September 2013 Newsletter LEGAL ERROR - Email to Management Company

Angela,

 

Please pass on to the directors and the HOA attorneys.

I do not know how many times I’ve had to address this, and I even have one of the HOA attorneys admitting to this (on audio recording), but the directors and the management company continues to misread, misinterpret, and misapply Section 7.1 of the CC&Rs.

 

In the September 2013 Newsletter it was declared that the “comment elements” (wrong terminology, it’s “common improvements”) that the association is responsible for includes:

 

·        Foothills Landscaping (including grass and street trees)

 

Section 7.1 makes it perfectly clear as to what the association is responsible for where the “common improvements” are concerned.

 

They are stated exactly as follows:

 

“Oak Knoll has or will have certain improvements which are for the benefit of all Lots. These improvements include: Sign monuments to be installed on Lot 29, Oak Knoll; traffic circle at intersection of Foothills Drive and Center Street; planter strips along Foothills Drive; and street trees on each Lot…All of the common areas and improvements are collectively called “Common Improvements.”

 

Section 7.1 DOES NOT SAY Street Trees “only” on Foothills Drive but rather “…on each Lot.”

 

You either fund the reserve account to take care of ALL street trees in the association or NONE AT ALL! The CC&Rs only allow for the upkeep of ALL street trees, not a selective few that benefits only those who live along Foothills drive.

 

The alleys are addressed in the CC&Rs separately, therefore they are not a part of the “common improvements,” therefore funds from the reserve account cannot be used to attend to maintaining the alleys. That is a separate fee assessed specifically upon those who live in the alleys and those assessments cannot be co-mingled with the funds contained within the reserve account.

 

I am working on a complaint to be filed with the DOJ against this HOA, and now this newsletter along with all the other documents I have on hand that will be submitted with that complaint substantiating each proffered argument in how the directors before and after hiring a management company to present day - and the law firm as well - have continued to run the HOA in a corrupt, discriminatory (e.g. against adults who have children – i.e. families), and unprofessional manner (e.g. misinterpreting the CC&Rs and governing statutory law of planned communities in its selective enforcement of the CC&Rs).

 

At the appropriate time I will be requesting to either receive a copy or have a copy produced of the financial statements and budget of the HOA for fiscal year 2013. If any mismanagement of funds for non-common improvements were spent from the reserve account, that too will be made a part of my complaint to the DOJ.

Additionally, I want a copy of the results of the reserve study as well mailed to me as well. Please forward that accordingly.

 

OKHA WatchDog

Illicit or Delinquent Activities on Meridian Drive?

It was recently brought to my attention by a concerned homeowner who has observed some odd activities on Meridian Drive within our HOA.

The following photos were sent to me of a vehicle known to be seen in the area driven by a young man who does not even own this truck and must live in another part of Newberg.

The young man sometimes parks either in front of the house he and others he brings and/or leaves with, sometimes a couple houses down, or on some specific occasions of unknown reason he will park around the corner on either Foothills Drive or Quail Drive in order to deter attention from himself and those that he is either taking to or leaving from the residence on Meridian.

Another concerned homeowner advised me that when they drove down that street recently they observed a man laying on a mattress in the front yard, and later when they drove by the mattress was up against the house.

I know for a FACT that the management company has been advised of the problem with the residents at the house in question, which also has people LIVING INSIDE THE GARAGE, among other CC&R violations...but do you think the HOA Board of Directors via the $11k paid management company is doing anything about the problem?

Of course not.

So, if anyone has observed the same and wants to be proactive in keeping our community safe for ourselves and your children...please send me any information and/or photos of problems within the community that detract from the "livability" and "attractiveness" of our HOA for which the CC&Rs were put in place for.

Also, don't forget to keep local authorities informed as well.

Sincerely,

OKHA Watch Dog

NEW Update: Work In Progress 2013

March 16, 2013

In light of the most recent response I received from the Board of Directors regarding my November 2012 inquiry, for which they inadequately answered, I cannot help but feel compelled to summarize the utter failure and disgrace each and every Board of Directors from approximately 1999 to present, and the negative effects each Board has had on our Homeowners’ Association.

First and foremost, let me either remind or enlighten each and every homeowner within the Oak Knoll Homeowners Association that we are governed not by the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) alone, but also the Planned Community Act under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 94.550 Planned Communities. Moreover, the CC&Rs do not override local ordinances and/or statutory law (though one of the attorneys and our current Board members like to think they do, but they are wrong).

Second, for the layperson you need to understand that there is a hierarchy to law and the Board of Directors are essentially the bottom feeders of that law. The United States Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, first and foremost; then comes Federal law, State law, then local (city or county) Ordinances. When it comes to contract law, which is exactly what the CC&Rs fall under, it is   at the very bottom.

Over the years there have been many egregious acts against the homeowners of this association by the various Board members, but two stand out the most; one of which is the pressuring of planting street trees upon your lot, and the other is paying dues towards repairs, maintenance, and/or replacement of items that are NOT common improvements (i.e. property) of the Homeowners Association.

For far too long the Board of Directors have voted to continue their version of the quote, unquote, “status quo,” of their ingrained ignorance in (incorrectly) reading the plain language of the CC&Rs. I have on tape, recorded, the Homeowners Association’s attorney admitting that the Board of Directors have long since been misinterpreting the CC&Rs where then sidewalks – and – street trees along Foothills Drive and whether or not they were common improvements of the association.

Notwithstanding, the Board of Directors took it upon themselves to “Vote In” a “status Quo” order to continue their illegal activity using our dues to pay for items that benefit only those along Foothills Drive (where one of our Board Members lives, which is an obvious implicit breach of her fiduciary duties) with the repair, maintenance and replacement of the street trees and sidewalks along Foothills Drive at the rest of our expense in direct contravention of the clear language of the CC&Rs and City of Newberg Ordinances as to whom is directly responsible for these deficiencies.

As of late the Board of Directors sent a letter in November 2012 about the upcoming budget for 2013, specifically where the damage of the sidewalks along Foothills Drive caused by street trees is concerned (among other issues). Their response dated March 11, 2013, was that the account to pay for those repairs would be from the Reserve Account. This is in direct contravention to CC&R Section 7, Oregon Revised Statute 94.595, and City of Newberg Ordinances.

Since the HOA is a non-profit organization, and there is a history of mismanagement of dues collected, the summary report I intend to write will be forwarded to the Oregon Department of Justice as a formal complaint with the appropriate charges and evidence provided to substantiate those allegations.

March 13, 2013 Response to Board on Illegal Reserve Account Spending

Oak Knoll Homeowners Association

Board of Directors

c/o Superior Community Management Co.

PO Box 4585

Tualatin, OR 970062

RE: March 11, 2013 Letter Responding to my November 26, 2012 Inquiries

Dear Board Members,

The answer provided in response to my questions regarding how the damage to the sidewalks caused by the street trees along Foothills Drive is to be paid for is unacceptable.

94.595 Reserve account for maintaining, repairing and replacing common property; reserve study; maintenance plan. (1) The declarant, on behalf of a homeowners association, shall:

      (a) Conduct an initial reserve study as described in subsection (3) of this section;

      (b) Prepare an initial maintenance plan as described in subsection (4) of this section; and

      (c) Establish a reserve account as provided in subsection (2) of this section.

      (2)(a) A reserve account shall be established to fund major maintenance, repair or replacement of all items of common property which will normally require major maintenance, repair or replacement, in whole or in part, in more than one and less than 30 years, for exterior painting if the common property includes exterior painted surfaces, for other items, whether or not involving common property, if the association has responsibility to maintain the items and for other items required by the declaration or bylaws.

Nowhere in CC&R Section 7 – MAINTENANCE AND ASSESSMENTS, 7.1, are the sidewalks mentioned in any language so as any reasonable person reading this section would come to the conclusion that the sidewalks were in fact “common property” of the Association.

 The ONLY items demarcated as “Common Improvements” (i.e. common property) are as follows:

“Sign monument to be installed on Lot 29, Oak Knoll; traffic circle at intersection of Foothills Drive and Center Street; planter strips along Foothills Drive; and street trees on each Lot.”

However, under CC&R Section 7 – MAINTENANCE AND ASSESSMENTS, 7.3, it does in fact clearly state the following:

“Each Owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of the sidewalks abutting his Lot, including any damage caused by the street trees.”

Given this clearly written statement in the CC&Rs as to whose responsibility any damage to the sidewalks, even the sidewalks along Foothills Drive, the Board cannot justify any claim that the Association has responsibility to maintain just the sidewalks along Foothills Drive and none other.

The Oregon courts are pretty clear on its interpretation and implementation of the term “shall” when put into contracts or statutory law. In other words, there is no room for your subjective interpretation of the CC&Rs to say what you want it to say or mean.

The CC&Rs are clear as to the responsibility of the repair of sidewalks, including any damage caused by street trees; juxtaposed with ORS 94.595 as to what the intended purpose of the reserve account is for – common property – of which the sidewalks along Foothills Drive are not designated as such and cannot be claimed as the responsibility of the Association. As such, you will NOT fund any repairs for the sidewalks along Foothills Drive out of the Associations Reserve Account.

At the appropriate time I will be requesting either an appointment to review the financial budgetary items paid for during fiscal year 2013, or I will make a formal request for copies of all documents pertaining to such. If and when I find any repair of the sidewalk along Foothills Drive being paid for out of the Reserve Account, this will be cause for legal action against the Board of Directors for a cut and dry breach of the CC&Rs, a breach of your fiduciary duties as members of the Board of Directors, and a clear violation of ORS 94.595.

This is not a threat, but rather a promise.

For far too long this Board of Directors has consistently violated the CC&Rs – in more ways than one – for which I have documented over the years, to include the lack of a Reserve Account and the required Reserve Study most of all per ORS 94.595 (which the Board has admitted to subsequent to my repeated written correspondences proving this fact, something that even your lawyers at Vial and Fotheringham LLP could not rebut, clearly advising you to do what you have long since been legally obligated to do since 1999 when the (then) Board voted in a Reserve Account).

Each and every time you and I have had to come to the point of a legal question in interpreting the CC&Rs and the Oregon Revised Statutes, you have lost each and every time (case in point is the street tree issue, which had nothing to do with the legal costs at your end in a vain attempt to force the matter but rather you were advised by counsel it was a losing battle as I was right, legally, and you were not), to include our recent disagreement over the missing Reserve Account that suddenly appeared in 2011 without a Reserve Study, and the fact that the Board was legally obligated and required to have conducted one before assessment of a Reserve Account, which the Board is now implementing into the Association budget.

While you may think you have the legal authority to continue paying for repairs of the sidewalks along Foothills Drive via the Reserve Account just because you all voted to follow the “status quo” (i.e. illegal conduct in breach of both the CC&Rs and ORS 94.595), it does not make it right or legal. You have no authority to supersede the CC&Rs and statutory law.

You’re all nothing but a bunch of “volunteers,” as you always claim (rather make as an excuse for any failures or errors on your collective part) at each meeting when your actions, or lack thereof are called into question by homeowners.

So if you really want to face a losing legal battle in this matter, go ahead and use funds from the Reserve Account for damage to the sidewalks along Foothills Drive in direct contravention of the clear and plain language of CC&R 7.3 and ORS 94.595 and we will see one another in the Yamhill County Circuit Court where you will lose.

Sincerely,

OKHA WatchDog

The HOA is still NOT entitled to personal information!!!

The January 18, 2013 letter reiterating the HOA's desire to have your personal information is STILL unsubstantiated!

The ByLaw they quoted specifically states, "...the name and address of said vendee, mortgagee, lessee or tenant."

Nowhere in that ByLaw or any Oregon Revised Statute does it entitled the BOD of the HOA to have your personal, cell or your work telephone numbers.

Moreover, they are NOT entitled to your email address and they CANNOT "require" your signature on this form of theirs.

I highly recommend that NO ONE complete this form and submit it, hoping that you have not done so already. If you did, well...that's unfortunate you would be so willing to give up information that would tell the HOA where you work (the phone number can be easily reversed on the internet), your personal/private cell phone number, and/or your email address.

If you have not returned your form yet, then I recommend you complete it as I did:

 

OKHA WatchDog