September Home Owner's AssociationNewsletter –Sept 15, 2011
www.saddleridgetn.net
Important informationin the below letter regarding the Covenant update…we will be making changes andhaving an extended review period.
Update to NeighborhoodDirectory:
Gilmartin's email has changedgilmartin6@charter.com is their new email address.
We would like to welcome two new familiesinto the subdivison:
Mark & Kelly Darden 12905 Long Ridge Rd. 966-8734 email dardenmk@yahoo.com and theirtwo children Gabrielle 1998 and Ben 2001
David & Shelia Spates 329 TreyburnDr 966-6105 email davespates@gmail.comand their two children Anna 2001 and Phil 2003
Seals email has changed to JMSEAL@charter.net
Saddle Ridge Social:
Saddle Ridge is hosting an Oktoberfest onSaturday October 22nd at 7 PM in the clubhouse. Come join us for a fun eveningthat will include appetizers, music and beer trivia. We are asking every personwho attends to bring a 6 pack of their favorite micro brew to share. If youwould like to bring an Oktoberfest themed appitizer we would appreciate that.Please RSVP by October 16th to Tim Sayers at tjsayers@tds.net. Let him know how many areattending, and if you will be bringing an appitizer. This event is open toSaddle Ridge residents age 21 and older. Thereis a UT away game this day, if the game overlaps this event, we will have aradio that broadcast the game.
Bermuda Grass:
The Wild Bermuda Grass at the entrance of theneighborhood was sprayed and will be reseeded with Fescue.
Board Positions Open:
There will be 3 opening on the board forJanuary 2012. Folks who are interestedcan let the current board know. If youthink your neighbors would be good board members, don't hesitate to ask them toconsider. They will be flattered, at theleast.
LetterFrom the President:
To Residents,
Please take the time to read the entire letter, the mostimportant aspect is at the end titled “CovenantReview”.
It is truly unexpected that the Covenants are creating somuch anger and division among some in the neighborhood. This is far from the SRHA Board’s intention. We feel this is due to a lot of rhetoric andmisinformation. This has caused a fewhomeowners to not only disagree on the issues but also be angry at the SRHABoard Members. We have been callednames, power hungry, acting in bad faith and so on. This truly is offensive that people wouldthink we were doing anything other than what we felt was right for theneighborhood. The anger in some of theemails has caused one member of the SRHA Board to respond to an email with aninappropriate comment about Gordon Michaels. I apologize on behalf of the SRHA Board to Mr. Michaels for this. Apologies have been sent to Mr. Michaels andaccepted. All the residents of theneighborhood are welcome to their opinion and to be upset with issues, but myonly request is to not make things personal. Those that were upset with Mr. Michaels were not upset with what hewrote or his opinion, but simply the way he and others have sent out documentsto the neighborhood without even contacting the SRHA Board for clarificationfirst. This takes things out of context,lopsided many issues and caused misinformation.
It is my hope that homeowners realize that the SRHA Boardand its committee updated the Covenants without ill intentions in a fair andbalanced way. Our goal in updating theCovenant was to allow the SRHA Board enough power to conduct business but nottoo much power that would cause unneeded hardship or be intrusive uponhomeowners. When you refer to the SRHABoard, remember this is a revolving door of the residents of this neighborhood(2 year limit). Because of this, thereis no reason any member of this community including the current SRHA Boardwould want to give the SRHA Board too much power.
There are a few points that have caused anger for a few thatI would like to clarify. My philosophyis if a couple people say it, a few others are probably thinking it, so let’sclarify.
1. Some feel that we sprung the Covenants upon thehomeowners. We have been working onthese documents for nearly two years. Ineach of the monthly newsletters we have advertised that we were working onthese documents. Just like any otherBoard function or meeting, this was open to the neighborhood. This is thereason it was in each newsletter. Had ahomeowner been very ambitious and asked to be on the committee, we would have gladlywelcomed them. Updating the Covenantstruly took a lot of time and we could have used the help.
2. Some people have been very angry with receipt ofcompliance letters and have voiced this to be their reason not to sign theCovenants. Realize that the SRHA receivedan abundant amount of complaints from neighborhood residents regarding trashcans and the appearance of the neighborhood this past spring. These complaints came via email, face-to-facecontact and phone calls from people very passionately worried about theneighborhood and home values. Based uponthese complaints, we checked the Covenants to confirm said violations thendrove around the neighborhood and agreed. It is then our duty as the Board to side with those that are in theright and uphold the Covenants, especially in a time when the housing market ishurting. I, nor any current SRHA Board member, enjoyeddealing with compliance issues. We hopethose that received letters would not take them personal.
· Those that receive Trash Can Violation letters,please understand that having your trash can permanently located in view of thestreet is a violation. This is true even if you have been doing this foryears. People complained and we had aduty to act. When I moved to thisneighborhood a few years ago, I too was in violation of this. Upon finding out about this violation, Imoved my trash can. In addition, weadvertised that this was a violation in the newsletter for months and on thebulletin board at the front of the neighborhood. This had no effect. Some people were also angry about the tone ofthe letter. The majority of the wordswere direct quotes from the Covenants and Bylaws and listed as so.
· Some people didn’t feel that letters were veryneighborly. We, as the SRHA Board,agree. The problem is we are volunteersand all hold full time jobs. Sendingletters is the most efficient process since we have 256 lots. Some of those that complained insisted thatwe should be making phone calls or going to people’s homes. I explained the situation as to why wecouldn’t and asked if they would like to volunteer to do this, none of themaccepted my invitation. There iscurrently an open position to any homeowner that would like to volunteer forthis.
· Some felt we were not compassionate to financialdifficulties some are facing. One homein this neighborhood had received dozens of complaints for a year and ahalf. During the first year, due totheir situation, the SRHA Board wasn’t allowed to make contact with them. When we were able to make contact with them,we let them know they were out of compliance, but we also asked them to pleasecontact us so that we could work something out. We asked this several times with no response. Some Board members were ready to help hadthat person responded and started a dialog with us. Since they didn’t want to speak to us, we hadto keep proceeding with the process. They have finally complied and their yard property looks farbetter. The Board is very sensitive to everyone’sissue, but without contact we can’t help anyone.
· Some were concerned that we were on a powertrip. First, let me explain that theSRHA Board passed a rule this year to allow everyone 3 warning letters thatcarried no consequences and were anonymous to avoid embarrassment. The reason for 3 letters was to allowresidents time to correct violations without incurring a fine. We were alsoaware that using a one day snapshot approach may cause some to get lettersafter the issue was already corrected. The4th letter would be the issuing of a fine. Thankfully, this Board gained compliance fromeveryone and did not issue any fines. Ifyou read the current Covenants, the Board should issue only 1 certified lettergiving homeowners 5 days to comply. If at that point the violation is notcorrected, a fine is issued. Again, weonly wanted compliance and didn’t want to fine homeowners so we created rulesthat allow 3 warning letters. We treatedevery violation the exact same to make the process fair. Even people I and other Board members knewreceived letters. I personally joinedthe SRHA Board because I was relatively new to the neighborhood and felt thiswould be a good way to meet neighbors that I may not have otherwise had theopportunity, not to deal with compliance.
· Some, including Mr. Micheals, are concerned withthe wording in the new Covenants, Article XVII, “if said condition is notcorrected within said time period, Association shall have the right toinjunctive relief against the Owner of the affected Lot and the Contractor orAgent of the Owner and the right to make all necessary corrections at theOwner’s expense, the cost of which shall be a lien upon the affected Lot.” This is language that was added by thecommittee, but let me explain why. Thepart Mr. Michaels left out is under the updated Enforcement, Article VII,homeowners now get 20 days after the certified mailing of written notice ofsuch violation instead of the current 5 days (as advised by lawyer). The other point left out is that currentlyafter that 5 days notice, if not corrected, the homeowner could be fined. The problem with this solution (a fine) isthere have been a couple of properties this year that had weeds and grass chesthigh (I am attaching a photo of one home that is currently bank owned that hadchest high weeds/grass…how would you like to live beside this and complain tothe Board who is powerless to do anything? There were two other properties similar to this). A fine does nothing to remedy the situationand the people who are trying to sell their home or live beside this propertyhave to suffer. Basically, for theextreme cases, this would give the SRHA Board the option to either fine theowner or fix the actual problem. Under the updated Covenants or the old Covenants,if there is an extreme violation like this, the property owner is going tofinancially owe something. So there isreally nothing new in the updated Covenant. The Board currently has the ability to fine, but hasn’t and I think futureBoards would also try to avoid using the limited powers granted to them by theCovenants. The only people that need toworry about this new rule are the people that plan on grossly violating theCovenants.
3. Some people are angry about the section in theCovenants that allow the SRHA Board to increase fees by 3% during any givenyear without homeowner approval. Thiswas something recommended by the lawyer as a common practice in today’s Covenants. This would not be something done every year,but remember expenses for the grounds, pool, utilities and maintenance go upevery year. Homeowners are invited eachyear to the annual budget meeting where we meet, discuss and accept a budgetfor the coming year. If this issomething you are worried about, attend this meeting and make sure the money isbeing spent correctly or join the SRHA Board. Also, something most haven’t considered is that currently the SRHA hasabout $100K in savings. In the Bylawsthat would accompany the updated Covenants, the committee added language thatlimits the SRHA Board’s spending to $10k on a single expenditure unlesshomeowners are notified no less than 60 days in advance to give them a chanceto voice their opinion. Currently thesesavings of $100K protect homeowners from assessments, but technically thecurrent Covenants allow the SRHA Board to spend all this money withoutnotice. We feel we handled this issue ina balanced way. If you attend the annualbudget meeting you will know if and why there would be a need to increase andwould have an opportunity to voice your opinion. There are safeguards in place. I love my neighborhood, but I too don’t wantto pay more than I have to. Everyoneneeds to remember that currently 3% of $360 is $10.80 or less than $1 permonth. The last increase to dues was for$80 or from $280 to $360.
4. Some are angry because they think there are alot of new restrictions. This is false. A majority of the Covenants are the same,some were tweaked, some things were taken from the Bylaws and put into theirrightful place in the Covenants and mention of the Developer has been removedfrom most of the document. These werethe majority of the changes; everyone has the documents and can look forthemselves. Anything new added waseither suggested because of complaints, an update to law, improved buildingmaterials (vinyl windows) or a suggestion from the lawyer. Our updated Covenants is very typical of manyother Covenants in the surrounding area. Residents need to remember that most homeowners choose to live in aSubdivision that have these restrictions to protect their home values and don’tsee them as a hassle.
5. Some don’t want to sign because of restrictionsthat were continued from the current Covenants. Whether there is a new Covenant or we continue with the same, thesehaven’t changed, they are not new. We are not going to make the Covenants less strict.
6. In the updated Covenants the Developersmaintains his two votes and doesn’t have to pay dues on those lots (5). The current Covenants allows the same thing,we simply grandfathered him in. Some ofthese lots may never sell, this is only fair. The developer took a large risk in creating this beautiful neighborhoodand just like the other lots, when and if these lots sell someone will get onevote for those lots and owe dues.
I hope homeowners that are concerned about some of themisinformation contact the Board and ask questions for clarification. Realize that this is the first time we aretrying to update the Covenants so there is no precedence to follow. We are doing our best. It is ok to disagree, but know that we had noill intent with anything that we did. Wevolunteer our time for the neighborhood which would otherwise require the needof a management company that would significantly increase everyone’s dues. I hope after reading the above, you realizethat we are not the Board some people describe but are simply your neighborswith limited terms.
Covenant Review:
It is the Board’s goal to have a united community withpeople who enjoy living here. Though Ifeel we could pass the updated Covenant as is, we would prefer not to pass itwith the minimum 51% acceptance that is required.
Attached to this email you will find a document that has allthe concerns that have been presented to the SRHA Board with responses. We hope these answer the currentquestions. If you have additionalquestions please ask.
We are going to have a reviewperiod for two weeks (until noon on September 30th, 2011) and make a few changes tothe updated Covenants. We apologize tothose that have already taken the time to sign; we will need you to re-sign therevised version. Thank you for yourpatience in advance. Soon after September30th, 2011 you will get a new copy of the updated Covenants in yourmailbox and signing will restart. Due toour lawyers taking a lot of extra time and the need to restart the signingprocess, we will now have an urgency to have homeowners who wish to accept theupdated Covenants sign. In Accordancewith the current Covenants, this process needs to be completed before the endof the year.
Please don’t be confused by this process. We have 256 lots and not everyone is going tobe happy. We are not going to changethings that are self-serving or affect only a few people. We have to consider the good for the entireneighborhood. The updated Covenants willnot have restrictions that are less than the current version that everyonesigned to join the neighborhood.
The following are things we need to discuss and things thatwill be changed. Please refer to theattached document for a more detailed explanation of these topics.
1. Better define “grass”, “truck” and “animals” vs “livestockand poultry” to avoid any misinterpretation.
2. Landscaping standards and repercussions are upfor discussion. These are important foryour property value. Currently the SRHABoard has little teeth to enforce against those that are in gross violation...hence the addition in Article XVII.
3. Possibility of 3% increase in dues on any givenyear is up for discussion (take it out, eligible every other year, a differentpercentage or some other option).
4. A few places where there is inconsistencybetween the Bylaws and the Covenants will be corrected.
5. A couple of spelling errors will be corrected.
6. Lawn standards are up for discussion.
We are hoping by stepping back, making a few changes andhitting the reset button we can gain more acceptance by homeowners and have aunited community. Please take the timeto review the large amount of information we have provided you. The signing process will begin again after September30th, 2011.
John Radu II
VolunteerSRHA President
