Dear Chicahauk Property Owners Association (CPOA) Members,
Like many of you, we received the latest email from “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” regarding their efforts to prevent the CPOA Board from enforcing CPOA’s Declaration of Covenants. Please note that CPOA has not authorized the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” to use the CPOA logos, images, or resident contact information for residents on the CPOA web page. Therefore, the Board is sending this correspondence to clarify any confusion that may have been caused by the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners’” use of CPOA’s name and image in their correspondence, website, petition and GoFundMe page addressed to members.
Per our previous correspondence, the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” group is in no way associated with or endorsed by CPOA. As such, any member that follows the advice of the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” or their attorney regarding the validity of the CPOA Covenants is doing so at their own peril and will be subject to fines for violating the Covenants. The CPOA Board fully intends to continue to comply with its fiduciary duty to enforce open and obvious violations of the Covenants.
As you likely know at this point, there are certain CPOA members who have chosen to identify themselves on the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” website mentioned below, and apparently strongly oppose the CPOA Board’s efforts to enforce CPOA’s Declaration of Covenants: Haley Sullivan, Judd Snapp, Kiirsten Farr, Steve Farr, Joe Menzie, Cynthia Menzie, Dawn Stultz, Michael Stultz, Michael Greene, Toni Greene, Michael Lancsek, and Diana Kalmanovich. These individuals have chosen to identify themselves on the following website: https://outerbankshoa.com/. The website indicates that it is supported by “100+ Chicahauk Property Owners”; however, CPOA has not been able to identify any of these additional members at this juncture.
As indicated on the above-mentioned webpage, the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” have hired their own attorney and issued a demand letter to CPOA, in an attempt to prevent CPOA from enforcing its Covenants. This group has also apparently initiated a campaign to raise additional funds to help pay legal fees and court costs in challenging CPOA’s Declaration. As a reminder, the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” want to challenge the following clause of the Declaration, which stems from Article III, Section 1(a):
Section 1. Residential Use.
(a) Each and every building lot within the Chicahauk Subdivision shall be used only for single-family residential purposes. No building or structure, including guest houses and/or suites or ancillary or accessory structures, shall be erected, altered, placed, or permitted to remain on any lot without the prior written approval, in accordance with Section 3 of this Article, of CPOA. Only one single family residence may be placed on and lot, and duplexes or multiple family houses are expressly prohibited. No guest house and/or suites ancillary or accessory structures may be leased, rented or sold separately from the main residence.
Please note that CPOA does not interpret the aforementioned clause as a prohibition on all rentals within the subdivision. On the contrary, CPOA only intends to prohibit rentals which constitute a multi-family residential use of the property and rentals of guest houses and/or ancillary suites or accessory structures. This means that any member of CPOA may rent out their entire primary structure to guests. However, CPOA members, under the current Covenants, are prohibited from: (i) renting out one or more rooms of their residence while simultaneously living in the residence; and (ii) renting out guest houses and/or ancillary suites or accessory structures.
Some or all of the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” have been knowingly violating the aforementioned provision of the Covenants, and in some cases, have attempted to hide the location of their properties in their online listings and/or claim that they were not living in their properties while renting. Now that the Board is aware of these violations, it is fulfilling its duties that you elected them to perform by enforcing the Covenants.
Please note that CPOA has engaged legal counsel to assist the Board in its efforts to enforce the Covenants. Because of the contested nature of this issue and the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” repeated threats of a lawsuit against the Board, the Board has incurred, and will continue to incur, significant legal fees and costs in defending these claims and upholding its fiduciary duties. Unfortunately, the expenditure of legal fees will affect CPOA’s budget and its ability to provide services, such as maintaining the common elements.
CPOA has already advised the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” that, if they want to amend the Covenants, they have the right to do so. Under the Covenants and N.C.G.S. Sec. 47F-2-117, the CPOA Covenants may be amended by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the membership (374 votes based on the current membership). Obviously, if the Concerned Chicahauk Owners are able to obtain the required number of votes to amend the Covenants, they will be permitted to do so. It will certainly be less expensive for all parties, including homeowners, if the “Concerned Chicahauk Owners” would focus their efforts on amending the Declaration as opposed to seeking a court order declaring the Covenants invalid.
Regards,
Your CPOA Board
