Close Menu
Berlin, Ocean Pines News Worcester County Bayside Gazette Logo Berlin, Ocean Pines News Worcester County Bayside Gazette

410-723-6397

Pines directors continue to work toward CPI revisions

(Oct. 20, 2016) After nearly two hours of debate on Monday, the Ocean Pines Association Board of Directors agreed that nine new compliance, permit and inspection (CPI) violations would be listed on the agenda of a regular board meeting this Saturday, and that the agenda also would include a first reading of a revised resolution governing how those violations would be addressed.
Part of the reason for the prolonged discussion was that several directors questioned whether the updated version of Resolution M-01 is an improvement and streamlined the process as intended.
Director Cheryl Jacobs, who helped write the proposed changes, said the revised document would bring violations to the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) much earlier. That, theoretically, would speed up board or legal action. She said the update included new provisions for foreclosure properties and repeat offenders as well.
Jacobs said attorney Joe Moore vetted the document.
Board President Tom Herrick, however, argued that the revised language did not include the strict timeline that was present in the earlier draft. Language that allowed for an appeal at ARC was also apparently taken out, although Jacobs argued that it was implied by requiring committee hearings that invited the homeowner found in violation to attend.
“How many days do you have to correct the violation? I don’t see that and I saw that in the old one, and I’m a guy that likes black and white,” Herrick said.
Interim General Manager Brett Hill said the current process was clearly defined, but that staff was struggling with how aggressively to pursue enforcement.
“I’m really concerned if we don’t have the dates and timelines clearly spelled out, how I can give direction to staff?” Hill said. “I think the legal action further defined in it is good, [but] quite honestly I’d like to see it go a step further.”
Jacobs said the exact timeline was difficult to determine because homeowners were entitled to certain due process protections and coordinating with regularly scheduled ARC meetings, which were pushed to the front of the process, logistically could not be uniform. Still, she said she would try to develop a timeline before the regular meeting.
“The strength of the old document was the timeline,” Hill said. “The issue is not with M-01 – it’s with the staff.
“With the way we’re written today … I can move something to ARC within 30 days,” Hill said. “I have no problem taking that action today, I just need to know that that’s what the board wants me to do.”
The directors agreed to place the first reading on the agenda with the understanding that further changes could be made before a final vote was held.