"Pause the final two installments of the special assessment while we reassess the project."
They followed through on this one, clearly communicating to the membership at their first public meeting and continuing through the process to change this in the HOA budget, although the about-face on the legality of the funding mechanism still needs an in-depth explanation from the current board.

"Conduct a thorough review of both the current wall plan and the alternative proposal that Rob Boyer has tried to present to the board."
A month in, we'd hope to have more substance. This plan is over a year in the making. For some history, the previous board paused the project in the first half of last year, at the request of Boyer and others, to explore potential cost savings. Initial figures were provided to our community representative Meek by Boyer last June. Meek and the previous board requested Boyer to get pricing from his vendors for demolition, permitting, environmental impact, lighting, irrigation, and other smaller items needed to “level” his bid for an apples-to-apples comparison to the approved project using pre-cast concrete.

Hopefully these figures are part of what is mentioned in the July 2nd update about seeking costs from vendors and will be shared at the meeting tonight. Remember, this is not some new proposal being quoted from scratch — they've been working on it for more than a year. The community has every right to ask why we're still waiting if details or a timeline are not provided tonight.

"Provide homeowners with clear, objective information regarding costs, benefits, risks, timelines, and long-term maintenance implications of each option."
The July 2nd letter sent by the board speaks to starting to work on cost detail on the fountain (repair versus demolition pricing), the gate, and the landscaping contract. But it's a bulk email, not the "clear options" presentation the campaign promised. The approved wall project being paused has detailed costs for every aspect of the wall, entryway, park, and gates. We need their side-by-side comparison figures to see accurate cost breakdowns and all of the savings they're promising. Hopefully those also materialize tonight.

"Hold a series of open town hall meetings where homeowners can ask questions, share concerns, and provide feedback" — paired with the companion pledge to "meet weekly to keep the project moving," with meetings "open to the neighborhood" and "frequent updates throughout the process."
This is where the community needs to see serious improvement. The board held one public meeting in its first five weeks, with the second meeting scheduled for tonight. That's a far cry from the weekly meetings promised. Most troubling are board president’s comments at that first meeting, saying, "I think regular meetings will be helpful but I am not sure weekly meetings are needed at this point." Fully walking back this promise before it ever really began. We've also yet to hear about any town hall meetings scheduled for our community.

"Establish a clear way for homeowners to submit questions, concerns, and feedback" and "ensure that all viewpoints are heard and considered respectfully."
Nothing established here either. Homeowners get to weigh in the same way they always have: by emailing the board directly or sending their own mass email to the community. It’s too early to tell if input will be heard and treated respectfully, and whether community input actually shapes their final decisions.

"Present the community with clear options regarding both the wall design and related features, including whether the water fountain should remain or be removed."
Not delivered yet. The July 2nd letter says the board has pricing on repairing versus removing the fountain, but that decision — like the wall material decision — hasn't been put in front of homeowners with any specifics. It's also unclear whether they're committed to following board precedent and conducting an open bidding process with multiple bids from multiple vendors to get us the best scope and pricing for all aspects of their alternative plan. Hopefully we get more clarity tonight, when they present their detailed 2026 budget adjustments and amendments for approval.

"Seek broad homeowner support and majority consensus before committing the community to a final path forward."
No open forum or any sort or draft plan/budget has been shared with the community for the wall, the fountain, the entryway, or the park. Most of the discussion so far has focused on EPS foam and a strict adherence to the original design, footprint, and color of the wall and entryway. A lot of work will need to be done to build consensus in the community, likely requiring a compromise between what the previous board approved and this new board's yet to be seen alternative plan.