Responses to Williams' NextDoor Posts

Williams has taken to NextDoor in a series of posts to "answer" FIRE's reasons for his recall from the Board. In those posts, he includes disinformation and, at best, disingenuous claims that need to be refuted so that voters understand the extent of his actions and behaviors that render him unfit for membership on the Board of Directors of Greenhills. We can't allow Williams to spread false information on social media platforms in order to further his personal agenda that is detrimental to the HOA. 

 

 

About his $6000+ fines

​

On June 21:

• "First of all, this all started about three years ago after receiving a "Violation Notice" for "unauthorized" changes to my home issued by Patrick Geary who then was the "Chair" of the Architectural Review Committee." FALSE. The fines began in 2022 and NOT issued by Patrick Geary because the ARC has no authority to issue fines. The fines were sent by Unity as they are for all homeowners in violation of ARC and CC&R regulations. What is more, all such fines are reviewed and adjudicated by the entire board in Executive Session (unless the recipient of the notice chooses to have a public hearing). During this process, there is ample opportunity for the recipient to make a case and argue against the violation. 

• "Not once did he [Geary]  ever contact us personally to resolve what he perceived as issues." PROBLEM. It is not the duty of ARC members to "negotiate" with homeowners. This is not how things are done in HOAs. See above about the role of the Board. Note that it can take up to 90 days for fines to actually be issued because of the grace period allowed for homeowners to remedy any reported problem. Mr. Williams did not make use of the process to remedy the situation. 

• "For the record, we did submit a plot-plan drawing and a check for $50. (I have a copy of the cancelled check.)" PARTIALLY FALSE. Williams did submit a check but not the ARC form. Williams received a reimbursement for the $50 because he did not follow what all homeowners must do; that is, fill out the ARC form and submit a full proposal. So in the end, Williams did not pay $50. He also never submitted the full ARC proposal. What is more, he initiated the "renovations" before he even submitted his $50. (This is all public information that was provided to a judge in February 2023.)

•  "I also included in that request to extend my side yard fence by about 12 feet and place a new entrance gate. Neither Unity nor the Board ever attempted a personal contact with this household." FALSE. Had he submitted the ARC form, it most likely would have been denied. In Greenhills, extending your gate twelve feet out in front so that it parallels your garage door would not be approved. 

• "Unity is also complicit in this issue... Why? I do not know other than their propensity for unprofessional actions." PROBLEM. This is classic "cast aspersions without evidence" in order to detract from your own faults, defects, or things you've done wrong. 

• "Fines are NOT Liens and can be repealed by a majority vote of the Board." TRUE. What Williams fails to mention is that he sits on the Board and wants to adjudicate (1) his own fines, and (2) those of others when he himself is not in compliance. This does not meet the standard of fiduciary responsibility or board members and represents a clear conflict of interest. 

• "This month, there were 39 Violation notices / Fine hearings and Unity get paid for everyone of them." PARTIALLY FALSE. Of those 39 violations, how many were for renovations and yards and how many were for speeding on Golf Drive? And Unity does not get paid because of violations they cite or for fine violations. There is no "kickback" or quota system for such things. 

• "I was at the Clubhouse for FIVE hours.... THAT MY FRIENDS IS .... A sign of acute mismanagement. Unity is paid big dollars for their excess time at our meeting...." FALSE. Williams left before the Board had concluded business. He did not attend the entire meeting. What is more, Management (i.e., Unity) is not in charge of the length of board meetings. The agenda, discussions, home owner forum, and so on, are not dictated by management. These are under the control of the board, of which Williams is member. 

• "more on that in the GREENHILLS INDEPENDENT NEWS e-letter.... Hope you are a recipient...." PROBLEM. Williams use of NextDoor to excoriate the board and management and his publication of his so-called  newsletter is in violation of the One-Voice Rule that is standard practice among HOAs throughout California.  

​

Addendum: note that in this particular screed on NextDoor, Williams admits that he owes the fines and also admits that he never followed up on an ARC application. Had he done so, he could have stopped the process of fines. Instead, he sat back and let it all happen. He abdicated his responsibility as a homeowner for following up. 

​

Victimhood

 

On June 23:

•  "I am the same person that you elected in 2023." TRUE. And there was evidence before your election of the kind of rogue liability you would have become as a board member. 

• "However, my “hands have been tied”. " FALSE. This is an empty claim. Williams has the rights (and responsibilities) of all board members. Is it that his hands have been tied or does he prefer to rant and make false allegations because it is easier than doing the hard work?

• "The current Board violates its fiduciary duties." FALSE. Note that no evidence is given for this broad and sweeping statement. A reasonable conclusion is that Williams is projecting from his own failures in order to detract from them. 

• "A “noisy” few are accusing me of a “Lack of Fiduciary Responsibility” and are responsible for an attempt to RECALL ME from the Board of Directors." FALSE. One hundred people signed the petition for the special election to recall Williams. That is hardly a few . . .

• "I have seen too many examples of Wasteful Spending, and violations of our CC&Rs and Bylaws as well as the sloppy maintenance of our funds." FALSE. As of this date, Williams has produced no evidence of wasteful spending or violations of the CC & Rs and the bylaws. As is the case in much of what he claims, these are empty if not false allegations. 

• "We definitely are in need of a replacement for our current property manager, who is the REAL “orchestrator” behind this recall attempt." FALSE. The call for Williams to resign or be recalled came from homeowners at several board meetings. Friends Involved in the Recall Election have no affiliation with management, board members, or any other official entity within Greenhills. His statement is another instance of false allegations.

• "I DO KNOW WHAT FIDUCIARY DUTY IS , , , AND I AM PRACTICING IT, AS WELL AS I AM ABLE TOO . . . . ." FALSE. He may think he knows what the term means, but he certainly is not practicing it. In the reasons FIRE has laid out in this website, it should be clear that Williams is not practicing fiduciary responsibility. 

​

What can be seen in Williams' posts, is an attempt to appeal to victimhood. He is no victim. 

​

​When and if Williams posts additional misinformation and false allegations on social media, those will be addressed here. 

 

​

 

​