Loading...
Riverchase(3)-CS 960423 RIVERCHASE OWNERS ASSOCIATION .' 8440 Walnut Hill Lane -, "--~' ' -" Dallas, Texas 75231 ~ I: ;: -.- April 23, 1996 Mr. Richard D. Singer 822 Mallard Drive Coppell, Texas 75019 Dear Mr. Singer: I have received a copy of your letter dated April 19, 1996 addressed to Riverchase Homeowners Association, Inc. Were I the only person receiving a copy of the letter, I would ignore you. The tone of the letter and its disregard for the true facts does not deserve a reply. Instead, I would have recommended that you obtain, and carefully read, Norman Vincent Peale's "The Power of Positive Thinking". However, out of respect for those receiving a copy of your letter, I shall set the record straight: 1. Riverchase Owners Association (ROA) was, is and remains ready, willing and able to release its homeowner members residing in Northlake Woodlands from ROA when the new Northlake Woodlands Homeowners Association (NWHA) is created and activated. 2. The NWHA does not exist. This is a task which ROA cannot accomplish. The NWHA must be created and activated by its developer with the assistance of neighbors residing there - such as you. In your letter to me dated June 29, 1995 (almost 10 months ago), you stated that you would personally work with Steve Parsons to have the new association operational by calendar 1996. There are only two logical explanations for the current situation: (i) you failed to work with Mr. Parsons, or (ii) you did so, but failed to accomplish your goal. Your letter of April 19 omitted this fact, which I deem to be a material omission. 3. You did not pay your 1995 dues in full. We accepted your offer of compromise, waiving legal fees incurred by ROA in collecting your dues, solely in an attempt (which has proven futile) to buy our peace and stop the distasteful correspondence from you. 4. If the new association can be activated in 1996, a mutually agreeable system for splitting 1996 dues between the two associations will be negotiated. Mr. Richard D. Singer April 23, 1996 Page Two 5. The statements of fact contained in paragraph 3 of your April 19 letter are incorrect and misleading. First of all, ROA will realize a meaningful reduction in operating costs as a result of Coppell's maintenance of the median (not parkways). However, the loss of revenue from the released NWHA homeowners will be a significant offset to those savings. For these reasons, the City Council did not specify the amount of the reduction, only that there be one. You state that we represented to the City Council that the 1996 assessments would be reduced "to reflect the significant reduction in operating costs which ROA would realize". This statement is absolutely false - for the reason stated above. ROA could not do so and would not agree to do so. ROA would be better served financially to keep you and your neighbors in ROA. 6. You further state that ROA is in "violation of the agreement with the City Council". Again, and succinctly stated: false. A small reduction was made by ROA in its 1996 dues assessment fully in compliance with the City Council's request. If there is a violation, it is by you and your developer for falling to keep your end of the bargain. The balance of your letter does not deserve comment. To any fair-minded reader, it speaks tbr itself. On a final note, I am pleased to state that we can agree on one issue: neither of us like ROA and truly wish it didn't exist. When the developer of Riverchase closed its purchase, ROA was imbedded in the deed records - created at an earlier time by others - and legally a part of the deal. When you and your neighbors closed the purchase of your homes, the ROA was likewise imbedded in the same deed records, and legally became a part of your deal. In recent years, the ROA has quietly engaged in a civil dialogue with city officials and with the developer of Northlake Woodlands to seek an equitable solution to their respective needs. The agreements reached in 1995 were the best we all could agree upon. In closing, I want to be abundantly clear on the true facts: 1. ROA cooperated fully with the developer of Northlake Woodlands and the city to provide an equitable release from ROA for those residing in Northlake Woodlands. 2. It is not the responsibility, nor possible, for ROA to create and activate the NWHA. That responsibility solely belongs to the developers of Northlake Woodlands and its residents. Mr. Richard D. Singer April 23, 1996 Page Three 3. Until NWHA is created and activated, ROA must continue to assess and collect dues, if it is to discharge its legal obligations. Very truly yours, AEH/jlb cc: The Honorable Tom Morton, Mayor Ron Robertson, Mayor Pro Tem Candy Sheehan, City Council Member Jim Witt, City Manager Steve Parsons