If you recall, there are three residents of Woodmen Hills that have assigned their enforcement rights to the covenant management board:
| Name | Address | Instrument |
| Jerry & Betty Medford | 7836 TOMPKINS RD | 209064049 |
| Mark & Phyllis Zinn | 8428 BOHLEEN RD | 209074467 |
| Eugene & Jodi Cozzolino | 7659 BULLET RD | 209074469 |
There has been lots of discussion going around about the potential liability these three residents are exposed to–point blank, the covenant management board derives their enforcement power from these three, in large part if not in toto. Since the covenant management board technically is acting on their behalf, it stands to reason that any legal decision against the covenant management board (such as the Chuck Warne case) would also involve these three homeowners.
Makes sense to me. If I authorize someone to act on my behalf, and they do something that is found in violation of law, I am as guilty as my agent. Don’t believe me? Check out all the people that are in prison over taxes who tried to use the same excuse. You can assign your authority — you cannot assign your responsibility.
Taking this into account, the covenant management board has voted to extend their insurance coverage (a $5,500/year cost that YOU and I pay) to these homeowners.
(Note: This is the annual insurance bill (according to their financials–the premium covers the board as well as this “assignment committee”)
Makes sense…“You’re supposed ta dance with the one that brung ya“, as the saying goes.
So what does this mean to you? If any homeowner in the filings covered controlled by the covenant management board were to bring suit against these three for any covenant enforcement action, YOU and I will pay for their defense through the covenant management board insurance — and any subsequent rate increase — unless this whole funding issue is resolved.
Also, to clarify: The comments from The Lawyer, the board, and Larry Bishop all center around Filing 11. But that’s not all that are affected.
If you pay any fees to the district — for water, wastewater, or parks and recreation — you are funding covenant enforcement.
This means you, Parkside.
This means you, Courtyards.
This means you, commercial customers in Filing 7.
This means you, Falcon Highlands.
This means….oh, you get the point.
“Oh what a tangled web we weave”
A few comments:
1. Only two of the three residents listed have signed over their enforcements rights. One couple has since moved out of the area and therefore revoked their assignment.
2. There are more than these two that have signed over their enforcement rights. I believe the two you listed are in filing 8, but other residents in other filings have signed over their enforcement rights.
3. Even though you do not state that the insurance coverage of the members of the Assignment Committee caused an increase in insurance cost, it seemed implied. I wanted to make it clear that this coverage did not cause an increase in cost. The increase in cost was a result of the lawsuits against the board. The coverage of the Assignment Committee was automatic because all committees under the WHCMB are covered immediately upon formation.
Good points, Shawn, thanks.
I understand that others have reassigned enforcement rights; these were the three that I knew of and could prove at this point (as evidenced by the “instrument number” which refers to El Paso county court filings). When I get the others, I will update the post.
It was not my intent to say the extension of insurance coverage equated to an increase in premium. What I was pointing out is that any premium paid is paid for by everyone that pays fees to the district…and that it’s very likely the insurance premiums would increase if/when coverage had to be called upon to defend these homeowners.
Creating an “assignment committee” who’s sole membership requirement is to assign enforcement rights to the covenant management board…hmmmm.
Your tone implies that you are with Ron on this issue…that if elected (and you did say some time ago that you plan on running for the board this year), you would do away with the covenant fees being paid out of O&M funds. Is that your position?
I thought it was pretty obvious…but just so everyone is clear:
I believe the district’s paying of covenant enforcement fees from O&M funds is illegal, and yes, I would stop it.
Covenant enforcement fees in and of themselves are not illegal–so long as the covenants a homeowner was subject to when they bought their house specified that fees would be collected, and the district splits out accounting lines such that it is clear the filings that are subject to covenant enforcement are the only ones paying for it.
At least you know where Dave stands in many of these issues. The current members (minus one) hides behind the lawyer. Pathetic…
The statement made by Pete (The Lawyer) is that Connie Goodwin was an old employee.
Enough said.
For the record verified by Secretary of State. The District (Larry) made the call on this one. He was the one responsible for the absence of any mail-in ballots.
I have called Connie and warned her that any malfeasance will be meet with swift and blinding legal action.
I have already prepared a letter outlining the prior actions here. This time the Bernies office will be on guard. When they count the votes this time I’ll be there.
The rule then was a District had discretion on whether or not to send out those ballots.
The new Law states that they now must.
Kudos to Mrs/Ms. Elizabeth you hit the nail on the head. Why would you expect anything else.
Pathetic was too nice a word!
Oh please don’t fret the election is already in the bag for the incumbants. I’ll bet you $100.00
All the incumbents who run will get re-elected. Larry will spend over $10,000 to save them with newsletters and whatever mailing he chooses.
Rest assured, I will not be voting for any incumbent board members!! And I have 4 close friends who are all home owners in Woodmen Hills who agree with me as do many of my neighbors in Filing 8.
I do have one question for Dave though. If you were to be elected to the Metro District Board, would it be your intention to officially dissolve the Covenant Management Board as an entity or just to cut the funding of that organization from O&M (which may have the same result)? I assume since the WHCMB was created by the WHMD that it could also be dissolved by it, but to be honest I am not sure of the legalities involved, if any.
Hi James–
I would cease funding WHCMB from O&M, plain and simple. Not only is it unfair to filings that already have an HOA, or to our commercial customers; not only is it illegal under CRS 32-1-1004(8)(b), it’s also unethical and unscrupulous the way the two boards (WHMD and WHCMB) went about seizing control.
Notice how defensive they get when anyone asks them? Heck, Jan has opened two board meetings trying to address these issues, and finds herself continually on the defensive. Watch…every time the board is questioned on this, they try to redirect the subject to “we don’t control the covenant board”.
Point of fact, they DO! Not only do they fund them (thereby perpetuating their existence), they also have unilateral abrogation rights, by the last line of the assignment letter.
I believe WHCMB is a separate and legal entity under Colorado Law, so WHMD cannot dissolve them; however, if they are doing such good for the community, perhaps they can solicit their covenantees.
Mr Richards, as you know the recall election was close and this time Larry will try even harder to save the other board members.
I like covenants if they are applied correctly and not used as tools for vengeance or personal vendettas and methods of generating revenue.
I have said in the past that the covenants board was given power it should have never gotten. The letter of assignment was invalid and was void from the start. I brought it to the last meeting and all the board members ignored it. Jen Barber stated “it was legal when I signed it” well that is the excuse they always use. I tried to get them to rescind it but no such luck.It was admitted that it isn’t needed anymore.
Mr.Richards please understand, I was getting slammed in court last summer by the same people who want you to forget they tried to jail me on 5 Different occasions and bankrupt me. I hope the rest of Woodmen Hills wakes up and realize that Larry wants to get filing 11 now.
I implore you to get to as many residents as you can to prevent Larry from using his position to post more letters telling everyone how this board save us from doom and gloom.
So please remember My name is Ronald Pace and I will do these 5 things if elected:
#1 Stop funding of covenants out of our budget
#2 Refund all fees charged to residence collected by WH on behalf of WHCMB
#3 Stop all litigation of any type against any residents.
#4 Rescind the contract with the WHCMB
#5 Lower monthly water bills by cutting spending and passing the saving on to all residences
This my promise and I keep my promises If I can’t I will resign and let someone else do it.