Bridlewood Quality of Life Coalition

Letter to Bridlewood HOA board’s attorney by kim0917

The link below will allow you to download or view a letter sent to HOA board attorney Chris Payne questioning the procedures and statements made at the July 29 special meeting.  It brings up some points we made in our next-day reaction.

FYI, it’s in PDF format:

Letter to HOA board attorney


More DMN coverage by kim0917

In case you can’t wait for Sunday’s Metro section, here’s a link to the full story run by the Dallas Morning News.

Gotta throw some kudos to Beckie Belcher, her group’s doing a great job at bringing attention to quality-of-life issues.

Letter from Bridlewood resident Jim Cafferty by kim0917
31 July 2008, 11:12 am
Filed under: Quality of Life | Tags: , , , ,

The below is a letter to fellow Bridlewood residents written by Jim Cafferty, received on the evening of July 30:

A few comments and observations on yesterday’s meeting and subsequent voting results:

1.  Can anybody who was in attendance last night square the results of the vote with what transpired at the meeting?  The tenor of last evenings meeting was serious, sometimes heated, and very biased against the board.  The distrust was palpable.

2.  I was under the impression that the results would be based upon a reconciliation of the proxies received as well as the votes cast in person.  In this case, the total number of proxies and live ballots would go in the denominator.  The votes for and against in the numerator.  I hate to parse the statement issued by the board tonight but it appears as though the vote results were based upon placing every home (1,307) in the denominator whether they were present or not or whether they submitted a proxy or not.

3.  This is very suspicious.  Of course I am parsing, as I said.  However, those in attendance last evening heard without equivocation that the message about transparency and clear communication was received loud and clear.  Less than 24 hours later we get a 64 word paragraph and some voting results.  This is outrageous!  If Mr. Long was serious about improving transparency and communication, he could have posted status updates at the least.  I am not splitting hairs here.  I would estimate well over 300 people attended the meeting last evening.  Try to get 300 people to attend anything on a Wednesday evening.  It is clear from the attendance and tenor of the meeting that the residents are deeply concerned.  Mr. Long, you have failed to live up to your word to this community in less than 24 hours.

4.  Point 3 is clearly outrageous for the following reason.  Giving the board the benefit of the doubt, and assuming they remain seated, we all heard that they will redouble efforts to poll the wants/wishes/desires of the residents regarding urban drilling.  Each board member promised that they would throw their support to the clear desires of the community regarding the drilling issues.   If the voting/polling on the gas issue proceeds as this has done we are in big trouble.  I am more alarmed than ever before.

5.  I heard it stated by several people at the meeting and will echo it here.  Let’s take a step back.  This board has:

>  An array of angry residents very displeased at their performance.

>  At least 2 websites set up actively questioning their intentions and pointing to facts concerning their knowledge vis-à-vis timelines, their personal correspondence to residents, their lack of transparency, etc.

>  Faced a crowd of over 300 people (my estimate) openly hostile and questioning their integrity and motives.  Can anyone recall a positive comment or statement of support from a resident at the meeting?

>  Broken out into tears at the events surrounding the meeting last evening and the events leading up to it.

All of this for a volunteer position.  I cannot square these facts and am deeply suspicious. Furthermore, I was deeply insulted at many of the answers posed to serious questions by the residents.  The answers were patently lies and insulted our intelligence.  Mr. Brinkman’s measured questions were brilliant, fact based and to the point.  Mike Long’s answer was, “Are you going to ask a question?”  Gail’s allegations of snipping email fragments was laughable.  I could point to many more.  Email is the window to the soul and we can all read how giddy Gail was after meeting with the Footlick people.

Friends and neighbors, we face difficult times ahead.  This issue is no more resolved than it was a month ago.  I believe we have taken three steps back.  We have a great and vibrant community. We deserve a board that is responsive, above reproach, and is working for the desires of the vast majority of our residents.


Jim Cafferty


DMN coverage of Cherokee Horn protest by kim0917

Here’s a link to video coverage from the Dallas Morning News of a protest outside of a Cherokee Horn office.  Fellow Bridlewood and Flower Mound residents participated.

We’ve been told to look for a full story in Sunday’s Metro section.

Ballot results by kim0917
30 July 2008, 5:06 pm
Filed under: News, Quality of Life | Tags: , , , , ,

The vote to remove the HOA board of directors did not pass, as announced at


The meeting was well attended by residents, to the point that it started late while they were all getting signed in. We don’t currently have an official head count. Residents were given a forum early on to ask questions of the board. Emotions ran high and a contentious tone was set for the proceedings — one resident directly asked individual board members their feelings about gas drilling in Bridlewood (all opposed, with the exception of Mike Walker who said the details of each case must be weighed separately). The board spent the evening on the defensive, even when they weren’t being directly attacked or questioned.


A court reporter was present so meeting minutes should be available to those who couldn’t attend. Requests have already been made for a copy of these minutes. We were also told that votes would be counted by an independent CPA firm and that the results would be known by 5 p.m.


Some specific points we’d like to point out:

·     The ballot results are vague and incompletely reported. They give the number of votes in favor of removal but don’t give the total number of ballots and proxies cast. They also don’t give the total number of votes against removal. They also do not make clear the rules governing this particular vote, taken in a special session called by petition.

·     Nothing lawfully put forward by the petition actually took place:

o    to consider and vote upon the removal of each existing member of the board of Directors of the Association individually;

o    to nominate candidate(s) from the membership to succeed the Director(s), if any, removed by the vote of the Members; and

o    to engage in general discussion about the oil and gas drilling and development controversy within the Association for direction to the board of Directors.

·     The HOA Board of Directors stated that they are “bad” at communicating with residents. They later complained about the cost of communicating through mass mailings. Yet they had no qualms about hiring an attorney at nobody’s request. They stated that the current total cost of this legal advice was around 15-20 thousand dollars. That money could pay for a lot of mass mailings.

·     Another point regarding attorneys: The board at one point stated that residents should not even be worried about gas drilling due to the clause in CC&Rs expressly forbidding it (it would require a two-thirds majority vote to be overturned). If there is no reason to worry, why hire an attorney to look into gas drilling issues without knowing for sure that a majority of homeowners want to overturn the clause? One of those mass mailings could have polled Bridlewood residents on the issue.

·     During the course of the meeting, several motions were brought from the floor. Though these motions were seconded, the board of directors ignored them and stated that Robert’s Rules of Order, the most common standard for such procedures, did not apply. To what rules of parliamentary procedure does the board adhere? They called several requests from the floor “out of order,” thus implying a procedural framework.

·     Requests from the floor for a roll call were delayed and denied several times. Ultimately, no roll call was ever taken.

·     Requests to determine the validity of the Brinkman/Reserve proxy were ignored. We still don’t know.

·     The board consistently insinuated that in calling last night’s meeting, homeowners wasted HOA money through legal fees. Perhaps the board should consider itself to blame. After all, its statements in emails and at meetings were the reason for the petition.


Your thoughts are welcome via the “comments” link.

FAQs — July 29 Special Meeting by kim0917

Below are some questions that have come through our email inbox over the last week.  We hope making them into an FAQ post will help to clarify what can otherwise be confusing information.


Is the Brinkman/Reserve proxy a valid proxy?

·     A proxy can be written by anyone on any paper, even toilet paper, as long as it states the person’s name and contains a dated signature AND is delivered to the HOA secretary (Mike Walker in this case) before the meeting.  This proxy would be as valid as any other. The Brinkman proxy has less problems like turning over your vote to Mike Long so we suggest that proxy.

Should the HOA board be allowed to defend itself at the July 29 meeting?

·     The board has defended itself on at least three separate occasions:

1.  At the June 5 Golf Club meeting

2.  In a letter to homeowners from Mike Long

3.  And with a letter in the Mane Event newsletter

Can my husband/wife vote too?

·     As per the CC&Rs, only one vote is allowed per household.

I handed in the proxy from the HOA board without reading the final clause and now wish to revoke it.  What can I do?

·     Download and print the Brinkman/Reserve proxy.  Complete it and then in the blank space below write the following:  “This proxy supercedes all other proxies.”  Sign and date this statement and make sure the trusted person taking it turns it in before the meeting to Mike Walker, secretary as indicated in the CCRs.

Won’t the Town of Flower Mound’s Master Plan protect us from unsightly, unsafe and unregulated industry in our neighborhood?

·     We, too, initially expected only to deal with the Town of Flower Mound on the gas drilling issue.  In fact, we assumed that the 1,000 ft. variance would protect us and there would be no issues.  However, several drilling sites have made clear that residences are not protected by the Oil & Gas Board of Appeals without vocal public opposition to a variance request.Had Flower Mound residents not come en masse to appeals meetings, it’s likely Red Oak and others would have been granted their requests, making it easier for future requests to be granted, including Bridlewood.  If they can drill in Bridlewood, one of the county’s most densely populated areas, then they will easily obtain permission to come into other neighborhoods.

As always, your questions and comments are welcome on the blog.  We’d like to put together a proper FAQs page with broader scope, so feel free to submit some of your own by clicking the “comments” link.

Review of the original petition that called for Tuesday’s meeting by kim0917

The following was written by Kim Brinkman


Below you will read the exact wording that was on the petition to request the Special Meeting being held on Tuesday, July 29 at 7:00 p.m. at Trietsch Memorial United Methodist Church sanctuary, 6101 Morriss Rd. in Flower Mound.


The petition was needed to be in accordance with the provisions of Section 6.4 of the bylaws of Bridlewood HOA to request the President of the HOA to call a Special Meeting of the Members of the Association.


The stated reasons on the petition were as follows:


1.   To consider and vote upon the removal of each existing member of the Board of Directors of the Association individually;

2.    To nominate candidate(s) from the membership to succeed the Director(s), if any, removed by the vote of the Members;

3.    To engage in general discussion about the oil and gas drilling and development controversy within the Association for direction to the board of Directors.


If you noticed, the letter with the proxy sent by the HOA board did not correctly state the purpose of the Special Meeting.  In addition, they can not make a broad claim to discuss/vote on “any other matter that may be duly transacted at the meeting.”  The Special Meeting was requested and called for the three reasons above and for three reasons above and none other.