Admin: Longtime resident and former BHOA President Phil Clement sent the following letter to the Board on Monday, September 13. In his email, he requested that the Board post the letter to the BHOA website.
It has now been more than a week since Mr. Clement’s email, and the Board has so far continued its recent practice of making no response to such requests. Mr. Clement has therefore agreed that Carefree Unity would publish it to make its contents available to residents.
An open letter to the Board of Directors, Boulders Home Owner’s Association:
Dear Directors:
In your last note to the community, you stated the board members did not agree amongst themselves about the motivation of community members to disagree with the board’s position on the water tank. Let me express my personal reasons. While I certainly prefer that the town had chosen an alternative location, I do not believe the level of objection and the criticism leveled at previous board and their supporters is warranted.
- Most importantly, I do not agree that the proposed water tank represents a significant threat to property values in the Boulders. I have asked realtors, who sell in the Boulders, if the disclosure of the proposed tank has impacted prices or sales. The answer has been “no.” As the co-owner of 3 lots, who has been here for over 25 years, I believe the board is making a mountain out of a water tank.
- At least one member of the board has criticized the engineer’s qualifications and the work done by her for the town/water company. I know of no reason to believe that individual is a better engineer than a professionally qualified one. Therefore, I do not accept his criticism.
- In communications from the board and an individual member of the board, there have been insinuations and accusations of town/water company designs for expansion of the proposed property. I personally do not find any evidence of any such conspiracy.
- You continue to characterize the previous board’s handling of the situation using highly emotional and judgmental terms, such as “pro town”. My own opinion is that while not as strident as your opposition, the previous board is being unfairly criticized. It is also my opinion that engaging in such descriptions is a tactic used by people who do not have confidence in their facts. Personal disclosure: my wife was a member of the previous board and does not qualify as pro town.
Based on the above, I conclude you have wasted your time and introduced great dissention into our community over a situation that does not warrant either the attention or acrimony. I suspect I am not alone for disagreeing for these reasons.
Most sincerely,
Philip A. Clement
Carefree Unity 