April 2024 Board of Directors Meeting

April 18, 2024

6:30pm

Meetings are held virtually.

Community members were sent a redlined version of the architectural guidelines ahead of the meeting and asked to submit feedback to the board. Much like the feedback about fines, it did not feel like that feedback was taken seriously. The document changes were passed holistically despite there being items that seemed problematic.

For example;

• It was called out that the changes were made against an older version of our guidelines and not the most current version.
  
  • The board said they would check with the lawyers but it was unclear the action item given that the vote proceeded anyway
• It felt as though the board was not actually familiar with the changes they were voting on
  
  • When a community member brought up that sheds would have to match the main colors of the house, the board insisted that this was untrue. They insisted that sheds would have to be neutral or match the colors of the community.
    
    • The bullet in the redline document reads "Sheds must match the color scheme and roof style of the main house"
    • The board said that they would not be enforcing that bullet point and would instead only enforce sheds that were not neutral colors or tones that didn't match the community as a whole.
      
      • It is confusing that the board would pass an amendment that they don't intent to enforce
• There is a new restriction that trees are limited to 15 feet. We asked what problem this limitation was trying to solve. The response from the grounds committee was that it was to ensure that people did not have unhealthy trees in their yards... implying that trees over that height are unhealthy?
  
  • The amendment does state that the trees should be manicured but it does not state anything about the health of the trees.
  • The change itself is poorly formatted/worded
    
    • "Privacy hedges/trees are permitted so long as they are maintained in a manicured manner and in a height not to exceed 15 feet at maturity (or maintained at such a height) to restrict/limit visibility between homes' sight lines from main floor windows (in essence, making it more straight forward/easier to create a privacy screen."
      
      • Yes, the missing bracket is how it's currently written. The sentence fragment is confusing and feels like a bad copy and paste from the power point slide.
      • Yes, our neighborhood is very uneven and hilly so it's unclear whose sight lines or which main floor windows this applies to
      • Why is it so important to see people in their backyards... it feels a little creepy
        
        • This is especially confusing because townhouses are required to install 6ft privacy fences if they choose to install a fence. Why are townhouses allowed privacy while single family homes are now being pushed toward 'open sight lines'?
  • The current guidelines state "Landscaping will normally be required to soften the visual impact of the pool, pool fence and other associated structures" which implies that landscaping should be used in the exact way this amendment is attempting to prevent
  • Community members were told by the board that this is a subjective guideline and that neighbors would not be getting violations if their trees were taller.
    
    • Again, confusing that the board would pass an amendment that they don't intend to enforce. It feels like regulation for the sake of regulation.
• Our guidelines currently state "Clotheslines or similar apparatus for the exterior drying of clothes are prohibited. No drying or airing of any clothing shall be permitted outdoors; provided, however if clotheslines are permitted under applicable Maryland law... "
  
  • It would make sense to remove that much of the amendment since the Maryland SB 224 law, effective on October 1, 2010, requires homeowner associations to allow homeowners to install clotheslines on their property.
  • This was an amendment that was submitted but not included in the wide sweeping updates
• Not to mention that this process has not appeared to follow the amendment process that was shared with the community (and maintained in the community document portal by HPS) since 2020.

To be told that the board is going to be "neighborly" and will subjectively enforce the guidelines does not give us a lot of confidence given how a board member behaved with us just a few months ago. How can community members know which guidelines are subjective and which ones are not? Not to mention how problematic selective enforcement of the rules will be.

It doesn't make a lot of sense to us but maybe the board will provide more clarity at some point. Maybe there will be accountability in the future. Or maybe an HOA is going to HOA.

5/14 UPDATE:
The board finally responded to our email, without directly addressing the individual concerns, and stated that the community would be receiving updated amendments/changes. They also doubled down on their new amendment process and it felt as if they were unaware and unbothered by the documented amendment process. They said that if any of our amendments were not in the final draft, then we should assume they were discarded. Nevermind that we submitted our amendments months before they decided to come up with a new process. There was no further discussion about the amendment appeal process. frustrating.

It feels extremely difficult to hold an HOA accountable. Yes, the community can vote members in/out but of the 220 homes, normally 15-20 people join the calls, which doesn't feel like an accurate representation of our community. It makes it very easy for a small majority to bulldoze their agendas. I look forward to the day that HOAs show themselves to actually be beneficial or the day that they no longer exist at all.