The signature image also resembled one appearing on an unrelated form he'd submitted during a previous HOA administrative process.
That didn't establish who personally inserted it.
But the surrounding records raised substantial questions about the document's authenticity.
When Victoria was asked to produce the original communication showing Anthony's consent, she couldn't.
Instead, she argued that he'd previously allowed family members and friends to use the pool.
Rachel rejected that as irrelevant.
Permission for invited guests didn't create a right for the HOA to organize commercial gatherings.
And the absence of an immediate confrontation on one occasion didn't authorize future use.
The document was referred for further examination.
Meanwhile, the association's counsel advised that it should not be treated as proof of a valid access agreement.
Elaine Brooks was horrified by what the independent review uncovered.
The board had trusted Victoria with organizing neighborhood events.
It hadn't authorized her to create a private recreational business using another homeowner's property.
Nor had it approved the disputed claims about access rights.
But the association's internal controls were weaker than Elaine believed.
Victoria had been allowed to make certain low-value event expenditures without seeking fresh approval for each payment. That flexibility was intended to make routine social activities easier to organize.
She'd used it to arrange services associated with the unauthorized pool gathering.
Some invoices described ordinary supplies.
Others involved promotional materials and event products.
A portion of the money passed through an account Victoria controlled in connection with her private event-planning business.
The accounting review couldn't automatically determine the legal classification of every payment.
Some might involve improper conflicts of interest.
Others might represent expenses for services actually provided.
But the overall pattern raised serious governance questions.
Victoria hadn't clearly disclosed the relationship between her HOA position and her private financial interests.
She'd also presented a residential swimming pool as a community amenity despite the homeowner's written objections.
Elaine called an emergency board meeting.
The association's attorney attended.
So did the management company's representative.
For almost three hours, the directors reviewed the available records and discussed their obligations.
The lawyer cautioned them against announcing conclusions that hadn't been established.
But he also explained that the board needed to protect the association from continued unauthorized activity.
The directors voted to suspend further spending related to the disputed program and prevent additional events at Anthony's property.
They also initiated the procedures required to review Victoria's authority and position.
Victoria responded with fury.
She accused Elaine of disloyalty.
Claimed Anthony was manipulating the board.