Chronicles

I will do my best to keep things simple and highlight significant events over time.  The most recent years include much activity.  I will be checking my dates as well.  SUBJECT TO CORRECTIONS

• 1995:  Gedern Village neighborhood and HOA established.  Common property areas, including the trail, were to be maintained by and for the use of HOA members.  HOA dues would cover such expenses.  Indenture documents express the terms.  The GV paved trail was demarked on the south end with a chain and a yellow ballard barring outside users.
• 2012: City of Columbia engages Heartland Conservancy to hold stakeholder meetings among various groups in the community regarding public trail plans.  This is the first time that GV residents heard of City plans to acquire our property and invade our neighborhood.  GV HOA members and other nearby Columbia residents were adamantly opposed to a public trail running right through Gedern Village.  We offered several alternative routes.  See report on pages 11-13.
• Sometime in this interim, the chain and ballard were removed from the demarcation point between the City's property and our GV Trail.  The person(s) responsible for its removal have not been identified.  Further, we began to see over time an increasing number of trespassers on our trail.  The City's trail was unpaved, narrow rock with horrible weeds close in.
• We begin to worry about unfamiliar people and their large pets or bicycles racing through.  I saw a man in 2015 urinate off the shoulder of our trail.  I quickly turned back homeward.   The City essentially had no solution and could offer no safety for our trail users.
• In summer 2016, the GV HOA trustees asked members whether we were interested in discussing the possibility of the City taking over our trail.  The yeas won on that point.  But the vote was not to deed the trail to the City.  Then things got busy.
• April 2017: Ubeknownst to GV HOA members, the City made its intentions known that it wanted our trail.  The situation has gone on for "years and year" and must be resolved.  (Pg 13-14 of this file of minutes)  The City discovered that the GV HOA does not own the land in question, but the developer does, through an entity that appears to be defunct.  It was determined that the City would crash the GV HOA meeting in May.
• May 2017: Our next annual HOA meeting was held.  Alderwoman Niemeitz and City Manager attended much to the surprise of HOA members.  They dropped the bombshell that the HOA did not own the trail land.  HOA members left surprised.  HOA trustees anticipated getting this business behind them sooner rather than later.  They presumed the membership were in favor of letting the City have the land.  And it seemed that all were ready to give in.  Importantly, the membership had been led to believe that the US EPA and Army Corps of Engineers required certain costly repairs of the trail and creek property.
• July 2017: The HOA trustees sent out a ballot to vote whether to allow City to acquire the trail land. The question presumed powerlessness and did not consider whether the HOA should approach the developer for the land itself.  Finally, as August neared, HOA members began to speak out and a groundswell of opposition to the transfer of our trail to the City of Columbia developed.
• August 2017: The HOA vote did occur with a 50/50 result of wanting to allow the City to acquire the trail.  HOA members were not finished or satisfied.  
• September 2017: Several HOA members opposed to the trail transfer met at the Gazebo and agreed on a plan of action for attending an upcoming City Council meeting at which they made clear their opposition to City ownership and public use of our trail through our neighborhood.  The trustees did not seem to want to help these members make their case to the City Council. (this file of minutes pp. 1-9)
• October 2, 2017:  City Council demanded "direction" from GV HOA members on the trail issue.  (this file last page) Upon receipt of official ballot and the rush to a decision by October 16, at the behest of the City, HOA members became up in arms and refused to vote.  The vote was abandoned. Members demanded a meeting to discuss the issues.  By this time, it became clear that the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers costs were not mandatory and possibly overstated.  There was no legal obligation to obey their guidance, no written communication to back it up or set a deadline.
• October 16, 2017:  City Council votes to acquire the GV trail property.  Its lawyers are of the view that the HOA have no claim on the land in spite of indenture documentation and 20 years of maintenance and private use by the HOA members. The City also entered into a contract to have its public trail from Rueck to GV trail paved (this file pp 2, 6)
• October 2017: GV HOA members meet to discuss a common property ownership, transfer from developer to HOA as well as purported costs to comply with federal agencies.  After it was determined that costs were overstated and not obligatory, members were persuaded that we do want to own the property, all common areas, in the first instance.  Even for those who might favor City ownership of GV Trail, it made sense to possess the land and control the terms and conditions under which the land might one day be transferred to the City.  (The City had made it clear it will not lease the property.  It apparently has no plans to compensate the GV HOA for its investments in the property over the past 20 years.)  The 28 households represented at that meeting voted to move to acquire the property from the developers, as intended by indenture documents and to reflect our prior claims on the property owing to 20 years plus investments in maintaining the property.
• November 2017:  Just before Thanksgiving holiday, the City's public trail was paved.  As the weather was warm, dozens of trespassers daily traversed GV Trail, brining big dogs, riding fast bikes, and in large groups, running GV HOA members and their pets/children, off their own trail.
• The GV HOA has since engaged counsel to transfer to the HOA the common lands associated with the neighborhood.  It is believed by HOA legal minds that the developer has an obligation to convey the property to the HOA.  
• Also since, GV HOA members on the trail have sought to deter trespassers with signage and notices on the pavement of our trail.  The HOA trustees do not want to put up official signs until the property is fully transferred in our name. My post below documents our difficulties with those who deface our signs.
• I presume the City has not beat us to the property since it would have mounted signage and we would have received some indication of the fact from our trustees.
• January 22, 2018:  The City acknowledged complaints of nonresidents of GV parking on our streets and whether to put of signage to prohibit trail parking in our neighborhood. It doesn't seem clear that the City wants to prevent such parking on our streets.  (this file p 6) 
• We continue to soldier on.