More Ethics Violations by the Board

The current Board came after me and my neighbor for my video surveillance system in use sign. This sign is required if a person wanted to use the camera footage to prosecute a theft or vandalism. The sign was small about 12’ by 8” posted on my front deck. The Board said it was in violation of the CCRs and that it had to come down.

One of the Board members Bill Washburn has a security company sign on a four by four post in plain view in his yard as well as a security sticker in every window. How can someone come after you for a security sign when they have a sign of their own and do not plan on removing it? Are they above the rules that they enforce?

This is not to much different than when Mary Carson Ford was a director and made Shauna Woods relocate her rock wall back inside the property line adjacent to the easement to Garth York’s development on Beech Court. While at the same time they built a rock wall and fence over the HOA easement adjacent to tract #994 on Cedar Court by a few feet thus infringing on the 20’ fire access to that house and the detention pond. That could come back on the HOA if the house burns because there was not enough room to get the equipment and hoses out of both sides of the fire truck.

Watch and see how the Board handles these situations. Are they biased and driven by personal agendas?

I have completed my investigation in regard to your complaint in regard to the location of the landscaping and cedar board fence that parallels the property line of residential site 23.

The landscaping consists of a rock wall with ornamental plantings and a cedar board fence that extend into the adjacent property and is maintained.  The cedar board fence is contained within the planter and parallels the property line of residential site 23.  There is a paved Utility Easement located on the adjacent property that abuts the property line of residential site 23.

The Utility Easement provides access to Tract 990 that contains a Storm Water Detention Pond.

The landscaping and cedar board fence do not obstruct or prevent access to Tract 990.

I have discussed this matter with the homeowners on Residential site 24.  They have no objection to the location of the landscaping and cedar board fence and would like them to remain “AS IS”.

I met with Mr. Robert Martin the Director of Community Development for the City of Sultan and informed him of the situation of the situation.  According to Mr. Martin, this is not a City issue and is a matter for the Board of Directors.

I contacted a licensed real estate broker about this matter.  The information I received leads me to believe this matter is beyond the authority of the governing documents and may be under the authority of the Washington State Real Estate Laws.

Boards Decision:

Based on the information received during my investigation, it is the opinion of the Board that the

Location of the landscaping and cedar board fence is acceptable  “As Is”.  Additionally, they do not detract from the appearance of the area.

Action Taken;

During my investigation I met with the homeowners on residential site 23 and informed them of the situation.  The content of the discussion is and will remain confidential.  They have requested a copy of this information for their records.  Due to their involvement in this matter it is my belief that their request not unreasonable and I will honor their request with a copy.

Additional Information:

In reference to the matter involving the homeowners on residential site 14 that was resolved.

The information I received during my visit with the homeowner leads me to believe that the matter was beyond the authority of the governing documents and may have been under the authority of The Washington State Real Estate Laws.

Feel free to contact me with any questions you might have regarding this matter.

Rick Dreger

(360) 793-3598