This post has all annual meeting meetings from 1997 to 2006.
Dougherty Lake Annual Homeowners’ Meeting
November 16, 2006
Des Peres City Hall
Trustees Present: Jim Harris, Nancy Shaffstall, Tim Fletcher
Absent: Jim Gruenewald
Jim Harris called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The trustees introduced themselves. Jim Harris explained that Jim Gruenewald was absent due to travel.
Trustees
Jim Harris noted that Steve Askren has resigned as trustee due to the press of his business. Carel Reynolds has volunteered to assume the remaining year of his term. Also, the terms of Jim Gruenewald and Nancy Shaffstall have expired but both have offered to serve another three-year term. Therefore, Tim Fletcher introduced the nomination of Carel Reynolds for the remaining term of Steve Askren and Jim Gruenewald and Nancy Shaffstall for new 3-year terms. Fred Shaffstall seconded the nomination and it was passed by acclamation.
Finance
Tim Fletcher distributed a report summarizing the income and expenditures for the twelve months ending October 31, 2006 together with the projections for the coming year. The trustees project an increase in next year’s homeowner assessment of about $7 per household. The exact increase will be determined in January, based on the Consumer Price Index for the area. General maintenance is budgeted to increase in ’06-’07 because of two factors:
Plans are to paint the guardrail along both sides of Beaver Dam Road along the lake dam.
Pump repairs have been a continuing issue with the lake aerators and while the trustees hope there will be no major repairs next year, money is set aside for this.
In answer to questions, Tim noted:In addition to $10,000 set aside in the lake fund, as required by our indentures, the subdivision maintains about a $5,000 reserve balance.
None of the homeowners are delinquent in homeowner assessment payments.
The yearly increase in assessment is an option, not a requirement. The trustees believe a modest increase is appropriate.
Lake and Streetlight Maintenance
Jim Harris presented a report provided by Jim Gruenewald. Highlights:The lake required more algaecide treatment this year because of the warm summer and storms.
At one point, the lake was in some backyards because of extreme rainfall.
We are also treating the lake water to reduce sludge accumulation in the bottom.
Residents should assure that only rainwater goes in our storm sewers; everything that goes in them ends up in the lake.
We have replaced polypropylene lines holding the aerators with steel lines.
We have replaced parts in the aerator at the south end of the lake. Residents think the plastic swan holding the lines up is much classier than the formerly used milk jug.
Streetlights were cleaned. Plans are to clean them again and replace some missing parts in the spring.
In answer to questions about vandalism, Nancy Shaffstall said that one streetlight was vandalized this year. Residents also noted that one Halloween pumpkin ended up in the street and some cars and mailboxes were vandalized over the July 4th holiday. Jim Harris reminded residents to call police if they note any disturbance. Des Peres police have excellent response time.Communications
Jim Harris reported that Carel Reynolds plans to publish 4 newsletters in the next year (up from 2 last year). Our website is still maintained by former resident Joe Odgers. In the past year, Carel also produced a new subdivision directory. Extra directories and copies of indentures are available from Jim Harris.
Landscaping
Nancy Shaffstall reported the following projects completed in the past year:
Sealed the basketball court and replaced a swing at the playground
New wood chips spread on the playground and a new Gingko tree planted nearby
The garden club continues to maintain the butterfly garden in the common ground near the playground and a native shade garden in the woodland border. The trustees have agreed to help sponsor another gardening program in the spring at the Lodge for the entire subdivision, contributing $120 to the room rental and speaker fee. The garden club will provide publicity and refreshments. This year’s topic will be Lawn Care the Easy Way.
Old shrubs have been removed from some cul de sacs with new shrubs, ornamental grasses and perennials planted. These new plantings have been chosen to thrive without supplemental water once established. Nancy thanked homeowners who have provided water to help new plants get established.
At the entry planting, daffodils, perennials and dwarf blue spruce have been added. We will continue to provide annuals at the entry sign. The goal is to have four seasons of interest in this area.
Two golden rain trees were planted in the road easement north of our entrance. South of the entrance, trees and stumps were removed above the retaining wall. We have asked the city of Des Peres to provide support in improving this retaining wall. Our proposal is to add two tiers of blocks and soil to make the area above the wall more level and suitable for planting and maintenance. The city has just notified us they have budgeted $5,000 toward this project. The trustees will meet with city officials to further develop a plan for this area.
General Q & A
The trustees provided the following answers to general questions:The aerator at the north end of the lake will be turned off sometime this month.
A tree on the dam died this year. The trustees have decided to not replace trees on the dam as they die since the root systems can harm the dam.
Leaf pickup was discontinued this year because the cost estimate was much higher than last year. Residents were notified of this in the fall newsletter. The trustees decided leaf pickup was not a good use of funds, primarily because:
With a variety of trees in the neighborhood, leaves fall at different times. One pickup cannot get all of the leaves and two pickups would be prohibitively expensive. When pickup was provided, only about half the homeowners took advantage of it.
After paying for lighting, general landscape maintenance, lake and other maintenance, our discretionary funds are quite small. The trustees feel that other projects will do more to benefit everyone in the subdivision and maintain property values.
There will be a street sweeping of the neighborhood on November 21. This is not intended as a leaf pickup and if large piles of leaves are in the street the sweeper will go around them. A dumpster for the debris will be parked on the dam the night before the sweeping.
One resident noted that some residents leave multiple cars parked in the street. We have no city or subdivision rules that address this as long as the cars are periodically moved.
The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
Back to Top
Minutes
2004 Dougherty Lake Subdivision Annual Meeting
November 16, 2004
Des Peres City Hall
In attendance: From the trustees, Rich Dugge, Chair; Jim Braibish, Communications; Jim Gruenewald, Lake/Maintenance; Nancy Shaffstall, Landscaping; Paul Shaver, Treasurer
Approximately 24 residents were in attendance.
Recognition of Volunteers
Rich Dugge recognized and thanked the many residents who volunteer their time to help with various activities in the subdivision. They include:
Mary Lynn Ahrenbeck, for helping with playground repair work
Kristin Fletcher, for the annual Kids’ Fishing Derby
Angie Ganninger, for the annual Fall Picnic
Joe Odgers, for hosting and maintaining the subdivision Web site
Doug Stephens, for helping with playground repair work
Susan Stephens, for holiday decorations
Betty Struckhoff, for her leadership of the Garden Club
Approval of Minutes
Minutes from the November 2003 annual meeting were approved.
Treasurer’s Report
Paul Shaver, Treasurer, presented the report. He distributed a financial statement for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2004. Following are points he highlighted:
2004 has been a busy year, with many improvements evident at the front entrance, in the common areas especially the playground, in the fall leaf pickup, and lake maintenance
We paid bills of $32,327 in fiscal 2004, which ended Sept 30th. Expenditures break down as follows:
48% landscape maintenance
16% administrative, largely insurance and City & Village Tax Office fees
14% general maintenance of common areas, street lights and fences
13% lake maintenance, including electricity for aerators, repairs of aerators, and controls of algae and weeds
6% general utilities including electricity for lighting, as well as water, sewer and trash pickup
2% social, including the fishing derby, fall picnic and holiday decorations.
The 2005 budget calls for expenditures of $36,564, an increase of $4,237 over 2004. The increase mainly covers:
$1,465 for second of two fall leaf pickups (the second pickup this year falls in the 2005 fiscal year)
$800 for winter removal, storage and re-installation of lake pumps
$677 for extraordinary repairs of irrigation systems
$775 for improvements in plantings and landscape maintenance
$520 increase in operating reserve for contingencies.
The 2005 assessment will be raised by $5 to $195 per home. This is lower than the rate of inflation. This basic assessment covers the routine operating expenses of the subdivision. The trustees always try to spend your money wisely.Lake/Maintenance
Jim Gruenewald reported on activities to maintain the lake and other physical facilities:
Treatments are being applied regularly to the lake to reduce the amount of algae and silt buildup.
This year, no addling of goose eggs was necessary; there was only one nesting bird and its eggs were washed away by heavy rains. The “Flight Control” product was sprayed once to land around the lake; we don’t know how effective it is. Its effectiveness is reduced by rains or when residents bag their grass clippings.
Bulbs have been replaced on many lights and repairs on others. We are identifying lights that require frequent bulb replacement to check for further repair needs.
Landscaping Report
Nancy Shaffstall presented the following Landscaping report:
Playground/Picnic Area: A lot of work has been completed in the playground/picnic area. Old mulch under the swing set was dug out and replaced. The swing set was power-washed and stained. The tarp and three swings were replaced. A dying maple tree was removed. A park bench was relocated to a more useful location. Dead wood in the forest-line was removed.
We appreciate the work by the Dougherty Lake Garden Club. They have planted and maintained the Garden by the Lake. It is a butterfly garden and certainly adds to the attractiveness of our common ground. They have also recently completed planting daffodil bulbs in two cul-de-sacs with future plans for the other cul-de-sacs.
Entrance: The planting bed at our entrance has been enhanced and updated throughout the seasons with tulips, then begonias, and finally mums.
Cul-de-sacs: On Camberwell Court., dead trees were removed and a new tree planted. On Briar Fork Court., a bare area was filled in with five new shrubs.
City of Des Peres: At our request, the City of Des Peres has done a great deal of work in and around the neighborhood. On common ground easements two dying trees have been removed. Four new trees will be planted. The biggest job was clearing the overgrown area along Des Peres Road south of the subdivision entrance. Additional work they will be doing includes stump removal and mulching of the area.
Leaf Pickup: The subdivision leaf pickup went well. The 2nd week of leaf pickup began Nov. 15th. I would like to remind everyone to rake your leaves onto the easement and not into the street where they block traffic and storm sewers.
Storm Sewers. All of the storm sewers in our neighborhood empty directly into the nearest body of water. That nearest body of water, in most cases, is the lake. I have a storm sewer map from MSD that confirms this information. Nothing should be discarded into the storm sewers. In September of 2000, we were told by our lake committee, after their investigation, that the major portion of the lake’s problem is simple homeowner contamination: people washing paint brushes in the street, raking sweet gum balls and leaves into the sewers or pouring old oil from their cars into the sewers. We want to remind everyone of our responsibility to our lake and to the water system. Please do not discard anything into the storm sewers.
Symmetry Landscaping Company: Our common grounds are routinely maintained by Symmetry Landscaping Company. We have been pleased with them, as well as Irrigation Services which handles our common ground watering systems.
Future Projects: Replacement boards have been ordered for the park benches. We have two volunteers to install them. We will be looking into other possible landscaping needs in the cul-de-sacs. The land between the Des Peres Road retaining wall and the subdivision fence will be replanted to prevent the return of undesirable, invasive plants, prevent erosion, and to maintain an attractive appearance at the front of our subdivision.
The Garden Club has a project coming up on Saturday, November 27th. They will be clearing the invasive bush honeysuckle from Dougherty Lake property in the woods adjoining the playground/picnic area. They are seeking subdivision volunteers to assist them. If you are able to help, please see Betty Struckhoff after the meeting or give her a call.Nancy thanked residents who have supported efforts to keep the neighborhood well-maintained, attractive, and desirable.
Residents complimented the subdivision for the leaf collection.
Trustee Elections
Two new members were elected to serve three-year terms on the Board of Trustees:
Steve Askren, 2405 Hollyhead
Jim Harris, 775 Haw Thicket.
Continuing their terms on the board for 2005 will be Jim Gruenewald, Nancy Shaffstall and Paul Shaver.The meeting was adjourned at 8 p.m.
Back to Top
Minutes
2003 Dougherty Lake Subdivision Annual Meeting
November 18, 2003
Des Peres City Hall
Trustees in attendance: Bob Butterworth, Chair; Jim Braibish, Communications; Rich Dugge, Lake/Maintenance; Mike Lohuis, Landscaping; Paul Shaver, Treasurer
Approval of Minutes
Minutes from the November 2002 annual meeting were approved.
Treasurer’s Report
Paul Shaver, Treasurer, presented the report. He distributed a financial statement for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003. Following are points he highlighted:
By changing landscape vendors in 2003, we saved enough money to improve service to the subdivision while holding the line on costs.
It costs about $32,000 per year to run the subdivision. About 25% is maintenance and repair, which is an unpredictable amount. The other 75% includes utilities, landscaping, administration, insurance, assessment collection costs, printing and postage. Plus, we underwrite a modest amount of social activity like the fall party and holiday decorations.
In the fiscal year ended September 30, 2002, we paid bills totaling $30,745. In the year ended September 30, 2003, the bills dropped to $25,664. However, this is simply a timing issue because two large bills ($2,660 for streetlight repair and $2,000 in landscape renovation) were paid after September 30).
For 2004, we project expenses of $32,389. For reference, our income from assessments is approximately $34,850 per year. We also earn a modest amount of bank interest.
Our goal is to pay all bills when due and to try to maintain a minimum working cash buffer of about $15,000 to cover emergencies. The subdivision is self-insuring, so we pay for damage to our property out of our reserves. Our income is received just once per year, in the May-July period.
Our restrictive agreement requires the trustees to keep a separate cash reserve of $10,000 minimum to cover lake emergency expenses.
The handout sheet compares expenses from 2001-02 and 2002-03 along with projected expenses for 2003-04. Relative to projected expenses for 2003-04, some budgetary risk areas are noted, where unexpected expenses are most likely to occur. At this time, the trustees are not aware of any latent expenses.
The bottom of the sheet shows a cash flow reconciliation. On October 1, 2002, working cash (not including the lake reserve) was $24,245. On October 1, 2003, working cash was $33,471, showing the bulge created by the bills paid after September 30 this year.
We expect to pay another $17,956 of expenses from now until May 31, 2004. On May 31, we project a cash balance of $15,518.
We note that the yearly assessment has been kept at $185 for 2001, 2002 and 2003. The 2003-04 budget projection indicates that we have a shot at keeping the $185 assessment for 2004, pending a final review of repair projects.
In 2003, the subdivision received assessment payments from 100% of the residents.
Landscaping Report
Mike Lohuis presented the following Landscaping report:
The goal was to maintain the high standard in landscape appearance that the subdivision has come to expect over the past few years.
A new landscaping company (Symmetry Landscaping) was chosen this year to provide comprehensive care to the subdivision common grounds. Symmetry was chosen after a bidding process for equal work. Symmetry’s bid was $9,001.84 for regular landscaping items. This represented a savings of $3,870 (29%) compared to Horstmann Brothers. Service has appeared to be equal to the high standards of recent years.
With the savings in the landscaping contract, a fall leaf pickup was added to the regular contract for $2,550 ($13.64 per household). This was an experiment this year. The trustees would be interested in hearing from residents on whether the service should be repeated in future years.
With the one homeowner leaf pickup, the total annual landscaping contract was $11,551.84 for the 2003 season (~$62/household). The contract allows for a 2% increase per year in the next two years.
Additional items (not part of regular maintenance) included:
o Goose control treatments in the common area for $147. The treatment provided a deterrent this summer to geese grazing on the common areas and mucking up the sidewalk. The “Flight Control” treatment is a naturally occurring substance that is not harmful to plants, mammals or birds.
o Front entrance annual bed (2 colors of begonias for all summer color) for $923
o Irrigation services and maintenance (provided by John Arnold) for $389.50 ($214.50 spring and $175 fall).
A renovation of the front bed was undertaken this year for a cost of $2,000. This renovation was done to replace the oak tree with a couple of new trees (Lilac – tree form), and update the look of the entrance and provide more color through the winter. In addition to the new trees, the front bed now includes some new flowering shrubs, perennials, evergreens, grasses and an additional (third) annuals bed.
Special mention should be made of the involvement of the Dougherty Lake Subdivision Garden Club. In particular, the renovation of the “Garden by the Lake” in the common park area which features a butterfly garden which is attractive and draws and nourishes numerous butterflies. Special mention should be made of the leadership that Nancy Shaffstall has provided in leading the project.
Residents praised the appearance of the entrance.
Lake Report
Rich Dugge presented the following report on the Lake:
The 2003 lake treatments included aquatic weed and algae control. This service, by Lee Redman (Agri Service Consultants), costs $650 annually and treatments are done as needed (usually 2-3 time per summer). This treatment is environmentally friendly to fish, birds and human usage of the lake.
An organic treatment was performed this summer (2 treatments of Power Pond bacterial treatment costing $125) which serves to digest and remove excess nutrients, algae, and organic sludge from the lakes bottom. This treatment helps to prevent the buildup of organic material and therefore the need for dredging.
The 5-HP Fountain Aerator had to be repaired in April. The motor had been shorted and needed to be rewound with new seals, O-rings and oil. Otterbine Company (Aerator manufacture paid for most of the repairs). The net cost to the subdivision was $310.
In July, the 3-HP Aerator Pump had to be repaired in for a cost of $210. Anchor line had been cut about 12′ from shore. Power cord needed to be untwisted and the aerator re-anchored.
The landscaping company (Symmetry) has begun to clean the lake outlet grate of debris after heavy rains for a cost of $60/cleanup. They provide this service upon request from the trustees.
The above treatments combined with the additional oxygen provided by our aerators, has helped improve the aquatic health of the lake and fish and aquatic bird populations this year. Total amount spent on maintain the lake this year was $1,355 + electricity for the aerators.
Residents complimented the maintenance of the lake. One resident noted that he has seen many varieties of heron, wood ducks, deer, fox and other wildlife; the wooded area on the northwest side of the lake has attracted many migrating wildlife. It was suggested that this information be communicated to residents through the newsletter and/or Web site.
Subdivision Indentures
Residents approved by a vote of 20 to 0 the consolidated Restrictive Agreement of Dougherty Lake. The new document consolidates amendments previously adopted by residents, and makes technical updates. No changes were made to the intent of any provision of the indentures.
Trustee Elections
Two new members were elected to serve three-year terms on the Board of Trustees:
Jim Gruenewald, 12948 Briar Fork
Nancy Shaffstall, 772 Haw Thicket
Continuing their terms on the board for 2004 will be Jim Braibish, Rich Dugge and Paul Shaver.
Those in attendance expressed appreciation for the service of retiring trustees Bob Butterworth and Mike Lohuis
2002 Dougherty Lake Subdivision Annual Meeting
Tuesday, November 19, 2002 at 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, Des Peres City Hall
TRUSTEES IN ATTENDANCE:
Brian L’Hommedieu, Treasurer; John Steuterman, Landscape; Carel Reynolds, Secretary; Bob Butterworth, Chairperson; and Mike Lohuis, Maintenance
27TH ANNUAL MEETING CALL TO ORDER
Bob Butterworth called the meeting to order, welcomed everyone and introduced the trustees.
OLD BUSINESS
Bob asked if the minutes from last year’s meeting could be accepted as they stand. John Steuterman moved to accept and Paul Shaver seconded.
Review Aerator/Bubbler Project
Mike Lohuis reported on the lake project. On March 12, 2002 at a special meeting of the homeowners, an assessment was passed to fund the purchase of one aerating fountain for the south end of the lake and one aerating bubbler for the north end.
The fountain was installed as planned however there were unexpected delays in installing the bubbler. Chemical treatment of the lake was limited to only one treatment, therefore showing that the aerator was successful in keeping the lake clean.
Because of the delay in installation of the bubbler, utilities were less ($1800 projected, actual $940). The schedule for running the aerators will be:
Summer –
Fountain 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
Bubbler 7 p.m. to 7 a.m.
Fall –
Fountain 12 to 6 p.m.
Bubbler 12 to 6 a.m.
Winter – Both 12 – 2 p.m.
George Griffin asked if we had any recourse for the problems with the installation of the bubbler.
Mike stated that because of the poor installation, the cable was damaged and we had to replace it. We attempted to follow up with the contractor, however he immediately went out of business and we have been unable to locate him. Luckily we had paid only ½ of the contract for the work.
Joe Odgers stated that the lake looked clean with no algae.
Review of Financial Statement
Brian L’Hommedieu went over the financials (see attached)
The cost of living increase for this year has been calculated at 1.5%, however, the trustees have chosen to not increase our annual assessment this year.
Charles Schrock asked if everyone was paid up on their assessments and if not what would be done. Brian stated that 2 people had not paid yet and that the procedure was for City and Village Tax office to follow up.
A question from the floor was whether the trustees were planning to do anything about hiding the electrical panel. Brian stated that we chose to leave that to the next set of trustees to decide.
Lighting Update
Mike Lohuis shared that considerable effort goes into keeping our lights going. This year maintenance costs were mostly from cut cables or photocells failing. He has had to replace numerous lenses. A lightning strike in the park last year cost us $877 to repair the lights along the lake. He reminded everyone that cut wires were very expensive, a repair costs from $200 to $300, and asked that everyone remind their neighbors to watch out for electrical cables when digging in their yards.
A question from the floor was whether we should consider installing all cables in conduit to protect them. On Hollyhead, the city street crews cut one wire, so they fixed it by installing the wire in conduit running from a small box by the homeowner’s mailbox. He suggested we ask the city to replace all of them the same way as they fix our streets. Mike will check it out.
· Fence Project
Bob Butterworth stated that the only project this year was the split rail fence along the common ground at the west end of the lake. The iron fence at the north end will be fixed this coming year.
·Landscaping
John Steuterman explained that this area was actually under budget due to our gardener leaving us this year. Since John took over landscaping, he has hired a turnkey maintenance company who does a very good job.
In the past John included the front of the subdivision along Des Peres Road, even thought it is not our property to take care of. The city stated they would cut it gladly…2 times per year. We felt that was not enough. The next trustees should decide if we continue this work.
John also stated that the playground was over used again this year…happily.
A question from the floor was what was the purpose of the removal of the tree at the entrance and what did we plant. John stated that the tree had died and we replaced it with a Japanese Lilac Tree. Normally the city will take care of trees along the streets, but we chose to take care of our own common ground.
Another question from the floor was what could we do about the leaves? John stated that he had at one time received a bid from a leaf contractor to pick up leaves for around $1500 to $2500. The new trustees will check into getting a bid to pick up leaves house by house several times during the fall.
NEW BUSINESS
Carel Reynolds asked if anyone else objected to there being organized garage sales in our subdivision, i.e. the one Barb Woodham does each year. Missy Goodwin suggested we allow them, however we ask one of our resident real estate agents to handle it instead of Barb Woodham.
Carel Reynolds shared that there have been several incidents recently of people parking boats in their driveways, which upset the homeowners. She asked if anyone felt that we needed to rewrite our indentures regarding boats. There was much conversation however the end result was to leave it alone and allow the City of Des Peres to enforce their ordinances.
Vote to Change Restrictive Agreement
George Griffin stated that he felt we had done a poor job of rewriting the restrictive agreement. There was much conversation back and forth. Joe Odgers defended his actions in rewriting the indentures, which was requested at last years annual meeting.
Greg Hoffman, a real estate attorney, pointed out many items in the restrictive agreement that needed to be restated, as it was very inconsistent.
Charles Schrock stated that we have been using this document for many years and that the rewrite is better than the old document. He suggested we go ahead and vote on the rewrite.
George Griffin made a motion that a committee be formed to revise the indentures and submit their revision to the homeowners. Carel Reynolds seconded the motion and the ayes passed it.
Barbara Schrock suggested that the committee keep in mind that they need to make it easy for us laymen to understand.
Charles Schrock suggested we set a time frame for the changes to be completed. Carel Reynolds suggested June 1, 2003 and all agreed.
The Indenture Committee will consist of: Greg Hoffmann, George Griffin, Joe Odgers, Tommy Bahn, Moira Crean, and one of the newly elected trustees.
Vote on Legal Fee Addition to Restrictive Agreement
Bob Butterworth asked of we should discuss the addition to the indentures. George Griffin suggested we include it in the rewrite and made motion we table it for now. It was seconded.
Vote for new Trustees
Three trustees had previously offered to run for trustee:
Jim Braibish, 12842 Stump Road;
Esther Figueroa, 2448 Camberwell Court; and
Paul Shaver, 12859 Stump Road.
When the time came for introductions, it appeared that Esther Figueroa had left the meeting. Missy Goodwin suggested because she was not here to speak for herself, we eliminate her from the ballot. Carel Reynolds asked if anyone in the room would be interested in filling the third position, and Richard Dugge stepped forward.
All three proposed trustees stood up and introduced themselves and were thanked for stepping forward.
Joe Odgers reminded us that it is against the indentures for 3 trustees to run for 3 years at one time so as to stagger the turnover. Richard Dugge offered to serve only 2 years.
· ADJOURN
Click Here to review the November 2002 Financial Statements in Adobe Acrobat Format.
Back to Top
2002 Dougherty Lake Subdivision Special Assessment Meeting
Tuesday, March 20, 2002 at 7:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, Des Peres City Hall
A special meeting of the homeowners of Dougherty Lake was held on Tuesday, March 12, 2002. In addition to 46 homeowners being present, the following trustees were present also: Mike Lohuis, Chairman; Brian L’Hommedieu, Treasurer; John Steuterman, Landscaping; Bob Butterworth, Maintenance; and Carel Reynolds, Secretary.John Steuterman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. John explained that we were going to go over what has been proposed, costs and funding and at that time the floor would be opened for questions. After that, we would take a vote of the homeowners present, majority ruling.
Mike Lohuis explained the philosophy behind the need for aerators. He stated that a full dredge would cost 10 times what the last dredge in 2000 cost (which was over $30,000+). The aerator would postpone this dredge for some time.
During the annual meeting of 2001, we took a consensus from those present as to what kinds of aerators the homeowners would like to see us install. The consensus was 1 fountain type aerator near the front by Beaver Dam Road and a bubbler type aerator to be installed near the inlet at the north end of the lake.
The aerators would be on a timer and would be turned off at night. Our plan is to remove the aerator in the winter and reinstall in the spring.
Total capital cost would be $10,453 with an annual operating cost of $1886. We propose a $60 per homeowner assessment, which would be included with the annual dues which will be mailed in April. This includes a 5.5% commission that must be paid to City and Village.
Questions:
Betty Struckhoff: Did we vote on 1 of each type of aerator at the last meeting? If so, why the fountain at all as she prefers the natural look of the bubbler.
Mike: Yes, we voted in November.
Bob Losby: What is the life of the aerator
Mike: They come with a 5 year warranty which is the best we could find.
Joe Odgers: Has anyone seen a bubbler? They seem strange to look at.
Mike: They may seem strange, but they are more efficient and less expensive to install considering the distance.
Diane Brinker: How do you plan to store them?
Mike: In someones garage as they are not very big.
Tom Rengel: Do we have to lower the lake to install them?
Mike: No
Tom Rengel: We didn’t ever need one before, why do we need one now?
Mike: That is exactly why we are in trouble now.
Tom Rengel: Why not install 2 bubblers if they are twice as efficient?
Mike: They are not twice as efficient, and the consensus of the homeowners was they wanted the esthetic beauty of the fountain.
Sherry Rubin: Can we change them from running from day to night?
Mike: Yes, if everyone agrees.
Jim Lees: What is the warranty on the aerators?
Mike: A repair man we talked with said replaced one only in 5 years.
Doug Campion: Bubblers are much better and more efficient.
Carel: But they aren’t attractive to look at.
Guy Hunt: Thank you trustees. This is not a significant assessment.
John closed off the discussion and a written vote was taken. Carel collected the ballots and the count was 8 no and 38 yes. The assessment passed and the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m
2001 Dougherty Lake Subdivision Annual Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, November 20, 2001 at 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, Des Peres City Hall
Trustees in attendance:
Brian L’Hommedieu, President/Treasurer; John Steuterman, Maintenance Administration; Carel Reynolds, Secretary;
Bob Butterworth, Maintenance; and Mike Lohuis, Maintenance
1. Call to Order. Brian L’Hommedieu called the meeting to order and asked that the minutes from last year’s meeting be accepted. Bob Webster moved to accept and Joe Odgers seconded the motion.
2. Lake Report. The following lake report was given by Mike Lohuis and Carel Reynolds:
Four items were remaining from last year’s lake project. a) To inspect the dam under Beaver Dam for cracks, b) To replace the top portion of the spillway with new concrete and c) To clean and paint the grate on top of the spillway. The dam was inspected by Strata Services and it was determined that there was not enough damage to warrant repair at this time. It was recommended that we continue annual inspections. Because of the expense involved in removing the grate to clean it and repair the concrete, it was decided to wait until the dam is in need of repair.
The trustees began accumulating data for the next step in maintaining the health of the lake. Upon investigation, we decided that we must install aerators in our lake if we want to keep it healthy and eliminate having to dredge it regularly. This has been a lengthy process but we finally have the details worked out.
Our first step was to investigate which types of aerators we should consider. Through our investigation, Otterbine aerators were selected which are sold by Outdoor Equipment. Due to the size of the lake, it is necessary to purchase 2 aerators for sufficient aeration. It has been decided that one will be a 5-hp. Gemini aerator, which not only aerates the lake but also produces a fountain that is very attractive. The second one will be a 2-HP ‘high-volume’ surface aerator, which does not produce a fountain (just a 4 foot high bubbling jet) but actually produces more aeration than the 5-HP Gemini aerating fountain.
These two different aerators will prove to be the more economical route for us (approx. $8K vs. $10K if we install 2 fountain type aerators). Crown Electrical (at a cost of around $1600 to $1800) has been selected to do the electrical installation this fall, which includes:
1. Replace existing panel with new 60-amp panel,
2. Install new conduit under street with two 25-amp circuits, and
3. Run power to the aerators, which will be located near existing junction box.
Outdoor Equipment will charge approx. $300 to install the aerators, and an additional $300 each time they come out to remove for winter and replace in the spring.
Discussion ensued regarding the types of aerators the trustees had chosen. After much explanation, an informal, nonbinding consensus was taken and the majority of the group voted to continue on with the original plan of 1 of each type of aerator.
3. Maintenance Report. The following maintenance report was given by John Steuterman:
The fiscal year 2000-2001 was the first full year that Dougherty Lakes Subdivision had contracted with professional landscape companies for many of the turf services. We started our year with Gerber Landscaping and will end with Horstmann Brothers Landscaping Company.
Gerber was initially contracted to provide a wide range of services that included seeding all common areas, mulch, trimming, chemical applications of fertilizers and herbicides, mowing, and irrigation control. Unfortunately, this company ceased operations in July of 2001 and we transferred these responsibilities to Horstmann Brothers.
The grounds maintenance season begins in the early fall with seeding, fertilization, and triple aeration of about 3 acres of common ground that included the right of way along Des Peres Road. We contracted for leaf removal later in the early winter along the seeded areas to allow for continued grass germination. The front circle was cleaned up under the supervision of Mrs. Nancy Pawol, a professional gardener hired to develop the front of the subdivision.
The early spring season was the beginning of our fertilization and weed control program using granular products in the common ground areas, including the seven cul-de-sac circles. We continued with the placement of about 30 cubic yards of mulch as tree rings, toppings for the 7 circles, the beds adjacent to the playground area and immediately under the swing sets.
In the late spring, the irrigation system was opened at the top of the subdivision and in the playground area. The controls were set with the knowledge that the playground control box would require replacement this summer. Bids were sent out to companies for replacement of the control box and John Arnold Irrigation Services was selected for the replacement. Several of the sprinkler heads were replaced due to normal wear and tear.
The summer season dealt with 32 mowings of the common ground areas, herbicides in the creek areas to control the weeds, several fertilizations of the grass areas, and spot weed control. The 7 circles received three separate trimmings and weed control. The circle in Briarfork Ct. was completely renovated.
The renovation of this circle proved to be less then satisfactory from the standpoint of a very poor rain level in the early and late spring. This resulted in the death of several of the bushes. The plan was to replace these bushes in the fall when more rain could be expected. Unfortunately, the warranty for these plants was null when Gerber went bankrupt in mid July.
The renovation (either partial or complete) of circles due to over-grown plantings will continue to be a long-term project. The success of these renovations will depend on rainfall and/or the willingness of individual homeowners to water the circle areas as none of these circles have irrigation.
Installation of an irrigation system in the circles would require about $5000.00 to $6000.00 per circle. This would require an assessment and it was felt by the Trustees that this project should wait until more pressing issues are completed.
Horstmann Brothers was selected to take over the grounds maintenance in early August. During this interim period, the subdivision grasses have been cut by Conrad Kempa, a young resident of the subdivision. The trustees are very grateful for Mr. Kempa’s help in this endeavor.
Throughout the year, the front circle has been replanted with bulbs and annuals under the supervision of Mrs. Pawol. The trustees have been very happy with the level of care provided to our signature front entrance. Mrs. Pawol resigned this year due to family responsibilities. Representatives of the Garden Club, Mrs. Mary Lee Butterworth (new Trustee) and Dr. John Steuterman (Trustee) will direct the care of the front circle. Horstmann Brothers will be providing the support staff.
The new fiscal year of October 2001 saw the application of the seeding program, thus completing the cycle of services for our subdivision.
The cost of all these lawn services (except the installation of the irrigation timer) from October 2000-October 2001, was $16,230.12. This total breaks down to $1,400.00 for the front circle and $13,830 for the rest of the subdivision.
Future plans call for the installation of a children’s garden by the Garden Club in the playground area. The costs have not been determined at this time and may reflect an increase in expenditures for the lawn maintenance budget.
As trustee in charge of grounds and maintenance, I anticipate a future budget of approximately $16,000.00 barring any extensive tree removal.
Discussion ensued regarding the increased cost of the maintenance and John Steuterman explained sufficiently.
4. Subdivision Lighting. The following subdivision lighting report was given by Mike Lohuis:
An article was included in the newsletter to assess the desire for newer and better lighting in the subdivision. Many residents responded saying they would like better lighting, but also that they preferred the current lamp style. Increasing the output of each lamp was investigated and a sample of the improved light was installed at the intersection of Beaver Dam and Crab Thicket. This sample light contains 4 bulbs instead of 2, and an improved transformer. Though it is a big improvement the expense to install new lights like this one is prohibitive at $350 per lamp. The Trustees are currently examining alternatives for improvements over the next few years.
Discussion ensued regarding the repair of individual homeowner lights. Mike recommended that homeowners contact Econolight. They charge $40 an hour, which is a very good rate.
There was also discussion about the constant need for repairing our subdivision street lamp lines. The reason was estimated that as people dig in their yards, they possibly cut lines. It was recommended that people check the location of lines before digging.
5. Goose Control. The following goose control update was given by Mike Lohuis:
Many of the Dougherty Lake residents have contacted us regarding the constant (summer) onslaught of Canada Geese. In an effort to address this issue, Mike Lohuis attended a Missouri Dept. of Conservation Workshop on September 6 at Powder Valley and reported the following:
Facts:
* Single permit for subdivision can be purchased from MDC to use approved methods
* Many options (that work) are now available for goose control
1) Landscaping changes, 2) Addling/Oiling of eggs in spring, 3) Harassment via Border Collies (prior to nesting, before molting, sporadically in summer, during fall migrations), and 4) Round-ups
* Many organizations/companies that can help
– Geese Peace (non-profit) training and volunteers for non-lethal control of geese (addling, harassment) training session for volunteers Feb 3-4, 2002
– Fly-Away Home Kennels (for profit) sales/leasing/contracts of Border Collie Control
a) purchase – $3,500, b) lease – $300/mo, $750/yr, c) contract control w/ handler, $4,200/yr (incl. 80 hrs.)
– Holper Pest Control (addling, round-ups)
a) addling – $35/nest + $3.50/egg ($500 min.), b) round-ups – (>$15 / bird)
– Others include: Critter Control, Goose Busters, and Holterra
We would like to propose the following strategy. First, it must be community based (concerted, sustained, complete effort). Second, by educating the residents, we can work together as a community. We feel that a combination of approaches would be best, as follow: 1. Stop feeding the geese, 2. Suggest landscape changes to discourage nesting and molting at Dougherty Lake, 3. Harass from early in year until after nesting is complete and then again immediately before molt and again in the fall. Mike obtained a Fly-Away Kennels videotape to show how the final step is accomplished. We will show the tape at the annual meeting.
Discussion ensued on how we could control the mess less expensively. It was suggested that we have someone hose down the sidewalks by the lake and park periodically to remove the geese droppings.
6. Fence Report. The following fence report was given by Bob Butterworth:
The fences in the subdivision required scheduled maintenance this past year. The guardrails along Beaver Dam Road at the lake were primed and painted for $1,946.48. The cedar portion of the fence fronting Des Peres Road was cleaned and stained on both sides for $3,390.00. The cedar privacy fence at the playground was also cleaned and stained on both sides for $395.00. Lastly, the playground equipment was stained for $100.00.
No discussion ensued.
7. Financial and Assessment. The following financial and assessment report was given by Brian L’Hommedieu:
The Trustees have reviewed the financial position of The Subdivision and are recommending a modest increase in the annual assessment for 2002.
At last year’s meeting, we announced that we planned to assess the homeowners to replenish the lake fund used in dredging the lake and repairing the dam. We were able to defer that assessment until this year.
Per paragraph 13 “COMMON LAND” in the Restrictive Agreement, the Trustees are planning to assess in 2002 the additional amount needed to bring the fund back up to $10,000. In addition, because of the many expenses the subdivision has incurred recently, they are recommending a change in the amount being assessed by individual homeowners and a change in the purpose of the fund.
Currently, the indenture reads:
(a) The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District requires that the maintenance of the dam and spillway to be constructed in the subdivision shall be the responsibility of the owners of the lots in the subdivision and of the subdivision trustees. It is the intention of the Grantor to establish a fund to be contributed to by the lot owners as herein provided for the care and maintenance of the dam and spillway until such time, if ever, this responsibility is assumed by some legally constituted public agency.
The Trustees are hereby authorized to assess each lot adjoining the lake the sum of $75.00 per lot per year, and all other lots in said Dougherty Lake Subdivision the sum of $55.00 per lot per year, which shall be in addition to the original assessment provided for in paragraph 19 of the Restrictive Agreement. It is the intention of the Grantor that this assessment be made and paid in full each year until such time as the sum of $10,000 is accumulated. In the event such sum is diminished, then the Trustees shall recommence the assessments until such time as the sum of $10,000 is accumulated. All of such funds, including the interest thereon, shall be maintained in a separate account, and the income there from and principal, if need be, shall be expended to pay the cost of the care, upkeep and maintenance of the aforesaid dam, spillway and lake.
Our recommended change reads as follows:
(a) The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District requires that the maintenance of the dam and spillway to be constructed in the subdivision shall be the responsibility of the owners of the lots in the subdivision and of the subdivision trustees. It is the intention of the Grantor to establish a fund to be contributed to by the lot owners as herein provided for the care and maintenance of the dam and spillway until such time, if ever, this responsibility is assumed by some legally constituted public agency.
The Trustees are hereby authorized to assess each lot in said Dougherty Lake Subdivision the sum of $75.00 per lot per year, which shall be in addition to the original assessment provided for in paragraph 19 of the Restrictive Agreement. It is the intention of the Grantor that this assessment be made and paid in full each year until such time as the sum of $13,000 is accumulated. In the event such sum is diminished, then the Trustees shall recommence the assessments until such time as the sum of $13,000 is accumulated. All of such funds, including the interest thereon, shall be maintained in a separate account, and the income there from and principal, if need be, shall be expended to pay the cost of the care, upkeep and maintenance of the aforesaid dam, spillway and lake. In addition, this fund may be used to make capital improvements to subdivision common land and equipment.
Questions ensued regarding the additional bank charges this year. Brian explained that the lake CD had been cashed early (thus the charge) to pay for the lake valve work. This money was replaced into the lake CD account. Brian also explained that we were planning to move the Lake account into a money market account so that doesn’t happen again.
Brian explained that because of the rising costs of operating a subdivision, we would plan to increase the annual assessments, per the indentures, to reflect the inflation rate which is 2.7% and amounts to $5 per homeowner.
The next discussion was on the changes proposed to the indenture regarding the lake CD assessment. These changes were proposed to help pay for the aerators and other capital improvements. After much discussion, it was decided that the new wording proposal should be tabled and the trustees should put together another plan to pay for the lake work. The trustees were asked to move forward with installation of the aerators as much as possible with the money available.
It was also suggested that the $10,000 lake fund was not near enough to take care of an emergency, should one arise and that the trustees should address that as a separate issue. One suggestion was to investigate flood insurance.
Another homeowner suggested that our restrictive agreement was not a legal document since it had been changed so many times. A motion was made and seconded that we rewrite the entire restrictive agreement and present it to the subdivision for a vote.
8. New business
There was discussion on homeowners raking leaves into the sewers. These leaves go directly into the lake, thus causing silt and future dredging.
2002 will be an election year for Trustees. Three trustees will leave the board in November and Brian asked homeowners to consider running. It was also suggested that perhaps one trustee stay on the board for 2 more years so that we do not have 3 leaving at once. That option will be considered.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
(For a complete transcript of the meeting, contact Carel Reynolds at 314-821-8787.)
Back to Top
TRANSCRIPTS OF PROCEEDINGS
ANNUAL MEETING DOUGHERTY LAKE SUBDIVISION
November 14, 2000, 7:00 P.M. – Des Peres City Hall
Chairman: Charles Schrock
Treasurer: Brian L’Hommedieu
Maintenance: Bill Ward
Administration: John Steuterman
Secretary: Carel Reynolds
AGENDA
25th Annual Meeting Called To Order
Meeting Format
Old Business
Reading of Minutes from Last Year’s Meeting
Review of Financial Statement
Update on Work Associated with the Lake
New Business
Annual Assessment Inflation Adjustment
Vote on Proposed Change in Restrictive Agreement
Election of New Trustees
Some Well Deserved Thank You’s
Meeting Adjourned
Website- http://www.geocities. com/dlsubdivision/
Charles Schrock called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. His opening comments are as follows: CHARLES SCHROCK: I’d like to officially call the annual meeting of the Dougherty Lake Subdivision to order. As I look back on it, it looks like it’s about the 25th annual meeting. I don’t think we’re all that old or been around that long, but some of us have. Before I start I’d like to introduce the trustees, I know most of you probably know them, but on my left is Brian L’Hommedieu, Brian is the Treasurer. On my right is Carel Reynolds, Carel is our secretary and the two gentlemen here, John Steuterman and Bill Ward, two that have looked after the maintenance in the subdivision and myself, Charles Schrock.
Meeting format tonight is as follows: We’ve asked someone to formally record the minutes of the meeting. We struggled a bit last year trying to get the minutes of the meeting together because we participated in the meeting and tried to write the minutes at the same time; so we’re going to try it a little different tonight, see how it works. So if any of you want to speak it is important that you identify yourself, stand up so we all can be heard. The crowd is so large but it helps the voice project and make your point.
So with that I’ll move on to old business.
First item of old business as in most cases is the minutes from the last meeting. We mailed them out last year, and we have given you a copy tonight. So look over and refresh your memory and so I’d ask if there’s any changes, corrections, additions to those and I’ll be quick and ask if there are none could I have a motion to accept the minutes as they are? Ed Ruehl moved to accept, and Bob Butterworth seconded.
Next item of old business is the review of the financial statement. You’ll see that we’ve been pretty active this year. Those of you who were here in September will recall our meeting about the lake. A copy of those minutes is included in the handout as well. I’ll ask Brian to go over the financial statement.
BRIAN L’HOMMEDIEU: You’ll find on the last page of the handout this evening, this year’s profit-loss comparison and on the very back of it our net worth for the course of the year. I wanted to run through briefly and point out the differences in last year’s spending and this fiscal year’s spending. Some are significant, some are not. You’ll see in the first category, administrative costs, there was a slight increase in administrative costs. Most of those were incurred because: we bought a program for the trustees that allows us to make up this report, some signs for announcements of these meetings and basically just generally updating and organizing our files and records. The postage costs increased fairly dramatically in that category and that is mostly due to the quarterly announcement that we’ve been sending out, and the quarterly newsletter. And then, after last meeting there were quite a few questions last year about the people receiving copies of the indentures and we made a special mailing of that at the end of last year. The increase in printing costs also was as a result of those two items.
There was quite a bit of a decrease in commissions. We negotiated with our City and Village Tax Office, the people you pay your assessments to, for a half a percent decrease in their commission and that is reflected here by about a $230 decrease in that.
It’s a rather large or fairly large increase in the common ground expenditures. Last year this was solely due to the purchase of a pair of picnic tables and a platform to put those on. The increase in fence construction was due to the construction of a split rail fence along the eastern border of the lake between the private property and the common ground on the lake there. That bench was dilapidated and crumbling and we replaced that. Fence maintenance was simply the painting of a fence over on the east side of the common ground or playground.
Insurance costs were basically the same. Irrigation costs were slightly less. You’ll see the largest difference here is in lake maintenance. For those of you who attended the meeting on the lake a month or so ago, we explained the costs that were incurred in removing a large amount of dirt from the lake, the costs that were incurred in analyzing that dirt, and inspections of the spillway. We spent about eleven hundred dollars analyzing the dirt that was in the lake bottom to make sure that it was suitable for dumping in areas that accept that sort of thing and that it was not contaminated. Eleven hundred dollars for inspections of the spillway vault, tunnel and dam area. Thirteen hundred dollars for a topographic survey of the area around the lake and parts of the lake bottom. A large part of the costs or probably nearly half was for about forty percent of the dirt we removed from the lake. The other sixty- percent of the dirt that was removed will be on the next year’s fiscal budget.
We spent about two thousand dollars, which was roughly half of the expense for rebuilding the wall along the very northeastern edge of the lake. We needed access to remove the dirt and to do the work on the seawalls around the lake. About half of that expenditure was incurred during this fiscal year and the other half will be next fiscal year. Another seven hundred dollars or so was spent in miscellaneous cleanup, including the purchase of scaffolding, biological inspections and recommendations for what needed to be done to maintain the health of the lake.
In the next category, lawn and garden care, we had a significant increase in expenditures there as well and I’m going to defer most of the conversation about that to John Steuterman. Legal expenses, considerably less, we settled the lawsuit that was discussed at last year’s meeting and we don’t anticipate any further expenditure on that particular issue.
The slight increase in miscellaneous costs were due do to gifts given to people who did work around the subdivision, those who worked on the neighborhood directory, and Christmas decorating and so forth. The slight increase in the party committee was to cover the expenses of a few additional functions — I believe we called them happy hour parties or fishing derbies that occurred during the year. The slight increase in utilities basically was due to the fact that we ended up with five water bills on last year’s budget rather than the normal four and that one additional bill was the summer bill, which is the highest.
Overall you’ll see that we spent a little more than five thousand dollars of our total expenditures, and if you review the previous treasurer’s reports you’ll see that that has not occurred for some time. Our basic net worth has increased from year to year as we’ve gone along; but we’ve come to a point where we have a few aging structures and some other issues that needed to be addressed and that is why we spent a little more than our income.
I would like to briefly mention that in this next fiscal year which runs from October 1st to next September 30th, we have quite a few other expenditures that will be incurred and the budget will look very similar to this if not a little bit more in the red next year. We have the remainder of the lake dirt removal, which has been completed, but the cost was incurred on this present fiscal year or which will be recorded next year. As I mentioned we only paid about forty percent of that cost. We had about fifty percent of the wall construction, through which they gave us access to the lake. We also found that the lake valve in the spillway vault was in need of replacement and that replacement has been done and its cost was about $7500. Finally, there are some repairs that need to be completed also on the spillway and the lake vault that Carel may touch on later, she knows more about that.
In the common grounds, we had two very large trees that needed to be removed. They were removed a couple of months ago. The bill came in after the end of our last fiscal year and that was about $2400. And then, the final half of the picnic table installation was paid this last fiscal year. Are there any questions?
CHARLES SCHROCK: You were going to defer to John on some of the maintenance items.
BRIAN L’HOMMEDIEU: The lawn and garden care, yes.
CHARLES SCHROCK: John, maybe if you just want to add your comments.
JOHN STEUTERMAN: We ran into an unanticipated disagreement with the vendor that was supplying our lawn and maintenance and that disagreement resulted in a mutual parting and put us into the lawn and maintenance procurement business before we had planned on doing that. So with the help of four boys, and four very responsible parents we were able to keep the grass cut most of the summer but in the course of analyzing the work that had been done there was a substantial amount of damage done to the subdivision by the vendor and so we are in the process of repairing and replacing everything from reseeding to replanting, taking out of trees, replacing trees, spraying of trees, shrubs, and we’re in the process of developing a long range plan with the circles. We have a liability to the Briar Forks Circle, the circles according to the public safety committee of the city of Des Peres says that you have to have a hundred percent visibility through your circles so that if a police car looks down the street they can see completely through the circle. If there’s a child standing on the north pole and you’re at the south pole you’re supposed to be able to see through the circle, we don’t have that, in one of the subdivision circles that’s going to be completely replanted and taken apart.
So I’m in the process of formulating a long range plan which is a one year plan and a two year plan and it will necessitate some expenditures beyond what we have originally done in the years past simply because so very little has been done. I’ll answer any particular questions.
ED RUEHL: John, you said there was a lot of damage done by the previous fellow taking care of the lawn, what kind of damage did he do?
JOHN STEUTERMAN: Trees have been girdled with weed whips necessitating the replacement of three trees. There was no fertilization or seeding of the playground area, there was damage to the turf with the extra heavy mowers they were using, resulting in rock exposure. There was damage to the irrigation system with the mowers running over the exposed outlets that were broken. That’s just on the common ground. Mulching not done in the circles, poison ivy in the circles that was left allowed to overgrow so we felt at the mutual parting that it was time to move on to a more experienced company. I let out bids, dozens of bids and we ultimately got down to three companies for which it was awarded to the Gerber Landscaping Company. Essentially I have gone up the food chain of landscaping people in an effort to find professional, knowledgeable and competent well-trained work crews and that’s where we are right now.
ED RUEHL: I’ve got another question, John. My question is on the maintenance of the lamps; they jumped considerably. Did we have a lot of vandalism on the lamps or what created that?
CHARLES SCHROCK: I’ll answer that because the previous year I was involved with it. We actually did not receive a bill from Yard Bright and when I called them and tried to get a bill, he simply never sent a bill. The necessary work was done repairing the lights, such as glass bulbs, etc., but at no cost to the subdivision despite my calls to Yardbright requesting a bill. Hence the year to year comparison looks strange i.e. going from a couple of thousand dollars to zero to a couple of thousand dollars.
BILL WARD: I’ve been working on that and part of the problem that we had is the City of Des Peres came through and did a lot of street work and knocked out a lot of lights. I got the City of Des Peres to come up with eight thousand dollars to repair about fifteen of the lights, including two of them that they had to redo the wiring in two cul-de-sacs. Yard Bright was not really maintaining the lights the way they should have. They let the maintenance of them go down to the point where most of them needed new photo cells, they needed a lot of new wiring, and they were just in real bad condition. Fortunately I got the city of Des Peres to cover most of that cost, which was almost above and beyond what they should have done. They were gracious enough to say okay, we made some mistakes, we dug up the wires and we just covered them over and we didn’t repair it. Actually I had to have a conversation with the mayor before I finally got that accomplished.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Flip over to the very back page of your handout, which is the assets and so on. If you go from year to year you’ll notice that the expenditures, the five thousand dollars that we spent above the revenue for the year, came out of the surplus that we built up over the previous several years in anticipation of spending a substantial amount of money on the lake at some point in time. That some point in time was this past fiscal year, although as Brian indicated some of the expenditures will roll over into next fiscal year. So it’s not like we’re penniless and looking to have to borrow money to cover our expenses.
Okay, if there’s no other comment or questions on the financial statements I’d ask for a motion to accept the financial statement as presented.
KAYE HUCH: I move to accept.
BOB BUTTERWORTH: I second we accept it.
CHARLES SCHROCK: With that, we’ll move on to the third item of old business and you’ve heard much of what I anticipated would be in the third item of business, that’s work associated with the lake. We had our special meeting in September to discuss where we were. We had sort of set the anticipation that we might need a special assessment to cover the work associated with the lake. The good news was that we thought that wouldn’t be necessary and we updated you as to where we were, although at that point in time we hadn’t moved any dirt out. At that point in time we also knew we had to repair the valve on the spillway but hadn’t done it. Through the good work of the lake committee I can tell you that the valve has been repaired, it’s a brand new one, and the dirt is gone, all forty-six truckloads of it.
So that’s the good news and as we said those actions would solve the problems above the problems for a lake. There’s always going to be little issues and we still have some little issues but the big issue has been taken care of and it will solve the problem for a goodly period of time. That was the allusion to some things in the future for the dam, spillway and the lake. Those, there is at least two items or maybe three, depends how you break it down. One is the top of the spillway — the spillway is concrete. At the top of that concrete it has been eroding, spaulding, to the point where it’s two or three inches, maybe even more, Carel will correct me if I am wrong here, and that needs to be built up and repaired. We have a bid on that and the bid was some fifteen or sixteen hundred dollars, in that range, anyway, under two thousand dollars and we’re still looking for quotes. It’s in that magnitude, some two thousand dollars to do that and we’ll do that. The board has said sometime next year when the weather is decent; it’s not something that urgently needs to be done.
The other item that was discovered during the inspection of the dam spillway, was in the raceway under the road where there needs to be some caulking of the pipe. It wasn’t a solid piece of pipe that was put in there, so there are sections with joints and some of the joints show signs of some leakage — small leakage is normal apparently, but you don’t want that leakage to grow and start eroding and causing more problems. That will be done sometime next year as well.
The grate on the spillway is another issue that needs to be addressed. There’s a metal grate, which has been there for thirty years. It was originally galvanized steel and it’s starting to rust around the edges and so it needs to be painted, regalvanized, replaced, whatever the best, most economical solution is.
One other that was talked about before is still the idea of having an aerator in the lake. So, there are some things still to come that need to be done on the lake, but I think the one that we had the greatest trepidation about, was the issue of silting. Would we be able to move the dirt effectively and to what extent did we have to move what quantity, that’s been answered, so there’s really nothing that needs to be voted on, unless you all have some comment. If not, I’ll move on.
New business includes the annual assessment. The annual assessment, back in 1991 was set up at $150 per household and the same for all households. That $150 per household was to be inflated with the Consumer Price Index, if the trustees so chose. They didn’t have to raise it, but could raise it without having to go to a vote of the residents. The past two years we’ve had it at $150. If you look at the Consumer Price Index, it allows it to be $187.36 and the trustees have voted on raising the assessment to $185, to make it an even number. With the anticipation that we are going to incur greater expenses in the general maintenance of the subdivision, as John talked about, and since we still have some work around the lake to do, we feel this is necessary.
So the next item of new business has to do with the restrictive agreement. If you look at the 3rd paragraph of Paragraph 13 “COMMON LAND”, there’s a minor word change. Paragraph thirteen actually deals with the ten thousand dollar fund that we’re obligated to maintain as sort of a contingency fund for the lake. The ten thousand dollars that was put in that fund has never been withdrawn to the best of my knowledge. That fund has grown to $16,389.37.
In that same paragraph, for whatever reason, when the restrictive agreement was prepared it also alluded to a $25 assessment. That is in direct conflict with paragraph 19 where it talks about the annual assessment or the assessment we just talked about raising to $185.00. We would like to recommend that the underlined words be deleted from the restrictive agreement.
The Trustees are hereby authorized to assess each lot adjoining the lake the sum of $75.00 per lot per year, and all other lots in said Dougherty Lake Subdivision the sum of $55.00 per lot per year, which shall be in addition to the original assessment of twenty-five Dollars ($25) per lot per year provided for in paragraph 19 of the Restrictive Agreement.
Are there any questions on what we’re proposing? It’s just simply wrong and it’s confusing because it seems to imply that our assessment is $25. So the proposal is simply to strike the underlined words. If there’s any discussion to that point, I’ll entertain it. If not, I would like to, by show of hands, have a vote for, for meaning you agree with the Trustees’ recommendation to strike the small part of that sentence out or against, if you want to leave it in. So if I may have a show of hands for the proposal to remove the words — okay, and against? Let the record show that it was passed unanimously.
GENE FIX: I have a question on the increase that we’re going to have in the assessment. And that has to do with the Consumer Price Index? For what, a number of years or what?
CHARLES SCHROCK: Well, let me just explain that. This is going back to the previous item, and it’s in paragraph nineteen of the restrictive agreement. This item was inserted into and voted on by the homeowners in 1991, and it states that at that point in time the Trustees were authorized to an assessment of a hundred and fifty dollars which could escalate with the Consumer Price Index if the Trustees deemed that they needed the funds. So at that point in time I believe we actually had an assessment of $150. Later on, the expenses went down some and so the trustees actually lowered the assessment to around $105, instead of allowing the $150 to move up with inflation, which today would be that $187 number that I quoted. After the assessment dropped, it then went to $125, and then it went to $150, but all these numbers were either at or below the $150 back in 1991, escalated by the Consumer Price Index.
GENE FIX: So it’s cumulative?
CHARLES SCHROCK: Yes, from 1991, so the hundred and fifty dollars escalated by the Consumer Price Index gets us to the $187 number and the trustees by paragraph nineteen, can assess any amount that they deem appropriate up to that amount. Don’t have to go up to it, but they can, depending on what they see as the projected expenditures.
GLORIA CAMPION: That’s without the consensus of the subdivision members, correct?
CHARLES SCHROCK: That’s correct, because the subdivision members have already vested the trustees with the authority to select the amount up to that limit. Now, if the trustees were to come to you tonight and say we want to have a two hundred dollar assessment, we would have to come to you and allow you to vote on that, and we would have to present that proposal to you a month before the meeting. That’s the process of raising the assessment and changing the restrictive agreement.
GLORIA CAMPION: There will be a number of thousands of dollars therefore above and beyond what you have been collecting prior to this. Do you have that money slated for a particular purpose or is it to go in the general fund for a future use and how long are we going to let this general fund accumulate income, and is it in perpetuity? If we do not need additional funds, I understand that this was a big year, how much are we going to accumulate in the general fund when we may not necessarily have expenditures for them?
CHARLES SCHROCK: Well, the board has looked at the future expenditures and we heard Brian talk about how much we had, and where we wound up with bills, substantial bills. So when we talk about half the bill for moving the dirt, the other half is something on the order of $7500, just to give you a sense of the magnitude. Some of the other bills that are coming in include the valve replacement, which wasn’t in this year, either.
So the valve is about $7500, so just two bills that I can share with you right now are $15,000. They are one-time expenditures. In addition, John talked earlier about us moving from the one man show of Mark to something that is a bit more comprehensive in maintaining the common ground and that will cost more money. So as we’ve looked at it, our thinking is that the assessment increased is appropriate given what we view as the anticipated expenditures next year and ongoing expenditures for the next several years.
GLORIA CAMPION: Okay.
CHARLES SCHROCK: In addition, we do in fact have to maintain that ten thousand dollars in the lake fund which was set up in 1982. At that time, ten thousand dollars may have been an appropriate reserve for the lake and the spillway and the tunnel and all of that, but frankly, in today’s terms, ten thousand dollars just barely bought you one valve in the spillway. So certainly one of the things that as you look to the future, whether you keep it in that lake fund, which is required by law, or in the general fund, you must mentally earmark that money for the lake because it is a significant liability. The fence is not an insignificant liability to the subdivision either. The fence is going to have to be painted next year, and that is a mere five thousand dollars. So you’ve got to start looking at the kind of expenses that the subdivision faces. I think we’re comfortable that we’ve made a good judgment on raising the assessment, okay? Any other questions or comments?
KAYE HUCH: Did you give a date for when will we see water in the lake?
CAREL REYNOLDS: It’s coming up.
KAYE HUCH: It is? So we are just waiting for it to rain enough to fill it up?
CHARLES SCHROCK: Yes, if you can influence the rain. We stopped lowering the lake about thirty days ago. The lake is spring fed to a small degree but rain fed by a large degree. One inch of rain will raise the lake about twelve inches. So we need about two inches of rain and we’ll be back up to where we were when we started. It is currently about two feet below the spillway whereas just a month ago it was at least five or six feet below the spillway. So nature is working in our favor and we’ll eventually solve that problem but obviously the winter months are slow months for rainfall and it tends to be not the kind of rain that fills the lake best anyway. It tends to be that slow drizzle. The last couple rains we have had are great for soaking in the ground and watering the plants, but not for filling the lake. The lake level is on the mend; it’s just a matter of time.
GUY HUNT: I don’t know if this is the right place in the meeting to ask this kind of question, but the lowering of the lake gave me a chance to see how many beer cans were going into it and it was kind of good actually because I have a question for the trustees or the community at large. Do we have an ongoing problem with underage drinking at the lake?
CHARLES SCHROCK: Well, I would just say I don’t know the answer to that question, but I will make one observation about the lake. Every storm sewer in our subdivision, from Stump to Hollyhead feeds that lake. In addition, storm sewers feed from Four Winds Farm and Des Peres Road, so the drinking problem doesn’t have to be at the park across from the lake. The drinking problem can be any teenager going home and saying, “I think I had better clean the car out before I take dad’s car back and park it in the driveway.
BILL WARD: The Des Peres police do a pretty good job of patrolling the subdivision and they have caught quite a few people doing that down there over the years and I think it’s gotten better than it used to be.
CHARLES SCHROCK: For most of us that live around the lake, we have to make a call to the police ever so often about the park area, and the police are pretty good about dealing with that, but my suspicion is that many of those beer cans come from around the subdivision, as well as right at the park area.
GLORIA CAMPION: I too had a question about that because walking early in the morning, particularly Monday mornings, I’m seeing a lot more garbage down near the park and beer cans and at the entrance to the subdivision. Is there anyway to have the neighborhood patrolled and maybe deal with vandalism that has gone on in the past in the neighborhood. I don’t know that it’s terribly bad right now but it seems to go in waves.
CHARLES SCHROCK: John, do you have any comments?
JOHN STEUTERMAN: Part of that discussion should include looking at the lighting in the subdivision to control vandalism. Our lighting is cosmetic, we have poorly lit streets with huge gaps of darkness up and down the street, having walked my dog at 4:30 the morning and 10:30 at night I can attest to that. I think probably a basic foundation of good community safety would include looking at the lighting issue, number one. We have a neighborhood watch program that the Department of Public Safety has put together for many years and the officer will come out to the neighborhood and speak to any group of citizens that either we entitle or one could be entitled to establish a new neighborhood watch program. So there are some ongoing opportunities out there that as trustee I’ll be happy to entertain. But I’ll tell you that I am in contact with Ameren U.E., as we speak to look into revitalizing the light system. That will probably be an assessment if we ever get that far, so we’re just in the talking stage right now, but clearly the lighting is very poor and lends itself to the very problems that you are discussing.
CHARLES SCHROCK: The next item of business is election of new trustees. Two of your trustees, Bill Ward and myself are in the final moments of our three-year tenure, so there’s a need for two new trustees. The board is made up of five trustees who share the burden and do the work that you bid it to do. I would entertain nominees for trustees for a three years term, it can be less if you want, but — I guess you can always quit, that’s what the term is.
MOIRA STEUTERMAN: I would like to nominate Bob Butterworth as a trustee.
GLORIA CAMPION: I second.
BARBARA SCHROCK: I would like to nominate Michael Lohuis as trustee.
BOB BUTTERWORTH: I second the motion.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Are there any other nominations. Now listen, it would be a lot more fun time to have three or four or five candidates, and I would have to get out my ballots. I prepared a special butterfly ballot for tonight, to allow anybody to weasel out that wants to.
ED RUEHL: I move we accept the nominations.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Nominations accepted, is there a second on that?
RALPH OSTERMUELLER: Second.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Well, I propose that the two nominees be accepted by acclamation since they are just an exact fit.
CHARLES SCHROCK: One final agenda item and this is just sort of just my item of throwing it in here without asking my fellow board members. This year was a very active year, trust me, I’ve been a trustee in years gone by and this was kind of a tsunami of years for trustees and for all the things we’ve done. Just a word of recognition for some of the good things that have been done. Brian, our Treasurer, has taken care of all the bills and they’ve been considerable this year. He’s also insured that we collected all the money that is due us and also insured that we got a better deal from city and village on the fee they charge us for collecting the money, as well as getting an education in Quicken. Brian was as involved in the lake as any of us for sure as well as taking on the assignment of getting that picnic table and the 25’ concrete pad. He almost got to the point on the concrete pad where he was about ready to do it himself, because he thought it was going to be easier than getting the contractor to do to it.
John took on the bulk of the general maintenance stuff in the subdivision and that runs the gamut, from grass mowing and sprinkler systems and we’ve got about four different systems for lights that need attention. With Mark’s departure and after talking to a number of people and deciding who might do a good job for us, and working through getting Gerber lined up, that was a considerable job, as well as being heavily involved in the lake activities.
Bill’s arm twisting and cajoling and finally abusing the mayor to get them to pay eight thousand dollars for what they tore up, even though they didn’t seem very strongly motivated to recognizing their deed. But in the end the city came through for us and it was Bill’s persistence that got that done.
And finally Carel, I introduced everybody in alphabetical order but I had to save Carel for last. Carel took on the lake project, really not knowing what she was getting into, nor really the rest of us. She went down a hundred dead ends before we started to see light. I can remember we had the marine biologist in and we talked to any number of people before we finally started getting a clear sense of where we wanted to go and what we needed to do and who were the right experts. I can’t imagine the number of phone calls she made, to tell you that she made a hundred phone calls regarding the lake would grossly underestimate it, I’m sure. To say that there were a hundred E-mails, I think I wrote a hundred E-mails on the lake. But in the end what’s important here is that results occurred, the valve got fixed and the dirt got moved and the analysis got done and we don’t have to stand here tonight in front of you making excuses about the lake. The heavy burden of all that fell to Carel; so I truly appreciate Carel’s work, she deserves more than a hand.
BILL WARD: And Charlie was the glue that held it all together.
CHARLES SCHROCK: So with that, there’s no other questions or comment.
MRS. MEANOR: I have one we’ve not touched on. The city of Des Peres has a leash law and we have some plants in our yard on our property between our house and the sidewalk. These plants have not been planted there for the convenience of some people’s dogs. We’re about to lose one and I’ve had to fence it off a little bit to keep the dogs away from it. We’ve also witnessed dogs being allowed to come up way up into the yard, and do their job and no one picks up after them. That distresses me. There’s also some people in the neighborhood that are walking their dogs, carrying the leash, while the dogs are running loose, so I would like to request that a note be sent with the letters of these minutes requesting that neighbors be more considerate.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Not the dogs?
CAREL REYNOLDS: I will just second what you’re saying, it’s been an ongoing issue that John and I are both trying to address. I put it in my newsletter in a soft article just as a letter for the residents and then we came out with the a clever Angel and Sam article which tried to address it, short of slapping everybody upside the face. We’ll gladly put it in the minutes
GLORIA CAMPION: I am a dog owner and I understand exactly where you’re coming from because I wouldn’t want anyone coming on my yard and doing it’s business. If you know who it is, rather than chastise the whole world of people that are following the rules, if you know who it is, let them know.
SALLY SCHWARTZ: I would like to remind any of these property owners about the law on electric fences, that they are to be five feet inside the property line.
CHARLES SCHROCK: That will be in the minutes and they are for everybody.
JEAN HAKE: For whatever it’s worth, I’m a dog owner who does pick up faithfully after our dog, but I have met at least one person from another area who frequently walks in Dougherty Lake and I don’t believe they always pick up. Sometimes it’s not the neighbor next door but it may be the neighbor down the street in another subdivision, so it’s pretty hard to control that kind of thing.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Well, I think we also bear some burden ourselves. When we see someone doing that, we speak up and say something to the person that’s involved. It will most likely stop at that point, at least for 99 percent of the people, but if you turn your back on it, it won’t stop.
MIKE LOHUIS: One of the things that you could do is put a little post out near the top of the subdivision with some plastic bags in it and a little sign that says, doggy bags.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Yeah, the parks have those. Anybody else got anything they want to share?
MRS. MEANOR: About fifteen years ago, Lieutenant Searle from Des Peres said if you would just leave lights on in the back of house, then we would go by and your yard is lit up and we can see if there’s anybody there. I leave my light on my porch every night.
ED RUEHL: I just have one comment, since I have somewhat of a vested interest in the fence, I’m glad to hear that you are going to paint it next year.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Well, Ed, finances may be tight and we maybe back to looking for some seniors to go up there and do a little spray job.
ED RUEHL: Well, you know who did it before, Charlie.
CHARLES SCHROCK: Okay, if there are no other comments.
MISSY GOODMAN: I have one, I would like to thank Kaye Huch for all the efforts she has put in to the neighborhood picnics and social hours. I think she deserves a round of applause.
CHARLES SCHROCK: With that, the meeting’s adjourned.
NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE
STATE OF MISSOURI
CITY OF ST. LOUIS
I, TOD MINNIGERODE, Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of Missouri, do hereby certify that the foregoing forty pages of transcript of the Annual Meeting of the Dougherty Lake Subdivision was recorded stenographically by my and reduced to shorthand by me on the day, between the hours, at the place aforesaid, and later transcribed into typewriting.
I further certify that I am neither attorney for nor related nor employed by any of the parties hereto; further, that I am not a relative or employee or financially interested in this action.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed my notarial seal on this the 30th day of November 2000.
My Commission expires August 25, 2003.
___________________________
TOD MINNIGERODE
Notary Public,
State of Missouri
Dougherty Lake Special Homeowner Meeting
Tuesday, September 19, 2000 at 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, Des Peres City Hall
The meeting began promptly at 7:00 p.m. Charles Schrock started the meeting by introducing the Trustees and Lake Committee who were present; Trustees: Charles Schrock, John Steuterman, Brian L’Hommedieu, and Carel Reynolds; Lake Committee: Joe Odgers, Jim Meanor, Jim Harris, and John Ahrenbeck. Charles thanked the Lake Committee for their efforts.
Charles started by stating that this was an informal meeting designed to share the findings of the Lake Committee. The following agenda, list of experts consulted on the project and map of the lake was supplied to everyone in attendance. Charles went over the agenda explaining each step and asked that questions be held until the end.
1. BACKGROUND
Last Annual Meeting Much Discussion, Few Facts, No Plan
Trustees Agreed to Study and Come Back with a Proposal That:
a) Involved Knowledgeable Experts
b) Is Fact Based
c) Decided What Is Essential Now / Latter
d) Understand Cost, and
e) Present Proposed Action Plan
2. INVESTIGATION
a) Lake Dynamics
b) Survey of Lake Depth via Boat and Formal Survey
c) Lowered Lake Level for Tie Wall Repairs
d) Silt Samples Analyzed
e) Had Dam, Spillway, Drain Valve & Under Road Pipe Inspected
f) Investigated Ecological Health of Lake
g) Investigated Permit Requirements to Move Silt
3. ACTIONS
a) Repairing Spillway Valve
b) Plan to Move –40+ Truck Loads of Silt From of North End of Lake this Year
4. FUTURE
a) Major Dredging NOT Required for – 5 Years
b) Will Complete Other Repairs to Dam etc. within 12 Months
c) Plan to Install Aerator in Lake (similar to City of Des Peres)
Upon our investigation, we learned that a major portion of the lake’s problem is simple homeowner contamination: people washing paint brushes in the street, raking sweet gums and leaves into the sewers, or pouring old oil from their cars into the sewers. That combined with a lot of run off from higher subdivisions makes it difficult to maintain a healthy lake. Because of the heavy run off, the water and algae are turned over quickly, however, any chemicals we add are quickly washed away in addition to bringing a lot of silt from above ground.In July we dropped the lake to allow homeowners to repair their walls and to take a closer look at the bottom of the lake. The homeowners chose a contractor and work began. The Trustees choose to allow the contractor to access the lake via the common ground next to ChuckToedtman’s property to eliminate the need to tear up each homeowner’s lot to access their walls.
Based on a manual survey of the lake and an instrument survey, it was determined that we have approximately 1 ½’ of silt at the northern end of the lake, more at the southern end. It was determined that if we decided to remove some dirt out of the lake, we would have to test the dirt, and that was done.
We hired Reitz and Jens, the firm who designed our dam, to inspect the dam. Minor work needs to be done to the dam and the valve and valve stem need to be replaced.
Carel Reynolds explained the work several lake experts did in helping us determine the health of the lake. The bottom line is that we do not have an unhealthy lake, just a dirty one. We need to: a) not restock the lake as often; b) treat the lake with chemicals often to stop the algae; c) remove some of the dirt that had caused the north end of the lake to become too shallow; and d) install an aeration system to help keep the lake healthy. Our plan is to do all of the above in the near future.
Lee Foster commented on what a great job the lake committee and Trustees have done and that they appreciate our due-diligence. He also asked that we ask the truck drivers who will be removing the dirt to please drive slow through the subdivision and clean up after themselves. He also asked that we thoroughly check out the noise an aerator will make, for the benefit of the homeowners who live on the lake and suggested we install a light on the fountain. We agreed that we would check into everything and if necessary, run the aerator only during the day.
Chuck Toedtman asked why we did not just remove all of the dirt that had accumulated in the bottom of the lake, and we explained that we did not have the funds to do that, and that we did not want to assess the homeowners the amount needed for that much work. Installation of the aerators will help manage the silt problem. Jim Harris added that we would most likely not have to dredge for at least 10 years, if ever.
Jim Matcuk asked how long the work would take and Charles responded that we would get it done as quickly as possible but that we are waiting to find a place to take our dirt.
Mike Lohuis suggested we put the dirt in the dip in the back of the playground. Charles explained that we could not do that because it would run into the creek behind the playground.
Charles announced that we would be taking nominations for two new Trustees at the annual meeting, which will be held on November 12th at 7:00 p.m. at Des Peres City Hall.
Charles stated that he had been asked about maintenance of the area between the sidewalk and street. His findings are that the trees and grass are yours to take care of.
Charles ended the meeting by thanking everyone for coming.
DOUGHERTY LAKE SUBDIVISION
MINUTES FOR THE ANNUAL MEETING
NOVEMBER 16,1999
The meeting was brought to order at 7:00 P.M. by Charles Schrock who conducted the annual meeting in Joe Odgers’ absence. Joe had a personal emergency (death in the family) and could not attend this meeting. A welcome letter from Joe was read in his absence.
Trustees introduced themselves and described their job assignment: Charles Schrock, Maintenance; Cindi Stanley, Secretary; Bob Webster, Treasurer; and Bill Ward, Administration. Joe Odgers is President.
Minutes: The minutes from the last annual meeting were presented for reading. A motion for waiving the reading of the minutes was introduced by Ed Ruehl and seconded by Tom Bahn. A majority voted to waive the reading of the minutes.
Financial Statement: The Subdivision’s financial statement for the fiscal year October 1, 1998 to September 30, 1999 was briefly reviewed by Bob Webster. The Subdivision’s financial position is excellent with income exceeding expenditures by $5,000. He noted that the Certificate of Deposit is a reserve required by MSD in case repairs are required on the Subdivision’s lake, dam or spillway.
Question: Tom Bahn – Why was street light maintenance dramatically less than previous years?
Answer: Bob Webster – Just the timing of receiving the bill from the service provider.
Question: Jim Lees – Who provides the service?
Answer: Charles Schrock – Yard Bright Co. provides the service.
Annual Assessment: The Trustees decided to maintain the existing annual assessment of $150 per home for the 1999/2000 fiscal year.
Lake Committee Report: Joe Odgers served as the Chairman of the Lake Committee which included John Ahrenbeck, Steve Berhndt (resigned), George Griffin, Jim Harris, Jim Meanor and Carel Reynolds. This committee was established as a result of discussions at last years annual meeting to determine if the lake had silted in sufficiently to require dredging. The guidance from the residents was to seek professional input and develop a plan. The Lake Committee’s Report was read and the meeting opened for questions and/or comments.
Comment: Peg Griffin offered comments on the Report in her husband’s absence (illness). George (a member of the Lake Committee) has a preference for following the advice of the consultant retained by the Committee versus the proposal of a majority of the Committee.
Question: Mary Lee Butterworth – Is this the only way to find the solution to all the issues of the lake?
Answer: Bob Webster – We do not have historical records on the topography of the lake bottom and hence no point of reference. The proposal is one of the most common ways to discover the amount of silt build up and how to correct.
Comment: Guy Hunt – He believes we need to develop an understanding of the sources of the silt build up, the effect on the lake and how to prevent in the future.
Comment: Charles Schrock – The lake has been dredged once around 1980. The run off area of the lake includes Four Winds Farm. During construction there was a lot of bare ground and erosion when it rained. This resulted in a lot of silt build up.
The current thinking is to lower the level of the lake during the summer of 2000 to assess the silt build up, develop a topographic map and allow lake side residents an opportunity to do maintenance on retaining walls. The timing will be set well in advance to allow for these activities.
Question: Gene Fix – If work needs to be done (silt removal), does it take a vote of the trustees only or a vote by the homeowners.
Response: Charles Schrock – The trustees have been empowered by the homeowners to make this type of decision. However, if the cost of repairs requires special financing (like the fence) then a vote by all homeowners would be required.
Civil Action: The homeowners at 740 Stump (Chad and Margaret Funkhouser) built a playhouse in their back yard. This was brought to the attention of the trustees by several homeowners in the early stages of construction. The Restrictive Agreement of the subdivision prohibits any detached buildings. In years past when other detached buildings were proposed or built the residents supported enforcing the Restrictive Agreement. The trustees felt obligated to enforce the Restrictive Agreement. The Funkhousers were approached regarding the building of the playhouse. They had a copy of the Restrictive Agreement. The playhouse was completed. The trustees sought legal advice. In the end the Funkhousers refused to remove the building and a lawsuit was initiated. The case was decided in favor of the trustees. With the courts favorable ruling the trustees decided not to incur additional legal expenses to force the removal of the structure.
Comment: Rex Bull – He feels we should stick with the Judges ruling and have the play house removed in order to maintain continuity with the Restrictive Agreement and the neighborhood.
Question: Unknown – Where in the Restrictive Agreement is the wording about the exterior buildings.
Answer: Charles Schrock – The very first paragraph of the Restrictive Agreement, paragraph 1- LAND USE AND BUILDING TYPE. Also paragraph 2a – ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL.
Comment: Ed Ruehl – A couple of years ago a resident erected a nice, clean and well constructed storage building but it did not meet the indentures and the homeowner had to remove the building. We should not accept one building because a precedent will be set.
Comment: Fred Shaftstahl – We need to uphold the Restrictive Agreement.
Motion: A motion was made by Rex Bull that the trustees take the necessary actions to have the playhouse removed. Fred Shaftstahl seconded the motion. A show of hands vote was taken. The motion passed; 23 in favor of pursuing removal, 11 against.
Amendments to the Restrictive Agreement: Two amendments to the Restrictive Agreement were submitted to the residents. The first was to Paragraph 2 – ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL. The intent of the changes was to clarify what the residents found acceptable regarding “outbuilding, shed, playhouse, detached garages, above ground swimming pools”.
A good discussion ensued with points made for and against. A vote was taken. The proposed change was not approved.
It has been brought to the attention of the trustees that a neighbor on the lake has installed a rather large satellite dish in their back yard. Neighbors are complaining, and Joe Odgers has talked to this owner and asked him to either remove the dish completely or remove it from eyesight by planting large bushes around the satellite.
To avoid further issues of this matter, the second proposed change to the Restrictive Agreement adds “antenna” to Paragraph 10 – TELEVISION AND RADIO AERIALS.
After some discussion, a vote was taken. The proposed change was approved. Paragraph 10 of the Restrictive Agreement will be amended as follows:
TELEVISION AND RADIO AERIALS AND ANTENNA. No television or radio aerial may be erected that projects more than eight feet above the ridge line of the house without written permission from the Trustees. No dish antenna with a diameter exceeding 24 inches may be erected or attached to any house or placed on any portion of any lot. Any dish antenna placed as a self standing structure on any lot must be unobtrusive and shielded from view and must have prior approval of the Trustees pursuant to paragraph (2) subparagraph (b) of this agreement.
A third proposed revision of the 3rd paragraph under paragraph 13 “COMMON LAND” in the Restrictive Agreement was introduced.
This wording was not changed when previous Trustees modified the Restrictive Agreement. This paragraph as it exists is in conflict with paragraph 19 “ASSESSMENTS: LIENS of the Agreement. It was brought to the trustees’ attention, however, that this change could not be voted on, because it was not publicized prior to the meeting. The issue was tabled for now.
Election of New Trustees:
The terms of Joe Odgers, Cindi Stanley and Bob Webster have expired. Nominations for new trustees were accepted. Nominees were John Steuterman, Carel Reynolds and Brian L’Hommedieu. A vote by the residents approved all three nominees.
No additional issues were brought forward and the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 P.M.
DOUGHERTY LAKE SUBDIVISION
ANNUAL MEETING MINUTES
NOVEMBER 10, 1998
Joe Odgers, the current president of the Board of Trustees, called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Each of the Trustees introduced themselves and stated their current function on the board. The members present were: Cindi Stanley, Recording Secretary, Charley Schrock, Maintenance and Bob Webster, Treasurer. The fifth Trustee, Bill Ward was not able to attend the meeting.
The Trustees expressed their thanks to several residents for their efforts this year on behalf of the subdivision: Bo Hanley who donated much time and effort in planting and maintaining the entrance to the subdivision, George Griffin for his advice and critic of the draft of the consolidated Subdivision’s Restrictive Agreement and Amendments and Ed Ruehl for his continuing unsolicited efforts in helping keep the common grounds clean and uncluttered and for other services.
Cindi Stanley commented on this year’s annual picnic. On behalf of all the Trustees she expressed thanks to Betsy L’Hommedieu, Mary Lee Butterworth, Jane Hokeness and Moira Steuterman, for their efforts in making this year’s event successful.
Joe Odgers stated that the minutes of last year’s annual meeting had been distributed to all residents and asked for a motion to wave reading of the minutes and to approve them as distributed. The motion was made by Ed Ruehl, seconded and carried.
Bob Webster presented the Treasurer’s report. Financial statements for the period 10/1/1997 through 09/30/1998 were provided. There were several question regarding the lake fund and also about various subdivision expense items. There was some discussion about the expense for the fee paid to George Larson for his work in collecting annual assessments. Bob mentioned that he had solicited a bid from another company and the rate was slightly lower. Bob will discuss this bid with Mr. Larson’s office to see if they will match the competitive offer. George Griffin had several questions in reference to the lake fund. Ed Ruehl had a question on the expenses regarding the sprinkler system. It was explained that there had been some vandalism of the control box at the playground and entrance and that several sprinkler heads have been damaged and required replacement. Bob also answered questions regarding the number of residents who where delinquent on the annual assessment. A motion was made to approve the report. The motion was seconded and carried.
Joe Odgers announced that consolidation of the Dougherty Lake Subdivision Restrictive Agreement with the seven amendments had been completed and a copy will be sent to all residents, along with the copy of the minutes of this meeting.
Joe Odgers reported on the status of recent activity relating to the need of making repairs to the lake. This has been under discussion for several years, and it is the consensus of many residents that something has to be done within the next few years. There was significant discussion relating to steps that should be taken before launching into a major project. Comments and recommendations were made by: George Griffin, Steve Behrndt, Bob Osby, Jim Meanor, Chris Kallaos, Julie Powers, Lee Foster, and Roy Sullivan.
There was general agreement that:
A Lake Committee should be formed to include Trustees and other Dougherty Lake residents.
A consultant should be hired to perform a study of the lake and recommend action.
Liability of Four Winds Farm and MSD should be determined.
A plan to include necessary action, costs and recommendations for funding should be drafted and presented at a special meeting of residents.
George Griffin moved to conclude the discussion of the lake. The motion was seconded and carried.Joe Odgers commented about the increase of the Annual Assessment from $125 to $150 and asked for comments or questions. There were none.
Joe Odgers called for the introduction of New Business. There was no reply.
Steve Behrndt moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded and carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 P.M.
DOUGHERTY LAKE SUBDIVISION
ANNUAL MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 29,1997
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by the current president, Ed Ruehl, who introduced the other current trustees. He thanked those residents who have helped with various subdivision projects during the year.
The Des Peres City Manager, Doug Harms, attended the meeting to provide details about Des Peres’ request to seek an easement through Dougherty Lake and Dougherty Ridge common ground for the purpose of access to a proposed Green Space area to be developed on a 10 acre tract immediately to the south of the area in the subdivision commonly referred to as The Playground. Donation of the property to the Missouri Department of Conservation is under consideration by the current property owner if easements can be obtained and the donated property can be “hooked” to the Phantom Forest site on Barrett Station Road which was previously developed as Green Space. Harms indicated he had received a positive response for an easement across their common ground from the Trustees of Dougherty Ridge Subdivision, although the easement grant had not as yet been approved by the Trustees. Harms explained the various possible scenario if the easements were not obtained, including the eventual development of the land by the owners or that if the land is donated without an easement through Dougherty Lake common ground, the probability that if developed into Green Space, a fence would be constructed adjacent to our playground. The current zoning is single family homes.
There was extensive questions and discussion. The primary concern was security, increased traffic, parking problems and a possible increase in vandalism. A motion was put to the floor that Dougherty Lake deny permission for an easement through the playground common ground for access to the possible Green Space tract. The motion was seconded, a vote was called and the motion approved.
Ed Ruehl reviewed the Des Peres Road fence project and told residents that the only thing left to do was to spray preservative sealer on the boards which would be done this fall. There was some discussion regarding the fence, construction methods and appearance.
Dick Charow, the current treasurer, provided a copy and report of the 1996/1997 Dougherty Lake revenue and expenses. In answer to questions he said that all assessments for the fence had been received except for one family and all general assessments had been received except for two families. All delinquent parties had been notified of impending liens.
Ed Ruehl confirmed the previously announced increase in the Dougherty Lake annual assessment from $105.00 to $125.00 for the next assessment period.
The proposed amendment to the Dougherty Lake subdivision’s Restrictive Agreement concerning allocation of a portion of the regular assessment to the Lake Fund prompted considerable discussion. Steve Behrndt raised the point that the original amendment establishing the Lake Fund limited the fund for the purpose of repair to the dam and spillway and this was done to satisfy requirements of the Sewer District. Mr. Behrndt said that the Lake is considered Common Ground in the Restrictive Agreement and should be maintained or repaired from the general fund. Because of the uncertainty of the original intent of the amendment, a vote on the proposed amendment was postponed. The Trustees will review the Restrictive Agreements and propose future amendments if necessary.
There was discussion on the lake and the probable need for dredging in the near future. The lake depth has dramatically decreased in the past several years. It was suggested that bids be obtained for this project. The Trustees will take appropriate action.
Discussion was opened on the amendment to the Restrictive Agreement covering fences. There were a number of questions, comments and suggested changes to the wording. Trustee Bob Webster addressed many of these questions and concerns. John Ahrenbeck presented some changes, which were incorporated into the amendment. A motion was made and seconded that the fence amendment be approved with the changes. The motion carried.
Three trustees were nominated: Bill Ward, Bob Mitori and Charles Schrock for the two open Trustee positions. Since there were only two positions to fill Bob Mitori withdrew his nomination. It was then moved and seconded that nomination be closed. Motion carried. Bill Ward and Charles Schrock will replace Ed Ruehl and Dick Charow.
It was suggested that several additional benches be purchased and installed at the playground area to provide parents a place to sit while their children were there playing. Trustees will considered the request.
It was suggested that the Trustees should consider having two general meetings a year by adding an additional meeting in the Spring. Discussion followed noting that this had been tried in the past and attendance was so low it was later abandoned. The Trustees will review the need for an additional meeting.
The current method of voting by those attending the meeting was discussed as it relates to the use of absentee ballots. It was considered that this is outside of the current Restrictive Agreement and would require an amendment. It was mentioned that this might be cumbersome because of the changes which often occur during the meetings. No action to change the present voting method is under consideration.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.