Residents of Filing 11 have been receiving a notice at their door over the past few days. What does this notice say?
| Before paying your $125 annual “Homeowner Assessment” (covenant enforcement fee) you need to know…
…filings 1 thru 10 have not been paying their $6.50 monthly “Homeowner Assessment” (covenant fee) since the court settlement last June. …THEIRS is being paid by the Metro District Board out of our $142.05 monthly Parks & Rec/Water charges! …filing 11 homeowners are “sharing the wealth” by being taken twice: $125 annual assessment AND $142.05 monthly charges. …under the 2010 budget just adopted by the WHMD, the practice is to continue!! Now I don’t know about you, but that’s unacceptable. As filing 11 homeowners we are entitled to: 1) Reimbursement for the portion of our $142.05 monthly charges that are being used for filings 1-10 covenant fees, AND 2) Reduction of our annual$125 fee to at least $100. I was present last year when Filing 11 Design Review Council was discussing the annual fee and admitted that they could get by with $100 per household but since they had reduced it the previous yearfrom $150, they would “play it safe” and keep it at $125. (Strange that filings 1-10 operate with $78/yr.!) If you concur, contact: Filing 11 Design Review Council and Woodmen Hills Metro District Board NOW! Richard Diffenderfer, |
I left out a reference to Jan Pizzi. 
Honestly, I had nothing to do with this — I had not even met the gentleman in question until last night’s board meeting.
Still, it’s interesting to see how the community is reacting…even without (not so) gentle prodding from me.
BTW, the budget for 2010 calls for the district to spend $80,000 on covenant enforcement.
Filing 11 is the largest of all of the filings. When Rusty conveyed the rights to filing 11 to the HOA committee, we had over 90,000 in “extra” money. This money was not earmarked for anything.
I wanted to return it to the 840 or so homes that resided in that filing. I did get the committee to reduce the fees to 125.00 prior to my departure. I also made sure we fired the management company that was charging anything they wanted.
I believe the current Board has been using the money to “change current covenants” at a rediculous price. Filing 11 is over 90% complete including landscaping. The existing covenants were holding up in court against alleged violations. To spend 20-30,000 to re-write them to me is a big waste. It would make sense to combine management for all of the filings, to reduce exspenses. Why can’t the meter readers make note of possible violations? I’d sure like to know how much Filing 11 still has in savings after all the Lawyer fees have been paid. What a waste of resources. I paid my 125.00, but it’s basically a waste of money.
Filing 11 people should take note of the Bill Vogrin’s opinion column in today’s gazette (2/1/10). Woodmoor HOA has ELECTIONS! They get to choose who represents them. It’s my understanding that Filing 11 does not have elections. I also recall a statement made by Filing 11 attorney some months ago in the newspaper that, by law, HOAs must hold elections and that she was “in the process of getting that corrected.”
Combining the WHCMB and the HOA seems like a good idea to me too. IF those positions were elected, not appointed. It would probably entail new bylaws and they would have to be re-written so that changes had to be voted on by everyone, not just the board.
As for using meter readers to note violations, most of the district is remote read. The meters send out the readings via radio signal and can be picked up some distance away. The receiver doesn’t even have to be on the same street.
I would have no problem combining the HOAs myself…but the way the district tried to force Filing 11 into line has left a bad taste in my mouth.
Start from the ground up, perhaps we have an opportunity…with the RESIDENTS concurrence (need 66% of them to concur anyhow).
Several good points here and several not so good points.
#1 Filing 11 has been watching the action in the other filings and I can tell you a majority of residents will not allow the Gestapo-like tactics now on going in other filings. The WHCMB getting more control is a ludicrous idea. What’s to stop them exacting revenge on a resident who they don’t like? Answer: “nothing”
Now if you elect a board that is not attached to Woodmen Hills, that would be the way to go. This way residents who have personal agendas and vendettas won’t have the power to inflict any damage.
Well Lynn of course it’s a good idea from your prospective, you work for the entity that is trying to drive another wedge into the personal lives of Hillers. You yourself said there’s no accountability by the WHCMB. Or have you changed your mind since being hired by Larry?
Fact I have been one of only a few who opposed the WHCMB from the start.
I agree with Dave on this one. If elected I will cancel the contract with the WHCMB form a real committee of residents to explore the real ideas to bring together the community. Again If elected, I will never take monies from the coffers of Woodmenhills to fund the covenants.
Fact the filing 11 covenants have a voting mechanism already in the articles. Its states 66% must approve any change. Let’s see the out come of the new changes to the revised covenants before moving ahead.
This way we can all see where filing 11 stands on changes. might be interesting to see if anything changes.
Not being in Filing 11, I’m not familiar with what you mean by “the way the district tried to force Filing 11 into line.”
The voting mechanism I refer to is how Filing 11 board is elected. To my knowledge, they appoint themselves just like WHCMB. Not sure that’s legal and I’m surprised Filing 11 residents haven’t investigated.
So, tell me how the district is trying to “drive a wedge into the personal lives of Hillers.” What you want out of covenants (if anything) and what I want seem to be different. I wanted discussions in public about how a covenant violation is resolved. I don’t care if they hide the address with some kind of code (which they don’t, btw). And I understand about keeping names private. No problem there. My objections (and others I’ve talked to) has always been that they appear to be arbitrary and secretive. At the last meeting, I saw much more open-ness. For example: Two people each had a “weed problem.” Resident 1 asked for an extension until May 31. Resident 2 wanted until August. The board approved the request by Resident 1 and disapproved the other. So you have the same issue, different results but the rationale makes sense. More weeds would certainly have cropped up over the summer. Without that public discussion of why one was approved and the other not, such a decision would appear capricious. Now let’s see if the minutes will reflect such a discussion so future boards have a point of reference.
“elect a board not connected with Woodmen Hills” – an interesting concept but what is the motivation for such a person to serve? Money? Not a good idea because funds would have to come from fines, etc. Altruism? Not likely. How many people would be willing to enforce covenants in an area in which they have no vested interest? Would you even trust such a person to be fair? In the above example, such a board might deny both residents outright in order to “play by book.”
That said, I would still agree to “re-doing” the whole thing. It’s a mess. Combining the two, getting voter buy-in on any changes, etc. Not sure it should happen soon, because it will be costly to change.
Hi Lynne–
From what I’ve been able to gather, the district tried to strong-arm Filing 11 the same way they did Melody/DR — with lawyers sending ominously-worded letters. See the legal bills from 2008 for details on this.
While I’m not sure where Ron was going with his recommendation for a “board not connected”, it does beg another question: What do we pay the management company for? the covenant board paid $45,000 for “management fees” in 2009…can we manage covenants WITHOUT a management company, do it all in-house? Or is that a simplistic question?
Ooohh…. didn’t know that about Filing 11. So are you saying those covenants rights were not transferred properly either?
In-house management? Makes sense and I would support that. However, I think there still needs to be some control / oversight in place to ensure a level of fairness, compassion, and consideration of extenuating circumstances. Who would do that? The Metro board? They would likely have to add another meeting or the current meetings would run really long.
One danger I see is that if we had a hard nose district manager and covenant manager (for lack of a better title), both employees, who did everything by the book, we’d have an uprising. Also the incentive to fine for monetary gain needs to be removed (isn’t that part of the problem in 11?). I think this can be figured out if we get some good factual dialogue going.
So far as I know the covenant enforcement rights were properly vested…but it appears the district tried to “strong arm” filing 11 into joining their cabal, and filing 11 refused…which apparently generated additional “letters from Pete”.
I am basing this solely on the legal bills and discussions with folks that were on the filing 11 board at the time…if/when I get copies of those letters I will of course post them.
I think we agree on one thing: The current covenant management board is tainted, and apparently there is antipathy toward the filing 11 system as well. We should start from scratch, get all the residents involved (or at least PROACTIVELY notified), and figure out where we want to go.
The Woodmen hills “Metro District” has legal rights based upon the individuals who are ELECTED to that board.
The Filing 11 board is an “appointed” board. Originally picked by Rusty Green and his Management Co. They appoint whoever they feel will serve the needs of Fil 11. I served with jan Pizzi when it originated. Again, we had to form the covenant review committee to allow transfer of title to the Homeowners. This needed to happen quickly to avoid additional legal fees and Management fees that were rapidly depleting savings.
With having over 800 homes in Fil 11, I didn’t see the immediate need to change the covenants to adhere to Kiowa laws or voting rights. Again, we are pretty much built out and I really believe, one Manangement Co. that handled all of the filings would be the answer. I disagree with the decisions fil 11 have made since I left that board. The majority of the original “appointees” have left the board. Many asked to leave. Needless money is being spent to change the covenants! This is a moot point when we have more important concerns. Do we have any candidates who will be running that do not have conflicts of interest. Ron? how can you serve on a board when you are in litigation with the district?
I’m still asking, who is electable? honest, I don’t care if they have district connections, that is silly. If they fully disclose and work for the people of this community, then they have my vote.
Anyway, do you research, I don’t think you guys, quite get the backround and current accountability of Fil 11 Covenant review board.
Still asking, who is willing? who is electable?
Beachbum–
You appear to have a lot of background information on filing 11…can you elaborate on why you feel the covenants don’t need to be changed, and the background between the district and filing 11?
I’ll reiterate — Ron can run if he chooses to, it’s up to him to convince the voters that he is electable. Ask Ralph Nader.
The problem I have with Fil 11 management co. is they “run” the committee. Or they did when I was on the board. Our President, who will not be staying on, basically allowed all guidance to be dictated from the Management Co. It was my understanding, we as the Covenant Board, would make decisions and let the hired help to ask we asked. Unfortunately, we had board members that liked to actively being involved and would rather just be told what was right (yes I’m sure you see the ugly picture now) Until we can get a Board that is willing to look at the big picture, they will continue to send out notices for small items, and allow other items to never be addressed. A Management Co. needs to be consistent, needs to treat each Homeowner the same with each process being the same. otherwise, you have lawsuits. But until we have Boards in place that are truly looking out for “US” We can’t begin to fix our problems.
Ps…sorry for wording, I’m sitting outside, can’t see
Dave,
When I met with the Attorney(before we took ownership) He had written each filing’s covenants. All were written to accommodate incoming Developers. They had input so hence they, small differences in each filing. He explained to me that thus far, the covenants although not traditional, did uphold in court decisions. That was what was important to me. The fact we were able to be effective and the courts deemed us legal. So basically it came down to , who’s attorney do you want to believe, one who had 10 year knowledge of all the filings (the Attorney I wanted to work with) or hire a whole new set of Attorneys from the bad advice of the new Management Co. This is why I left the Board! The cost to try and hold an election will ultimately be funded by you and me. Were our covenants working, yes, were we enforcing yes. However, they were not being run by the Committee, the Management Co would make suggestions and the board would do what they were told, was the “right way”. I totally disagree with this concept. You must be informed, you must provide the guidelines to the Management Co, then they act upon the Boards ruling. Make sense?
Anyway, it was my understanding, Filing 11 was the only filing that had a stash of cash when handed over to the homeowners. I tried very hard to keep that cash surplus. I’m afraid to ask how much is left.
Dave,
If we had a great deal of empty lots still waiting to be developed. I’d feel differently on making changes to our covenants. But I’m sure you can agree, you have seen a vast improvement in the last 2 yrs in the conditions of landscaping. Any existing violations in Filing 11 that are pertaining to landscaping issues have liens against them. Once they have been re-sold, either by short sale, etc. The new buyer will escrow for landscaping needs. Those funds will be released once Filing 11 concurs the landscaping has been completed and is satisfactory. So basically, little is left to be done in Filing 11. Just basic friendly reminders to be respectful to your community and neighbor.
So that is my primary reason why I feel we don’t need to change them at this time.
I have numerous letters from the Fil 11 attorney(transition attorney) discussing this all in detail. But due to this is privileged information because I was on the Fil 11 board, I can’t share them here. Falcon lady. I guess my point is this:
We are paying quite a few different covenant enforcement management co. It would only make sense to have the same management co. hired to take care of all of Woodmen Hills. When we hired the existing management to work for Fil 11, they were charging less than half of what the Developer’s management Co. was charging. Perhaps the meter readers was not a valid example. But I know for fact, that even under all the different “Boards” we have in place, it would be cost effective to have one Management Co.
I have no knowledge of the Metro Board trying to take over Fil 11 CCR. It was conveyed legally, per the governing documents and the State and County regulations. But I can assure you, it was all done legally, non-profit formed, bi-laws, etc.
I will start by telling you this: The “mess” being referenced to by several on this site was the culprit of the very same people still holding matters over our head.
We have outside influences still here. I have said from the start that if people don’t believe in me don’t vote for me.
I have never had the chance to prove anything to anyone. I did get over 800 to vote like me or not.
Now I will have the use of the elementary school and open candidate forum to show you my plan.
My perspective is void of outside influence.
We have several new candidates that will shine in this election. Please listen to their entire message.
If you’re of the opinion that this board has been completely honest and forthcoming in the past then they have nothing to fear. Now if you think it’s time to elect a fresh set of ideas with a board who will listen your concerns and be fully open and non combative when asked simple questions.
Why is it so KGB to be a board member.
Ralph Nader gave you seat belts. Not bad.