Purpose for Covenants:
The reason that deed restricted communities exist is because there are some neighborhoods that steadily deteriorate into what some people consider to be cluttered (sometimes filthy) eyesores, which leads to declining property values (as the community becomes less desirable to live in), where people who do maintain nice homes move out, and more people move in who do not care if their homes deteriorate, and the downward spiral continues.

The purpose for deed restrictions is to help ‘set a bar’, which requires that all homes are maintained at a certain minimum standard level of maintenance and architectural decency. This serves to help prevent neighborhoods from deteriorating in their appearance, to preserve a certain “niceness” & “attractiveness” in a community, helping it to remain a pleasant place to live, and to preserve property values.
It is true that some people are not well suited to living in deed restricted communities in that they do not like living under any rules at all, which pertain to how they may maintain their properties, but since everyone who does move into a deed restricted community is legally obligated to respect those rules, it is everyone’s responsibility to consider, whether or not they can live within a deed restricted community before they actually decide to move it. It is not reasonable for a person to complain about the existence of those rules, after they have already accepted them by moving in, and it is even less reasonable for a person to think that they can move into a deed restricted community and simply disregard those rules.

Deed restricted communities are designed to serve those who do want the protections and benefits that a deed restricted community offers, and are willing to respect the rules. They are not designed to serve the wishes of those who do not want to live with any community rules whatsoever.

Frankly, if a person does not wish to live within the limits imposed by deed restrictions, they should be living somewhere else.

People who are well suited to living in deed restricted communities are happy to follow the rules, because they recognize that those rules are not that difficult to live with, and they respect and appreciate the value they get in return, which is the assurance that an effort is actively underway to preserve the quality of their home neighborhood, which they consider to be something genuinely worth supporting and appreciating.

This is not to say that every rule within a deed restricted community is perfect, but they are what they are, and for the most part, residents simply have to take them as a package and accept the minor imperfections along with the rest of the bundle. It is possible to change rules over time, but they are intentionally designed to be very difficult to change, so that they may not be changed at a whim, and investing residents may take some assurance in the knowledge that the ‘protections’ they bought into a neighborhood for, will not disappear over night, due to the whims of a few.

Burden of the Association Administration:
It is important for all residents to be aware that it can be a very difficult job to serve as a conscientious volunteer on the Board (or a committee) of the Association. There is no pay. It consumes (in some cases) significant amounts of personal time, with very little reward in terms of public appreciation. The work is often difficult & stressful, and requires ordinary individuals (no different from any other resident) to live up to difficult legal responsibilities, including enforcing the rules, even though that can be a more unpleasant responsibility than most might imagine, especially when people argue back against those who are simply trying to serve the community by administering the rules that we are (as a community) obligated to enforce.

That association volunteers should be subject to complaints or abusive reactions for making good faith efforts to perform a difficult but necessary duty is the thing that is most unfair about enforcement activities.
Members are morally & ethically obligated to be mindful of this before reacting inappropriately to properly served non-compliance notifications.

Timeliness of Enforcement Actions as an Objection to Enforcement:
When the Association transferred from Developer Control to Membership Control, there were essentially zero systems or processes in place to facilitate the job of managing a 290 home development, and so, the majority of the “priority effort” of the administration, has had to be focused on developing the processes and systems necessary for the very survival of the association itself. Given the small amount of volunteer support offered, it has been extremely difficult to get around to policing the numerous non-compliant conditions that have developed over the several years’ of developer control, given that Association Management is not the business that the developers were really in, and that consistent administration was not high on their priority list.

As a consequence, it is necessary for the membership to recognize, understand and appreciate that there will be an extended period of time where the administration must work to incrementally address all compliance issues within the development.

The fact that a covenant violation may not have been addressed before, even though the non-compliant condition may have existed for an extended period of time, is simply and legally irrelevant to the question of enforcement, and is not a legitimate basis for arguing that covenant compliance is not required. The fact that a violation may not have been previously addressed is purely the result of there being too much work for too few volunteers to be able to get to it sooner… nothing more, and this reality does not have any effect on the fact that a violation exists, upon the propriety of corrective action at any given point in time, or of the legal obligations of both the member and the Association to ensure that compliance is achieved.

Summary:
In short, the limitations and obligations conferred by our covenants are not legal ‘suggestions’ and they are not ‘optional’. They are firm and legally enforceable ‘requirements’.
In addition to the legal obligation that all members have to comply with our covenants & community rules, there is also a moral obligation to demonstrate courtesy and appreciation for the self-sacrificing effort that community volunteers are contributing to each of us as residents as they take time out of their personal lives to conscientiously perform duties in preserving, protecting, and promoting the common good of our neighborhood.

Understanding, courtesy, and appreciation, including the avoidance of creating any unnecessary difficulties or conflicts, and the avoidance of adding any unnecessary burdens upon our volunteers is the public duty of every member.

(back to top)

Historical Development Role:

Initial Phase- When the members who became the first “resident” Board of Directors, first assembled, the first challenge they took on was to facilitate the transfer of administrative responsibility for our Association from the developers of our community to our resident members.
Next, they worked to facilitate the transfer the legal “ownership” of our Common Lands from the developers to the Association, itself.
Finally, they worked to press for completion of the Public Works Agreements, connected to our development, which was completed with the final blacktop grading of Ratcliffe Court.

Critical Processes Phase (which overlapped the Initial Phase)- This phase involved establishing a preliminary budget, securing lawn mowing services, so that we could ensure that our common areas were consistently maintained at a reasonable level (that had not genuinely been the case before), developing community communication methods (including the setup of our website), developing preliminary dues billing and collections processes, and developing our first rudimentary accounting system so that we would be able to meet our legal requirement to file tax returns and produce financial statements.

Core Process Definitions Phase- Once the Critical Processes were functioning (at least at a ‘survival level’), then the attention of the Board was turned towards a more meaningful development of all of the processes that would be required if the Association was to be able to function as a legitimate business entity. (None of those processes had been previously defined).
Development of those systems and processes is not easy, and involved a considerable amount of education, research, trial, & error, but it finally appears that (at least) we are well on our way to getting there. The deployment of these FAQs illustrates this continuing process development that is still under way.

Emerging Operational Phase- Simply put, none of our processes are developed to the point that we could call them “fully developed” or “mature”. However, they are ‘largely’ developed so that their functionality is predominately in place. That being said, there has not yet been enough time to refine these systems & processes to the point that they maximize efficiency & professionalism, while minimizing complications, inconvenience, & occasional pain.
Patience, Understanding, & Support from the Community would be helpful while we work towards that point in our evolution, when we will be able to say that we have truly transitioned into a Fully Operational & Mature Phase.

(back to top)

Specific Ongoing Responsibility Roles:

Budget Management- While we do not have a ‘formal’ budgeting process at this point (and may not need it), we do have an informal process (and responsibility) to ensure that our financial viability (as an organization) is maintained by projecting both income & expenditures and managing both so as to provide for the expenditures necessary to protecting, maintaining, and preserving the interests of the community, without exceeding the resources available. The role of working to this priority enters into every aspect of every other activity that the Board engages in.

Dues Setting- The Board sets Dues Level Targets, based upon a “balancing” of the community desire to minimize dues levels, against the community desire to improve the level at which we maintain our community. Once those targets are set it must attempt to win approval for those changes within the community approval process.

Dues Collection- Once dues levels are “set” the Board must ensure that it has a process in place to actually collect those dues from the membership. The first part of this is a sound billing process. Protecting the continued viability of the Association requires that (at a minimum) this process must be standardized and automated to a degree that will permit it to continue even if the entire current board were no longer in place. Secondary objectives are that it results in a fair & professional interaction with our membership and that it minimizes the ‘cost’ that it incurs.
To this end we have engaged a local billing service that is able to process our annual billing statements, including receiving payments, & depositing those payments into our account. They provide relevant reports to us on their activities (including copies of all checks received and deposits made), and we are able to reconcile those reports to our bank statements. There are some opportunities for improvement in our standardized statement formats and we continue to work on that. We’re also beginning to use this service for community-wide mailings, and we’re looking into taking advantage of computing technology to improve the data interface between their process and our bookkeeping system.

The second part of the Board’s Dues Collection responsibility is a sound collections process. The majority of members understand that our Association must collect dues if it is to survive and that it should not be considered a true burden for members to remit payments in a timely manner when billings are received. However, there are enough members who have not yet made this part of their routine, that it has been necessary to develop a process for pursuing collections actions when required.
As with Billings, protecting the continued viability of the Association requires that (at a minimum) this process must also be standardized and automated to a degree that will permit it to continue even if the entire current board were no longer in place. Secondary objectives are that it results in a fair & professional interaction with our membership and that it minimizes the ‘cost’ that it incurs.
With these objectives in mind it became clear that given (a) the low level of our dues & (b) the comparatively high costs of legal action (attorneys and court fees), it would be impossible for the Association to absorb those costs without it costing more to collect than is actually collected. It was also clear that collections actions could not be avoided because, if the membership learned over time (as it would) that non-payment would never be pursued, it would not belong before so few would pay that our Association would fail.
To this end we have engaged a collections attorney to pursue those actions on our behalf and are developing standardized processes that will eventually ensure that timeliness and efficiency of collections is maximized. Consistent with the provisions of our covenants, our policy also provides that the full set of attorneys fees, court costs, & all other legal costs are assessed back to the member causing the need to go into collections. This provides additional incentive for members to avoid going into collections and it protects the Association against failure due to non-payment of membership dues.
There are several aspects to this process that are still being refined, including a standardized “schedule”, whereby collections actions will begin promptly at the end of the late notice process (by the billings service), and a standardized process for a more ‘timely’ filing of liens against the properties of those who do not remit their dues.

(back to top)

Common Grounds Maintenance- The largest single recurring expense that the Association has is for mowing our common areas. This is addressed further in another FAQ, but as with all things, protecting the continued viability of the Association requires that (at a minimum) this process must be standardized and automated to a degree that will permit it to continue even if the entire current board were no longer in place.
The first Secondary objective is that it balances the requirement for consistently good grounds maintenance (so as to contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of our neighborhood), while simultaneously avoiding a level of cost that would disproportionately impact the viability of the Association or other important community priorities.
Additional Secondary objectives are that we meet all of our legal requirements to avoid negative tax status impacts and undue liability impacts.
Beyond merely cutting our grass, “grounds maintenance” also includes the responsibility to address “other” property maintenance issues, such as storm water management facilities (ponds & ditches), removal of dead or dying trees that might pose safety threats, and the maintenance & repair of our private roads near the waterfront.
In some cases, responsibility lies with the Town of Elkton, in which case the role of the board is to “negotiate” for maintenance activity if required. In other cases, the limitations on our funds makes it difficult to do everything that might be requested, but the Board can (and does) prioritize maintenance issues, and ensures that they are addressed as funds become available.
The Association always has maintenance projects that it is currently working and/or preparing to work.

Security Activities- While the Association does not have the funds to hire security personnel to patrol our community, the Board does pay close attention to the security status of our community and responds with whatever means are available to it when concerns arise. When cars or homes are broken into, we coordinate with residents to identify any pertinent surveillance information they might have and notices are place on the website or mailing sent out to the community (as the situation seems to dictate). We also share information with local law enforcement, and attempts have been made to start up a neighborhood watch group (though insufficient volunteers stepped forward to make it possible). That being said, we did erect community watch signs within the development for whatever deterrence value that might have.
The Association has been involved in monitoring ‘traffic problems’ on our streets, and has been in contact with town authorities & local law enforcement to encourage improvements in roadway features as well as an increase in patrols.
We’ve also been involved in monitoring our waterfront area for abuses involving “dumping” and also the appearance of periodic illicit activity that might pose some kind of public risk.
In addition to attempting to address immediate concerns, the results of these activities are fed into our long-term property improvement plans, as well as entering into considerations for future policy enhancements.

(back to top)

Property Improvements- Many of the Long-term goals of members of the Association relate to property improvements that were promised by the developers but never delivered. These include a clubhouse with tennis courts, a swimming pool & a marina, as well as a nice community entryway, hiking trails, etc.
Though our current cash flows do not make it possible for the Association to attempt to pursue these improvements in the short run, the Board has, nevertheless, accepted a responsibility to attempt to pursue these kinds of property improvements in whatever timeframe our cash flows DO permit.
To that end, the Association under resident leadership did already install the entryway sign that now sits at the entrance to our community. The Board also repaired it and reinforced it when it was at one point seriously damaged by vandals. Original attempts to provide night time lighting for it failed, when the cost of running electrical lines were quoted at prohibitively high levels, and when purchased solar solutions failed to live up to their advertising. More recent negotiations with Delmarva has resulted in the identification of a more affordable option for getting electric lines run to the sign. However, it remains costly enough that it will have to wait until sufficient funds become available.
More recently, in response to both our security concerns regarding our waterfront area, and to our goal of working towards the long term “marina vision”, the Association has initiated installation of an Electronic Gate at the entrance to our waterfront area.
This serves the dual purpose of (a) denying access to that area for people who would abuse it, and (b) making it possible to begin cleaning up that area (to state-park-like status) so as to make it a much more valuable recreational resource for our entire membership.
Another recent addition to the website is our link to join our “waterfront cleanup committee”. The Board is trying to facilitate the organization of a team of concerned residents, who would like to contribute to the improvement of our waterfront area by volunteering their own personal time to pitch in, to help clean it up and make it nicer for everyone. Attempting to mobilize community involvement is just one more role that the Board tries to serve.
The Board is also always involved in “planning” for future improvements that it might make towards our shared long-term vision.

Legal Reviews- There are times when outside entities will (in some way or another) threaten or compromise the legal rights of the Association. In those cases it is the responsibility of the Board of Directors to compensate for those threats by being well enough informed and advised (as to the various legal implications of ongoing activities) that it can be (a) alert enough to know when a legal reaction is required, (b) capable of initiating those actions when required, & (c) capable of using this knowledge to effectively negotiate with other parties, so as to be able to avoid the necessity for legal action.
Legal consultation is also required to ensure that, as our systems and processes are developed, they are specifically designed to effectively serve all of our needs against the backdrop of the overall legal context that those systems support.
This responsibility (again) enters into every aspect of every other activity that the Board engages in.

(back to top)

Community Elections- The Board has the responsibility to convene and conduct all community elections for Board Membership and for any initiatives that might have been raised for public voting. This must also be conducted in a way that meets all legal requirements.

Community Communications- There is a continuous need for communication between the Membership and Association Administration, and the Board has the Responsibility to ensure that these needs are adequately met.
This website is the first leg in providing for this need, and it is being continually updated to include more and more useful information. This will continue indefinitely.
It also provides a mechanism for members to communicate with the Administration through email within a relatively short timeframe.
The Board also maintains a P.O. Box, to serve a broad spectrum of communication needs, which is referenced on our website and is on every document that is distributed to the community.
The Board has also sent out periodic information mailings, including a more formalized community newsletter. These mailings tend to occur at least 2-5 times per year, depending upon the need.

Architectural Reviews- It is the legal obligation of every member to request and obtain a written approval from the Board of Directors of the Association (or its designated committee) BEFORE initiating any material alteration to the exterior of a home or lot. Consequently it is the express legal obligation of the Board of Directors to facilitate that process (through creating the documentation and procedures) and to thereby protect and preserve the architectural integrity of the community, by ensuring that no changes occur which conflict with the language or intent of our covenants AND that no changes occur that are outside of the bounds of “reasonable architectural aesthetics”. It is expressly the responsibility and authority of the Board (or it’s designee) to make that determination.
This may seem “subjective”, but it is essential if the Association is to serve it’s primary purpose for existing, which is to protect all members against the kind of community deterioration that can be cause by residents who exercise no restraint at all in how they maintain or alter their properties.
In support of this effort, it is the responsibility of the Board to establish the policies and guidelines used by the Architectural Review Committee in performing its reviews, and to also serve in an oversight role, to address problems that might arise in this process, including the fielding of objections raised by members, regarding the handling of their Architectural Review.

(back to top)

Covenants Compliance- It is the express legal obligation of the Board of Directors to ensure compliance to the covenants throughout our community. It facilitates this process by drafting policies and guidelines for interpreting the requirements of our covenants, and by serving in an oversight role over the Covenants Compliance Committee, as it sends notices and otherwise acts to accomplish compliance.
In this oversight role it also fields objections raised by members, regarding the findings of the Covenants Compliance Committee. If a formal review is required before proceeding to the litigational phase, this will be conducted by the Board of Directors in its quasi-judicial arbiter role.
If legal enforcement becomes necessary the task is handed off to an attorney, but the Board has the responsibility to define standardized process and procedures for administering this activity, as with others.
This is addressed elsewhere, but it is important to keep in mind that administration of our Association remained in developer hands for approximately 10 years, where oversight was substantially lacking. This lead to a situation where so many covenant compliance issues developed that it is now a physical impossibility for the current administration to achieve an instantaneous correction throughout the community, especially in light of the facts of our resource limitations.
All that can be reasonably expected is that the Board provide for and ensure that a logical process is deployed, which can systematically and incrementally work our community into eventual fully compliance. That is the plan that the Board is currently working to.

Tax Filings- As with any other Corporation our Association is required to annually file State & Federal Corporate Income Tax returns, and State Personal Property Tax returns. We do have a specialized status as a Homeowners’ Association, that permits us to avoid paying any income taxes on our dues, but we must meet all filing requirements in order to maintain this status, and it could be lost if we do not successfully do so.
If we hired direct employees we would be subject to payroll tax filing requirements, which is one reason why the Board must take care to arrange all business transactions, so as to avoid creating the legal definition of an employer-employee relationship. Accordingly, all transactions and contracts executed by the association must be worded carefully with the pertinent legal criteria always in mind.

(back to top)

Financial Reporting- It is the responsibility of the Board to ensure that an accounting system is in place, which can provide for the accumulation of information that adequately reports the financial operations of the association, so as to make it possible for a user to understand the current financial strength of the association, against the backdrop of adequate visibility into its standard expense burden, and reflecting the ongoing cash flows of the association.
When the resident members assumed responsibility for the administration of the association there was no meaningful accounting system in place. Over the past several years a meaningful system has been incrementally developed, which now approaches adequacy.
Remaining opportunities for improvement are primarily focused on enhancing the efficiency of transfers of information between our billings service and our resident bookkeeping system, so that financial reports may be developed on a set schedule.

Membership Records- in order for the Association to be able to fulfill its duties, it is necessary that it maintain records that always identify the current owners of all properties, and maintain a current file of all correspondence with that member, including communications related to dues collection, architectural approvals, and covenants compliance. Once our waterfront gate is made operational and members are given key cards for access, that will add one more piece of informational status that must be maintained.
While the Association has struggled somewhat in maintaining the currency of these records, a number of new system development efforts are under way, which we believe will help us to be more efficient at managing this information.

Customer Service/Consumer Relations- At all times the Board has a responsibility to attempt to respond to membership questions, concerns, and complaints. The website goes along way towards providing for this need, and including website enhancements such as these FAQs, it is important that improvements to this process continue to be pursued.
There have been attempts to implement a community welcome wagon, but it has so far failed, due to our Membership Records challenge, and due to the lack of sufficient volunteers.
In line with the spirit of developing a good community feeling, the Board has worked to provide for community activities such as “community days” (pony rides, moon bounce, barbeque, etc.), the Christmas House Decoration Contests, Community-wide yard sales, etc. Again, the shortage of volunteers, in the light of all other responsibilities, has an impact here.

Public Relations- The Board must also maintain working relationships with Town & County administration including representatives in the Planning Department, Public Works Department, Police Department, Fire Department, etc, as well as with Representatives of some of the Utilities, and certain State Agencies as well.

(back to top)

If I See Other Violations, Do I Have a Right to Ignore Notices Issued To Me For a Violation?:

Answer: No, When the Association transferred from Developer Control to Membership Control, there were zero systems or processes in place to facilitate the job of managing a 290 home development, and so, the majority of the "priority effort" of the administration, had to be focused on developing the processes and systems necessary for the very survival of the association itself. Given the small amount of volunteer support offered, it was extremely difficult to get around to policing the numerous non-compliant conditions that have developed over the TEN+ years of developer control, considering that "association management" is not the business that the developers were really in, and that consistent administration was not high on their priority list.
Given the extreme resource limitations faced by the Association it is simply a physical impossibility to address all of the accumulated non-compliant conditions within the development all at once. The only option available to the Association is to develop and deploy a logical process for systematically addressing all issues over time. This is what the Association is currently doing, and a court would recognize the Association as being entirely fair & reasonable in this approach.

As a consequence, it is necessary for the membership to recognize, understa! nd, and appreciate that there will be an extended period of time where the administration must work to incrementally address all compliance issues within the development.

If a member sees a violation condition elsewhere in the development, that only means that (a) it has already been addressed, and the member is simply not privy to the corrective action process that is already under way, (b) it was missed during the sweep for violations, which does not make it ok for others to have violations, and odds are if it reoccurs it will be caught, or (c) it is not one of the classes of violations we are addressing at this time, but will be included in a later sweep. Regardless of which explanation applies, none of them constitute a legitimate defense against enforcement actions or support the notion that a member in a current violation action has a "right" to violate our covenants at will, and to disregard notices of non-compliance, simply out of criticism over "good ! faith imperfections" in the enforcement process. This would! be tantamount to a person claiming that a court should dismiss a speeding ticket because another speeder did not get caught. If that logic prevailed no laws or rules could EVER be enforced. Our courts are not inclined to put themselves out of business in this way. If they did, chaos would rule forever more.

The fact that a covenant violation may not have been addressed before, even though the non-compliant condition may have existed for an extended period of time, is simply and legally irrelevant to the question of enforcement, and is not a legitimate basis for arguing that current covenant compliance is not required. Any failure to detect the violation sooner would be purely the result of there being too much work for too few volunteers to be able to get to it sooner... nothing more, and this reality does not have any effect on the fact that a violation exists, upon the propriety of corrective action at any given point i! n time, or of the legal obligations of both the member and the Association to ensure that compliance is achieved.

Summary:
In short, the limitations and obligations conferred by our covenants are not legal 'suggestions' and they are not 'optional'. They are firm and legally enforceable 'requirements', regardless of whatever other "whack-a-mole" conditions might be popping up elsewhere within the development. It is only through these enforcement actions that the Association can ultimately educate non-compliant members in their obligation to BE compliant.

In addition to the legal obligation that all members have to comply with our covenants & community rules, there is also a moral obligation to demonstrate courtesy and appreciation for the self-sacrificing effort that community volunteers are contributing to each of us, as residents, as they take time out of their personal lives to conscientiously perform duties in preserving, protecting, an! d promoting the common good of our neighborhood.

Understanding, ! courtesy, and appreciation, including the avoidance of creating any unnecessary difficulties or conflicts, and the avoidance of heaping any unnecessary burdens upon our volunteers is the reasonable & appropriate public duty of every member.

(back to top)

Deed restrictions are (as the name implies) Restrictions that have been legally attached to a piece of land, and are documented upon the Deed, itself, which legally limit how a piece of land may be used

They were PUT IN PLACE BY THE DEVELOPERS and CANNOT BE CHANGED BY THE BOARD

So, PLEASE … if any Homeowner is not happy about the restrictions that apply to them… do not blame the Board, or direct frustrations in their direction. It’s not their doing.

The only CONSTRUCTIVE thing that can be done… is to “get active” and work within the community to get a two-thirds consensus to get the changes that a homeowner or group of homeowners… thinks that we need. The Board will provide the information and assistance to anyone that wishes to accomplish this kind of action. All the Board can do… is to communicate clearly to the community… what those restrictions are, and how they apply.

The Legal Basis for the Restrictions … If a homeowner within the community will read their deed (which is the “Title” to their House and Land), they will see that it specifically states that the use of their land is subject to the covenants and deed restrictions, as defined by the Kensington Courts Community Association governing documents. Those restrictions were “attached” to our land by the developers before they sold that land to any homeowners, and was therefore… those restrictions were already “bound” to that land when it was purchased by a homeowner. In effect, when we willing bought into this community we “willing accepted” and “agreed to be bound” by those limitations. It’s like a contract that is legally enforceable and cannot be broken, except through the voting mechanism described above.

(back to top)

It is not the Covenant Committee intent to fine our members, but help them become compliant with all community covenants. This is why we give our members the benefit of the doubt to correct any and all violations on their lots.Please know that we may have other infractions within our community and because of the workload and less volunteer efforts, our process have been slow. We are in need of Covenant Enforcement Volunteers to help us address violations in a timely manner.

Each owner/s are responsible for any and all possible violations within their lots.
Please understand that the responsibility of the Covenant Committee is to identify property violations and help members reach full compliance.

(back to top)

Who Are the Board of Directors of the Associations?:

Rod Burr is the President of the Association and his duties are to preside at all meetings of the Members and of the Board of Directors and see that orders and resolutions of the Board are carried out. He have authority to sign all leases, mortgages, deeds, and other written instruments and shall co-sign all checks and promissory notes.

Ray Barton is the Vice-President who acts in the place and stead of the President in the event of his absence, inability, or refusal to act, and exercise and discharge such other duties as may be required of him by the Board.

Robin Embleton is the Treasurer and she receives and deposit in appropriate bank accounts all monies of the Association and disburse these funds as directed by resolution of the Board of Directors; she sign all checks and promissory notes of the Association; keep proper books of account; cause an annual audit of the Association books to be made at the completion of each fiscal year; and prepare an annual budget and a statement of income and expenditures to be presented to the Membership at its regular annual meeting, and deliver a copy of each to the Members requesting the same.

Michael Ireland is the Secretary and she records the votes and keep the minutes of all meetings and proceedings of the Board and of the Members; keep appropriate current records showing the Members of the Association together with their addresses; and perform such other duties as required by the Board.

Reggie Little is the Communications Officer who helps to convey communicable information through publications and technical issues. Responsible for informing owners of any updates and reminders through internet email. Also he directs our Covenants Committee with planning and establishing a systematic process.

(back to top)

What Is An Architectural Request Form and Why Is It Needed?:

An Architectural Requst Form is a required form needed to be submitted prior to the start of any exterior home improvement. Our covenants that establishes the requirement that all changes to the exterior of a home are preceded by a request for and receipt of a written architectural approval before commencing. It is important to remember this for all future proposed changes within your property.

The purpose of this is to help ensure that the appearance of our community is preserved, through review and verification that a proposed change is indeed compliant to our covenants as a matter of procedure. It is important that you receive this written approval because that document serves as your legal proof that you did indeed get approval (much like a building permit) so that no one could question you legally in the future.

(back to top)

Why Can't Residents Ride Off Road Vehicles, including ATVs Within Our Community?:

The Board of Directors can appreciate the frustration of some members at not being able to ride off-road vehicles or ATVs within the development, and wish it was possible to satisfy all wishes and desires simultaneously, but this subject has been through a very extensive review, and it has become clear that we really have no option. The simple & inescapable conclusion is that there are (a) practical, (b) ethical, and (c) legal barriers to permitting this activity that just cannot be overcome.

Practical- Many residents did not move into the community until more recent times, which means that they haven’t had an opportunity to witness what life was like in Kensington Courts through the early years of the development. For the first 10+ years, the developers retained control of the Association administration, but aside from putting up a “No ATVs” sign at the bottom of the development, they did little to enforce the covenants in our governing documents (which, among other things, prohibit off-road vehicle operation within the development). As a consequence, people didn’t pay much attention to our covenants, or just assumed they could do as they pleased. The result was that several households had ATVs and rode them freely throughout the development; and it lead to a significant number of issues. People were getting drunk and then riding them, apparently thinking that as long as they weren’t on the streets (though they were) they weren’t breaking any laws, and so it was ok. As a consequence, there were multiple incidents where children were nearly run over, with confrontations between parents of those children and the “rowdy riders”, which routinely escalated an already dangerous event into something even more violent & threatening.
On top of this, the people who were riding throughout the common areas (and particularly in wooded areas) were doing significant damage to our grounds, creating paths that turned into ruts, running over small trees, destroying vegetation, crossing property lines into other people’s lots, and generally disrespecting everyone else around them.

What we learned from this is that, once people are permitted to ride in the development, many will tend to progressively move into virtually running amok, and there is no one that can control them. It really was a “give an inch and they’ll take a mile” situation. It became clear that making additional rules, which might attempt to put boundaries on their behavior, would be useless, because they were already demonstrating that they were adopting a self-centric, prerogative, attitude that had no regard or respect for following any rules, at all, which limited their behavior. Through the course of that experience it became clear that the creation of more “detail” rules would only result in a longer list of rules that many would happily violate. Courtesy, maturity, responsibility, & consideration for others (non-riders) were almost entirely absent, once these riders got into the “off-road frame of mind”.

The only way it could have even conceivably worked, would have been if we hired security personnel to watch the riders continuously and “pull their ticket” (somehow) if they broke the rules. Unfortunately, we do not have the financial resources to hire people for this, and could not bear the legal and insurance implications of the inevitable accidents that would occur, or those inevitable confrontations that would occur when riders objected to the enforcement decisions of those security people. The nightmare of trying to oversee such an arrangement would, by far, dwarf any benefit at all; and would clearly put the interests of a very, very, few, above those of the vast majority, not usually a good policy move for any organization.

Even considering such a scenario would also overlook the fact that, whatever land we allocated for this activity would be essentially destroyed, in terms of vegetation, wildlife habitat, and the natural beauty, that so many people in our development value and wish to preserve. Our community would be left with all of the natural aesthetics of a motocross track.

On top of all of this, the operation of off-road vehicles in such close proximity to our homes would result in a significant imposition (onto the general population of our community) of air & noise pollution into our private spaces, that would interfere with the opportunity for the rest of the community to have full enjoyment of, not only our common areas, but even to their own lots. People want to be able to relax in their back yards or on their decks and enjoy the peace & quiet of our natural setting, and as one resident put it, they cannot do this “with the noise of ATVs reverberating through their skulls”.

The bottom line “practical” lesson we gained from this was that that once people are permitted to ride ATVs, there are no lines that can be drawn, which can be enforced effectively. What we learned is that the only rule that can be effectively enforced is one of zero riding, zero exceptions, & zero tolerance… as is clearly stated in our covenants. If any exceptions were permitted at all, then those wishing to test the enforcement resolve of the Association would jump on that opportunity to launch the progressive deterioration scenario all over again. Anything less than “zero tolerance” would be impossible to manage and would be hopeless.

Ethical- Kensington Courts is located mostly within State Protected Wetland zones, and it was designed & set up in cooperation with state & local government, and with environmental groups, who were initially opposed to our development even being permitted (it would have been denied under current law). Under the compromise, which permitted our development to be approved (by the Town Planning Commission) under a grandfathering clause, the original developers had to pledge that our development would be set up to co-exist harmoniously with (and with minimal impact upon) our natural wildlife setting. Our covenants were deliberately designed to restrict activities in this fragile ecosystem, so that it would naturally attract residents who are more interested in enjoying & appreciating the peace, the quiet, and the natural beauty of our wildlife setting, and who would be naturally inclined to help to preserve the natural state of our land, rather than those who would thoughtlessly damage it for instant gratification purposes.

By and large this is exactly what happened. The vast majority of our residents moved into the neighborhood because they wanted to live in a place, which would afford them the opportunity to experience a reasonable measure of the kind of tranquility that can come from living in such a nature-sensitive community. When they read the covenants they were pleased that these kinds of provisions were in place, and decided to invest their money in this development in reliance on the promise that the association would fulfill its duty to ensure that those nature preservation rules would be followed.

To put this into perspective, in the first 7 years after the resident members assumed responsibility for the oversight of our community, there were 6-to-8 residents that complained about not being allowed to ride off-road vehicles (some of whom no longer lived within the community by the end of that period), and there were 150 or so, who complained (in one way or another) about the rudeness and general inconsideration of those who disrespected our community rules, in causing negative impacts upon the peace, quiet, and general “niceness” of our community.

It’s useful to remember that some communities are designed around golf courses so that people with that common interest can live in a neighborhood which actively supports their shared interest. Our community was designed around a respect & appreciation for the preservation of a natural wildlife setting, so that people with that common interest can live in a neighborhood that supports this shared interest. There are other communities designed more directly around boating, and there may well be communities that are designed to promote various forms of motorsports, but Kensington Courts was never intended to be that kind of community, because it would directly conflict with the priorities that it WAS designed to serve.

Simply put, it has been made abundantly clear to the board of the association that the vast majority of our community does not want any off-road vehicle activity within the development; but more importantly, this community was advertised as one that would not permit such activity, and many (if not most) residents relied upon this promise (& the covenanted assurance) that this kind of activity would not exist within this development. The truth is that those members have a legitimate right to have that promise fulfilled. The very few residents who might feel otherwise do not have a similar right. State law requires that every new prospective resident is advised (by the title company, realtor, and seller) that these covenants are in place and that they act as a legal restriction upon the deed for each lot (actually limiting the personal property rights of each resident with respect to the activities that they may engage in, even on their own property), for the purpose of promoting this particular type of environment, SO that each person could evaluate whether or not they would be happy living in this kind of community, and so they could make a decision as to whether they wished to (a) accept & respect those covenants or (b) choose a different neighborhood that would be more to their atmospheric liking.

When each new resident signed the required acknowledgement form at their settlement, they were (in effect) legally making their decision to accept, respect, & follow the rules of the community. To accept the terms of entry into the community by moving in, only to later turn around and reject the rules that they (and the rest of the community) had agreed to, is not a good faith act (by definition), and isn’t an easy or reasonable position to defend or justify. It certainly would not be defensible in court. Covenant documents are legally binding and enforceable in court.

So, as an ethical matter, the truth is… that the board of the association is morally and ethically obligated to (a) respect the wishes of the membership majority, who moved into the development in good faith, over the wishes of the few, who are (essentially) disregarding their own commitments; and to (b) honor the clearly expressed “founding principles” of the community, as well as its commitments to governmental & environmental agencies.

Legal- The prohibition against riding off-road vehicles anywhere within the development (including on one’s own lot) is expressly included within our covenants, and it is also inferred within the minutes of the Elkton Town Planning Commission records, when approval of this development was based upon developer assurances that the covenants would include provisions to protect against activities that would be likely to inflict serious damage to our natural habitat lands… provisions such as the prohibition of off-road vehicle activities.

Our covenants also expressly limit the authority of the Board of Directors of the Association. Because of these limitations, it is not within the power of the Board to permit this activity when it is expressly prohibited within the covenants. Even if there were no practical obstacles, even if there were no ethical obstacles, and even if the Board did believe it to be a good idea, it would simply be illegal for the board to permit it, even WITH the kinds of additional restrictions some have suggested. There simply is no legal option.

Summary- It’s not that there is anything wrong with riding off-road, it’s just that there are places for it that are reasonable, and places for it that are not reasonable. What we now understand is that, in and around a compact, residential community (in general) has proven to be one of those places, where it is not reasonable, and that, in and around our community is especially not reasonable, all things considered.

We understand that residents can inquire about this rule in all innocence, and that they may not be aware of this full background, and so this explanation was drafted to help provide a reasonable answer to the question when raised. It is sincerely hope that a reading resident/member will (through this reading) develop an understanding and appreciation as to why this rule is in place, and will be able to see why it is important for all residents to respect and follow these covenants. As always, membership understanding and cooperation are greatly appreciated.

(back to top)

What If I Don't Like Our Covenants?:

The first step is to fully understand the situation.Despite what we may think or feel, under the law, no one is entirely free to do anything or everything they might want to do on their properties. There are always limitations.

Zoning laws prohibit people from building factories or feed lots for livestock in residentially zoned communities. The simple fact that a person owns a lot in a development does not entitle them to “do as they like” and construct one of these operations there.

This does not mean that we do not have “freedom”. We can still build a factory or a feedlot if we wish. It is just that we must find a piece of property that does not have any zoning restrictions (prohibiting those constructions), and we must locate our factory or feedlot in one of these permitted places.
Our community has been (in effect) “ZONED” (by virtue of our covenants) to be a deed restricted community, where the entirety of our development has had certain prohibitions attached to it. This does not mean that you are not permitted to engage in prohibited activities (if you so desire). It’s just that IF this is important to you, then (just as with any decision to build a factory) you must first find a place to put your home where it would not be prohibited.

If a person buys a lot with the intention of installing a factory, but fails to verify first, that factories are permitted within the zoning limitations of that property and it turns out that they are NOT permitted, then that person simply messed up. They can’t later complain about the existence of the zoning, or argue that it is unfair that they can’t put the factory on that lot. It was clear from the beginning that the factory was not permitted, it is the responsibility of the purchaser for failing to do the due diligence to confirm that his plans would be permitted on his new lot. He has no one to blame but himself.

Similarly, when a person was preparing to purchase a home in our development, their realtor and their title company were legally required to inform them that ours is a deed restricted community, and to give them a copy of our covenants so that they could read those covenants and be fully informed as to whether or not these rules “fit” within their needs. The realtor and title company could lose their license if they failed to do this and a buyer could have legal recourse back against them. Consequently, every resident member probably signed a form at settlement, which acknowledged that they were so informed.
Under the law, it is a buyer’s legal obligation to ensure that they read and understood our covenants before they move in, and if they DO move in, state law deems that they HAVE read, understood, and accepted the limitations that those covenants impose upon the use of their property. We have all, in essence, FULLY AGREED, that we may not & will not act to violate them.
If a member did not actually read those covenants, it is not the fault or responsibility of the Association, it is not the fault or responsibility of any of their neighbors, and it is not the fault or responsibility of anyone serving as a volunteer within the Association’s administration. That is the consequence of signing documents before you read and understand them.

All we can do from this point is to accept and respect the legal realities and live with the consequences. Making life difficult for others because of our error is not a reasonable or fair reaction.
So, again, no one in the Association is “dictating” what occurs on your property. Those restrictions are being “dictated” by the law, based in your legal consent. When the Covenants Committee acts to ensure compliance to our covenants it is not only acting to protect the values of the community. It is acting to protect the very survival of the Association, because if it did not live up to its duty to properly administer the covenants, it would lose its ability to oversee our community AT ALL. In that case, all of our common properties would revert to town ownership, our common grounds (including our waterfront area) would become public property, and our neighborhood would be invaded by large amounts of traffic and unpleasant activities, which we would have no power to restrict…. very bad stuff.

However, there is one other alternative, if a member’s desire to have a covenant changes is strong enough, they can choose to pursue the process of having the covenant changed, and the Board will be supportive of any reasonable efforts to do so. Be advised, though, that the process was intentionally designed to be difficult so that rules could not be changed too frivolously. Changing a covenant requires that a minimum of two-thirds of the membership (194 members) sign a form (signatures must be verified) agreeing to the change. If a member genuinely wishes to undertake this effort, and are willing to talk to enough people within the development to get those approvals, the Board will provide them with the necessary forms and execute the necessary legal filings to complete the process if a member succeeds.

(back to top)

What Would It Take to Intall Sidewalks and/or Concrete Curbs In Our Development?:

Probably a change in State Law.This question was brought up, discussed, & resolved during the Elkton Planning Department Hearings, which resulted in approval for our development to be constructed.

Because our development is largely within State Protected Wetlands & Wildlife Habitat Area, the water permeability of the land & storm water management were both significant environmental concerns raised in objection to our development even being constructed.

As it has been explained (supported by planning department documentation) State (& certain environmental group) objections to our development being constructed were withdrawn only when planning approval included a list of “environmentally sensitive conditions”. Among these were that we would have gravel shoulders & roadside swales with no sidewalks or curbing.

Because of this it is doubtful that we could ever get those improvements approved.

(back to top)

Why Isn't the Grass Cut More Frequently Or More According To the Schedule that I Would Prefer?:

Because it isn’t reasonably possible. The cost of mowing our common areas approaches $1,000 per cut, and a season’s worth of mowing already approaches half of our annual income. If we were to have the grass mowed more frequently we could easily spend more money than we actually take in during a year.

It’s important for residents to remember that the duty of the Board of Directors to do its best to meet ALL of the legal, moral, & practical obligations of the community. This means “balancing” all concerns against each other, and making a point to spread our resources so that we accomplish ALL of them, at least to the minimum necessary level. Given our modest level of annual dues, it isn’t reasonable for anyone to expect much more.

As it is, the Board has managed to arrange its budget so that we are able to have our common areas mowed, generally, once every two weeks. This may not keep the grass as short as some might keep their personal yards, but it does tend to be better than how well local governments maintain public parks, and that is probably as good as we can reasonably expect.

In managing our limited resources we do not begin mowing as early in the year as some residents do with their own yards, or continue mowing as late into the Fall as some might, but do make a point to ensure mowing occurs during approximately the same timeframe as public properties (parks, etc) are mowed.

It is also important to keep in mind that human scheduling is never perfect. Our mowing contractors are (by the nature of their businesses) “independent” to a degree and must manage their own lives & businesses, as well as taking care of our grounds. Accordingly, there will be times when they have scheduling challenges, which may cause our mowing schedule to fluctuate to a minor degree, and of course, weather (such as rain) and other out of control events can also impact the possible mowing schedule, as does the preference by many members to avoid mowing during evenings, weekends, or holidays.

In short, minor thoughtful reflection is usually enough to make it possible to see that, all tings considered, the existing schedule is optimized to be about the best it could be, and in fact, community-wide mowing normally occurs with consistently reliable regularity.

Residents who lived within the development before the membership assumed responsibility for the Association can attest that conditions were much worse before that point in time.

(back to top)