LENA PRISCO and TIM TRAYNORLet me be direct at addressing the concerns surrounding landscaping and Associa’s role as our community management company.
Our new landscape contractor is putting in the effort to bring the community up to an acceptable standard. However, Associa’s recent report fails to provide clarity on when we can realistically expect those results. That lack of transparency is unacceptable. Lena and I have made repeated attempts to meet with The Greenery to get answers for both you and us, yet Associa has informed us they are “too busy” to spare even fifteen minutes. That is not the level of responsiveness this community deserves.
The most urgent issue we face right now is irrigation. We are still in drought conditions, and without a fully functioning system, improvement is simply not possible. I continue to receive emails and direct feedback from residents describing common areas that have gone years without proper irrigation. My own weekly inspections confirm this: the system is failing in multiple areas. Berms and open spaces are struggling to survive. In addition, many areas were improperly constructed, lacking the necessary subsurface organics to sustain healthy growth—even with working irrigation. Responsibility for these deficiencies lies with KHOV. There is clear, visible evidence throughout the community where corrective action has been requested and ignored.
As for Associa’s performance, the results are mixed. Despite being funded by our dues, they do not operate with direct accountability to us. This creates a disconnect between the needs of residents and the priorities of KHOV. We have limited influence over their actions, and that lack of control is a fundamental challenge within a declarant-controlled HOA. At present, we must operate within those constraints.
That said, you should expect your resident board members to take decisive action where it impacts your quality of life. Lena and I are fully committed to advocating for this community. We have invested significant time researching alternatives and pushing for solutions that have already saved the community substantial costs while improving outcomes. These efforts have forced meaningful discussions and, in some cases, led to better decisions from KHOV. We will continue to press forward with that same level of determination.
Regarding Associa, I encourage each of you to form your own conclusions. I have formed mine. I am actively engaging with other HOAs and evaluating high-performing management companies. I will continue to present that information—and my recommendations—directly to KHOV. However, it is important to be clear: the authority to change management companies rests solely with the declarant, not the community.
There has been discussion about conducting a community survey. While that may provide useful insight, it will not, on its own, drive change unless it clearly demonstrates a benefit to KHOV. Without that leverage, it risks being ineffective.
Until circumstances change—or until I am no longer permitted to serve under the current board structure—I will continue to represent your concerns forcefully and without hesitation. This role comes with responsibility, and I take that seriously. I remain committed to advocating for this community and ensuring your voices are heard. ~ Tim
More…
Attention: The meeting conducted by Berkeley County Planning Board this Wednesday evening at 6 PM is intended to seek public comments on the proposed PD MUV which as advertised will include assignments of numerous zoning designations for the purpose of establishing various density zones throughout the proposed project. (see map inset)
Based upon interviews with County planning staff by the IATeam, it is our understanding that this new Planned Development Mixed Use Village (PD MUV) designation is an as of right development granted under the existing 2006 PD MU designation. What is being considered will be subject to current Berkeley County requirements as set out in the various departments that have oversight into this project.
