The petition finally worked! Congratulations to the homeowners who had the courage and stamina to oppose the actions of the former board president. But wasn't it amazing that it needed the threat of possible legal cost  to convince the swing vote to do the right thing? Like with many other examples, weird decisions are being made as long as their own pocket-book isn't threatened. 

Association members in Orlando ousted a former board. But even after the new board finally won in Appeals Court last month, the community will be stuck with more than $ 120,000 in legal fees. The judge called the lawsuit, brought by the former board an "unnecessary defiant expense."  This is plainly ridiculous!

In another recent court trial a judge compared the actions of the board of a homeowners' association, which was threatened with a recall petition, with the actions of a "Banana Republic."

Board members have the fiduciary duty to work in the interest of the homeowners. When lots of association money is spent to pursue a board member's personal agenda, the whole idea of a homeowners' association is turned upside down. And other board members, who support this kind of attitude, should voluntarily step down, before more efforts are wasted. This should be a lesson of community spirit! But not every association has members who are willing to fight the wrong. 
Hats off to these courageous neighbors!

ST. AUGUSTINE SHORES -- A contentious meeting Thursday of St. Augustine Shores Service Corporation's board of directors ended with removal of president Terry Brannon in a 4-2 vote.

The vote was a monster victory for the 999 homeowners -- of 3,054 in the Shores -- who had signed a petition demanding Brannon's resignation.

Robert Medeiros, vice president, said elections will be held in May to determine a new president. Until then, he would move up.

"I feel bad about this. Terry is a personal friend," Medeiros said. "But this was for the community's sake. Maybe now we'll accomplish something at our meetings. They've been the same thing for the past six months."

Residents were unhappy with what they called Brannon's abrasive management style and his support for leaving "greenbelts" alone -- a hot issue in the Shores.

Some homeowners over the years had cleared wild areas between and behind homes to expand their property and resisted efforts of the corporation to stop the practice.

Homeowners said the bylaws allow them to do so.

Then the corporation sued 19 residents, angering them and creating a standoff. The corporation dropped some lawsuits later, but it was too late to build bridges. Their meetings became marked by arguments over legalities, bylaws and personalities.

Deputies were called at least once, some meetings ended early and Brannon even reportedly brought a bodyguard with him to one meeting.

"We have to get business done. We have to have the cooperation of the community to have a peaceful meeting," Brannon said in February after a particularly nasty meeting.

Brannon was not available for comment. Neither were the two board members who voted to keep him president: Rudolf and Suzanne Esser.

According to John Geiszler, a Shores resident who wanted Brannon gone, the residents "were sick and tired of the way he related to people, but his policies got him voted off."

A petition started by resident Beatrice Racicot in September to remove Brannon got the 25 percent of the residents it needed by November.

The bylaws say that is what is necessary to remove a board member.

Racicot was warned they would never get enough signatures.

"But people rushed to sign it. We kept pushing it, setting up booths at polling places," she said.

The board eventually voted 3-3 on the issue. Brannon refused to leave.

In November, he required that the residents' petition be reviewed and its signatures checked. A job that should have taken three days took three months, Geiszler said.

In February, the board voted to validate the petition and on Thursday, a crucial vote switch by board member Klaus Gringer ended Brannon's unpaid post.

"Today was the end of the trail for Brannon," Geiszler said. "He picked up his papers and left the meeting, muttering. He was less than happy."

Racicot said Gringer voted against Brannon this time, but had voted for him before.

"He was told he would have been personally responsible for legal fees if he didn't vote him out," she said. "The Service Corporation wouldn't pay those bills."

She was happy at the vote. "We didn't give up," she said.

Medeiros said Brannon had good qualities.

"He tried hard to do the right things," Medeiros said. "He stood his ground. But that may have been what caused this. Hopefully, we can straighten some things up. I just want to see us working together."