Then it got worse...
In early 2006, the next condo president, Charles Mohler, proposed another assessment of $995,000, this time for repairs to the parking deck and garage. Mohler
said several times that the reason the garage was in bad shape was that it had not been maintained properly over the years and was now in need of
major work. While he
had been on the Board when Mr. Trey had promised that future assessments would be done according to proportional ownership (square footage of unit), Mohler
proposed yet another equal assessment and it was passed by the Board. Again many owners protested and asked that this matter of how assessments
are done and what the documents say about it be settled before future assessments are made. One long time Board member, Annie Ward, reminded the
Board of the Declaratory Statement from the State from the 1990s which supports the proportional assessments that had always been done at The Towers. Unfortunately, Mohler
was not open to listening to owners and began his personal battle to do things the way HE wanted to do,
without regard for our condominium documents.
Committee for Fair Assessments was formed...
Owners discussed the assessment situation, informally at the mailboxes, in hallways, at the pool. Finally a group of owners met formally and
tried to figure out how to get the Board to follow our condominium documents when levying assessments. Several owners had shown the documents to
attorneys and a judge and the consensus was that our documents clearly specify that all assessments are to be made according to the square footage
of each unit. After many attempts to discuss this situation with Mohler failed, and all requests for information that were made in writing were
ignored and not even acknowledged, the group decided that the only way to remedy the situation was to hire an attorney to represent the interest of
the owners against the members of the board.
Stonewalling...
The attorney for the owners requested documents from the Board and these documents were refused. Delay. The attorney had to get a judge to
order the Board (actually Mohler, since the full board was often not consulted in any of these matters) to turn over the requested documents. More delay.
Owners asked to see various documents. Mohler told them to make their request in writing, by registered mail. They did, but they were still
refused access. Delay. Finally a few owners were able to get the State to force Mohler to allow them to see documents they requested. This took
approximately 6 months from time of request to time of viewing of records. Delay. Meanwhile, owners were told in open board meetings that
they were welcome to view documents any time. That just wasn't true. While perhaps some owners did get access to condominium documents, those
questioning the assessment procedures were stonewalled, ignored, and often insulted time and time again.
Another assessment...
In October of 2006, Mohler proposed another equal assessment, for $190,000, to cover the annual insurance premium. Again, many owners protested, saying
that the documents are very clear that insurance is one of the expenses that our monthly PROPORTIONAL assessments cover, and restated that ALL
assessments are to be done proportionally. Mohler replied that the association attorney, Keith Broll, in a letter of response to the assessment
question posed by Mohler, said that assessments could be done either way (equally or proportionally). Owners disagreed but the Board again
voted to assess owners equally once again.
And another assessment...
The garage repair project, which was done without the involvement or consultation of the Building and Grounds Committee (they were not allowed
to participate in this. Why?) seemed to be running amuck. The original estimate of cost was left by the wayside and the project kept getting
more and more expensive. The only board member who was allowed to be involved in the process, in fact the one person who appeared to be
solely responsible for the project, Charles Blake, announced that we needed to be assessed another $500,000 to pay for the rest of the
repairs. Again, the Board voted to do this assessment equally, with many owners very vocal in their disagreement about the way these assessments
were being done.
The lawsuit dragged on...
The legal system is not known for being expedient and it was not in this case. The Committee for Fair Assessments just wanted the Board to agree
to stop doing the assessments illegally and to follow our condominium documents. The Committee tried
again and again to discuss these assessments with Mohler but were rebuked. They made several offers to settle this lawsuit. TWO BEDROOM OWNERS
TAKE NOTE: About a year ago,
they offered to settle the suit if the Board would agree not to do any further assessments equally and would do ALL assessments in the future
proportionally, as they had been done for nearly 30 years. The Committee said they would NOT ask for any reimbursement of overpayments to owners,
and would NOT ask for any refund of legal fees paid. The Committee was taking a long term view of the situation instead of looking at their own
personal situations, knowing that some owners had overpaid by nearly $6,000! If Mohler would have agreed to that offer a year ago, it would
have been settled then. But he did not, and he told them to "take me to court" in order to resolve the suit. This cost all owners dearly, not
just those who were paying the legal bills of the Committee's lawsuit.
Those nasty legal bills...
The Committee asked owners to donate to a fund to help offset the expenses of the lawsuit and owners generously responded. But they also knew
that they were paying both sides of the legal bills, one way or another. While the insurance company that holds the directors liability policy
agreed to pay for the legal costs of the board's side of this lawsuit, Mohler, for some reason, continued to consult with Keith Broll, at a great
expense to the association. Why, when an insurance company was paying the legal bills and had hired an attorney who was doing all of the work
for the association on this lawsuit, would Mohler continue to spend association funds to pay for another attorney? Did the Board vote to pay
for this attorney? Was Mohler authorized by the Board to expend these funds on an attorney month after month? No minutes from board meetings
have been found that show where the Board voted to spend these funds. It appears that he made these expenditures without authorization from
the Board.
Our day in court...
Finally, after yet more delays by Mohler, a judge heard the case in January of 2008. Only one assessment was actually being decided on, the
$995,000 garage repair project assessment (the first one) from February of 2006. The association's attorney (paid for by the insurance company)
argued that the assessment had been for damage caused by the unexpected 3 hurricanes of the fall of 2004 (?? Really?? We were told that it was
because the garage had not been maintained properly). Attorneys and clients on both sides and the judge had the actual
condominium documents that are filed with Volusia County and there is a line in those documents that had been missing from copies handed out
from The Towers office, which CLEARLY stated that assessments are to be done proportionally by square footage of ownership. The judge ruled
in favor of the owners and asked their attorney to write up the order for him to sign. Attorneys from both sides discussed the matter with
each other and with their clients. The attorney for the Board was still paid for by the insurance company, but Mohler insisted on having Keith
Broll at all meetings, with Broll's bill paid for by all the owners. Did we vote for this? Who authorized Mohler to spend association on a second
attorney? It quickly became clear that Mohler was not going to agree to a fair settlement for the owners, so they filed an amendment to their
suit, adding in the remaining three assessments that had been done equally.
It finally ends...
After more requests for delays by Mohler, the judge finally signed his order on March 27, 2008, an agreement that had been reached at the
eleventh hour by all parties.
In it, it was determined that owners who overpaid for ALL FOUR ASSESSMENTS will be refunded the amount they overpaid; those who underpaid (two
bedroom owners) will be assessed the amount that they should have been assessed before; an amount of money toward legal fees would be paid to
those owners who filed the lawsuit; and MOST IMPORTANTLY, ALL FUTURE ASSESSMENTS, SPECIAL OR REGULAR MONTHLY ASSESSMENTS, WILL BE DONE
PROPORTIONALLY, BASED ON SQUARE FOOTAGE OF OWNERSHIP, AS STATED IN OUR DOCUMENTS.
The dust settles... It will take some time for the dust to settle around this lawsuit. The Committee for Fair Assessments is pleased that it has finally been resolved, and feels confident that future boards will follow the guidelines for levying assessments as outlined in our condominium documents. It is unfortunate that it took so long for this resolution to be reached, but we are pleased that is it finally over.