Shaddock Estates HomeownerÕs Association

Board Meeting  - June 8, 2006

127 Evergreen Drive

Auburndale, FL 33823

 

The meeting was called toorder at 7:05 P.M.  In attendancewere Brian Starr, Scott Munroe, Ty Baden and Michael Wasnorowicz.  Also present were Susan Whitney, DianeThyben, Jack Simms, Terri Sigismondi and Bill Wallace.

 

It was noted that all theboard members present had read the minutes from the last meeting.  Brian Starr made a motion to approvethe minutes of the last board meeting. Ty Baden seconded the motion. All board the board members voted yes and the minutes were approved.

 

It was noted that Tim Robbinshad repaired the sprinkler system and the city of Auburndale was paying for therepair. 

 

It was noted that there arestill people speeding in the neighborhood in spite of the speed limit sign thatwas installed last month.  It wasalso noted that there might be an unlicensed driver in the neighborhood.  It was pointed out that unless awitness to this speeding or driving without a license comes forward and iswilling to attest to these activities, the board couldnÕt do much.  The installation of speed bumps and/orhumps was discussed as a deterrent to speeding.  The board agreed that a majority vote of the members wouldbe solicited before any speed bumps were installed.  Jack Simms raised the issue of keeping the gates closed 24/7as a way of slowing down people going through the gates.  It was pointed out that the gates wereprogrammed to be open during the time that the school kids went to school andreturned from school to discourage the practice of gate riding.  It was decided that the gates would beprogrammed closed 24/7 until school resumed session in August.  Mike Wasnorowicz pointed out that thiswould be a temporary solution at best and that once the gates were programmedto be open for the school kids, the speeding problem would be no different thanit is today.

 

The agenda item concerningplanters and urns was addressed. The question was raised,

 ÓIs there a difference between planters/urns and lawnornamentsÓ?  It was noted thatArticle V, section 14 of the declaration, does not specifically forbidplanters.  It was also noted thataccording to the by-laws, it is the responsibility of the board to interpretthe declaration, including section 14, as it sees fit as long as thatinterpretation is in the best interest of the community.  In the past, the board has interpretedsection 14 as meaning that any artificial item, regardless of purpose, was inviolation of section 14.  The boardcontends that by allowing one exception to section 14, they must allow allexceptions.   After muchdiscussion, the board declared a moratorium on the planters and urns issue.  For now, the board decided they wouldallow planters as long as they contained living plants.  

 

Susan Whitney told the boardthat instead of focusing on planters and urns etc., the board should look atthe bigger picture of diminishing property values.  She stated that one recently sold property appraised at$100,000 less than market value and that another property was at least $20,000less.  She went on to say that thereason for the decline in the values of these properties was the condition ofsome of the surrounding properties.

 

Agenda item #5, Òreviewingthe declaration concerning the new landscaping and discuss the policy of theHOAÓ was addressed.   After alengthy discussion, the board decided that it needed to get the architecturalcommittee more involved in the business of the HOA.  It was also decided that the board would survey eachproperty in the community and send violation letters to each member who was inviolation of the declaration including unapproved landscaping projects thatwere not and had not been approved by the board.  It was decided to take a photograph of each property andnote the date taken as a way of zero-basing each property.   A letter would need to be sent toevery member notifying them of this survey. 

 

Agenda item #6, establishingfines, was discussed.  It was notedthat per Chapter 720 of the Florida State Statutes, fines could not exceed $100per occurrence and if fined daily, the fine could not exceed $1000aggregate.  It was further notedthat a violator must be given an opportunity to appear before an arbitrationcommittee before the fine could be assessed.  After a lengthy discussion, Ty Baden made a motion toestablish a fine in the amount of $100 per violation per day with a limit of$1000 total for each violation. Brian Starr seconded the motion. Every board member voted yes and the motion was passed. 

 

Agenda item #7, themembership of the architectural and arbitration committees was reviewed.  It was noted that Jack Simms and JulieFlowerdew had volunteered for the arbitration committee.  The board appointed them to that committee.It was noted that Jose Arroyo was already a member of the arbitrationcommittee.  Kevin Gervase wasappointed to the architectural committee. It was noted that more members were needed for these committees.  The board asked for volunteers for thearchitectural committee from the attendees without success.  Jack Simms made a comment that perhapsthe attendees could solicit their neighbors for these committees.

 

Agenda item #8, the dog poopin the common areas, was discussed.    It was noted that all of the retention ponds,including the one on Evergreen, are also common areas and that dog poop must becleaned up immediately when deposited there.   It was decided that a $100 fine would be assessed for eachincident of a pet defecating in any common area should the pet owner notimmediately clean up the defecation. The issue of enforceability still remains.

 

New violations werediscussed.  It was noted that thereis a dog statue at 110 Shaddock. It was also noted that the lawn at 112 Shaddock needed mowing.   It was stated that letters neededto be sent to those members.

 

The meeting was opened to newbusiness.  Diane ThybenÕs stormdoor was discussed.  It was notedthat she had the door installed without the approval of the board.  The board approved the door, after thefact, providing that the storm door be painted to match the front door and/orhouse.  It was argued that the doorcould not be painted.   The issueof storm door(s) was tabled to a future meeting.  

 

Brian Starr made a motion toadjourn the meeting.  Scott Munroeseconded the motion.  All voted yesand the meeting was adjourned at 9:30PM.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1