Jul 2018 | 🚨Lloyd Procton, Esq. | 🚨Rules & Regulations legal review | 🚨Draft R&Rs sent to counsel for review. |
| 🚨Mar 2019 | 🚨Steven Weinberg (Frank Weinberg & Black, P.L.) | 🚨40-Year financing meeting | 🚨Met with Carol Eskew (CPA) and Stan Schachne (architect) to structure financing and project phasing. |
| 🚨Jul 2019 | 🚨Steven Weinberg (Frank Weinberg & Black, P.L.) | 🚨RFP / bid coordination | 🚨Managed sealed-bid openings, validated contractor licenses, and provided ranking spreadsheet. |
| Mar–Aug 2019 | Allen S. Kaufman | Deposition retainer ($1,200) | Deposition scheduled Oct 17 2019; likely tied to vendor or project records. |
| 🚨Mar 2022 | 🚨Unnamed Counsel (likely Procton successor Hollander?) | 🚨Loan document review | 🚨Provided recommendations on bank-loan terms & assessment allocations. |
| 🚨Jul 2023 | 🚨Hollander, Goode & Lopez LLP (Matthew Goode) | 🚨Austro Construction contract approval | 🚨Approved final contract and engineer exhibits for bank submission. |
Legal Observations
- 🚨Counsel involvement appears throughout key capital actions; minutes reviewed do not reflect owner 2/3 material-alteration votes.
- 🚨Weinberg’s 2019 role bridges Procton’s era to Hollander’s — creating an unbroken continuity of counsel involvement from 2008 to present.
- 🚨The “petition for fines reduction” language mirrors counsel-drafted phrasing, showing a language consistent with legal guidance.
🧭 Cross-Year Legal Observation Patterns (2018–2023)
| Attorney / Firm | Period | Documented Role / Action | Connection to 40-Year Program |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🚨Lloyd Procton, Esq. | 🚨2018–2019 | 🚨Reviewed Rules & Regs, advised on compliance, collections | 🚨Helped shape early architectural rule control before project onset |
| Allen S. Kaufman | 2019 | Retainer for deposition | Unclear subject; proximate to project financing timeline |
| 🚨Steven Weinberg (Frank, Weinberg & Black) | 🚨2019 | 🚨Attended project financing meeting with accountant & architect | 🚨Provided legal guidance on scope & lender documents |
| 🚨Unnamed Counsel (Hollander?) | 🚨2022 | 🚨Loan documentation review | 🚨Assisted with loan structure & SA language |
| 🚨Matthew Goode (Hollander, Goode & Lopez LLP) | 🚨2023 | 🚨Approved Austro Construction contract & bank exhibits | 🚨Central to project launch; same firm tied to 2025 arbitration activity |
Cross Year Legal Observations
1. Counsel involvement consistently preceded owner awareness
Across all cycles (2011-2019, 2021–2023), attorneys were engaged early in shaping:
- Contract structures
- Financing frameworks
- RFP/bid evaluations
- Materials + scope decisions
🚨These steps occurred before owners were formally informed or given voting opportunities, and in several cycles, no 2/3 membership vote appears in the minutes or supporting packets.
2. A clear continuity of counsel emerges (2008–2025)
Despite attorney names shifting over the years, the functional role did not:
- 2007–2009 → FWB (records, recalls, owner disputes) / Procton outward-facing
- 2010–2014 → Procton outward-facing / FWB background billing
- 2018–2019 → FWB reconstruction financing + RFP/opening of bids / Procton outward-facing
- 2021–Present → Hollander takes over reconstruction contract + enforcement
🚨The legal posture stays consistent: attorney-guided decision-making on major capital actions, with minimal owner-facing transparency.
- 🚨Legal approvals (Procton → Weinberg → Goode/Hollander/Lopez) reveal a continuity of counsel involvement spanning 2008–2023, guiding all major capital actions.
- 🚨The phrasing of 2023’s “petition for fines reduction” reflects legal risk management strategy, not Board initiative.
- 🚨No minutes indicate legal direction to issue owner disclosures for material alteration votes, may implicate F.S. 718.113(5). Owner vote records (if any) were not located in the packets/minutes reviewed.
- Significance:
- 🚨While not directly attributed to an attorney, this phrasing—“petition for elimination or reduction”—clearly mirrors legal guidance.
- 🚨It implies counsel advised the Board to withhold payment and rely on post-completion negotiation with the City — a strategy premised on post-completion negotiations with the City.
- 2007–2009: FWB heavy involvement + Procton front-facing
- 2010–2014: FWB background + Procton front-facing
- 2015–2017: Minimal attorney presence + Procton front-facing
- 2018–2019: FWB reconstruction financing & bidding + Procton front-facing
- 2020: No clear activity + Procton front-facing
- 2021–Present: Hollander, including construction-contract handling
The legal posture stays consistent: attorney-guided decision-making on major capital actions, with minimal owner-facing transparency.
3. 2023’s “petition for elimination or reduction of fines” reflects attorney-style framing
The wording is aligned with the tone and structure typically used in compliance/legal communication.
Nothing in the minutes suggests this phrasing came from the Board itself.
Instead, it matches the pattern of counsel shaping:
- 🚨Risk-contained messaging
- 🚨Post-compliance negotiation positioning
- 🚨City-facing correspondence strategies
🚨This suggests the 2025 fine forgiveness petition for Phase 4 was part of an attorney-advised approach, not an internally generated initiative.
4. Missing owner-vote disclosures continue across all attorney eras
🚨Across 2008 → 2011 → 2019 → 2023, the record shows:
- 🚨No minutes documenting owner notices for material-alteration votes
- 🚨No recorded results of a 2/3 membership approval
- 🚨No attorney direction (in minutes) advising the Board to issue these notices
🚨Owner-vote documentation is either absent, never created, or never provided in meeting packets. This continues into the 2021–2023 construction cycle under Hollander.
5. Significance of the pattern
It’s not just episodic attorney involvement — it’s structural.
The same functional behaviors appear across three different firms and over 17+ years:
- 🚨Early legal steering of major projects
- 🚨Reliance on attorneys to define communication and process
- 🚨Minimal owner-facing transparency
- 🚨Silence in minutes on owner-vote procedures
- 🚨Recurring use of attorneys to shape narrative and response posture
And importantly:
🚨The 2018–2019 FWB reappearance and 2021 Hollander takeover show that this is a long-duration operational model, not an accident or a one-off.
Contractor Continuity Note:
🚨Austro, the contractor selected during the 2018–2019 sealed-bid process, had already been performing work in Omega Villas from 2017 through 2022.
🚨Despite this ongoing role, Austro was still included in the bid pool and awarded the reconstruction project.
No minutes or owner packets disclose this existing relationship at the time of selection.
🚨This mirrors the longstanding pattern where major decisions — whether legal, financial, or construction — were shaped through established relationships prior to owner notification.
Special Assessments / Loan Actions (2018–2023)
- 🚨Dec 20, 2018: Continue Special Assessment for 2019 until loan repayments start; Juda Eskew to issue coupons.
- 🚨Sep–Oct 2020: Board and accountants position for loan; institutions “have money to lend” for 40-Year work.
- 🚨Mar 14, 2022: Cash on hand detailed ($1.295M total across accounts) while City’s 180-day clock runs; loan pursuit continues.
- 🚨Jul 18, 2023: Insurance Special Assessment adopted for the last four months of 2023 with specific per-unit rates; 2024 increase shifts into budget.
- 🚨Oct 24, 2023: $4.6M Popular Bank restoration loan approved (24-mo LOC @6.75% → 20-yr @7.46%).
🧭 Summary of Notable Cross-Year Patterns & Observations (2018–2023)
- 🚨Election / Seating: 2022 repeats the “no homeowner quorum → auto-seating” pattern; officers self-confirmed.
- 🚨City Escalation: Engineer reports (2018) → “on the clock” (2019) → permits & 180-day ultimatum (2022) → fines and petition (2023).
- 🚨Attorney Arc: Procton (rules review 2018) → Weinberg (2019 finance & procurement) → Kaufman (2019 deposition) → Unnamed loan counsel (2022) → Hollander/Goode (2023 contracts).
- 🚨Funding: Continuous special assessments (2018–23), then $4.6 M loan to execute restoration.
- 🚨Project Control: S&D Engineering technical lead; Austro Construction GC by 2023; Juda Eskew accountants embedded throughout.
40-Year Recertification Project Summary of Key Details
| Topic | Summary |
|---|---|
| 🚨Material Options | 🚨Stucco, Hardie board, and T-111 were repeatedly evaluated 2019–2023 as exterior finish choices under the 40-Year Recertification program. |
| 🚨Cost Differential (2019) | 🚨Stucco identified as $7–$8 per sq ft cheaper than T-111 and resistant to rot and termites. |
| 🚨Hardie vs. Stucco (2023) | 🚨By 2023 the Board and engineer treated Hardie as equal in price but superior in durability to stucco. |
| 🚨Window Replacement Mandate | 🚨City requires impact windows or shutters when frames are disturbed for rot repair; Austro quoted $1,200 per window. |
| 🚨Construction Standards (2023) | Proposed assembly (Tyvek + plywood + roof paper + Hardie) exceeds City and County code requirements. |
Interpretation:
🚨These minutes establish a documented timeline of structural awareness, cost comparison, and scope expansion under the 40-Year Recertification program. 🚨They also confirm that the Board was fully aware of the code-driven nature of the window and siding replacements — yet there is no recorded 2/3-vote notice to owners authorizing these material alterations.
40-Year Recertification Major Notations / Minutes Excerpts (2019 – 2023)
🗓 March 20, 2019 – 40-Year Certification Discussion
🚨“Buildings were built with 2×4 studs which are no longer code; will have to bring up to code by installing 2×6 studs.”
🚨“Exterior walls only have 2×4 studs covered by T-111 on exterior and drywall on interior.”
🚨“Plan is to reinforce studs, install plywood and then finish as voted on by the residents (possible options include stucco, Hardie board, T-111).”
🚨“Cost analysis shows stucco is $7–$8 per sq. ft. cheaper than T-111 and is termite and rot resistant.”
🚨“Windows are old and are not efficient; may need to be replaced.”
🗓 March 21, 2023 – Roof / Structural Work Repairs
“Levy Horvath brought a sample of how the outer walls would be constructed with Tyvek, plywood, 30 # roofing material (for additional waterproofing), and Hardie board. This would exceed the requirements of the City of Plantation, Broward County, and Florida codes.”
🚨“Items that may need the unit owners’ votes to make a material change include:🚨
• 🚨Trellises – remove or replace and with what material, or eliminate
• 🚨Window / door banding – remove or replace with stucco or replace with Hardie board, or eliminate
• 🚨T-111 – replace with Hardie board, stucco or T-111.”
🗓 March 7, 2023 – Roofing & Siding Options
🚨“Mr. Horvath also said the windows on the upper story would need to be replaced with hurricane impact windows or have hurricane shutters if they are removed due to rotted areas that need replacing. This is required by the City of Plantation. He has negotiated a price of $1,200 per impact window.”
🚨“A discussion about stucco or Hardie for the siding concluded with Farrukh Sayeed saying he preferred Hardie board since the stucco lathe could corrode over time. Mr. Horvath said the cost of installing stucco or Hardie board is the same.”
🗓 November 7, 2023 – Project Execution Phase
🚨“T-111 will be removed and replaced with Hardie board and stucco will be repaired, if needed. Where possible, he will sister the studs if needed. Austro has already obtained the roof materials and Hardie board. Impact windows will be ordered when the homeowner commits to purchasing from Austro.”
Meeting Summary & Video Footage: Massive construction briefing. Contractor and engineer explain roofing, siding, and structural work. Owners react strongly to window replacement risks, termite exposure, interior damage, power outages, parking issues, and lack of attorney presence, as mentioned by Maude Bruce. Board admits windows are owner responsibility and must be replaced if framing is rotten. Termites widespread. Construction estimated at 6–10 weeks per building, over a year total. Many unresolved concerns about notice, costs, and protections. Meeting ends with promises of FAQs and building order list.
- Video Link of the Meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EGRfYnbl_k&t=388s
Attorney Notations Connected to 40-Year / Construction Scope / Minutes Excerpts (2018–2023)
2018
🗓 July 19, 2018 – Rules & Regs Sent for Legal Review
🚨“Rules and Regulations revisions will be sent to Attorney Lloyd Procton for legal review prior to Board adoption.”
(Context: This was during early discussions of architectural control and material guidelines — effectively setting the tone for how later construction approvals were handled.)
Significance:
🚨This established a legal-gatekeeping pattern, where the attorney—not the owners—vetted and approved rule changes affecting construction materials and enforcement scope.
2019
🗓 March 20, 2019 – Structural & Legal Coordination
🚨“Patty reported she met with Carol Eskew (accountant), Steve Weinberg (attorney), and Stan Schachne (architect) concerning financing for the restoration project. Financial institutions would need the project scope for each phase to determine the lending amount.”
Significance:
🚨Attorney Steven Weinberg (Frank, Weinberg & Black, P.L.) directly involved in financial structuring discussions tied to the 40-Year recertification project.
🚨This is the same firm later criticized in Whistleblower’s earlier DBPR complaint (2008–2009) — demonstrating continuity between the association’s long-term counsel network and later contractor dealings.
🗓 July 24, 2019 – Bid and Legal Oversight
🚨“Attorney Steve Weinberg opened the RFP bids and will validate licenses and complaints.”
Significance:🚨Counsel facilitated bid opening and license validation; the minutes do not discuss any conflict-of-interest evaluation.
🗓 October 17, 2019 – Attorney Consultation (Retainer)
“Motion to approve retainer of $1,200 for Attorney Allen S. Kaufman for deposition.”
(No details about the deposition subject, but it’s referenced in proximity to 40-Year restoration and loan preparation meetings.)
Significance:
The Kaufman engagement appears to coincide with legal document preparation or potential deposition related to prior vendor disputes — suggesting the association was already positioning legally ahead of the 40-Year project financing.
2022
🗓 March 14, 2022 – Loan / Legal Oversight Reference
🚨“Board discussed attorney’s recommendations regarding the bank loan documents and closing procedures. Questions were raised regarding how the loan would be reflected in the budget and special assessments.”
Significance:
🚨Although the attorney isn’t named, the advice here likely came from Procton or a successor (Hollander?), showing counsel’s continuing control over the financial structuring of construction-related debt instruments.
2023
🗓 July 18, 2023 – Contract & Legal Approval
🚨“A motion was made by Blaire Lapides and seconded by Renata Sayeed to approve the Austro Construction contract subject to Association counsel’s approval and submission of Engineer’s Exhibits to the bank. Motion passed unanimously.”
Follow-up Line:
🚨“Attorney Matthew Goode of Hollander, Goode & Lopez LLP provided legal approval after exhibits were finalized.”
Significance:
🚨This marks the first formal appearance of Rhonda Hollander’s law firm in the 40-Year restoration project chain — approving Austro Construction’s multimillion-dollar contract.
🚨This is key because that firm (Hollander, Goode & Lopez) is now at the center of your retaliation and arbitration disputes.
🚨It shows a direct bridge between Hollander’s corporate legal role and her later adversarial conduct.
🗓 October 24, 2023 – City Fines Discussion (Legal Posture)
🚨“Omega has not paid any fines and will not until the restoration project is completed. At that time, Omega will petition for the fines to be eliminated or reduced.”
2018-2023 Omega Villas Board Meeting Minutes
- 2018 BOD MTG MINUTES
- 2019 YE BOD MTG MINUTES
- 2020 YE BOD MTG MINUTES
- 2021 YE BOD MTG MINUTES
- 2022 YE BOD MTG Minutes
- 2023 YE BOD MTG Minutes
Scope of Review
This summary is based solely on Association minutes and board-packet materials (2018–2023) provided or accessed for this review. Absence of a topic in the minutes does not prove the event did not occur; it reflects that we did not locate it in the materials reviewed.