We recently had a sham of an annual home owner’s meeting.
The key takeaway for this author is that the Board, and its managing agent, has no problem lying to home owners, and to shut down anyone (by muting them, kicking them out of the meeting and slandering them) who points out the clear misstatements.
Let’s fact-check a few statements:
“The Berkley Court board of directors is required to facilitate an annual home owners meeting, at any time during the year, not necessarily in January.”
-Berkley Court Board of (Unelected) Directors
Section 4.4 of the original bylaws, in place since October 1981, state when the annual home owner meeting is to be held.
“We never have had proxies before at Berkley Court.”
-Berkley Court Board of (Unelected) Directors
Both the Declaration and the original bylaws (snippet seen above) state that votes can be delivered via proxy. Once again, this is IN PLACE SINCE 1981! One home owner also testified that she has received proxies in earlier meetings.
“What is a proxy? How would you define a proxy vs. an absentee ballot?”
Efer Gavidia, Property Manager
When the property management company does not know what a proxy is, although it is referenced multiple times in TX Property Code statutes, and it has been explained to him by a home owner 2 months prior, would you consider him competent in his field?
“No home owner has asked for a proxy in this election.”
-Berkley Court Board of (Unelected) Directors
Request made by one home owner in July 2021 – after educating the property manager on what a proxy is (vs. an absentee ballot) – and told that the proxy would be issued if there were multiple candidates for an election. A separate home owner requested a proxy 2 DAYS BEFORE THE MEETING and was denied. Selective amnesia? Willful obstruction? Incompetence? Whatever the reason – the ultimate question is why this person is still in this role when he is clearly unfit or unethical.
“If any home owner is not getting what they need, please let us know. We are here for you.”
-Berkley Court Board of (Unelected) Directors
All sorts of things were escalated to the (unelected) Board officially. The initial response from the Secretary was to divert from the topic and introduce all sorts of arbitrary rules selectively, that she could not evidence as not being discriminatory. The ultimate response is laughable – a redirection back to the property management company that was the cause of the escalation, so that it is a circular loop of no one doing anything. This is the current (unelected) board’s idea of oversight, governance, and stewardship – we can do better!
“We have had annual home owner meetings… we have minutes…”
-Berkley Court Board of (Unelected) Directors
Home owners pointed out critical gaps in fulfilling the required director and officer responsibilities, whether in holding meetings or maintaining minutes, in July 2021 – two months BEFORE this claim was made without anything being done in between. And yet another example of an escalation, this time to ALL the (unelected) directors…
“We welcome to have a conversation with any home owner to discuss their concerns.”
-Berkley Court Board of (Unelected) Directors
A mass email to all home owners stating that board members do not want to be spoken to while in Berkley Court was sent in June 2021. Emails to the (unelected) directors result in harassment or no response as they witness the property manager abusing residents in replies. Telephone numbers are unlisted or not working. Home owners who approach the clubhouse to speak with the unelected directors are turned away for arbitrary reasons or locked out. Home owner meetings have not been held in years, and the one that has been held kicks home owners out and mutes participants. Hmmm, how exactly are these board members accessible or approachable?
At the end of the meeting, the property manager shared a speech of how he thought the unelected directors were doing a fine job. What do you think – is this the first time he is telling the truth, or is this just another convenient lie to help cover up the complicity and the mismanagement to date?
