Just a reminder. There could be an important vote on whether the cell tower site will be designated as “common” property.
Also, I received this item (below) from President Su Nogay a few days and just forgot to post it earlier. It comes in response to a question about the legal “permanence” of tonight’s vote on the cell tower site; in other words, what kind of assurances do we have that, in the future, all of this progress toward protecting our greenbelt won’t be easily overturned the next time a cell provider tries to woo the HOA with a big-money offer? President Nogay’s response is below. (Additionally, here are the HOA’s covenants as they apply to the various parks in Shady Hollow; these would come into play if/when the cell tower site is designated as “common area.”)
As always, comments pro and con are welcome. Cheers.
———-
From President Su Nogay:
“Activities of past Boards and Future Boards are beyond the current Boards control.
Why the area was given to the HOA in the designation it was is open to question, but it is what it is.
What future Boards and members do is also beyond this Board control.
What I can tell you is this: this Board (at the request of Parks Chairman Bruce Kennedy) is having the Association Lawyer write up the legal documents to designate the land in question to “Commons”.
These legal documents once passed at the October 30th meeting, will be signed and filed at Travis County. This is as legal as it gets. A copy of this document will be made available at the October 30 th board meeting to anyone who attends and will be published in the Shady Hollow Highlights for all to see. It is important to understand that by converting this property to Common’s that means that all land that is owned by the Association falls under a set of covenants or is commons. There is no deception happening here.
The individual who asked the question is correct. A motion passed in a meeting can simply be undone by a motion at another meeting. This is not the Boards intent on this matter.
The Board recognizes that the insecurity that exists in the community on this matter must be addressed. Bruce has informally received agreement from the Board that they will pass the motion to convert that land to Commons at the October 30th meeting. I will (President Nogay) will sign the legal documents and those documents will be filed at the County prior to the November 12th membership meeting.
The answer to your question is a matter of trust and this point. One must trust and believe that this will be done.
If you look at how the Board has handled this situation you will see they have done exactly what they have officially said they would. They have evaluated the situation by looking at all the issues and have made decisions based on what they felt is best for the Community. Specifically they evaluated the “Cell tower offer” determined to positive and negative impact on the community and ultimately made a decision. It can be assumed they will continue to do what they say they will.
Some may argue how well, how slow or fast it took them to accomplish this, but they cannot argue that they have done what they said they would.
The Board cannot take responsibility for people’s doubts. They can only move as they always have – honestly following the directives they have been given and in the direction they feel is best for the community.
Trust and belief is part of each member’s right to choice. The Board hopes that their record will garner the trust of the membership and have had their eye on the end goal all along. That goal and privilege was to do their jobs as elected to do and make sure that all interests of the Association are considered in each decision.”
October 30, 2008 at 3:02 pm
It is good news that, now, everyone seems to be trying, in some way, to prevent a cell tower from being built by our homes. But it is difficult to understand why President Nogay and the current Board majority would prefer to subject their version of the “no-cell-tower” bylaws change to the whim of a mere Board of Directors vote in the future.
By state law (the Non-Profit Corporation Act) our Board of Directors can amend the bylaws UNLESS “the MEMBERS in amending, repealing, or adopting a particular by-law expressly provide that the board of directors may not amend or repeal that by-law.”
President Nogay’s proposed Bylaw to the November 12th membership meeting contains no such prohibition against future Board action to undue whatever is done at the November 12th meeting. In contrast, the bylaws change petitioned by over 350 homeowners would have prohibited the Board of Directors from amending the new bylaw prohibition against cell towers contained in that petitioned proposal.
For whatever reason, President Nogay declined to submit the petitioned bylaws proposal to the membership meeting on November 12th. That proposal would have prohibited cell towers on ANY property (not just the one site proposed) in or owned by the association now or in the future and designated such land as parkland. Only with a vote of 2/3 of the membership could that prohibition be amended in the future.