Why not have a subdivision vote - each household getting one vote - to decide the issue? 

Julie Joski

Dear Neighbors,

I understand everyone's perspective and appreciate everyone's input on the subject but we need to find a win-win solution.  That means compromise on personal opinions while addressing the real root cause.  So, what is the cause for a neighbor to say "no, you can not have a trampoline in your backyard?" We need the answer to this one question.  Can we add a clause on trampoline restrictions similar to swimming pools (must be fenced), fences (only so high), play sets (color of awning - behind house line), etc.. and if so what would you suggest for trampolines?

One other point, precedent has been set.  Most of us have lived with the issue as exceptions were made during development and the guidance was "screen the trampoline from most of your neighbors and from the streets."  For those that have moved in since development was complete it appears that your decision to move into the community was not influenced by having existing trampolines in the neighborhood.  Therefore, let's find the easiest way to put words in the covenants to reflect what is acceptable for the majority of our community.

In closing, please respond with some suggestions on how we could amend the articles to meet your needs and those of your neighbors who prefer to have trampolines (and have had them for 5 years).

Thanks!

Woodard's

See?  The above posting is an example of a family who had good ideas and wanted to work within the system for change.  What they more than likely found out was they had no chance what-so-ever to effect that change given the restrictive rules on making changes in the covenants (unless you are a board member that is). 

YOU:  What?  What do you mean? 

ME: What I mean is this.  It took only 38 votes to elect the HOA board.  To change the restrictions as described by that same board would have taken a petition/vote of over 230 signatures (2/3 of the homes, total estimated at 350 - I don't have the exact number at hand and I'm not going to look it up.  It's illustrative and the proportions are what matters).  In this day and age with everyone having such busy schedules there is no way anyone could catch 230 people at home, let alone get signatures from each one.  It's an impossible requirement but it's there to give the ILLUSION that we plebes can change things if we so desire.  It's like your boss pretending to give you input on your annual objectives.

YOU: But what did you mean about the board? 

ME: Oh, yeah, the board..........the 5 member HOA board can pass any resolution they want to with a vote of 3 out of 5 board members. 

YOU: You have got to be kidding me!!  Are you sure?

ME:  Sure I'm sure and not kidding at all.  Follow the math here.  About 10% of the people (38 of 350) in this neighborhood (me included) cared enough to show up to vote for these HOA members.  So for Homeowners to effect change they have to have a super-majority of 66% but for HOA Board members to effect change, they only have to have a YES vote by THREE people.  That's LESS than 1% of the total votes in the HOA.

YOU:  WTF???  How is that fair and how does that even begin to be equal representation??  I didn't vote for any of them and now they can do almost anything they want with a 3 of 5 vote?

ME:  WTF indeed, my fellow neighbor.  Be on the look out for HOA board members measuring your grass and street tree trimming heights!  Maybe next they will require that each home spend at least $750 on their water bill to keep the grass green all summer.  There's a rumour that they don't like wooden fences either and may pass a resolution to outlaw them.  Got $15K for a new wrought iron fence?  Maybe we should all move to Hallbrook and buy Porsh-ahs.  Biff, Buffy, you're going to late for private school !!  We've got money to burn so throw these $100's on the fire!

Space below reserved for kc300c's inane reply that is as inevitable as the sun setting in the West: