What about the agreements signed by both The Club and the RCA? What is the governing document that determines which entity pays for maintenance and improvements to the roads, easements and landscaping?
The Club and RCA are contractually required to follow the mutually agreed upon “Declaration of Easements and Covenants to Share Costs for Renaissance” (“Declaration”), a copy of which is attached here. However, there appears to be a misunderstanding about the Club’s responsibility as to items outside of the scope of the Declaration.
Are there any other governing documents besides the Declaration?
The Declaration is the only governing document, as referenced in the original sale. The Declaration governs the “Joint Property,” which includes the “landscaping and improvements comprising the main entry features serving Renaissance and the Commercial Property; and the landscaping, lighting, fixtures, equipment, signage and other community improvements within and along Spine Road, serving the Residential Property, the Club Property, and the Commercial Property.”
The Club is required to maintain the Joint Property. The standard of maintenance is defined as “maintaining, improving, repairing, replacing, insuring, paying taxes and other incidental charges incurred, and taking any and all steps to keep the Joint Property in a well-kept, neat, and attractive condition including, without limitation, repairing and replacing improvements and landscaping, maintaining, repairing, and replacing equipment and fixtures, and performing such other duties as may be necessary or appropriate.”
How are the costs determined and who pays for them?
The Club is required to prepare two estimated annual budgets:
o Entrance Budget—The Club is reimbursed by the parties for 75% of the Entrance Budget.
o Road Budget—The Club is reimbursed by the Association for 50% of the Road Budget.
Per the Declaration, in no event shall the Association have any “right to disapprove, rescind, or reduce” either the Entrance Budget or the Road Budget.
What about the paver replacements?
In the spirit of compromise, The Club at Renaissance agreed to pay for the paver replacement in 2025.
Isn’t there precedent for The Club to pay salaries and expenses for gate personnel?
While The Club’s predecessor operated outside of the Declaration and previously contributed to the RCA’s gate personnel services, the Declaration does not reference or require any salaries or expenses for personnel. As such, The Club has no obligation to contribute to these salaries on a going-forward basis. However, in good faith, the Club has offered to cover 10% of the RCA’s payroll cost plus 50% of other expenses, which would total approximately $80,000 in annual costs—for something The Club is under no obligation to pay under the Declaration.
Will the Club engage a third-party vendor to perform maintenance services?
The Club is not required to engage a third-party vendor to perform the maintenance services. However, in order to resolve unfounded claims raised by the RCA that The Club’s maintenance costs are excessive and not competitive, The Club has offered to allow the RCA’s preferred vendor, Juniper, to assume responsibility for the maintenance services.
You should be aware that The Club’s 2025 maintenance budget and the Juniper budget tendered by the RCA are not an apples-to-apples comparison. There have been patently false allegations that The Club overcharges the RCA by some $80,000…..However, The Club’s actual costs far exceed the scope of services set forth in Juniper’s proposal, which will not cover the RCA’s actual maintenance needs.
You also should note that the Vista Berm maintenance and additional flower planting were line items specifically requested by the RCA for The Club to perform, with the understanding that The Club would not agree to share in those costs. In the spirit of compromise, The Club has offered to give the RCA exactly what it has requested in terms of turning maintenance services over to Juniper.
How else has The Club at Renaissance exceeded its obligations?
As a good faith gesture, The Club paid approximately $150,000 for asphalt paving. This was done with the hope and commitment to reach a global agreement with the RCA that would include a new final cost sharing and community membership agreement. We did this despite our concerns that we would give this concession without any reciprocity from the RCA. Unfortunately, that is exactly what happened.
A year later, the small minority of residents are asking again that The Club pay to gain trust, while not proposing a settlement agreement in return. In addition, they recently notified The Club that it would no longer contribute to labor costs associated with the joint property landscape maintenance nor will it pay for Vista Berm maintenance, which is a violation of the existing agreement and will subject the RCA to costly and protracted litigation with The Club.
What’s next? Where do negotiations currently stand?
Unfortunately, at this point, negotiations between The Club and the RCA have stalled, as the RCA appears to be taking a wait-and-see approach to determine if its strategy of filing the zoning complaints with Code Enforcement will somehow give it a leg up in the parties’ negotiations.
Linked below are the most recent communications between The Club and the RCA, where you will see that, despite The Club’s offers of compromise, this small faction of residents representing RCA have remained unreasonable and unwilling to negotiate in good faith.