I must express my view on the fountain we now have in place in the middle of the large pond. I must because I spend at least 20 to 30 minutes at the pond every morning exercising my Labrador and see it face to face. Before I begin I am sure there are several people involved in the implementation of the fountain idea and I can appreciate the effort that must of occurred for it to be approved and installed. Also, I recognize that the Board is there to represent the members of the HOA and we have empowered them to make decisions on our behalf. But I truly feel that a gross misappropriation of funds and a slack in fiduciary responsibility has occurred. Per the posted message dated 9/9/2001 ?“Fountains in the Lakes?” one of the reasons for the fountain as aesthetics and I heard that an increase in the value in our homes were the reasons for the fountain, I became confused and still am as to what thorough analysis occurred to decide a fountain was an essential or even appropriate first capital expenditure for the HOA. If the reason were to reduce mesquitos and/or algae (of which I believe we pay a service to manage; thereby, reducing costs), then that would be a decent reason to me. The figures I have (please see posted message dated 9/9/2001) are $6,000 initial cash outlay and going forward the utility bill will be approximately $300 per month not including future repairs. Those amounts seem atrocious, especially when we could shut the fountain off now and pay for the installation within an estimated 20 months ($6K / $300 = 20 months). I understand that we got a great deal for the fountain worth $12K and free installation of the power line by the utility company, but it is still $6K less money we have to spend on more critical items and the power company gets an annuity of $300 a month that more than covers their installation costs. I do not agree that the fountain provides aesthetics and adds value to our homes. I believe the natural and quiet setting at the pond is more attractive than adding an unnatural fountain in the middle. As far as adding value to my home, no doubt I am for that, but I have a hard time believing that the fountain will really make a difference. The pond creates the additional value by itself and the more we cheapen it with unnecessary items, the less attractive it becomes. Do not get me wrong, I do not believe it has hurt the value, I just cannot believe it has added any value. It just seems that a fountain should be way down on the list of items that we should invest in compared to items such as a path that encircles the whole pond (no matter the material used), a play gym (no doubt I could benefit from with my two boys), cash reserves for future repairs to the streets, or if there is excess cash a dividend (for a lack of a better word) back to members based upon the time of paid up membership. However, I applaud the Board?’s request for comments on the installation of a 2nd fountain. Maybe in the future, capital expenditures over a certain dollar amount could be placed on the website and open for comments over a certain time period. This could possibly aide the Board in future endeavors and help them make decisions that are more representative of the members as a whole. On a personal note, I have set a goal to become more involved and attend the Board meetings and I challenge others to join me. I have to accept the Board decisions unless I am willing to get involved in the decision process. Please express comments.

Best regards,

Brad Spicer


By Brad Spicer

Well said

Brad,

I think you pretty much wrapped it all up so I'll add nothing more but to say that I'm a little dissappointed in the fountain. I intially supported the idea and waffled a bit as to whether it would add or subtract from the beauty of the ponds. The fountain, even if you're against it, seems a little underpowered in comparison to the size of the pond. Visually, it looks underwhelming, maybe that's by design, maybe I just like things gaudy! Either way, I fear what a larger one may have looked like.

I offered my services to ''draw'' a fountain in the lake so we could get a better idea of it's appearance. Alas, I probably offered it too late so I share in the responsibility. Ideally we could have all seen those images on the web site, had an intelligent discussion and then decided. I have a feeling that's how it will work in the future, at least for those, like Brad, who care enough to be involved.

An aside, this web site is available to all of the committees and I encourage them to keep it updated. Just as we have done with Yard of the Month, we can also do other ''special'' things for the neighborhood as well.

Just FYI: The web site home page gets about 200 hits a month. The calendar page (where the meeting schedule is) about 20.

ALL Opinions are Appreciated

Before I begin, I just want to thank Brad for his opinion as posted on this website, however much I may disagree with his comments.

As head of the Landscaping Committee, I can honestly say that the fountain project has been one that has been given all due consideration and discussed in great detail from almost every imaginable perspective.

I think that everyone will agree that, in a neighborhood of 167 homes, there will NEVER, NEVER, NEVER be a single decision made by committee or board that will be unanimously met with enthusiastic approval (witness gate closure 24/7, fountains, sidewalk, play area, etc.). Even on this issue, viewpoints from every angle have been expressed (''love the fountain'', ''hate the fountain'', ''why don't we get a bigger fountain?'').

As for fiscal responsibility of the committee and board, the recommendation to install the fountain was thoroughly researched and bid prior to even presenting the project to the board. I guess I don't understand the implication that projects should be a source of revenue to the community (??). As far as priorities go, I have to believe (once again) that each individual's list of priorities will differ from his/her neighbor. That's why ''consensus'' and ''majority-rule'' must be observed in any voting situation.

My last comment is that I think Brad has hit the nail on the head regarding input....if you feel strongly about an issue, the only real way to HELP your neighborhood is to become involved. The board, landscaping committee, architectural committee, streets & safety committee, playground committee, and social committee all have man-power needs that need to be met on an on-going basis. The time committments are probably a lot less demanding than almost any volunteer organization, and you will meet some really great folks.

Lastly (and I really DON'T mean for this to sound like it's coming from a soap box), our society seems to be one in which only disgruntled comments are ever heard. If you notice things that you like (i.e. Holiday decorations at the front entrance, Cinco de Mayo parties, or even a fountain in the lake), please take a second to let someone know.

Brad, thanks again for your comments.

John Woodyard

Involvement

First and foremost, I would like to thank all of those who devote their time and effort to making our neighborhood better. I do think that there have been many improvements made. The point I would like to make here, however, relates to the process that has been employed regarding decisions that appear to me to be significant enough to warrant discussion among the homeowners as a whole rather than just among the board or relevant committee.

While I certainly understand the viewpoint that discredits the complaints of those that take no action to express their opinions, I find it difficult in the system that has been established to do so. I have felt strongly about two issues in our neighborhood (the gate closure 24/7 and the fountain). However, in both instances the homeowners were not given an opportunity to express viewpoints until AFTER a decision had been made by the board--which apparently is too late to matter. I admit that I do not have the time to devote to a committee, but I do try to stay informed and connected through this web page. However, it is less than helpful that by the time something makes it on this page, the issue is moot because the board has already acted. While I certainly agree that, in any group, no decision will meet with unanimous approval, we have the technology to enable the board to use this page to get a feel for general sentiment on some of the more significant issues, and it would not take much effort to utilize this capability.

I'm all for ''democracy'' but I disagree that the current system is condusive to hearing the views of the homeowners. If homeowners are made aware of the more significant issues that are being considered and given a chance to participate in the process (rather than just being informed of the decision), it seems to me that not only will the decisions be better, but the after-the-fact complaints should naturally decrease.