the Flunker lawsuit legacy . . .
Neighbors were friends and worked together . . . then something changed in 2016. Danny Flunker instigated the first lawsuit, of what would turn out to be SIX (6) LAWSUITS the Flunkers, would lead over 7 years time.
#1 FLUNKER LAWSUIT: In 2016, as WOPOA President but in a rogue action (meaning without Board approval) Danny Flunker acted to harass and then have the power to Marinas physically dismantled. The marinas are neighboring private properties. He claimed, among other fabricated allegations, that the marinas were dangerous. Mr. Flunker's tampering with the power actually created more danger for Windermere neighbors as well as public boaters. Joe Gimenez (a fellow WOPOA Board Member at the time) investigated and stood up to Flunker on this issue, as well as calling him out on other WOPOA matters. Then President of the smaller marina, Dana Martin, also stood ground against her then good friend, Mr. Flunker, and his bullying tactics. Both marinas fought the ridiculous take-over "terms" Mr. Flunker put forward.
After Mr. Flunker who was not a property owner at the time, was “disagreed with" by many in the neighborhood, friendships dissolved, a vendetta was borne, and a tornado force of destruction swept through the lovely community of Windermere.
A $285,000 lawsuit to DEFEND the marinas culminated in an injunction against WOPOA for the "interference" to private property and ultimately established in perpetuity the marina easement rights for their access, power and usage, etc. 24 owners each paid out-of-pocket. $4,000, and the WOPOA Insurer paid the rest of the legal fees for this attack. Mr. Flunker resigned from his position as WOPOA President, just prior to being required to officially authorize the insurer to pay. [See Marina Lawsuit]
Five more lawsuits would occur with a Flunker at the helm and at a cost to friends & neighbors.
After Mr. Flunker who was not a property owner at the time, was “disagreed with" by many in the neighborhood, friendships dissolved, a vendetta was borne, and a tornado force of destruction swept through the lovely community of Windermere.
A $285,000 lawsuit to DEFEND the marinas culminated in an injunction against WOPOA for the "interference" to private property and ultimately established in perpetuity the marina easement rights for their access, power and usage, etc. 24 owners each paid out-of-pocket. $4,000, and the WOPOA Insurer paid the rest of the legal fees for this attack. Mr. Flunker resigned from his position as WOPOA President, just prior to being required to officially authorize the insurer to pay. [See Marina Lawsuit]
Five more lawsuits would occur with a Flunker at the helm and at a cost to friends & neighbors.
#2 FLUNKER LAWSUIT: In 2017 Danny Flunker founded TOMA, initiating the "TOMA lawsuit" (Cause #47531) citing a two year earlier Water Company (WOWSC) Board agenda error, which he claimed resulted in a “secretive” land transaction between the WOWSC and his former friend: Ms. Martin. This agenda error was uncontested by the WOWSC, later proven innocent, and most all of the community knew about the impending sale. The sale had been been made VERY PUBLIC in 2014-15.
Mr. Flunker personally had knowledge of the land for sale per the fact that, in 2015 he, as WOPOA President, put in a bid for part of the land in effort to maintain a WOPOA storage lot amenity that resided on that land. Still, in 2017 he and litigants: Rene Ffrench, Bruce Sorgen, and Dick Dial would claim no one knew about the land sale.
The TOMA litigants had their uncontested agenda point confirmed by the Court but, didn’t get the “relief” of $100,000 and the land sale reversal they wanted. So, they appealed again and again. All Courts agreed with the lower court’s decision in confirming the agenda error but they all denied any relief. Litigants appealed to the SUPREME COURT of Texas where their case was denied. See Lawsuits
Mr. Flunker personally had knowledge of the land for sale per the fact that, in 2015 he, as WOPOA President, put in a bid for part of the land in effort to maintain a WOPOA storage lot amenity that resided on that land. Still, in 2017 he and litigants: Rene Ffrench, Bruce Sorgen, and Dick Dial would claim no one knew about the land sale.
The TOMA litigants had their uncontested agenda point confirmed by the Court but, didn’t get the “relief” of $100,000 and the land sale reversal they wanted. So, they appealed again and again. All Courts agreed with the lower court’s decision in confirming the agenda error but they all denied any relief. Litigants appealed to the SUPREME COURT of Texas where their case was denied. See Lawsuits
|
#3 FLUNKER LAWSUIT: In 2018, Patty Flunker initiated Cause #48292 with: Rene Ffrench and Mark McDonald to continue the pursuit of the land sale reversal . This lawsuit ultimately dragged on for 4+ years with changing Plaintiffs, all costing the end-users. At one point, it appeared that Ms. Flunker revisited her strategy deciding to run for Water Company Director (with the goal to reverse the land sale via a board vote) and she dropped out of the lawsuit.
Intervenor litigants, Rene Ffrench, Bruce Sorgen, and Dick Dial took this cause over requesting $1,000,000 (plus attorneys fees) in relief. Conspiracy was the propaganda topic. They asked the Court to hold 8-10 former & then present Directors accountable for collusion. After untold number of boxes of evidential paperwork was processed by the WOWSC refuting ridiculous claims from the Plaintiffs, the Court determined no collusion and released all past Directors, but one (Ms. Martin), who was the purchaser of the property. |
The Plaintiffs wanted her to pay a difference of the land purchase amount: $204,000, and what they misrepresented the land was valued at: $780,000 to $1,200,000.
They represented their efforts to be on behalf of member ratepayers, yet one of the key litigants (Bruce Sorgen) is not a member himself. Additionally, it took only 10% of the entire ratepayer membership to lodge this complaint which sadly cost all the rest of the membership. Their "win" on our behalf was $70,000 not the $500,000-$800,000 they claimed was the value they sought the Court to award in their 5 years of litigating. They reportedly spent $428,000 in attorney fees (which the attorney claims is unpaid) and caused the water company over a million & a half to gain $70,000. See JURY VERDICT |
Patty Flunker worked for the Texas Rural Water Assn. (TRWA), a non-profit entity with the Mission "To serve, represent, support, and strengthen member water and wastewater utilities." Evidently, at one time while actually “serving & supporting” the WOWSC (a member of TRWA) Ms. Flunker suggested that the corporation actually raise their rates.
Ms. Flunker later would sue her own water company & then protest the increased rates.
Ms. Flunker later would sue her own water company & then protest the increased rates.
Why didn't Patty Flunker do her job in "assisting" her own rural water company
when she worked for the Texas Rural Water Association.?
Instead, she attacked her own rural water company.
when she worked for the Texas Rural Water Association.?
Instead, she attacked her own rural water company.
#4 FLUNKER LAWSUIT: In 2020, Patty Flunker, with Josie Fuller, swayed a very small percentage of Ratepayers (water company member tap owners) to lodge protest with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) about the March 2020 rate increase. The rate increase caused by defense costs incurred to fight other Flunker Lawsuits. This is referred to as the Ratepayers Case.
The defense costs from the PUC case is what is “currently” reflected in our increased rates. The latest PUC “brief” your ratepayer representatives are lauding, is just that. A BRIEF. The brief was submitted by a “STAFF” level PUC attorney. It will now go in front of the Judge for final ruling. In the last go-round the Judges overruled the staffs’ recommendation.
The defense costs from the PUC case is what is “currently” reflected in our increased rates. The latest PUC “brief” your ratepayer representatives are lauding, is just that. A BRIEF. The brief was submitted by a “STAFF” level PUC attorney. It will now go in front of the Judge for final ruling. In the last go-round the Judges overruled the staffs’ recommendation.
Why are Ratepayer Reps so excited about a PUC brief when "if" approved
it could determine whether or not our company will be allowed to keep afloat by covering its expenses
or whether it is will be destined to Receivership.
it could determine whether or not our company will be allowed to keep afloat by covering its expenses
or whether it is will be destined to Receivership.
|
#5 FLUNKER LAWSUIT: Danny Flunker, instigated yet another lawsuit for which he blames the water company. He claims the WOWSC spent funds on a lawsuit with the Attorney General's office. It turns out that Mr. Flunker initiated the Water Company's defensive action with his inappropriate demand for invoices from the WOWSC, claiming they were public information. These invoices contained WOWSC legal strategy data and needed to be protected, not given to the enemy who was attacking our company.
FRIEND OF FLUNKER LAWSUIT: In 2022, Jeff Walker, protested to the PUC regarding election irregularities. This protest was ultimately rejected, but the PUC demanded the water company respond which cost the WOWSC around $25,000. Alleged election irregularities were unproven. The PUC deemed this case inappropriately submitted.
Interestingly, when reporting "election irregularities" Mr. Walker didn’t report the fact that his friend, Mr. Sorgen, litigant in Flunker lawsuits #2 & #3 and supporter of #1 & #4 (and similar to Mr. Flunker: not a property owner & not a WOWSC member) fraudulently attempted to vote in numerous WOWSC elections since 2017. DO YOU REALLY WANT this Wannabe
. . . "in charge" of your company . . . handling your finances . . . the "new voice of reason," . . . as your leader? Take me to your leader . . . |
#6 FLUNKER LAWSUIT: In 2021 Danny Flunker was on the ACC Committee when the WOPOA was sued by a homebuilder due to actions/inactions of the ACC Committee. Micki Bertino & Mark Carpenter were also on that committee. The 2022 WOPOA Board was active in mediation re this lawsuit but this case did not conclude.
It will be interesting to see how our current POA Board navigates this lawsuit. Would this be considered a conflict of interest since Mark Carpenter is now a WOPOA Board member and Danny Flunker is the current ACC Contact? I’m sure it will cost us, like the rest. FLUNKER PIRs — FUELING the FIRE with other costly actions. Check out the excessive number of Public Inquiry Requests that the Flunkers have lodged.
Shouldn't your Water Company be allowed to spend its (your) resources of time, energy and finances on its purpose of delivering pristine water and getting rid of your waste?
Vote for those protecting your Water Company
not those who cost you! Vote for NELSON & GIMENEZ see ALL Candidate Bios |