Home Page

Board Monitor

The following address was read by Kay O'Neal for Dorian MacDougall who could not attend. The articles accompanying this document were reproduced for the convenience of the viewer. Copies of the original documents were presented to the board of directors.

This website is open to all residents of Shavano Ridge. Other opinions were expressed at this meeting. If those speakers would like to have their speeches presented here, they may email them (in word document or plain text form) to this address. dmacdougall@satx.rr.com


An Adversarial and Inflammatory Management Style

In my past dealings with the Shavano Ridge Board of Directors, I had long ago concluded that they lack the necessary honesty and integrity to hold any position of trust. I base this conclusion on the following facts: 

In April of 2000, we altered the appearance of our home with a new coat of paint in complete compliance with the rules as understood by the developer, the Shavano Ridge Board of Directors, and ourselves. The Board later confirmed their understanding of the rules, as they existed in April of 2000, in the October 2000 edition of Out on the Ridge. 

Article 1. "The Architectural Control Committee (ACC) has been requested to review it's (sic) present policy of allowing homeowners to paint the exterior of their houses any color (or colors) they choose. At the urging of the Board of Directors, the ACC is now requiring homeowners who wish to paint/repaint the exterior of their houses to submit their color selection(s) to the ACC PRIOR to beginning work."     Out on the Ridge, October 2000.  

Yet seven months after we had made this, board approved alteration, they decided to make up new rules and deny grand fathered status to those who acted in compliance with the previous set of rules. When later asked to explain their actions and written statements they claimed that they were not responsible for anything they said or wrote. 

The board claimed on numerous occasions, in writing, that these new rules had actually been in place since the subdivision was constructed and even implied that these standards were imposed by the developer. 

Article 2. "They can paint their homes in the same original builder scheme or any color of any other home in SR which was the original paint color of the original contractor." Shavano Ridge Homeowners Association, December 2003

 However, the developer’s own salesman and the head of their design department both denied this claim stating that the developer never imposed any such standards on Shavano Ridge. 

Article 3. "Centex Design Center confirmed that there are no - and never have been - standard colors for Shavano Ridge." Truth Camino, Centex Design Center, March 2004

 Later, the Board claimed we had altered our home in violation of their own, self imposed, guidelines. 

Article 4. "...an informal meeting was held by the BoD prior to this board meeting, seeking resolution of a fifth covenant violation with a resident who failed to submit an ACC request to repaint his home and then painted the home in a color not in accordance with the SR house paint color scheme." Meeting Minutes, June 2003

 Yet, the Board admitted, again in writing, that they had no guidelines of their own until February of 2001—eleven months after we had painted our home. 

Article 5. "The Board requested the ACC to write new standards on repainting homes. This is due at the next Board meeting on February 13th, 2001." Out on the Ridge, February 2001

Still later, the board claimed that they were pursuing this action, in defense of a policy which had been completely misrepresented, on the advise of their attorney, who personally profited from the conflict the Board had created.

Article 6. "The same lawyer whom the board later fired decided that repainting was an alteration included in the CC&Rs." The San Antonio Current, March 2004

On two occasions, to support their fabrications, the board altered documents. In writing, they quoted from a clause in the CC&Rs. This clause had not only been altered to obscure its true meaning, but additional language was added. 

Article 7, the altered clause. "No building, fence, wall, outbuilding or other structure or improvement shall be erected, altered, added onto, placed or repaired on any lot in the subdivision until the plans and specifications shall first submit to the ACC a complete set of plans and specifications for the proposed improvements...." Letter from the Shavano Ridge HOA, December 2000

This clause appears in the CC&Rs as follows:

Article 8, the original clause. "No building, fence, wall, outbuilding or other structure or improvement shall be erected, altered, added onto, placed or repaired on any lot in the subdivision until the complete plans including site plans, grading plans, floor plans depicting room sizes and layouts, exterior elevations, any other plans or information deemed necessary by the ACC for the performance of its function..." Shavano Ridge CC&Rs

When asked, in June of 2003, to supply copies of all the Board meeting minutes that referred to our case, they altered a potentially embarrassing entry in the meeting minutes. 

Article 9, the original minutes. " A motion was passed stating that the ACC must give prior approval before any fences can be painted or stained.  Fences that had already been painted or stained were grandfathered. A letter would be sent to those homeowners stating that the ACC would have to give approval before they could be repainted or stained" Meeting Minutes, August 2001 

Article 10, the altered minutes. " A motion was passed stating that the ACC must give prior approval before any fences can be painted or stained.  A letter would be sent to those homeowners stating that the ACC would have to give approval before they could be repainted or stained" Altered Meeting Minutes, June 2003 

Then they falsely claimed that the original copies of the minutes, issued nearly two years earlier, were suddenly found to be “sent in error prior to Board review and approval." 

Article 11. "These are the corrected and approved minutes of the Shavano Ridge Homeowners association Board meeting held on August 14, 2001. Please disregard previously received minutes as they were sent in error prior to Board review and approval." Copy of altered Meeting Minutes, June 2003

The truth was that these minutes had been approved at the next board meeting in Oct. 2001.

Article 12. "Approval of Prior Meeting Minutes: The minutes from the previous board meeting(s) were corrected and accepted." Meeting Minutes, October 2001

And the Board did not stop at this deception; in the October 2004 meeting minutes, the Board stated that the altering of the minutes that you have just witnessed does not happen.

Article 13. "Any change(s) to the approved minutes are noted in the next BoD's approved minutes. Approved minutes cannot be changed by the BoD." Meeting Minutes for October 12th 2004. 

The fact that they were trying to hide was that they did grandfather some of the homeowners who repainted prior to February 2001.  

They set a deadline date for repainting and then threatened to sue nearly a year before that deadline; then they claimed that the threat to sue was a mistake and printed a false statement in Out on the Ridge stating that all the involved parties had been dutifully notified of the mistake.

Article 14. "Once informed of the incident, the board issued rescind letters to the homeowners, followed by corrected covenant violations correspondence." Meeting Minutes, February 2003

We did not receive any type of verbal or written notice of this action even though two ACC members live on our street. Instead of notifying us, they tried to use this “mistake” to threaten us.  

Color choices taken form other Shavano Ridge homes were rejected as not being in compliance with the standard Shavano Ridge colors. 

Colors that had just been introduced to the San Antonio area were accepted as being in compliance with guidelines supposedly created ten years before. 

In the end, this new color is barely a shades difference from the original color.

After all that was said and done, no one has yet been able to see a difference.

It seems the whole purpose of this useless and damaging exercise was to get one particular homeowner to comply with guidelines that did not exist when the incident took place.

Article 15. "He repainted," Beverly says, "and the paint just got darker. It's still orange, but he abided by the rules." The San Antonio Current, March 2004

In short, I believe they were throwing their weight around and having fun with the CC&Rs.  Shavano Ridge doesn’t need this type of representation. 

In spite of the fact that they have been repeatedly made aware that there are numerous publications available that would guide them in the pursuit of a reasonable and responsible management style, to my knowledge, they have made no effort to improve their knowledge and understanding. Instead, they prefer to violate all the recommendations of these experts including those of their beloved Community Associations Institute. 

Every time I have had the unfortunate occasion to come into contact with this group of people, they have shown me that they lack the necessary honesty and integrity to represent our community in any way. They created this conflict and many others and will certainly create more if given the opportunity. They continue to pose a threat to every homeowner in Shavano Ridge, and for that reason, and for all the others listed above, I believe the homeowners would be well advised to make changes to the Board in March 2005. 

Dorian MacDougall

Home Page

Board Monitor