May 24, 2026
NOTICE TO AUTUMN LAKES MEMBERS:
OFFICIAL CORPORATE REQUIREMENTS FOR ASSOCIATION ELECTIONS, QUORUM SATISFACTION, AND DOCUMENT INSPECTION RIGHTS
PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE
The purpose of this document is to clarify the strict corporate and legal standards that govern the Autumn Lakes Association election process. To ensure structural integrity, transparency, and total compliance with both our community’s founding instruments and the laws of the State of Missouri, this statement outlines exactly how a failed quorum must be handled for an election meeting, how results are legally finalized, and the absolute rights of members to verify all voting records.
SECTION I: THE BOUNDARIES OF VOTING AND THE QUORUM MANDATE
The Autumn Lakes Association is a Missouri not-for-profit corporation. Under our corporate framework, all voting processes, board management, and election results are strictly tied to the execution of structured, live membership assemblies (meetings).
Authorized Voting Methods: The governing documents authorize members to cast votes in exactly two ways: in person at a meeting or via a written proxy form submitted to the Secretary. The documents contain no provisions allowing for independent, un-assembled direct mail-in ballots or doorstep collection boxes to be used outside of an active meeting framework.
The Quorum Threshold: To transact election business and choose leadership, the Indenture of Trust mandates a strict majority quorum consisting of a full 51% of the record unit and lot owners present in person or represented by proxy.
The Prohibited "Doorstep Box" Method: The Board cannot circumvent the meeting requirement by leaving a ballot drop-box out to accumulate un-assembled physical votes over several weeks to hit the 51% threshold. A doorstep container cannot hold a corporate "quorum." Votes cast or accumulated outside of an active, legally convened session are null and void.
Preservation of Proxies: If an initial meeting fails to reach the mandatory 51% quorum, the Association is not required to destroy or throw away the valid, written proxies already gathered. Valid corporate proxies remain active and legally carry forward into subsequent adjourned continuations of that same meeting.
SECTION II: THE LEGAL MECHANISM FOR A FAILED QUORUM (WHAT MUST HAPPEN)
When an election meeting fails to meet its mandatory 51% quorum threshold, the Board lacks the corporate authority to open ballots, count votes, or declare winners. Under the Indenture of Trust and By-Laws, the Association must execute the following precise sequence:
Formal Adjournment on the Record: At the initial meeting where the quorum fails, the session must be called to order, the lack of quorum must be formally documented in the official minutes, and the floor must vote to adjourn the meeting to a specific subsequent date, time, and location. By announcing these exact details directly on the floor prior to adjournment, the Association satisfies the legal notice requirement without the expense of re-mailing a 15-day notice to the entire community.
Targeted Proxy Solicitation: During the interim break between the failed meeting and the reconvened date, the Board and community members may canvas the neighborhood to collect additional signed written proxies from non-participating owners to bridge the 51% quorum gap. They must solicit proxies (designating a representative to vote on their behalf when the meeting resumes) rather than standalone direct ballots.
The Final Reconvened Meeting: On the designated adjournment date, the meeting is formally called back to order.
Quorum Verification on the Floor: Before a single ballot is tallied, the total number of members physically in the room plus the accumulated written proxies (both original and newly collected) are counted. The meeting cannot proceed to voting until the combined total satisfies the 51% majority threshold of the community.
Casting and Public Certification: Once the 51% quorum is verified on the floor, the election cycle officially opens, votes are cast, and the ballots are tabulated within the meeting. To legally finalize the seat transitions, the Chairman and Secretary of the meeting must sign a written certification of the election results, which must be acknowledged and formally recorded with the St. Louis County Recorder of Deeds.
SECTION III: MEMBER RIGHTS TO INSPECT ELECTIONS AND EVIDENCE
To guarantee that an election is honest and that the 51% quorum was legitimately achieved, community members possess absolute, enforceable inspection rights under Article IX of the Association By-Laws and the Missouri Nonprofit Corporation Act (Chapter 355, RSMo).
The Pre-Meeting Registration List (Section 355.271, RSMo): The Association is required to maintain an alphabetical list of all members entitled to vote. This baseline registry (which acts as the meeting sign-in sheets) must be made available for inspection by any member starting two business days after the initial meeting notice is given, throughout the adjournment periods, and live at the final reconvened meeting. Any member present is entitled to inspect this list to verify who has registered.
The Post-Election Audit Window (Section 355.826, RSMo): Cast ballots, signed proxy forms, and meeting sign-in sheets are the underlying corporate records used to build the official minutes. Any member has the statutory right to audit these physical materials to ensure accuracy. To review the ballots and proxies, a member must:
- Submit a written request to the Association providing at least five (5) business days' notice.
- State a "proper purpose" made in good faith (such as verifying the mathematical validity of the 51% quorum or confirming the accuracy of the vote tabulation).
Proxy Transparency vs. Confidentiality: While individual ballot choices are tallied carefully, written proxy forms—which contain the unit owner's signature and their designated voter representative—are corporate records open to member inspection. The Board cannot conceal proxy forms or sign-in sheets under a false claim of "board confidentiality." Bypassing member verification or hiding voting evidence violates both the Autumn Lakes By-Laws and Missouri state law.
CONCLUSION
Every homeowner at Autumn Lakes has a vested interest in a legally compliant, transparent governance process. By adhering strictly to the adjournment mandates of our documents and respecting the 51% quorum threshold and inspection rights guaranteed by Missouri law, we protect the community from invalid elections, corporate liability, and procedural challenges.
May 22, 2026
In terms of HOA (Homeowners Association) governance, collusion occurs when two or more individuals—typically board members, property managers, vendors, or specific homeowners—secretly cooperate or conspire to achieve an unlawful, unethical, or unauthorized goal at the expense of the community.
Because HOA board members have a fiduciary duty (a legal obligation to act in the best financial and personal interests of the community), collusion usually involves a breach of that duty for personal gain, political control, or financial profit.
Here are the most common ways collusion manifests in an HOA environment:
1. Vendor & Bid Collusion
This is the most common financial form of collusion. It happens when board members and outside contractors work together to manipulate the association's spending.
Kickbacks: A board member secretly agrees to award a lucrative contract (like roofing, paving, or landscaping) to a specific vendor in exchange for cash, personal home repairs, or other perks.
Bid Rigging: A board member shares confidential competitor bids with a preferred vendor so they can underbid, or coordinates with multiple vendors to artificially inflate prices, splitting the excess profit.
2. Election & Quorum Manipulation
Collusion can also be political, where board members work together behind the scenes to maintain power, suppress homeowner rights, or control the outcome of community votes.
Proxy and Ballot Tampering: Board members or committee individuals secretly coordinate to alter, discard, or falsify proxy forms or ballots to ensure a specific vote passes or a certain board member stays in power.
Quorum Sabotage: A group of board members might secretly agree to intentionally avoid or disrupt annual meetings to prevent a legal quorum from being met, thereby extending their own terms indefinitely or blocking a vote on new rules.
3. Selective Enforcement & Favoritism
This occurs when board members conspire to apply rules unequally across the community to benefit themselves or their allies, or to penalize political opponents.
Rule Exemptions: Board members secretly agree to look the other way on major architectural violations or delinquent dues for each other, while strictly fining regular homeowners for minor infractions.
Targeted Harassment: Board members or property managers cooperate to weaponize the HOA's rules against a specific homeowner—such as a vocal critic—by intentionally hunting for violations or fabricating complaints.
4. Backroom Decision-Making (Sunshine Law Violations)
Most state laws and HOA bylaws require board decisions and voting to happen in open, announced meetings where homeowners can observe.
Secret Quorums: If a majority of board members secretly meet via private group texts, emails, or unannounced gatherings to debate and decide on HOA business before the official meeting, they are colluding to bypass the community's right to transparency. The official meeting then becomes a mere formality, as the decision was already rigged in private.
The Legal Reality: Collusion itself is a descriptive term for the conspiracy, but the actual legal charges resulting from it usually fall under breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, embezzlement, conversion (theft of corporate property), or violation of state corporate/HOA statutes.
May 19, 2026
Strategy for Pitching the Ballot: Autumn Lakes HOA Election
The Ballot Problem & Board Coercion: The current Autumn Lakes ballot lacks both a write-in option and an "abstain" box—a structural restriction that forces the community to rubber-stamp the single, uncontested candidate. The Board likely permitted this restrictive layout out of administrative laziness, relying on strict compliance with internal deadlines to avoid extra effort; a desire to weaponize low turnout, gambling that apathetic neighbors will sign blindly to get it over with; or an intentional funneling strategy designed to coerce a false binary, banking on the fact that most homeowners do not know how to weaponize non-participation.
The Goal: With the election tomorrow and no time left to modify the ballot, your objective is strategic non-participation—intentionally crashing the quorum to legally invalidate the election, force the board or trustees to redo the entire administrative process, and ultimately force them to correct the ballot flaw for the next attempt.
The Execution: To successfully block quorum, you and aligned neighbors must completely withhold all ballots, sign no proxy forms, and skip the meeting entirely. Because your documents state that a majority (over 50%) of the owners must be present in person or by proxy to establish a quorum for electing Trustees, keeping just under half the neighborhood away will entirely freeze the process.
The Specific Impact of Failure: If you successfully block quorum tomorrow, the governing documents dictate that the only action those in attendance can legally take is to adjourn the meeting to a later time. This legally freezes the election and forces the board to incur the exact administrative headache, delays, and extra work you intend, while current board members simply "hold over" in their seats. To actually achieve a quorum at the rescheduled meeting, the Board will likely be forced to correct the ballot issue by providing a revised version that includes proper write-in or abstention options to secure the community's required participation.
PITCH THE BALLOT
BOYCOTT THE MEETING
May 22, 2026
Constitutional Protections, Private Governance, and HOA Enforcement Standards
The First Amendment's freedom of speech protects not only spoken or written words, but also "symbolic speech," which includes non-verbal expression like displaying flags or engaging in silent protests. Under landmark U.S. Supreme Court rulings, the government is strictly limited in restricting this type of expression, establishing that actions like burning an American flag (Texas v. Johnson) or wearing black armbands to protest a war (Tinker v. Des Moines) are constitutionally protected forms of political expression. Consequently, silent protests—such as kneeling during the national anthem or standing in quiet vigil—and the flying of various flags are legally recognized as powerful, non-disruptive means of communication that cannot be banned simply because the message is controversial, provided they do not cross into direct threats, incitement, or substantial disruption of public safety.
When these public boundaries are overstepped and individuals believe their First Amendment rights have been violated regarding flag displays or silent protests, they have several lawful recourses to seek justice and protect their expression. The primary legal remedy is filing a civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in federal court, which allows individuals to sue government entities or officials acting under state authority for violating constitutional rights. Through these lawsuits, individuals can request an injunction—a court order forcing the government to immediately halt the restrictive policy or practice—as well as monetary damages and the recovery of attorney fees. Additionally, individuals can seek immediate assistance from advocacy groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to secure legal representation, file formal administrative complaints with relevant agencies, or use public awareness campaigns to bring media scrutiny to the violation.
While these federal constitutional remedies are robust against government overreach, they operate very differently when it comes to Homeowners Associations (HOAs) because the U.S. Constitution restricts the government, not private entities. Because HOAs are private corporations established by a contractual agreement—the neighborhood's Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs)—they are generally not considered "state actors" and are legally permitted to restrict flags, signs, and public demonstrations on community property. However, this private authority is not absolute; if an HOA uses local police to aggressively enforce its rules, or if it was uniquely structured by a local municipality to handle public municipal duties, a court might rule that it crossed the line into acting as a government entity, making it subject to constitutional limits.
Furthermore, even where state action cannot be proven, state laws heavily dictate what an HOA can and cannot restrict, often overriding the association's private bylaws to protect specific types of expression. For example, many states have passed explicit laws that forbid HOAs from banning the display of the American flag, state flags, or military flags, though the association can still regulate the size, location, and height of the flagpole. Broad bans on political signs or silent gatherings in common areas can also be challenged if the HOA enforces them unfairly—such as allowing some flags while banning others—which opens the board up to breach-of-contract lawsuits or state-level housing discrimination complaints.
This interplay between statutory law and private covenants highlights the bottom line of community governance: consistency is the ultimate legal shield, and selective enforcement is a fast track to a courtroom. When a board enforces rules against one resident but looks the other way for another, it completely destroys the legal presumption of validity that HOA rules normally enjoy. In the eyes of the law, arbitrary enforcement is legally indefensible. If a board allows one type of flag or sign but bans another based purely on the content or who is flying it, that isn’t just bad leadership—it is active discrimination, and courts will routinely strike down those rules and penalize the association.
To maintain total compliance, prevent arbitrary enforcement, and protect the community from these costly lawsuits, a board must follow a strict operational standard:
Enforce the Rule, Not the Content: If the rule states "no flags larger than 3x5 feet," the board must measure every oversized flag equally, whether it is a sports team banner, a political statement, or a holiday decoration placed on the lawn by the Board. Consider enforcement of flag orientation such as vertical or horizontal, differentiation of signage versus flags, whether vehicle signage differs from home signage, whether an HOA violation puts the HOA in further jeopardy considering their being notified of noncompliance of local, state, or federal laws.
Document Everything: Every violation notice, timeline for compliance, and fine must follow an identical, documented paper trail to prove that no single resident is being targeted or given special treatment.
Remove Personal Bias: Board members must completely separate their personal opinions, political beliefs, and neighborhood friction from their official duties.
Ultimately, treating the rules like a strict, neutral formula across the board is the only way to ensure fairness, preserve community harmony, and keep the association out of legal jeopardy. Or visit me in court, again.
May 18, 2026
For 2026, we have budgeted $1,715,112 for day-to-day operations, along with an additional $469,000 for special capital projects. Combined, our Board of Trustees will be responsible for managing $2,184,112 of HOA funds this year for both operations and major projects.
Are you comfortable entrusting this level of spending to Trustees who have demonstrated inexperience and incompetence in managing our operations and finances in prior years? We have seen significant budget overruns year after year, along with questionable decisions such as purchasing substandard roof shingles with a shorter-than-average lifespan simply to save a few dollars. That is short-sighted decision-making at its finest.
What else could go wrong when even more money is thrown at ongoing problems without accountability or competent management?
To help you understand how our 2026 dues are being spent, please review the information below. I have included a breakdown of how our Operating Expenses are budgeted for day-to-day operations using our 2026 monthly dues.
Next, I have included the 2026 special projects budgeted through our Reserve funds. This spending is in addition to normal operating expenses.
Finally, I have provided a combined view of the ALC (Condos) and ALC (Homes/Amenities) annual budgets so you can see exactly how the money is planned to be spent this year. Please review it carefully. You may notice some very interesting priorities.
For example, we are only planning to spend about $59 of your monthly dues on building repairs and maintenance, including the clubhouse. That represents only 12% of our total budgeted Operating Expenses for the year. This is exactly why we continue facing massive capital projects year after year — because we are not properly maintaining our buildings, roofs, siding, and other infrastructure along the way.
Meanwhile, we are budgeting nearly twice that amount — 23%, or approximately $108 of your monthly dues — for grounds maintenance such as mowing, tree removals, clubhouse mulch, and snow plowing.
You can find this information in the first chart below alongside the pie chart.
Is this really how you want your money being spent?
Personally, I would rather see less spent on excessive mowing and snow removal, and more invested into maintaining and improving our buildings and infrastructure. That is the only realistic path toward reducing the need for constant large capital expenditures and eventually beginning serious discussions about lowering monthly dues — something homeowners throughout this community have been demanding for years.
May 18, 2026
The Missouri Declaration and Bylaws Modernization Act
(codified under new sections of Chapter 442).
This legislation directly harmonizes conflicting provisions in Chapter 355 and explicitly tightens property association governance rules regarding operations, voting, and documents.
Mandated Retention and Availability: The Act specifies explicit record retention requirements for community associations, overriding standard corporate silence.
Bylaw Override: The law establishes that these statutory inspection and retention provisions control over any conflicting or restrictive clauses found in an association’s older, existing declarations or bylaws.
What Happens If a Board Refuses?
If Autumn Lakes association board refuses to retain ballots or blocks a unit owner from inspecting election paperwork, Missouri law gives owners leverage:
* Written Demand: A formal written demand must be submitted detailing the explicit records requested (e.g., "All written ballots, signed proxies, and sign-in sheets from the annual meeting election held on May 20") and stating a proper purpose (e.g., "To verify the accuracy of the Trustee election vote count").
* Court Enforcement (Section 355.836): If the board refuses a valid request, a judge can summarily order the association to permit the inspection and copying of the records. Furthermore, if the court finds the board refused without a reasonable basis, the court can order the association to pay the owner's attorney's fees and court costs.
Summary for Autumn Lakes upcoming election
If Autumn Lakes neighborhood indenture documents are silent on how long ballots are kept, the board cannot use that silence to throw ballots away or hide them. Under Missouri's statutory framework for property associations, election materials are considered part of the "other records" of the corporation, and modern updates have reinforced that owners have a statutory right to inspect these documents to ensure election transparency and governance accountability.
May 16, 2026
Autumn Lakes: escalating situation and upcoming vote
This outlines an escalating situation within the Autumn
Lakes Subdivision (Maryland Heights, MO 63043), revealing a community in
active conflict. The data from the Autumn Lakes Uncensored blog,
newsletters, and court filings paints a picture of intense disputes between
homeowners and the Board of Trustees over finances, litigation, and community
governance.
The following is a comprehensive, integrated breakdown of
the ongoing situation and its historical progression.
I. Core Themes & Community Dynamics
1. Significant Financial Strain & Dues Increases
- Rapidly
Escalating Fees: Homeowners have faced massive, cumulative monthly HOA
dues increases approaching nearly 60% across 2025 and 2026. The Board
attributes these hikes to Reserve Study findings and long-deferred
infrastructure maintenance.
- Controversial
Spending Priorities: Residents strongly dispute how their money is
being allocated. The Board is criticized for locking into rigid,
multi-year vendor contracts (such as with Lawn Groomers) and
spending heavily on commercial lawn care and chemical treatments rather
than structural repairs. Critics argue that flexible, cost-saving service
reductions—such as bi-weekly mowing or optional
"subscription-based" snow removal—should be utilized to offset
costs.
- Impact
on Property Values: Due to rising fees and continuous neighborhood
litigation, an influx of condos has gone up for sale. Homeowners have been
explicitly warned that active lawsuits involving the Association make it
harder for buyers to secure financing, dragging down local property values
and marketability.
2. Legal Escalations & the Governance Crisis
- Shift
to Governance Litigation: Dissatisfaction with the Board's lack of
transparency, refusal to provide records, and alleged "secret
fines" has fueled structural legal actions. Home owner drafted a pro
se Petition for Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief (Mark
Gavan v. Autumn Lakes Association), attempting to secure a court order
forcing the Board to strictly adhere to original recorded Indentures and
Bylaws.
- Lack
of State Oversight: The Missouri Attorney General’s office reportedly
confirmed it lacks jurisdiction over HOAs, leaving homeowners with only
two avenues of relief: civil litigation or voting out leadership.
3. Management Irregularities & "Selective
Enforcement"
- CPM
Restrictions: Property management company CPM faces backlash for
allegedly charging residents $100 per hour to inspect financial records.
Homeowners have also raised allegations of ballot irregularities during
community votes, claiming ballots were disqualified based on paper color
or signature issues.
- Rules
Applied Unequally: The Board faces continuous accusations of
"cronyism" and selective rule enforcement. For example, in late
April 2026, the Board and CPM denied Gavan's architectural request to add
a flagpole bracket, citing "community aesthetics," despite
identical brackets being permitted on neighboring homes. Conversely,
residents note that clear violations—such as neighbors operating
commercial businesses and parking vehicles with marketing placards in the
residential area—go entirely unpunished.
4. Safety, Maintenance, and Environmental Failures
- Abrupt
Privacy Fence Removals: In late February 2026, residents were outraged
when the HOA abruptly clear-cut a long-standing common privacy fence on a
Friday morning without prior warning. When confronted, the management
company allegedly used generic AI-generated language to deny any legal
obligation to replace the fence, telling exposed homeowners to "call
the police" if people trespassed through their yards.
- Fire
Hazard Exposures: Homeowners have flagged a massive, unmitigated pile
of wood and debris sitting near the sports courts as a severe combustible
liability. Residents warn that a lightning strike during thunderstorm
season could cause a devastating fire, exposing the Association to severe
financial risk and potential insurance claim denials due to gross
negligence.
- "Toxic
Autumn Lakes": Environmental concerns have mounted over the
excessive use of herbicides, fertilizers, and algae treatments on common
ground, which residents tie to water waste and subsequent fish kills in
the community lakes.
II. Master Chronological Timeline (2024–2026)
2024
- Early–Mid
2024: The Annual HOA Meeting takes place. Initial public concerns
regarding lack of transparency, tightening operating budgets, and
maintenance begin surfacing on the Autumn Lakes Uncensored blog.
- Mid-2024
(Financial Snapshot): Official data from the Autumn Lakes Gazette
shows tight operating balances and reserves.
- September
19, 2024: The Board successfully restores the community’s FHA
certification, preserving mortgage eligibility for incoming buyers.
2025
- Spring–Summer
2025: A newly completed Reserve Study reveals major funding gaps and
looming, deferred structural maintenance. Homeowners begin warning
neighbors of incoming, massive dues increases.
- August
31, 2025: Homeowners file an injunction to halt an upcoming Board vote
regarding controversial Indenture Amendments, alleging procedural flaws
and unfair ballot counting. An update is also published regarding a
separate lawsuit over an "illegal flagpole" allegedly
trespassing on common ground.
- September
4–5, 2025: Homeowners are notified of the final amendment vote
tabulations. Activists challenge the legitimacy of the process and urge
neighbors to fight the changes.
- September
11, 2025: A court hearing takes place to formally challenge the
legality of the Board's amendment ballots.
2026
- February
3, 2026: The online dispute escalates heavily into free-speech and
constitutional claims. Residents accuse the Board of executing retaliatory
rule enforcement and withholding financial records.
- February
10–11, 2026: Outrage peaks as details surface showing that a 50%–60%
two-year dues increase is being swallowed up by HOA legal fees and
fighting record subpoenas rather than repairing neighborhood
infrastructure.
- February
16–17, 2026: Homeowners launch public picketing and protests at the
subdivision entrance to demand accountability for deteriorating buildings
and mismanaged reserve funds.
- February
18–19, 2026: Signage enforcement wars begin. The Board targets protest
signs, but local police reportedly confirm to homeowners that their
entrance protests fully comply with municipal ordinances.
- Late February 2026: The HOA suddenly chops down a massive neighborhood privacy fence without warning, leaving adjoining properties fully exposed.
- March
28, 2026: A community video titled “Pathetic. You get what you vote
for” circulates widely online, aggressively pushing for a complete
overhaul of Board leadership.
- April
22, 2026: CPM and the Board issue an official denial of Gavan’s
flagpole bracket request. Gavan fires back via email, formally documenting
instances of selective enforcement, unaddressed commercial vehicle
violations, and ignored fire hazards.
- May
1, 2026: Activists distribute community notices urging residents to
email the Board directly to demand an audit of where their monthly dues
are going.
- May
6, 2026: The blog publishes a list of tough "Questions for the
Candidates" aimed at vetting incoming leadership regarding
transparency and fiduciary duties.
- May
12, 2026: Residents publicly blast the Board's newly signed multi-year
contract with Lawn Groomers, citing a complete lack of financial
wisdom during a community budgeting crisis.
- May
20, 2026 (Upcoming): A highly contentious HOA Board election is
scheduled for 7:00 PM. Homeowners are actively organizing to vote out the
current President and demand the resignation of the remaining Board
members in an effort to stabilize the community. Given the volume of capital
projects funded for 2026, residents are calling to replace inexperienced
volunteer oversight with a single, certified professional Project Manager
to safeguard against potential budget overruns and quality control issues.
III. Current Summary & Outlook
As of May 2026, the Autumn Lakes Subdivision exists in a
strange dual reality. On one hand, day-to-day neighborhood life functions
normally, with routine city inspections, Nextdoor pet care tips, and local
library events continuing in parallel. On the other hand, the HOA governance
structure is experiencing a massive systemic crisis.
With massive dues hikes squeezing residents, structural
legal battles moving into the circuit courts, and key infrastructure and safety
hazards neglected, the upcoming May 20, 2026 election is viewed by the
community as a critical breaking point that will dictate the financial and
legal future of the subdivision.
PITCH THE BALLOT
Nearly 60% monthly dues increases 2025, 2026
May 12, 2026
by Laura Fisher
Board signed another multi-year contract with LawnGroomers and IMO didn’t set up reduced services to save us money by not paying for things we don’t need — or even things we could cut back on temporarily in order to divert $$$ for more building maintenance and painting. It’s your money — tell your trustees how you want it spent.
There are MANY ways services could have been reduced without noticeable difference: bi-weekly mowing July-Aug-Sept; no more chemicals & aeration (weed killer, fertilizer & overseeding during drought season); reduced mowing on slopes to prevent erosion (this takes community discussion because “natural” look may not initially appeal to all, but if it’s just in some areas with signs explaining purpose (“prairie restoration” or “native plantings”) it might be loved by more over time). Then there’s the snow removal and salting of sidewalks to condo front doors — opportunity to save money in several ways: reduce, eliminate, do by “subscription”, etc: (those who want or need it pay for it; those who don’t want it, don’t get it & don’t pay for it.) We have “snowbirds” who are not here in Winter — why not let their drives melt in a couple days or even a week? If you had enough people opting in or out by subscription, uncleared drives would not be a signal of absence, just choice.
So many missed opportunities to save by not involving community in open discussion of opinions, options & choices — because the board believes they know best and believe you don’t want to be bothered with input & discussion.
And none of this needs to be “forever” changes — it would just be a way to wisely redirect money to prioritize recovery from long deferred upkeep, tree maintenance, AND to get HOA dues back in line. Speak up to the people taking the action AND to the community at large, your neighbors: “it’s your money; use it (how) you want it.”
Here I go again.....
To force the Board to follow the
existing governing documents, you should pivot from a claim for personal
damages to a Petition for Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief. This asks
the court to formally declare that the Board must follow the Indentures and to
issue an order (injunction) compelling them to do so.
IN THE CIRCUIT
COURT OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI
MARK E. GAVAN, Plaintiff,
v.
AUTUMN LAKES ASSOCIATION,
Case No.: [New Case Number]
Division No.: [To be assigned]
PETITION FOR
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
COMES NOW Plaintiff Mark Gavan, pro se, and for his cause of
action against Defendants, states as follows:
I. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE
Plaintiff is a resident of Maryland Heights, Missouri, and a
member of the Autumn Lakes community.
Defendant is a condominium association governed by the
Missouri Uniform Condominium Act (RSMo § 448.3-102) and its own Indentures.
Jurisdiction and venue are proper in St. Louis County as the
property and actions in question are located therein.
II. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
4. The Autumn Lakes Indenture of Restrictions constitutes a
binding contract between the Association and its homeowners.
5. On [Date], the Board [describe specific action, e.g.,
removed property/denied a hearing] in direct violation of Section [X] of the
Indentures.
6. The Board is currently enforcing rules not found in the
governing documents or is selectively failing to follow mandatory procedures
outlined in the Revised General Rules and Regulations.
7. Plaintiff has notified the Board of these discrepancies,
yet the Board continues to ignore the Indentures.
III. COUNT I – DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
8. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-7.
9. An actual controversy exists regarding the Board’s
authority to [describe the specific ignored rule].
10. Under RSMo § 448.3-102, the Board’s powers are strictly
"subject to the provisions of the declaration".
11. Plaintiff requests a judicial declaration that the Board
is legally bound to follow the Indentures as written, without imposing
additional, unauthorized requirements.
IV. COUNT II – PERMANENT INJUNCTION
12. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-11.
13. Unless the Board is enjoined, they will continue to
breach their fiduciary and contractual duties to follow the governing
documents.
14. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law to stop the
ongoing disregard of community rules.
15. Plaintiff requests a permanent injunction ordering the
Board to cease all actions that contradict the existing Indentures.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court:
A. Enter a Declaratory Judgment stating the Board must
adhere strictly to the Indentures;
B. Grant a Permanent Injunction compelling the Board’s
compliance;
C. Award costs and such other relief as the Court deems
just.
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________
Mark E. Gavan, Plaintiff Pro Se
May 6, 2026
Questions for the Candidates:
May 1, 2026
WHERE ARE YOUR DUES GOING? 💸
Ask the Board about the mounting HOA legal fees being paid for with your monthly HOA dues. Get the facts. You might be surprised by what you find.
📧 Email them: AutumnLakesBoard@gmail.com
From the Gazette, below, some "unofficial" rules that conflict with our HOA Indentures/Bylaws:
https://www.autumnlakesstl.com/indentures-and-amendment.html
April 22, 2026
------ Original Message ------
From "Mark Gavan"
To "Melissa L. Hoover" <mls@carmodymacdonald.com>; "Alexis F. Rose" <afr@carmodymacdonald.com>; "Kerri A. Mitchell" <kam@carmodymacdonald.com>; "Stephen G. Davis" <sgd@carmodymacdonald.com>; "autumnlakesboard@gmail.com" <autumnlakesboard@gmail.com>; "Janet Lynch" <janet@cpmgateway.com>; "Vince Taormina" <vince@thetaorminafirm.com>
Date 4/22/2026 1:50:59 PM
Subject Re: [#XN8268239] flagpole bracket - Request Denied
Dear Janet & Board,
I am in receipt of the denial notice dated April 22, 2026, regarding the flagpole bracket at my residence.
The Board’s denial states that because I "already have a flagpole bracket, adding a second one would not be allowed" in order to preserve the "aesthetic appearance of the community." I am writing to formally contest this denial based on the following:
1. Evidence of Selective Enforcement A neighbor within the community is currently utilizing the exact same bracket and mounting approach that I have proposed. Under Missouri law, an Association must enforce its rules in a uniform and non-arbitrary manner. Denying my request while permitting an identical installation nearby constitutes selective enforcement, which is a breach of the Board’s fiduciary duty to apply restrictions consistently.
2. Request for Specific Legal Authority I am willing to remove the old bracket if the Association can provide the specific legal foundation for this restriction. Please provide the exact article and section number within the Indentures of Trust & Restrictions or Bylaws that:
- - Restricts the number of flag brackets permitted per unit.
- - Provides specific mounting instructions or technical specifications for flag hardware.
The Board’s authority to reject modifications for "aesthetics" must be grounded in the recorded governing documents. If the Indentures and Bylaws do not explicitly limit the number of brackets or define these specific mounting restrictions, the Board may be exceeding its authority under the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, which prohibits restrictions that prevent the respectful display of the flag.
I look forward to receiving the specific citations from our Indentures that support this denial.
Sincerely,
Mark E. Gavan
3131 Autumn Trace Drive Maryland Heights, MO 63043
p.s. Please see 2nd photo. Condo owner continues to conduct commercial business and display marketing placcards on their vehicles amongst the HOA community. Please address this ASAP and response to me accordingly, as this practice is against HOA governing documents and also city ordinance.
p.p.s. Please refer to our correspondence letter below, regarding the Board's declining of my landscape brick repairs. Evidence showing the Board and other condos getting the exact same repairs can be found on our webite. My Work Order was rejected. You can see more on this topic at: Autumn Lakes Uncensored - a Subdivision of St. Louis, MO
p.p.p.s. At the same website link, please refer to our HOA fire hazard notification and fiduciary breach by the Board. This puts our Board at significant liability and risk of fire damage. If it burns, the HOA has been put on notice.
------ Original Message ------
From "Community Property Management" <customerservice@cpmgateway.com>
To mark@autumnlakesuncensored.com;
Date 4/22/2026 1:33:27 PM
Subject [#XN8268239] flagpole bracket - Request Denied
Dear Mark E Gavan,
This is a courtesy notice to inform you that an application for an exterior modification or improvement (ARC request) at 3131 Autumn Trace Drive has been reviewed and denied. The denial letter is attached.
We appreciate your patience while this information was being reviewed.
Regards,
CPM on behalf of Autumn Lakes Condominium
Community Manager: Janet Lynch
Questions? Reply to this Email Subject or call (636) 227-8688
April 22, 2026
Urgent Notice: Fire Hazard Liability and Financial Exposure
The pile of wood and debris currently situated between our condos (across from sports courts) is more than an eyesore; it is a significant combustible liability. As we enter thunderstorm season, the risk of a lightning strike turning this debris into an accelerant is a direct threat to our homes and our collective financial stability.
1. Threat to Association Reserves
Our Reserve Fund is designed for planned capital improvements (roofing, paving, etc.), not for preventable disasters. If a fire occurs, the Association may be forced to drain the Reserves to cover immediate remediation and emergency costs. This could lead to:
- * Depleted Funds: Delaying necessary maintenance for years.
- *Special Assessments: If the Reserves cannot cover the immediate damage, the Board will have no choice but to demand thousands of dollars from each homeowner upfront.
2. Insurance Implications & Board Negligence
Maintaining a known fire hazard is a breach of the Board’s fiduciary duty.
- * Premium Hikes: If an adjuster sees this debris, our master policy premiums could skyrocket.
- * Claim Denial: If a fire starts in this pile, the insurance carrier may investigate for gross negligence. If they determine the Board failed to mitigate a known risk, the carrier could potentially deny the claim, leaving the Association (and its members) to foot the entire rebuilding bill.
3. The Importance of Personal "Loss Assessment" Coverage
This situation is a prime example of why every resident must carry Loss Assessment Coverage (typically part of an HO-6 policy).
- * The "Knock on the Door": When the HOA master policy deductible is assessed—or if the Association is sued beyond its coverage limits—the Board’s attorney will come "knocking with a hat" on your door to collect mandatory funds from every owner.
- * Financial Protection: Without your own personal Loss Assessment coverage, those thousands of dollars come directly out of your own personal savings even though your own condo may not have been impacted. With it, your personal insurance handles the HOA’s demand for funds.
Summary for the Board
The Board has a legal obligation to protect the community's assets. Allowing this debris to remain constitutes a failure to mitigate risk, exposing the community to catastrophic fire, insurance cancellation, and individual financial ruin. We request the immediate removal of this debris to ensure the safety and solvency of our Association.
May 21, 2026
Report to City of Maryland Heights
May 14, 2026
Ha! They asked the "Broker". This is the sales person that is not even employed by our insurer. We are liable for this woodpile.
April 22,2026
Remember these 2 condos on the left? Last year they got a 10-day makeover with new chimney, siding, trim, and more. Now, they’re getting a fresh power wash and paint to finish the look. It really is all about "who you know". Abuse of power.
April 21, 2026
My damaged bricks were "rejected" for replacement so I replaced the entire top level of bricks myself last year--1st photo. This year, a replaced end brick has completely vaporized--2nd photo (my current situation). My brick wall repair Work Order was "rejected" by the Board--see letter below in response to my submitted Work Order. Discrimination.
A condo is getting a new landscape wall today--see video below.
The Board members are getting new landscape bricks and porches--see slideshow below.
April 20, 2026
In Missouri, your "private space"—such as a patio, deck, driveway, or small yard area adjoining your unit—is legally
classified as a Limited Common Element (LCE) under the Missouri
Condominium Property Act (Chapter 448).
While the HOA theoretically "owns" the land as
part of the common grounds, Missouri law grants you exclusive use and a
higher degree of privacy protection over these areas than typical common areas
like a sidewalk or parking lot.
1. Limited Common Elements & Exclusive Use
Under RSMo § 448.2-108, Limited Common Elements
are portions of the common elements allocated for the exclusive use of
one or more (but fewer than all) units.
- The
Right to Exclude: Because these areas are for your exclusive use, you
have the legal right to exclude other residents and the general public
from these spaces, just as you would your own living room.
- Trespass
Applicability: Under RSMo § 569.140 (Trespass in the
First Degree), a person commits trespass if they knowingly enter or
remain unlawfully on real property after receiving "actual
communication" that they are not welcome. Your written notice to
the Board serves as this actual communication.
2. Board Rights of Access (The "Reasonable"
Standard)
The Board does not have an unfettered right to enter your
LCE whenever they wish. Under RSMo § 448.3-107, their right of access is
restricted by two main conditions:
- Necessity:
Access must be "reasonably necessary" for the maintenance,
repair, or replacement of common elements.
- Governing
Documents: Most Declarations require the Board to provide reasonable
notice (typically 24–48 hours) before entering an LCE or unit, except
in a bona fide emergency (e.g., a bursting pipe or fire).
The Lawful Distinction: Entering your private patio
to "discuss a matter" or "inspect" without prior notice or
a specific maintenance reason is generally considered an unauthorized entry. If
they enter after you have explicitly told them to stay off and communicate only
in writing, they may be crossing from a civil HOA dispute into a criminal Trespass
in the First Degree or Harassment issue.
3. St. Louis County Considerations
In St. Louis County, local courts historically uphold the
"Business Judgment Rule," but this applies to Board decisions,
not Board conduct.
- Selective
Enforcement: If the Board is entering your space specifically to find
violations while ignoring others, you may have a claim of selective
enforcement or "breach of fiduciary duty."
- Whistleblower
Protection: Given your history with the HOA, any uninvited entry after
your formal "no-contact" directive could be interpreted as retaliatory
harassment, which is frowned upon by Missouri judges in civil
litigation.
Summary for Your Records
|
Concept |
Legal Reference |
Your Protection |
|
Exclusivity |
RSMo § 448.2-102 / 108 |
You have the right to treat LCEs as private property. |
|
Notice Requirement |
RSMo § 448.3-107 |
Access is for maintenance only and requires reasonable
notice. |
|
Trespass Notice |
RSMo § 569.140 |
Your written demand "Stay off my private area"
constitutes legal notice. |
March 28, 2026
Expect More of the Same...
For those of you who joined me at the Candidates Forum three years ago, I explained why I was running for the Board. I warned that things in Autumn Lakes would get worse before they got better. This is what I meant: our HOA reserves are depleted, our roofs have reached the end of their useful lives, and our sports courts are a mess. Our lakes and shores are dying, we have lost the use of our deck grills and wood-burning fireplaces, and we spend more on lawn care and snow removal than on building repairs. Meanwhile, our dues have doubled in just two years. This is the direct result of the Board’s leadership over the last many years. If you want a different result, you cannot keep casting the same vote. Same Board, same behavior, same results. The next election is May 20 at 7pm.
February 22, 2026
Anonymous Message
I just drove through Autumn Lakes to see my house from the back side. I saw the banners on the suv near the front and snapped a photo to come take a look.I am one of the residences that just had the long-standing (often not-standing) privacy fence removed from our backyard. When I enquired about repairing their fence, they said they had no plans to repair the fence. Then out of the blue on a Friday morning they chopped it all down. Not a warning or explanation. Now our back yard is fully exposed. Its not the house we bought. Its not the neighborly friendly heads up or simple communication that seams like a reasonable courtesy.They sent a letter generally saying \"we have no legal obligation or plans to repair the fence. If you have people walking through your back yard call the police.\"After Googling a possible legal precedent for the situation in Maryland Heights, I got the exact ChatGPT response as was in the Autumn Lakes letter. Nearly copied and pasted.My uncle lived in a condo for many years there. He had full inside of how the operation was run; Poorly. When he passed away, his kids had to handle the legal hurdles just to sell the condo. It took them months just to cut through the BS.As I understand it, there have been 2 firms managing Autumn Lakes in the 9 years I\'ve lived adjoining it, and the 2nd one just blames the 1st for any lingering crap.I don\'t know who this reaches, or if I will even be taken into account on your wonderful, and quite confirming of my feelings, page here... but these people don\'t give a shit about my position. I could only imagine being under their \'management\' in a condo or home. I mostly want to know if this fence is being replaced, or did they just leave us with our back yard pants pulled down. To whom it may concern, thank you for any reply.
February 22, 2026
Sec. 25-15.4. - Prohibited signs.
The following signs and advertising devices are hereby prohibited:
February 19, 2026
------ Original Message ------
From "Mark Gavan" <Mark@AutumnLakesUncensored.com>
To "autumnlakesboard@gmail.com" <autumnlakesboard@gmail.com>
Cc "Janet Lynch" <janet@cpmgateway.com>
Date 2/19/2026 11:54:44 AM
Subject adhoc committees, etc.
Board,
Impressive that you’ve suddenly discovered the idea of ad‑hoc committees. Too bad you shot it down three years ago when I proposed it. Maybe dust off the materials I presented at that meeting—refer to attachment. Also unfortunate that you hosted the Communication Strategy Forum and then did absolutely nothing with it. You left the fruit on the ground. Pathetic.
Do you understand that your constant reactive behavior—never proactive—is exactly why this HOA is in the condition it’s in? We need forward‑thinkers. The old habits have failed repeatedly. So do the responsible thing: resign, and bring in one professional manager to replace all five Board seats. Shared with other communities, this person would cost a fraction of what you waste. Snow removal alone cost $287,000 in 2025 — 200% over budget, and that level of mismanagement is routine for this Board. You overspend every year, which is why our Reserves are depleted and the HOA is broke.
A competent manager—someone trained in best practices, contract negotiation, and vendor bidding—would have secured better pricing, better vendors, and better materials. Even you admitted at last night’s meeting that our Reserves Study is already busted because the Board purchased low‑grade shingles with a shorter lifespan, guaranteeing premature full replacement. A professional manager would have prevented that.
A proactive manager also would never have allowed us to forget to file roofing claims at the time of the storm, nor would they have allowed the HOA to submit fraudulent insurance claims later for subsequent storms. These failures are the direct result of a Board that is overwhelmed, inexperienced, and incapable of managing the responsibilities you insist on keeping.
Please admit that you have bitten off more than you can chew, and that you are unable to deliver the professionalism, expertise, impartiality, and basic competence that this HOA requires. A professional manager would eliminate the bias and discrimination that continue to infect Board decisions. And yes—we would still have an HOA Oversight Committee to supervise that manager.
February 18, 2026
Transparency, Cronyism, and the Reality of Our "Showcase Community"
A sincere "thank you" to our owners: your 50% dues increase over the last two years is hard at work—specifically on Treasurer Laura Farkas’ property and that of her inner circle.
The double standards are undeniable. Recently, a unit across from the clubhouse owned by a friend of the Treasurer (Stacy D.) received full landscape brick repairs allegedly funded by the HOA in preparation for its sale. Yet, when other owners (i.e. me) submit Work Orders for crumbling landscape walls, they are denied and told "landscape bricks are owner responsibility."
This is the definition of cronyism and favoritism, bias and discrimination--unethical and illegal behavior. Under Treasurer Laura Farkas’ 20+ year of "leadership," our community has declined while a select few enjoy HOA-funded improvements. While the Board prioritizes friends, the rest of the neighborhood is left with denials and decaying infrastructure. So much for living in a "Showcase Community". Have you received your requested repairs, or are those funds reserved only for the Board’s favorites?
February 17, 2026
Autumn Lakes Neighbors,
Picketing has been going strong. Plenty of horn honks, thumbs‑up, and supportive waves from Autumn Lakes neighbors. Most folks simply drive by quietly, which I take as understanding the situation even if they don’t feel empowered to intervene. Only one person—Rob Bergtholdt—chose to express dissent using his middle finger. Fine with me though--at least he has an opinion to express, unlike most of you who whine about our high dues and property neglect but don't lift a finger to do anything about it. Hopefully you are our neighbors that have chosen to move elsewhere rather than fight the Beast. I count 8 condos about to be listed for sale, possibly 9. Shaw & John appeared to be illegally marketing their illegal realty services to the last house at the bottom of ATD, in violation of our Indentures.
The core issue remains unchanged: our Board has driven this community into a financial and structural corner, and the only real path forward is for them to step aside. Once they do, we can bring in a professional property manager who will finally get our spending and budgets under control, reduce our dues, and rebuild our Reserves so we can actually fund future projects instead of lurching from crisis to crisis.
Right now, we will never get ahead while we pour so much money into lawncare and snow removal at the expense of our buildings. Our buildings receive the smallest share of the budget, and it shows—rotting wood, patchwork roofs in mismatched sizes and colors, and repairs that should have been replacements years ago.
And then there are our lakes. They remain polluted because the Board continues to ignore the Indentures’ clear prohibition on applying chemicals to the water. These decisions have long‑term consequences for property values, safety, and the health of our shared environment.
I could go on, but the pattern is obvious. For anyone who wants to review the legal side of this situation, here is the link to the HOA lawsuit that is currently sitting dormant—for now:
https://www.courts.mo.gov/fv/c/FILING.PDF?courtCode=21&di=30931148
February 16, 2026
PICKETING BEGINS TODAY
JOIN ME, or let the decay caused by Autumn Lakes Board continue to rot our buildings and the perceptions of our community. I won't be picketing for long, alone, as has been typical. Join me or let this effort also die on the vine. Realize, you are running out of options--short of moving. I count 8 condos to be on the market this week. And at $625+ monthly dues, expect to see lowball prices being offered. No buyer wants monthly dues that are higher than their mortgage payments.
February 16, 2026
🏡 Estimated
Monthly Cost for a $220,000 Condo (63043)
Below is a realistic payment breakdown using typical
rates for average‑to‑low credit, plus local condo‑specific costs.
1. Mortgage Assumptions
- Purchase
price: $220,000
- Down
payment: 3% (common for low‑income buyers using FHA or similar
programs)
- Loan
amount: $213,400
- Interest
rate: ~7.25%–7.75% (typical for average‑to‑low credit borrowers)
- Term:
30 years
Estimated Principal & Interest
At 7.5% interest:
PI = $1490 monthly
2. Property Taxes (St. Louis County – 63043)
Maryland Heights has moderate taxes.
Typical condo tax range: $2,200–$2,800 per year
Monthly estimate: $185–$235
3. Homeowners Insurance
Condos are cheaper to insure because the master policy
covers the building.
Typical range: $40–$70 per month
4. Mortgage Insurance (FHA or Conventional w/ low down
payment)
With low down payment + lower credit:
$150–$220 per month is typical.
5. HOA Fees (Based on 63043 condo listings)
Local listings show HOA fees commonly between $250–$400
per month.
Examples from current listings:
- Autumn
Lakes ($600+); Bryce Canyon, Marine Terrace, — all in the $250–$350
range.
Let’s use $300 as a realistic midpoint.
Note:
Autumn Lakes HOA Fees = $600+ so add $300 to your monthly total
🎯 What This Means for a
Low‑Income Buyer
Most lenders use the 31%–36% front‑end DTI rule,
meaning:
To qualify for a $2,200/mo housing payment, lenders
typically want:
Gross Monthly Income approx. $6100-$7100
That’s roughly $73,000–$85,000 annual income.
If income is lower, buyers often need:
- A co‑signer,
or
- A down
payment assistance program, or
- A cheaper
condo (many in 63043 list between $150k–$190k)
ESTIMATED MONTHLY COST FOR A $220,000
CONDO (ZIP 63043 – MARYLAND HEIGHTS, MO)
Assumptions:
- Purchase Price: $220,000
- Down Payment: 3% (common for low‑income buyers
using FHA or similar programs)
- Loan Amount: $213,400
- Interest Rate (average-to-low credit): 7.25%–7.75% (using
7.5% for estimate)
- Loan Term: 30 years
1. Principal & Interest (7.5% rate)
Estimated Monthly P&I: $1,490
2. Property Taxes (St. Louis County – 63043)
Typical Condo Range: $2,200–$2,800 per year
Monthly Estimate: $185–$235
3. Homeowners Insurance
Typical Condo Insurance: $40–$70 per month
4. Mortgage Insurance (FHA or Conventional w/ low down
payment)
Estimated Monthly MI: $150–$220
5. HOA Fees (based on current 63043 condo listings)
Typical Range: $250–$400 per month
Midpoint Used: $300
TOTAL ESTIMATED MONTHLY PAYMENT
Range: $2,115 – $2,415 per month
INCOME REQUIREMENTS (Typical Lender Standards)
Lenders generally require housing costs to be 31%–36% of
gross income.
To qualify for a $2,200/mo payment:
Required Gross Monthly Income: ~$6,100–$7,100
Required Annual Income: ~$73,000–$85,000
Notes:
- Lower income buyers often need down payment assistance, a
co‑signer,
or a lower‑priced condo.
- Many condos in 63043 list between $150,000–$190,000, which
reduces monthly cost significantly.
Download this analysis here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oKXHvSieVKn0uFIBvenSU-Q5gf_gaIjR/view?usp=sharing
February 15, 2026
Daily picketing begins tomorrow
If you are concerned about your 50% dues increases the past 2 years then this is your opportunity to get off your ass and do something about it. Join me at the picketing protests for the years of Board misconduct. This Board needs to resign and be replaced by 1 professional manager representing our best interests, without bias. Get the spending/budgets under control and reduce our monthly dues by 35% where it belongs. Nobody is going to buy condos here, at these insanely inflated listing prices, with $625 monthly dues and awful-quality amenities. Our condo values are about to fall.
February 13, 2026
🛑 THE TRUTH MATTERS. HERE ARE THE FACTS. 🛑
Some people are saying I don’t know how our HOA works. That’s like saying a doctor doesn’t know how a Band-Aid works. 🩹🙄
I didn’t just "guess" at the rules. I spent YEARS in school and passed the hardest tests in the business to become an expert in money and plans. 🎓⚖️
🎓 MY "REPORT CARD" (THE FACTS):
College Degree: Bachelor’s in Accounting 📜
Super-College Degree: Master’s in Accounting 📜🏅
Passed the CPA Exam: (The hardest test for money experts!) 💸✅
Passed the PMP Exam: (The hardest test for project experts!) 📋✅
🕵️♂️ WHY I’M ASKING QUESTIONS:
I use my "Pro-Level" brain as an IT Consultant now, but I still know how to spot a mess. When I was on the Board, I saw:
🔒 Locked Doors: They wouldn't let me see the paperwork.
❓ Secret Fines: Rules that nobody could explain.
🤐 No Answers: When I asked for the truth, they stayed silent.
💡 THE BOTTOM LINE:
People can say mean things, but they can’t "un-pass" my exams and they can't "un-earn" my degrees. 🧠💪
I want Honesty, Fair Rules, and Clear Math for our neighborhood. Don't let "mean talk" distract you from the TRUTH. 🏘️✨
#FairHOA #TeamTruth #FollowTheMoney #OurNeighborhood
February 12, 2026
To the Autumn Lakes Board of Trustees and Janet Lynch at CPM,
Please be advised that I am formally seeking the removal of the existing Trustees to be placed as a ballot option for the upcoming May election. This demand is made pursuant to the Autumn Lakes Indentures (Article VI, Section 3) and Missouri Revised Statutes § 448.3-103.
The current Board is in a position of irreconcilable conflict. While homeowners face a 50% dues increase, the Board is utilizing those funds to hire legal counsel to quash subpoenas for records—records that are required to verify the truth or falsity of sworn affidavits filed in Case No. 24SL-CC01168.
By fighting the disclosure of work orders and repair logs, the Board is acting as a "shield" for private individuals rather than fulfilling its fiduciary duty to the Association members. Under Missouri law, including § 448.3-102 RSMo, the Board must act in the interest of the community, not in the interest of suppressing transparency.
I hereby demand the following be included on the May ballot:
Removal of Trustees: A vote for the removal of the current Board of Trustees by a 2/3 majority of owners, as authorized by Article VI, Section 3 of the Indentures.
Corporate Successor Appointment: A vote to appoint a professional Trust Company or Bank as a successor Trustee, possessing the requisite $2,000,000.00 capital and surplus as mandated by Article VII, Section 3 of the Indentures.
Attached is a draft Petition for Appointment of a Receiver and Removal of Trustees. This petition will be filed with the St. Louis County Circuit Court if I do not receive your written agreement to include these ballot options by 12:00 PM on February 19, 2026.
Regards,
Mark E. Gavan
PETITION TO THE COURT (Draft)
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS
STATE OF MISSOURI
| MARK E. GAVAN, | |
| Plaintiff, | Cause No. |
| vs. | Division No. |
| AUTUMN LAKES ASSOCIATION BOARD, et al. |
PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER AND REMOVAL OF TRUSTEES
COMES NOW Plaintiff, Mark E. Gavan, pro se, and for his Petition against the Board of Trustees of Autumn Lakes Association, states as follows:
Authority: This Court has the equitable power to appoint a receiver and remove fiduciaries where there is evidence of mismanagement, waste of assets, or a breach of the duty of loyalty. § 448.3-103 RSMo.
Breach of Fiduciary Duty: The Board has authorized the expenditure of Association funds—derived from a 50% increase in assessments—to obstruct legal discovery in a private defamation matter. Specifically, the Board is attempting to quash subpoenas for HOA repair logs that would impeach the sworn affidavits
Conflict of Interest: suppressing records that would expose selective enforcement
Waste of Corporate Assets: Association funds are being diverted to high-priced legal counsel (Carmody MacDonald P.C.) to prevent transparency, causing irreparable financial harm to the homeowners.
Requisite Qualifications for Successor: The Autumn Lakes Indentures (Article VII, Sec. 3) explicitly provide for a Corporate Successor Trustee with at least $2,000,000.00 in capital. Plaintiff asserts that only such a neutral, professional entity can restore the Association’s integrity.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Court enter an Order:
a. Appointing a neutral Receiver or Corporate Trustee to manage the affairs of Autumn Lakes Association;
b. Enjoining the Board from spending Association funds on the defense of private interests;
c. Mandating an immediate audit of all HOA work orders and financial records; and
d. For such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Mark E. Gavan, Pro Se
PETITION OF THE OWNERS OF AUTUMN LAKES ASSOCIATION (Draft)
FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE OWNERS
TO: THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF AUTUMN LAKES ASSOCIATION
The undersigned, being the record owners of at least twenty percent (20%) of the lots/units in the Autumn Lakes Subdivision, hereby petition the Board of Trustees, pursuant to Article IV and Article VI of the Indentures of Trust, to call a Special Meeting of the Owners for the purpose of voting upon the following matters:
REMOVAL OF TRUSTEES: A vote to remove all current members of the Board of Trustees for cause, specifically for the waste of Association assets and breach of fiduciary duty regarding the use of dues for private legal defenses.
APPOINTMENT OF CORPORATE TRUSTEE: A vote to appoint a professional Trust Company or Bank with trust powers, possessing a capital and surplus of at least $2,000,000.00, as the Successor Trustee to manage the affairs of the Association as authorized by Article VII, Section 3 of the Indentures.
AUDIT OF RECORDS: A vote to mandate an independent audit of all HOA financial records and maintenance logs from 2022 to present.
SIGNATURES OF RECORD OWNERS:
(Note: Per the Indentures, only one vote/signature is allowed per lot/unit
| Date | Unit/Lot Address | Printed Name | Signature |
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y2Acegb4YfoS0Yk7vqLObgLZWjRCkZq7/view?usp=sharing
February 11, 2026
In Missouri, replacing a Board of Trustees with a
professional manager (often called a "Receiver" or
"Corporate Trustee") is a significant legal move. Usually, this
happens when the Board is unable to function, is accused of financial
malfeasance, or has failed to maintain the property according to the Indentures.
Here is the breakdown of how this process works and the
associated trade-offs.
How to Replace a Board with a Professional Manager
There are generally three paths to achieve this:
1. Judicial Appointment (Receivership)
If you can prove to a judge that the Board has breached its
fiduciary duties, engaged in fraud, or is "hopelessly deadlocked,"
you can petition the Court to appoint a Receiver.
- - The
Process: You
file a lawsuit (or a motion within an existing suit) asking the court to
strip the Board of its power and appoint a neutral professional to manage
the HOA’s affairs until a proper election can be held or the issues are
resolved.
- - Missouri
Context: In St.
Louis County, a judge will look for evidence that the Association is being
"irreparably harmed" by the current Board’s actions.
2. Amendment of Indentures
You can bypass the Board by rallying the community to vote on
an amendment to the Autumn Lakes Indentures.
- - The
Process: Most
indentures require a high threshold (e.g., 2/3 or 3/4 of all owners) to
change the governance structure. You would propose an amendment that vests
executive power in a professional trustee/manager rather than an elected
board.
3. Removal and Appointment
You can follow the existing removal procedures in your Bylaws
to oust the current Board members. Once removed, if no owners are willing to
serve, the Association can contract with a professional management firm to act
as the "Sole Trustee," provided your governing documents allow for a
corporate entity to hold that seat.
*************************
Based on the Autumn Lakes Indentures and Bylaws, there
are two primary paths for replacing the Board of Trustees with professional
management: the removal of current trustees by the membership or the
appointment of a corporate successor trustee.
1. Removal of Existing Trustees by Owners
To clear the way for professional management, the existing
board must first be removed. According to the Indentures:
- - The
Power to Remove:
Any Trustee may be removed from office by a two-thirds (2/3) vote
of the owners of all lots in the subdivision.
- - The
Meeting Requirement: Such a vote must take place at a meeting of the owners, which can
be called by a petition signed by the owners of at least 20% of the
lots.
- - Notice: Written notice of the meeting's
time, place, and purpose must be sent to all owners at least 10 days
prior to the meeting.
2. Appointment of a Corporate/Professional Successor
If a vacancy occurs or the entire board is removed, the
Indentures allow for the transition to a professional entity:
- - Corporate
Trustee Appointment: In the event of a vacancy or the inability of individuals to serve,
a majority of the remaining Trustees (or the owners if no Trustees
remain) may appoint a Trust Company or similar corporate entity to
act as a successor Trustee.
- - Qualifications: A professional successor must
be a Trust Company or a Bank with trust powers, having a capital and
surplus of at least $2,000,000.00.
- - Powers
of the Professional Manager: Once appointed, a Corporate Trustee possesses all the
rights, powers, duties, and authorities originally granted to the Board of
Trustees under the Indentures.
3. Professional Management via the "Management
Agent" Clause
Even without removing the Board, the Board itself has the
authority to delegate day-to-day operations to a professional:
- - Delegation
of Authority:
The Trustees are explicitly authorized to employ a Management Agent
at a compensation established by the Board to perform such duties as the
Board shall authorize.
- - Scope
of Duties: This
can include collecting assessments, hiring maintenance personnel, and
managing the financial records of the Association.
Summary of the Change Process
- - The
Removal: Per
the Indentures, any Trustee can be removed by a two-thirds (2/3) vote
of the lot owners.
- - The
Appointment: If
the Board is removed, a majority of owners (if no Trustees remain)
can appoint a Trust Company or Bank with trust powers to act as the
successor Trustee.
- - The
Corporate Requirement: Any professional successor must have a capital and surplus of at
least $2,000,000.00.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lmfXshDC5xfY9sym6iPViEBWTr96knz6/view?usp=sharing
- - The
Removal: Per
the Indentures, any Trustee can be removed by a two-thirds (2/3) vote
of the lot owners.
February 3, 2026
THE IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY AND THE FULLY-CLOTHED MOON: A TALE OF SUBURBAN ESPIONAGE
I. THE GREAT SPREADSHEET HEIST
The drama began when the HOA President accused Mark of "stealing" HOA financial records. In a stunning display of legal gymnastics, the Board—which had been violating the Indentures by withholding these records—claimed that Mark’s access to the books was an act of espionage.
"It’s a daring heist," one observer noted. "Mark 'stole' the records by being a member of the association who is legally entitled to own them. It’s like being accused of shoplifting your own groceries after you’ve already paid for them and walked out of the store."
II. THE "REPLY ALL" INSURGENCY
The accusations of high-tech thievery didn't stop at spreadsheets. The Board further alleged that Mark "stole" a secret email distribution list. In reality, the "top-secret" list was hand-delivered to Mark by the Board’s own Treasurer, who accidentally CC’d the entire community on a mundane update about an asphalt project.
The Board’s position is clear: homeowners talking to each other is a threat to national security. To this HOA, a "Reply All" button is a weapon of mass destruction, and Mark is the digital insurgent who dared to use it to discuss community affairs.
III. THE WIDOW-MAKER DEFENSE
The absurdity reached terminal velocity when the President and her husband filed a civil suit, alleging—among other things—that Mark’s free speech caused a "widow-maker" heart attack.
While common sense suggests that an 80-year-old man hauling heavy real estate signs through 91-degree Missouri humidity in mid-August might be a factor, the President has a different diagnosis. Apparently, Mark’s insistence on frugal spending and ethical governance created a localized gravity well of stress that bypassed the husband’s clogged arteries and went straight for the heart. "I’ve been told my whistleblowing is effective," Mark said, "but I didn't realize it could physically deposit plaque in a neighbor's cardiovascular system. That’s usually the job of the President’s cooking, not my middle finger."
IV. THE REAL ESTATE TURF WAR
Behind the legal curtain lies a classic conflict of interest. While the Indentures strictly prohibit business activity within the condos, the President has turned the community into her personal real estate "farm."
The neighborhood has allegedly evolved into a two-tier caste system:
- The Chosen Ones: Real estate clients of the President who enjoy expedited repairs and priority contractor scheduling.
- The Untouchables: Whistleblowers and "non-clients" whose work orders are sent to a special dimension where time has no meaning.
V. THE CONSTITUTIONAL BAIT-AND-SWITCH
The City of Maryland Heights joined the fray by offering a "Jury Trial" in their official court flyers—the municipal equivalent of a "Free Refills" sign. Mark accepted the offer. A judge granted the order. But when the City Prosecutor arrived at the St. Louis County Court, he suddenly developed a case of "Procedural Amnesia" and reneged on the deal.
This "bait-and-switch" has now triggered a §1983/Monell claim against the City. Mark is suing the municipality for the radical idea that a City shouldn't be allowed to lie to its citizens about their constitutional rights just because the Prosecutor finds a jury "inconvenient."
VI. THE FINAL STAND
As Mark awaits a bench trial (having been denied his jury) for the "Crime of the Clothed Moon," the stakes couldn't be lower—and yet, the principles couldn't be higher.
On one side: A realtor weaponizing the police and the city to protect her "turf" and hide her violations of the ethics agreement. On the other: A man walking his dog, protected by the First Amendment, who simply wanted the Board to follow the rules they signed.
In Maryland Heights, it seems, the only thing more offensive than a middle finger is a homeowner who actually reads the bylaws.