10/4//2005

Rakow questions ARC policies
By Bob Lassahn

At the September Ocean Pines Association (OPA) meeting resident Bill Rakow stepped up to the podium during the public comments portion and delivered a 15 minute speech, carefully setting out his concerns over recent rulings by the Environmental Controls Committee/Architectural Review Committee (ECC/ARC). During an interview Mr. Rakow stated such action goes against his normal instincts, as he prefers to sit down and talk out the problem with the principals involved.

This Naval Academy graduate and career Marine says he does not have a stake in the issue. Although he was also a builder after his retirement from the Marines in 1990, he is now out of the business and his purpose is only to secure a level of fairness for those now running afoul of the “new rules.”

Mr. Rakow says that after discussing the situation with OPA General Manager Dave Ferguson and a conversation with ECC/ARC committee members he felt he was getting conflicting information and sought to further clarify exactly what current policies are in effect. When unsuccessful in getting all parties to the table he reluctantly stepped up in the public forum. His tactic worked in that he managed to secure a meeting with OPA Board President Glenn Duffy.

Reached by telephone Mr. Duffy confirmed that after meeting with Mr. Rakow some two weeks ago he also has some concerns and a review of the situation is in progress.

The issues Mr. Rakow seeks to address are a bit difficult to understand at first glance. They involve the relationship of the ECC/ARC with the OPA Board of Directors and general manager, in addition to an opinion set forth by the OPA attorney Joseph Moore. To those not intimately familiar the whole thing begins to sound like Abbott and Costello performing the famous Who’s on First routine. The first thing is to sort out the players.

ECC/ARC
The Environmental Controls Committee (ECC), now commonly referred to as the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) is actually an autonomous and independent entity established by the Declaration of Restrictions (DR) for each section of Ocean Pines. The ARC personnel most familiar to Ocean Pines residents are employees that embody the working arm of the ECC/ARC and carry out the day-to-day inspections, etc.

The OPA Board of Directors
As confirmed by Mr. Duffy, beyond an authority to appoint ECC members or  “hire and fire,” the OPA Board does not exercise authority over the committee’s guidelines development or their decision regarding any variance request.

Declaration of Restrictions  and Guidelines
The DRs are a formal statement of how land use is governed within the community and any deviation from them requires proof regarding undue hardship and practical difficulties. The DRs also state that an appointed ECC/ARC is the sole body that can establish rules, policies or guidelines regarding their content. The DRs are difficult to change and require a specified majority of each section’s lot owners.

ARC Guidelines is a working document that sets out many of the rules necessary to comply with the intent and purpose of the DRs and they are solely the purview of the ECC/ARC. The document sets forth such things as coverage (percent of square footage in the usable portion of a lot, excluding setbacks, that may be covered by a structure), structure height and many other rules that amplify the content of the DRs. They may be changed by the ECC/ARC without formal approval of lot owners, but must conform to the content of the DRs. The ECC/ARC may determine its own standards for approval of exceptions to the guidelines.

The issue
Mr. Rakow contends that since June 2005, the ECC/ARC has been acting on advice from OPA attorney Joe Moore that essentially prohibits granting exceptions to guidelines. He says the oral opinion (reduced to writing in August) provided that ECC/ARC must treat requests for variances to both the DRs and Guidelines the same and the petitioner must prove undue hardship or practical difficulties and a need versus simply a “want.” He says lot owners are being denied, in his opinion unfairly, exceptions that have almost routinely been granted to many others according to his research.

To date Mr. Rakow says at least six individuals applying for variances to the Guidelines have been denied and a number of others have given up, modifying their plans instead of fighting the issue.

Mr. Rakow wants to see these issues addressed and says he “will not go away” until something is done to clarify the rules. According to Mr. Duffy he will apparently get his wish. During a telephone interview Mr. Duffy states after listening to Mr. Rakow he shares concern over the situation.

Mr. Duffy says that each case must be looked at objectively and recognizes the swing from perhaps a 99 percent approval to a 99 percent denial represents a significant change. He is not completely convinced that all of Mr. Rakow’s points are completely valid, but the situation does cry out for attention. He hopes to arrange a meeting with Mr. Rakow, the ECC, the OPA general manager and the attorney to review the situation.

Send an Email Letter to Courier Editor - be sure to include your telephone number.