News & Announcements 

Open SIA Board Meeting Minutes

Monday September 14, 2026 at 10am

Driveway at 1801 E. Shell lane

Meeting was called to order at 10am

Attending: Board members Flax, Finn, Garrard, Melchiori and Lehnhardt. 

Members: Tammie Lowe, Dave Wolfram

Review and vote on fencing proposal from 1801 E. Barefoot – it was moved, seconded and approved by a vote of 4 -1 (VP Finn was the no vote) that the project can move forward as submitted with the caution that the fence must be within the property line per the survey and screened by vegetation from the road.

Review of revised draft of ARC Guidelines – some edits were made to the document with input from both attending board members and members. One issue was the recurring reference to the Board where the ARC should have been the reference. A next draft has been distributed to the Board for one final review before printing and mailing September 30.

Determination of the location of the annual meeting – The annual meeting will be held in the driveway of 1995 W. Barefoot Pl. at 10am Saturday November 14, 2026. Thank you Steve and Holly Melchiori for hosting us once again.

Financial review – Proposed annual budget and current balance sheet were presented and will be posted on the website. We are nearing the end of the budget year and have only a couple more payments before the end of the    month, like trimming along the roads. We currently have a balance of $33, 766.80 in our accounts. We are proposing the annual dues remain stable at $300 per lot. We also expect to receive a significant refund from our previous road contractor either before the end of the year or shortly after new year.

Annual meeting refreshments – Tammie Lowe offered to help but not as coordinator. Thanks Tammie! We are still looking for someone to lead the process.

Annual Mailing costs review- Estimate of $330 for production, mailing and supplies. Food is additional. Was about $300 last year. All these costs are within our budgeted items for the year.

Review of sample mailing packet – the packet will include the revised ARC Guidelines, ballot, ballot envelope, return stamped and addressed ballot certificate/proxy envelope and required voting certificate, proxy form, proposed budget, FY 25-26  balance sheet and dues invoice.

Meeting adjourned at 11;30am

What: Open SIA Board Meeting

When: Monday September 14, 2026 at 10am

Where: Driveway at 1801 E. Shell lane

Agenda:

1. Review and vote on fencing proposal from 1801 E. Barefoot

2. Review of revised draft of ARC Guidelines. Is it ready to be sent out to the members with the annual mailing Sept. 30

3. Determination of the location of the annual meeting.

4. Financial review – Proposed annual budget and current balance sheet

5. Annual meeting refreshments – we need to find someone to chair the refreshment committee

6. Annual Mailing costs review- Estimate of $330 for production, mailing and supplies. Food is additional – about $300 last year. All these costs are within our budgeted items for the year.

7. Review of sample mailing packet.

All Members are welcome to attend. Bring your own chair.

Open SIA Board Meeting Minutes

Saturday September 5, 2026 at 9:00am

1881 E. Barefoot Pl.

Agenda: Review of Architectural Guidelines Revision Committee Draft Recommendations

Attending: Board members Flax, Finn, Garrard, Lehnhardt and Melchiori. Members: Lil Fox, Renee Hall, Ron Lowe, Andy Dlugosz, Alex Collazo and Beth Darragh by phone

The meeting was called to order at 9am. Thanks to John Finn for allowing us to meet indoors.

The background on the process and work of the nine member ad hoc committee established to review and propose revisions to the ARC Guidelines was reviewed by Chair Rene Hall. The group met throughout the summer and, through extensive discussion and compromise, put together an extensive draft document which was presented to the Board for review last week. A shorter edited version was also produced but not presented to the board initially as there was some disagreement on the committee as to presenting the edited version. The Board asked that the edited version be provided for review also.

Each Board member asked questions that they had noted specifically in the draft document and provided feedback in terms of whether an item belonged in the ARC Guidelines, needed editing or simply needed further explanation. There were some items proposed that did not fit within the structural requirements of the ARC Guidelines.  These will be discussed in terms of enforcement from our founding document standards, specifically maintenance of vacant lots. This will addressed separately by the Board. The review lasted 2 1/2 hours.

Committee Chair Hall will incorporate the comments from the Board and the condensed version into a final draft document which will go to the Board for a final review. The final Board approved document will then be posted on the SIA website and sent out in the mailing for the Annual meeting at the end of September. At the annual meeting the membership will be able to discuss the document and vote on whether to adopt it or not. A simple majority of the attendees and proxies (as long as a quorum is achieved – 21 of our 69 members) will be needed for approval. Individual sections of the document can be voted on separately.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:30am

John Lehnhardt – SIA Secretary

What:  Open SIA Board Meeting

When: Saturday September 5, 2026 at 9:00am

Where: 1881 E. Barefoot Pl. in the Driveway

Agenda

Review of Architectural Guidelines Revision Committee Draft Recommendations

All SIA members are welcome to attend. Bring your own chair!

What:          Open Board Meeting

When:         Saturday August 22, 2026 1:30pm

Where:        1991 W. Barefoot Pl. in the Driveway

Agenda

Review of fencing proposal for 1861 E. Barefoot Pl. and Board vote on the recommendation from the ARC.

Minutes

Attending:

Board members: Flax, Finn, Lehnhardt, Melchiori and Garrard.

SIA Members: Jim Chalkley, Ron and Tammy Lowe, Dave and Diane Wolfram, Denise and David Kneiss, Ann and Ed Seemann, Doug Stanford

Meeting was called to order at 1:32pm

Discussion:

The Kneisses of 1861 E. Barefoot Pl. submitted a fence plan to the ARC for a five foot high wooden privacy fence around their back yard pool and extending to within 5 feet of the road at the west side of the house on the property line. An original partial fence installation was done on this property without ARC or Board approval and was removed at the Board request. The ARC approved the fence plan with modification that the extension toward the road not extend beyond the front edge of the house structure.

There was much discussion around the denial of the fence extending to within five feet of the road on the East side.

State Law 720 – 26, the law governing HOAs, states that:

720.3035 Architectural control covenants; parcel owner improvements; rights and privileges.—

(1)(a) The authority of an association or any architectural, construction improvement, or other such similar committee of an association to review and approve plans and specifications for the location, size, type, or appearance of any structure or other improvement on a parcel, or to enforce standards for the external appearance of any structure or improvement located on a parcel, shall be permitted only to the extent that the authority is specifically stated or reasonably inferred as to such location, size, type, or appearance in the declaration of covenants or other published guidelines and standards authorized by the declaration of covenants.

(4)a If the association or any architectural, construction improvement, or other such similar committee of the association denies a parcel owner’s request or application for the construction of a structure or other improvement on a parcel, the association or committee must provide written notice to the parcel owner stating with specificity the rule or covenant on which the association or committee relied when denying the request or application and the specific aspect or part of the proposed improvement that does not conform to such rule or covenant.

In other words, you have to specify the reason for refusal of a structural addition and that reason has to be stated or inferred in the Governing documents.

It was stated by several folks that there was a mention somewhere in the original governing documents that no fence should extend beyond the front of a house. We were unable to verify this at the time of the meeting or in reviewing the governing documents afterwards.

720.3035 also states:

“An association or any architectural, construction improvement, or similar committee of an association must reasonably and equitably apply and enforce on all parcel owners the architectural and construction improvement standards authorized by the declaration of covenants or other published guidelines and standards authorized by the declaration of covenants.”

It was also pointed out that there are many fences within the association that extend beyond the front of the house and even some that go all the way across the front of the property.

In our AMENDMENT TO DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS, LIMITATIONS, CONDITIONS AND AGREEMENTS from 1982 it states:

“The Architectural Review Committee shall have the right to refuse to approve any such plans and/or specifications which are not suitable or desirable, in its opinions, for aesthetic or other reasons, and in so passing upon such plans, the Committee shall have the right to take into consideration the suitability of the proposed structure or improvement, and of the material of which it is to be built, to the site, the harmony thereof with the surroundings and the effect of the proposed structure of other improvement on the outlook from the adjacent or neighboring property.”

The aspect of aesthetic suitability was mentioned in the discussion but was not posed as a reason for denial by the ARC. The fence will not be highly visible from the road and can be screened by plantings from the neighbors side.

It was stated by the Kneisses that they were informed that the fence could only be 5’ high. They prefer a 6’ fence for privacy. A review of the Governing documents and Guidelines did not come up with a 5’ limitation. Some fences, including the SIA exterior fence are 6 ft high and that its one of the standard sizes readily available in building materials.

It was eventually moved and seconded that the original fence proposal submitted by the Kneisses, including the extension of the fence within 5’ of the road, and allowing for the fence to be 6’ high be approved. The board voted 4 to 1 in favor of the motion, with Vice President Finn casting the opposing vote.

A further topic of discussion was centered on how decisions are made for the Association and how much input members have in decisions.

Our SIA-HOA system is technically modeled after the US Governmental structure as a Democratic Republic. Members elect their representatives, the SIA Board, to make the decisions for the Association, just like US Citizens elect their local, State and Federal representatives. Members can lobby with the Board to influence decisions, but The Board of Directors has decision making power for the Association in all matters per our Governing Documents, except in specific areas. Members must vote and approve all amendments to our Governing Documents and our Architectural Guidelines by majority vote at our annual meetings or by ballot by mail. The Board cannot make changes in those Governing Documents without member approval.

The SIA Board is elected every year by vote of the members.

The Board has appointed a committee to draft a revised proposal for amending the current ARC Guidelines. The committee will present the draft proposal to the Board for review and the Board will decide what then goes to the Members for vote at the annual meeting. This approved ARC Guidelines proposal will be sent out to the Members at the end of September with the Board election ballot.

The meeting was adjourned at 2:30 pm.

Open Board Meeting – Saturday August 22, 2026 1:30pm at 1991 W. Barefoot Pl. in the Driveway

Agenda

Review of fencing proposal for 1861 E. Barefoot Pl. and Board vote on the recommendation from the ARC.