The meeting began with a sincere apology from Ellen for rushing through the agenda last week, and not allowing residents to speak. A similar agenda was covered today, but after each agenda item, residents were allowed to speak for one minute on each topic. The pet rule had by far the most comments, and people are still scratching their heads about how and why the animals are being allowed to remain.
There appears to be a litigious group of individuals in this park who throw the word lawsuit around as commonly as others use "please and thank you". The board is simply following the recommendations of their attorney to save you, the home owners, the expense of mediation and litigation. No one is happy with the end results.
Ron proposed a motion that would allow us to form a committee to handle the fine appeals that are being allowed once the procedure goes into effect. Fines can be traffic-oriented, pet oriented, or any other infraction of the rules and regulations. The members of the committee will be non-board members, and they will not be related in any way to a board member. A true jury of your peers.
The process is working in other parks and homeowner associations, and we have confidence that it will work here. The point is not to get your money, they are striving for compliance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Dear LiP,
No need for anyone to be scratching their heads. According to Ellen DeHahn, the park attorney, if a rule is not enforced equally or not enforced at all, then there is no rule. That has been the situation in our park for several years. Now in order to reestablish the pet rule the pets who were living in the park as of 18 August 2007 must be allowed to remain in the park (grandfathered).
Dear Anonymous,
The Regency Cove residents who actually CONFORMED to the no-pet rules, who gave away their loving animals to move here, who never even questioned the concept of ENFORCING a rule they chose not to break in the first place, are the people hurting in this grandfather clause.
All of you who decided to sneak in your animals, despite the Rules and Regulations, you knew it was coming. It's here. Deal with it.
Why is it that Ellen can appropriate $30,000.00 (in Her secret "workshop") to remodel one apartment to benefit one person (not even a shareholder) and ignore the shareholders concerns about security?
I don't agree with the Attorney.
I would like another opinion. We have been constantly reminded both verbally and in the Outlook that there should be no pets in the park.
Now that we find ourself in this turmoil the first step will be to establish rules of conduct and terms of enforcement.Just saying the no pet rule will be enforced will not have any better results then the present situation.
speed reader, what exactly are you trying to say? your comment isn't very clear. as far as attorneys go, we have the best in the area. you may want to get another opinion and hire your own attorney. just make sure that it is one whose specialty is homeowner communities. actually we should forget this issue about pets as there are more important concerns we should address.
Post a Comment