By Greg Ellison

Staff Writer

(Oct. 17, 2019) The Ocean Pines Bylaws & Resolutions Committee on Oct. 4 agreed that additional time will be required to review proposed revisions for resolutions regarding the lot maintenance violations discussed by the Ocean Pines Association Board of Directors two days earlier.

Committee chairman Jim Trummel said the directors had first readings for a trio of resolutions, including a new addition, at the board meeting on Oct. 2.

“One proposal was for M-10 , which would effectively replace M-01,” he said. “That’s the one that in effect tells CPI [Compliance, Permits and Inspections] … how you take a complaint and process it, [including] sending notice to … the lot owner.”

The proposed M-10 resolution would whittle down the number of required communications with property owners and speed up the process for addressing non-compliance.

“It changes the time frame down to 30 days,” he said. “The general manager is authorized to send it to the attorney to get court action against the violator.”

Envisioned as a replacement for compliance procedures outlined in M-01, Trummel said the board discovered the process to swap out M-10 was more involved than suspected.

“The original intent on the agenda was to just to repeal M-01 [but] they said there has to be two readings … so somebody can talk about it if they want to,” he said.

Trummel said after further discussion, board member Frank Daly suggested a method to streamline the approval process.

“He proposed in lieu of repealing M-01, just substitute what you’ve got for M-10 as a comprehensive replacement of M-01,” he said.

Trummel said first reading were also held for two related resolution changes surrounding compliance.

The first would eliminate the need for the Architectural Review Committee to consult with the board prior to the general manager being notified of ongoing violations.

“I don’t have a problem with that, it’s entirely appropriate,” Trummel said.

The other proposal is an amendment to M-04 regarding lot maintenance.

Trummel said the sections involved regard cutting tall grass or weeds and picking up debris or trash.

“It wants to delete that second part about the debris or trash,” he said.

Trummel said the current language included in M-04 is composed with respect to the declaration of restrictions requirements for the association to legally gain entry to individual lots for addressing deficiencies.

“The debris and tall grass restriction is a special restriction in the listing of 12-15,” he said. “They’re really two separate, but in retrospect there is really no basis in saying the individual line restriction about tall grass and debris stands apart from the entry on the lot (requiring) a two-thirds vote of the board.”

Prior to the current M-04 language from 2010, Trummel said the legal guidelines for authorized entry on private property stemming from lot maintenance issues was more clearly defined.

“The prior resolution was specially written to give direction because of a two-thirds vote of the board … to go on the lot to cut the grass and pick up debris,” he said.

In his estimation, Trummel said it was an oversight to have M-04 not specify the need for a two-thirds vote to enter private lots.

Putting aside the particulars, Trummel said the committee’s immediate quandary boils down to time frames.

“Effectively the originator, Daly said give it to the Bylaws Committee to look at,” he said.

Trummel, who attended the board meeting, raised the concern at that point and noted the bulk of the committee would have insufficient time to review the information for subsequent discussion.

Despite having a brief window to peruse the proposals, Trummel said fellow committee members would require comparable allowances, while also noting addressing the topic at the groups next scheduled meeting could be problematic.

“The next problem, it’s the day before the next board meeting,” he said. “Whatever comments we come up with at the next meeting we’ll have about 12 hours to get it into the hands of the board. Half of them probably won’t see it.”

Committee member Jeff Knepper said careful note should be taken of who participated in drafting the resolution revisions to avoid conflicts.

“If we drafted that, or had substantial part in drafting it, we have to be bloody careful about reviewing it because it’s our own work,” he said.

Trummel also said prior board members Cheryl Jacobs and Tom Terry had earlier worked on an updated version of M-01.

“There is a draft to be considered of a change to M-01 to make it more expeditious,” he said.

Regardless of updates from years earlier or more recently, committee member Bob Hillegass said clear direction is lacking.

“The bottom line is somebody should give us direction what they want us to do,” he said. “They’re not doing it and at a meeting they’re asking you to review something that we haven’t been officially asked to do. There’s a real breakdown there.”

Knepper said process is crucial for the committee to ascertain if proposed revisions create conflicts within the bylaw provisions.

“The new thing that’s proposed needs to be in what somebody considers final form,” he said. “Then it’s worth looking at.”

Recognizing the time required to properly vet the proposals the committee agreed to hold a special meeting on Oct. 23

Ocean Pines Bylaws & Resolutions Committee member Bob Hillegass ponders perspective offered by chairman Jim Trummel regarding resolutions involving lot maintenance violations discussed at a board meeting just days prior to the committee meeting on Oct. 4.

to permit sufficient time for the board to review its conclusions.