July 2026 Board Letter: Fact Check & Response 

On July 20, 2026, the Board—excluding me—once again distributed a community-wide letter discussing me, my website, and the governance dispute. (Actual letter is included at the bottom of this page)

Rather than respond through another community-wide email, I am publishing the Board's letter together with factual responses and supporting documentation.

My goal is not to convince anyone to agree with me. My goal is to provide additional context, identify where important information has been omitted, and allow homeowners to review the supporting documents and reach their own conclusions.

Not every statement below requires a response. Where I agree with the Board's statement, I will say so. Where I believe important context is missing or a statement is inaccurate, I explain why and provide supporting documentation whenever possible.

Board Letter

Dear Members, 

Earlier this year the Board sent you communication regarding the dispute that Ms. LaBruzzo has against the Association, various directors, and various members.  We made it clear that the Board’s focus was to “minimize disruption,” to conduct “Association business in accordance with governing documents,” to “avoid further expenses to the Association,” and to not “engage in ongoing public exchanges” related to Ms. LaBruzzo’s dispute.  Stated simply, the Board believes it is best for the community to move forward and to focus on corporate and community business. 

Board Letter

Ms. LaBruzzo’s continued publication of divisive and inaccurate information demonstrates that Ms. LaBruzzo does not share these same goals.  As a currently sitting director, Ms. LaBruzzo’s continued actions are both unfortunate and a violation of the fiduciary obligation she owes to all of our members. 

Board Letter

Although the Board has intentionally limited its public comments throughout this process, members deserve an accurate update regarding the current status. 

The Board provides the following factual updates: 

• The mediation initiated in connection with this dispute has concluded without a resolution.

  • My Response: Correct. The mediation concluded without a settlement.

• The Board proposed lower cost alternatives in an effort to resolve the matter, but those alternatives were not accepted.

  • My Response:  This statement is not supported by the facts as I experienced them. At no time before, during, or after mediation did the Board majority communicate any "lower cost alternative" to me. In fact, the Board majority insisted on a higher-priced mediator than the original one that was suggested by my attorney.  Following mediation, I requested to be restored to Executive Session discussions. The Board responded by outlining conditions under which it would consider that request. That was not presented as an alternative to mediation. If the Board is referring to some other proposal, it has never been identified or communicated to me.  board response to my email. For more detailed information, See Governance Concerns 

• The Association’s insurance carrier denied Ms. LaBruzzo’s request that the carrier provide coverage for her costs associated with the legal dispute she initiated.

  • My Response This statement omits important context. I did not personally submit a claim to the Association's insurance carrier. My attorney notified the carrier under the Association's Directors and Officers liability policy, which exists to provide a defense for directors acting in their official capacity. Had any other director been in a similar position, the same claims process would have been followed. The Board majority does not explain why this information is included in a letter to homeowners or how it relates to the governance issues discussed throughout their letter. An insurance coverage decision is based on the terms of an insurance policy. It is not a determination regarding the merits of the underlying governance issues. For more details See Governance Concerns

• A petition seeking to recall the entire Board was withdrawn before a membership vote after several petitioners removed their names from the petition

  • My Response: Homeowners should ask the question WHY did petitioners remove their names?  Because the board majority speaking through the Association Attorney in an open session, threatened to disclose the identities of petition signers despite requests for confidentiality. That disclosure influenced the outcome. For more details See Recall petition intimidation?

• In May 2025 the majority of the Board voted to remove Ms. LaBruzzo from the office of President and reassign officer responsibilities

  • My Response: Correct. In May 2025, a majority (3 of 5) of the Board voted to remove me as President. No cause was stated at the meeting, no Board investigation was conducted, and I do not believe my removal can fairly be characterized as simply a disagreement over governance. While we had significant differences regarding governance, those disagreements were accompanied by repeated personal attacks against me, accusations that I believed were unfounded, and an increasingly adversarial relationship with a few Board members. Together, those factors led to my removal from leadership positions. For more details See Historical Summary May 28, 2025

• In 2026, the majority of the Board voted to remove Ms. LaBruzzo from the office of Treasurer after concerns were raised regarding fulfillment of fiduciary responsibilities to the Association.

  • My Response: The Board voted me into the position of Treasurer after the last election without any concerns.  My removal as Treasurer a month later, did not arise from my ability to fulfill fiduciary responsibilities. It followed my repeated requests, in my role as Treasurer, for sufficient information to fulfill my financial oversight responsibilities regarding the Association's legal expenditures. Rather than finding a solution that balanced confidentiality with the Treasurer's oversight responsibilities, the Board chose to remove me from the position. I continue to believe there were reasonable alternatives that would have allowed both objectives to be met. See January 2026 Meeting Minutes

• Earlier this year, the Board determined that privileged and confidential Association materials required additional protection and created an Executive Committee that did not include Ms. LaBruzzo. After mediation concluded, the Board offered to add Ms. LaBruzzo to the Executive Committee as part of a proposed settlement under which she would withdraw her claims, release the Association and Directors from her claims, and agree not to file suit. Ms. LaBruzzo declined that proposal.

  • My Response: The Executive Committee was created nearly ten months after I requested mediation. While the stated purpose was to protect privileged information relating to the mediation, the Board excluded only me, an elected Director, from ALL Executive Session discussions, many of which had nothing to do with the mediation itself. I believed then, and continue to believe, that protecting privileged information related to the mediation did not require excluding one elected Director from all Executive Session matters. There are less restrictive ways to protect confidential information while allowing me to fulfill my responsibilities as an elected Director. Following mediation, I requested re-instatement in an email.  The Board responded that my reinstatement was contingent upon accepting settlement terms - terms which prevented me from my rights as a homeowner in this Association. I encourage you to review the supporting correspondence and determine for yourself whether this was an appropriate approach. Board response to my email click here.

Board Letter - Page 2

The Board is aware that communications concerning these matters continue to be distributed outside the Association’s official communication channels. Ms. LaBruzzo’s actions demonstrate that she wants to continue publishing false information, that she wants to continue defaming members of our community and our Board, and that she wants to continue engaging in behavior that does nothing positive for our community.  The Board will not engage in the same destructive behavior. 

Board Letter - Page 2

At recent meetings, Ms. LaBruzzo has threatened the Directors with claims that she has sufficient evidence to file suit against the Association, the directors, and various members of our community.  Rather than doing so, however, Ms. LaBruzzo is simply publishing information that contains no fact checks, that violate the mediation confidentiality she agreed to earlier this year, that violate her fiduciary obligations owed to all members, and that have never been proven in a court of law.  

Board Letter - Page 2

The Board encourages Ms. LaBruzzo to either cease her inappropriate behavior and publications or to file suit and attempt to prove the false and unsupported allegations she continues to make.  Continued publication of false information does not prove its truthfulness. 

Board Letter - Page 2

The Board members other than Ms. LaBruzzo will continue to focus on conducting Association business professionally, efficiently, and in compliance with fiduciary obligations while attempting to minimize unnecessary legal and administrative expenses.  The Board thanks all members of our community for your help in shifting the focus of our community from one of unnecessary division and negativity, to a community focused on cost effective and efficient running of corporate affairs and community issues.  Thank you.