Howard Buchalter, South Cherry Creek Vista

HOA Covenants


Based on the changes made, I can now get firmly behind the proposal. I say this as a long practicing attorney who has defended many individuals against abusive HOAs in court. I truly believe it would be in the best interest to support this very modest and fair proposal and urge your support.l


OK, folks, I provided the HOA Board with some suggested revisions, which were in large part welcomed and incorporated into what will become a revised proposal. I am now confident that the revised proposal would strike the right balance between having an HOA that could preserve and better the appearance of the neighborhood and property values, while preventing potential abuse both financially and legally. In particular, some key provisions included in the revised proposal, include the following:

1.Impose a strict $60/yr. limit on assessments ted to a mandatory spending plan that will be distributed by the board beginning 2018' This is very reasonable, especially if you see what other neighborhoods charge for their HOAs and it is fair that everyone contribute .

2. The annual assessments could only be increased by 6%/yr., unless a legal majority of all residents votes otherwise;

3. Strict limits on fines and attorneys fees to prevent egregious cases where an HOA seeks thousands of dollars to collect on a nominal amount of dues; No threat of foreclosure- that has been removed at my urging..

4. Further relaxation of architectural oversight over small projects. No review requirement for projects costing less than 5500.

5. Elimination of requirement of vehicular parking of boats, trailers, etc in garages. They would only need to be screened from view.


Howard Buchalter, ESQ

Cherry Creek Vista South Homeowners Association
Covenant Vote Summary 2017


Total Votes 344 (Homes that voted) of the 622 Homes

No = 111

Yes = 233

Breakdown by Filing
Total Votes 344 of the 622 Homes


Total No Votes = 111

Total Yes Votes= 233

Filing 8 = 52 Homes

Total Votes 22
No 12
Yes 10
Needed to Pass 27

Filing 9 = 106 Homes

Total Votes 37
No 14
Yes 23
Needed to Pass 54

Filing 10 = 71 Homes

Total Votes 34
No 14
Yes 20
Needed to Pass 37

Filing 11 = 104 Homes

Total Votes 65
No 16
Yes 49
Needed to Pass 53

Filing 12 = 143 Homes

Total Votes 92
No 25
Yes 67
Needed to Pass 72

Filing 13 = 98 Homes

Total Votes 56
No 21
Yes 35
Needed to Pass 50

Filing 14 = 48 Homes

Total Votes 32
No 10
Yes 22
Needed to Pass 25Type your paragraph here.

Why should association documents be amended?

·        To eliminate obsolete provisions.
·        To eliminate provisions no longer                          observed or enforced.
·        To eliminate provisions that conflict with              current laws.
·        To eliminate developer language and                  privileges no longer being used, such as              two-class voting or exemption from use              restrictions.
·        To improve poorly drafted documents by            clarifying ambiguous provisions.
·        To tailor documents to fit the living                      experience of owners/members.
·        To redo documents to grant the                            association the necessary powers to                    operate effectively.
·        To provide for changes in technology                  (satellite dishes, home office use, etc.).
·        To make documents more “user friendly” –          through better organization, a table of                contents and descriptive headings, etc.
·        To eliminate or correct mistakes and                    errors.
·        To take advantage of recent changes of              the law.

the Art of Community

Covenant Revision History 


Proposed New Covenants Relined 7/13/17

Proposed New Covenants Relined 6/8/17

Proposed New Covenants Relined 6/6/17

Proposed New Covenants Relined 4/25/17

Proposed New Covenants Relined 4/13/17


Original Proposed New Covenants March 2017

VOTE Message and RESULTS (Below)


Thanks to all of you who voted, attended meetings, gave feedback and expressed support for the revised covenants. 344 of the 622 home owners voted. Yes votes outweighed No votes 2 to 1. Filings 11, 12, and 14 were extremely close to passing (each filing needed a majority of owners to vote yes). Unfortunately, none of the seven filings received a majority of yes votes, so the existing, original, covenants (including the ARC and Dues) remain in effect.Type your paragraph here.