|
This page is provided in an effort to improve communications between the homeowners and
the board members. We welcome all your pertinent comments, suggestions, complaints, and
questions. We will get back to you as soon as we can. Be sure to review the
FAQ page first;
you may find your question already answered. (Red text indicates
fields that are required. All information is held in strict confidence.)
|
DHOA Blog
|
Membership Dues
|
1/24/2012
|
|
Dear Homeowners and the Discovery Board:
---
With the covenant changes, I have concerns about the possibility of unreasonable homeowner dues being imposed and fear that Discovery property values will be negatively impacted if homeowners fees do not have a reasonable cap.
---
The current limit was a factor in my decision to purchase in Discovery. (I recognize that the amount was nominal in 1992 and that inflation has since erased much of its purchasing power.)
---
The covenants rewrite shows no limitation of dues outside of a vote of the attendees of the annual meeting; Unfortunately, the annual meetings are typically attended only by a VERY SMALL minority of homeowners. At these meetings, I have often heard discussion about fees being too low, but never heard discussion of what additional services might be provided for higher fees. (examples might include: trash service for the whole neighborhood on the same day, snow removal, additional litigation, etc.) Be sure that approval of the new covenants will result in higher (and needed) homeowners fees.
---
Would the Discovery Board of Directors be willing to provide some background information about the amounts neighboring homeowners associations assess and what services are provided for those fees?
---
Personally, it would be much easier to support the proposed changes to the covenants if there was a hard limit on the homeowners association assessment. It is not unreasonable to identify an algorithm which can adjust for inflation and still provide a comfortable cap. The homeowners fees limit could easily be set in terms of the average property tax assessment--or possibly set in 2012 dollars with an adjustment for inflation...
---
Thank yous to the board and to each individual homeowner for your dedication to our neighborhood and the quality of life in Discovery!
I used this type of covenant review: Executive
Sender:
Name: William Marbaker
Street Address: 540 Buckeye
EMail: marbaker@yahoo.com
Phone: 719-593-1540
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPLY:
AFTER CONSIDERING YOUR ARGUMENT TO PLACE A "HARD" LIMIT ON THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE ON DUES VOTED ON BY ATTENDEES AT AN ANNUAL MEETING, WE WOULD LIKE TO DEFER ANY DECISION BY THE BOARD UNTIL WE RECEIVE ADDITIONAL INPUTS. WE, HOWEVER, COULD SUPPORT WORDING THAT WOULD LIMIT ANNUAL DUES INCREASES TO NOT MORE THAN 5% PER YEAR BY A LEGALLY CONSTITUTED ANNUAL MEETING (MEETS QUORUM REQUIREMENTS) AND THAT INCREASES OF MORE THAN 5% PER YEAR WOULD REQUIRE A MAJORITY VOTE OF MEMBERS FOR APPROVAL (APPROXIMATELY 167 DISCOVERY LOT OWNERS).
WITH REGARD TO ANNUAL DUES FOR OTHER NEAR BY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION: RAVEN HILLS-$60.00, GOLDEN HILLS-$125.00 AND COMSTOCK VILLAGE-$36.54
|
|
Clotheslines
|
1/21/2012
|
|
Article III. Section 15.
This section prohibits outside clotheslines "unless approved by the ARC...." I would like to see clarification as to what, exactly, the ARC would approve with regard to clotheslines. It seems environmentally irresponsible to prohibit clotheslines and demand that everyone use (waste) energy to dry clothing when the arid environment would do it with no energy use in about 30 minutes. Rather than prohibiting the intelligent use of the sun to dry clothes, why not provide strict guidelines for those who would like to do the environmentally correct thing and use a clothesline. Example: clotheslines shall be in the rear of the house,
obscured from view from the main road, and promptly taken down at the end of the drying cycle. Perhaps they could be restricted to occupying the back porch or patio area. I can't see any harm in my neighbors drying their clothes outside as the weather permits.
Respectfully,
Dwayne Liller
335 Discovery Ct
268-6963
RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
AFTER CONSIDERING YOUR ARGUMENT TO USE CLOTHESLINES INSTEAD OF DEFAULTING TO AN ENERGY USING DRYER, WE AGREE AND WILL ELIMINATE THE WORD "CLOTHESLINES" IN BOTH THE TITLE AND TEXT OF SECTION 15. WE ALSO WOULD HOPE THAT MEMBERS USE CLOTHESLINES RESPONSIBLY AND WITH SENSITIVITY TO KEEP THEIR DRYING CLOTHES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE OUT OF THE PUBLIC VIEW.
|
|
|
