At the Special Election meeting for the CC&R Admendment there was a fair amount of discussion about the Blanket Utility Easement in the Amendment that some are concerned with. One person said she had consulted with her attorney and they were not concerned about it. Others were not comfortable with it.

A total of 387 ballots were turned in and there were also 15 proxies for a total of 402 votes. Since we needed a minimum of 420 votes, there were not enough to start counting. A motion was made to extend the voting date to September 15th. It was Seconded and the members present at the meeting approved it. The next general homeowner meeting will now be on September 15th at 7:00 p.m. at the at the Junkyard Café “Garage Room”, 2585 Cochran Street. A lot more votes are needed to get a good decision for this amendment, please start talking with your neighbors that haven’t voted and encourage them to vote now and urge them to vote YES for the amendment.

President Corey Baker also announced that we can continue to mail ballots to Ballot Box during this time. If you haven’t yet mailed your ballot, please send them right away so your choice will count. Mail it no later than September 8th to insure timely delivery. The post office is taking as much as five days to deliver mail. You can still bring your ballot to the meeting but it’s easier to mail it in the prepaid envelope. Also, to have your ballot picked up and delivered to the September 15th meeting, call (805) 206-3519 for pick up.

If you or any of your neighbors have misplaced their ballot, they can get a replacement by emailing Ballot Box at [email protected] with their request. The request will need to include:

• The complete name of the homeowner
• The complete name, Bridle Path Homeowner’s Association
• The property address
• Address where the replacement should be mailed (if different than the property)

Another option is to obtain a proxy. You can call (805) 206-3519 to get a proxy sent or delivered to you, along with instructions for its use.

Remember a YES vote will allow the HOA to correct the many landscape areas the City says need to be repaired over a period of years with budgeted expenditures. A no vote will likely cause the City to demand immediate restoration of the areas they say are in a state of decay. This could result in a huge special assessment and/or a dues increase to all homeowners.

Here is a post from Facebook authorized by Dorna Brown

“Since some members are posting criticisms of the Amendment (which is fine) I want to draw attention to the ramifications of the Amendment not passing.

Also, as to questions about the cover letter and the green page where you are suppose to check yes or no. If you vote yes, it passes. If you vote no, it doesn’t pass.

If the amendment does not pass, there is a guarantee of at least one lawsuit that will be filed against the HOA, and likely several others. The insurance deductible is $50,000 per lawsuit. This will come out of the HOA’s pocket (our pocket) The current lawsuit will begin discovery and go to trial. The Judge will then rule on whether or not the 2018 Board failed to perform their fiduciary duty. If the HOA loses, the litigants will be entitled to reimbursement of their attorney fees and possibly extra damages. The insurance company may not pay everything so the HOA would have to pay. A vote of 2/3 has to approve an assessment. If the assessment isn’t approved, then the funds would come out of the reserve. It would most likely bankrupt the HOA.

Are we willing to lose our mountain park, our arenas and our way of life? You decide…”

by Dorna Brown

Beginning in 2016 the Board fought with the City for two years trying to get out of maintaining the HOA landscaping. The City eventually issued the HOA violations because the landscaping was not up to an acceptable level of maintenance in accordance with the Conditions of Approval for the development of Bridle Path. Rather than comply, the Board decided to turn it over to the owners to force maintenance it had not performed as required by the City. Then the Board issued CC&R violations to the owners to force the maintenance, followed by fines and then attempted to strip owners of their voting rights at an upcoming HOA election.

The lawsuit was filed seeking performance by the HOA to perform their landscape duties as set forth in the Conditions of Approval for the development of Bridle Path as reiterated by the City in its March 22, 2017 letter. This letter clearly points out maintenance areas and who is responsible, HOA or owner (see the chart on page 2). The letter is posted here in the Downloads Tab. A letter from the HOA is shown as an attachment to the City letter. It’s a bit difficult to read in a few places, but it’s the best the City could provide.

We urge you to Vote YES on the amendment as it will bring Bridle Path into compliance with City requirements and will also resolve so many conflicts within our community.

The settlement we are asking for is not for damages of any kind, we are simply asking to be reimbursed for our verifiable out-of-pocket and legal expenses, a great deal of which was paid to produce the amendment. The amendment you will be voting on would not have been possible without our expenditures for legal advice to make this event happen. We did not just sue Bridle Path over lack of maintenance. We sued because a previous board attempted to suspend our voting rights just before an annual election. We have been actively involved in working on this amendment so it will make all of Bridle Path a better place.

“Reasonable” is a relative term and so is “generous”. Someone on Facebook said the insurance company made a “generous” offer. In fact, the “generous” offer was for a small fraction of our out-of-pocket costs. We would be happy to settle this issue prior to a vote but it is our understanding the insurance company has declined to revise their offer until after the election is held.

At the June 28 Town Hall meeting, Jeff Beaumont explained that the insurance company would very likely make a more “reasonable” offer once the amendment passes because it would be so much less expensive than going to trial. Unfortunately, our truthfulness is being used to imply we are greedy when we are not. Unlike the HOA, the litigants do not have an insurance policy limiting our costs to $25,000. We have spent a great deal more than that and continue to incur additional fees.

It’s important to consider what is in Bridle Path’s best interest. Should our HOA be spending money on legal fees, enforcement costs, or disputes with the City or would it be better to utilize our funds directly for the betterment of our neighborhood?

We truly hope you will vote YES for the amendment as we believe it is best for all of Bridle Path.

Be sure to tell your friends and neighbors about this blog.

With all that’s been said recently, it’s time to give you facts instead of allegations and “He said – He said” statements. Everything presented here can be verified by witnesses and/or independent documents. Once you read this, please share it with your Bridle Path friends and neighbors to inform and help them understand the true facts. Email us with any questions.

Even though they agreed in mediation to prepare an amendment to our CC&Rs to bring them in line with City requirements and back to pre-June 1, 2018 practices and they worked diligently to prepare such an amendment, two prior Board members are now campaigning for you to vote NO. We do not know why. We have fact checked some of their statements and here is what we found.

Statement: Bill Apodaca stated that the litigants agreed in October 2020 to dismiss their case prior to the amendment being presented to the owners.
Fact: Apodaca was not at the meeting where this agreement allegedly occurred, so his information is not first-hand.

Statement:  Tony Delgado stated that the litigants agreed to dismiss their case prior to the amendment being presented to the owners.
Fact: There were four people at a meeting in October 2020, two Board members (one was Delgado) and two litigants. Both litigants and the other Board member state this did not happen. Delgado pressed hard to get the litigants to agree to dismiss but they said they needed to consult with their attorney before any agreement on this issue.

Statement: Bill Apodaca stated that the Insurance Company made a generous settlement offer (regarding damages).
Fact: The insurance Company’s offer was for a small fraction of out-of-pocket and legal fees we have incurred to introduce and defend the lawsuit. Generous is a relative term.

Statement: Tony Delgado stated “I was in the room with the mediator Luis Cardenas, retired Superior Court Judge, and he said, and I quote, “I believe there is a 50/50 chance of winning this lawsuit. It could go either way”.
Fact: Dean Kunicki, the HOA attorney Jeff Beaumont, the litigants’ attorney Michael Kwasigroch and Anne Smith were all at that meeting. Our memory is that Judge Cardenas stated that the litigants have a good chance of prevailing in this case. The Board’s letter (page 3) accompanying the ballot states “Please note that we [the HOA] have been advised by the mediator, who is a retired judge, that we have a strong risk of losing at trial.”

To be clear, we, Ray and Anne Smith, are litigants in the current lawsuit against Bridle Path. We sued the HOA in January 2019 because the HOA Board at that time threatened to suspend the voting rights of us and approximately 25 owners immediately before our annual election, thereby attempting to influence the outcome. Prior to that we endeavored to resolve our differences with the Board in a reasonable manner. Unfortunately, that Board refused, and the lawsuit is still ongoing. Hence here we are still amidst this controversy.

The Next BPHOA Town Hall Meeting will held at the First Street Arena on August 9, 6:00 p.m.

This meeting will be about the upcoming amendment vote.
The Board plans to present additional information and have more questions answered then.

The Town Hall will give you and opportunity to make an informed decision.
We recommend a YES vote on this amendment.

Put this on your calendars and be sure to attend this very important meeting.

Many of you have probably seen some of the contentious Facebook posts, flyers dropped on selected doorsteps or even yelled out from a passing car about our upcoming CC&R amendment. Most of information passed out contain unsubstantiated evidence of fraud or even fabrications that are presented to cloud the real issues.

There is one big misstatement that continues to be propagated: The litigants agreed to drop the lawsuit before the CC&R amendment vote. The litigants did not say they would drop the lawsuit before the approval of the CC&R amendment. Ask anyone who says this for factual proof. The litigants did agree to drop the lawsuit if the amendment passes. Please read the information that came with your ballot for the amendment vote. It is factual and correct.

To address some of the concerns, Anne Smith posted a letter from the City on the Facebook Bridle Path Simi Valley page. We hope you find the information helpful.

In February, 2017 The HOA President, John Johnson sent a letter to the City Director of Environmental Services, Peter Lyons asking for clarification of landscape maintenance. This letter is posted in the Downloads section above as “Letter from BPHOA to City requesting clarification of City’s Fallback Assessment District and other issues regarding landscape maintenance”. The copy is somewhat murky but is what the City provided.

The City’s response about BPHOA responsibility can be found in the Downloads section as “Responses from the City regarding landscape maintenance”. This was sent to John Johnson, then Board President in response to his request for clarification. Once received, the Board tried to suppress it from inspection by owners. A copy of the letter from the City was obtained under the California Public Information Act and was distributed to all the homeowners in Bridle Path.

Here are some highlights from the letter:

• “The BPHOA is the responsible entity for maintaining landscaped areas within street rights-of-ways…and on portions of private properties…” (page 1)
• “Conditions of Approval require that the BPHOA maintain landscaped parkways and private slopes throughout the neighborhood in order to ensure …public landscape image, aesthetic value, and quality of life.” (Page 2)
• “The lack of provisions in the amended CCRs do not negate or supersede the association’s responsibility…” (Page 3). (This directly contradicts what Tony Delgado has stated.)
• “The BPHOA is responsible for maintenance…slopes on private residential properties along Mellow Lane, Rambling Road, Sunnydale Avenue, Azure Hills Drive, the east portion of Prance Court and the south portion of Gallop Court” (page 4).