Good evening IHHA Board and Architectural Committee,

Attached is an open letter signed by 22 residents of Ivy Hill. While these 22 homeowners collaborated directly in drafting the letter, the concerns expressed reflect a broader sentiment shared by many others within the community. We are requesting a response to the concerns outlined in the letter no later than one week from today. While we prefer to keep this conversation limited to the board and the undersigned homeowners at this time, please understand that if the letter goes unanswered, we are prepared to share it more widely within the community.

It is unfortunate that communication has reached the point of requiring this level of formality. Yet, we remain open to a direct conversation regarding practical, constructive solutions for Ivy Hill.

We look forward to your timely response.

OPEN LETTER TO THE IVY HILL HOMEOWNER’S ASSOCIATION AND ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE

To the Board of Directors of the Ivy Hill Homeowners Association (IHHA) and Members of the Architectural Committee (AC):

As homeowners within the Ivy Hill subdivision, we are writing to express a number of serious and ongoing concerns regarding how the IHHA and AC have been operating. This letter is intended not to inflame but to inform — and to open a path toward greater transparency, fairness, and lawful governance.

We recognize that members of both bodies may be volunteering time and effort with good intentions. However, the patterns of behavior we have witnessed raise valid and pressing questions about procedural integrity, authority, and compliance with both deed restrictions and corporate governance obligations.

Key Areas of Concern

1. Lack of a Qualified Architect on the AC
   The deed restrictions require that the Architectural Committee consist of five members, one of whom “shall be a qualified architect.” Based on available information, the AC has operated for at least four years without a licensed architect, and possibly longer. Despite this, the AC has continued to send violation notices, interpret restrictive covenants, and approve or deny homeowner requests — all of which may be invalid under the governing documents.
   
2. Representation as a Mandatory HOA
   Although the IHHA is a voluntary, non-stock corporation, it presents itself as a formal homeowners association. This is reflected in its name, website, and public communications. Most significantly, a billing statement was recently mailed to all homeowners without clearly stating that dues are voluntary. Many recipients reasonably interpreted this as a mandatory assessment, when no such authority exists under Virginia law or our subdivision’s deed restrictions.
   
3. Lack of Transparency in Operations and Records
   While the IHHA eventually provided a copy of its bylaws — only after repeated requests and legal pressure — its leadership has continued to demonstrate an ongoing resistance to transparency. Requests for additional documents that homeowners are entitled to under those very bylaws — such as meeting minutes and other organizational records¹ — have been met with significant reluctance or have simply gone unanswered.
   
   There remains little to no communication to the broader community about how decisions are made, how standards are enforced, what those standards are, or how homeowners can engage in these processes. As a result, homeowners are often left in the dark when it comes to understanding how the more subjective elements of the restrictions are being applied. The absence of a clear and cooperative posture toward information sharing has made it difficult for homeowners to understand their rights, the committee’s authority, and the extent to which the IHHA is operating in alignment with its stated responsibilities.
   
4. Selective and Inconsistent Enforcement
   The AC has applied inconsistent standards to homeowner requests and enforcement decisions. In one case, a shed was ultimately approved only after installation — following informal compromises — while a nearly identical request from another homeowner, submitted in advance and verbatim, was denied. The justification given was that the approved homeowner was working toward a compromise, though such exceptions are not reflected in any known policy.
   
   Meanwhile, many other shed-like structures and fences — some decades old — remain in the community, further undermining claims that uniform standards are being applied and making suspect the claim that the AC is approving or denying requests based on harmony with the surrounding community.
   
5. Decisions Made without Proper Authority
   Every decision made by the AC during a time when it was not properly constituted (i.e., lacking a qualified architect) is legally questionable and, in our view, invalid. These decisions include not only violations issued but also approvals granted, denials made, and policies interpreted.

Reasonable Steps We Request the IHHA and AC Take

In order to restore homeowner trust and ensure legal and procedural integrity, we respectfully request that the IHHA and AC take the following steps:

Immediate Corrective Actions:

1. Recruit and Appoint a Qualified Architect
   Promptly recruit and appoint a Virginia-licensed architect to the AC, as explicitly required by the deed restrictions. Until such a member is in place, we request that the AC cease issuing violations or interpreting the restrictions.
   
2. Cease Representing the AC as Properly Constituted
   Until the committee is legally composed, refrain from representing it as having authority to approve or deny requests.
   
3. Acknowledge Past Errors in Representation
   Issue a public statement acknowledging that the recent billing statements did not carry any mandatory obligation, as IHHA is a voluntary organization. Acknowledge that prior communications may have caused confusion and will be corrected going forward. Issue a full refund to any homeowner who joined as a result of that bill, and wishes to cancel their membership.
   
4. Distribute Governing Documents to All Homeowners
   Provide all homeowners with a copy of the IHHA bylaws and any relevant architectural review procedures. These documents should have already been made available², according to those very bylaws, upon request and are essential to basic transparency and homeowner awareness.

Policy and Procedural Reforms:

5. End Selective Enforcement Practices
   Ensure that future enforcement decisions are based on clear, consistently applied standards. If previous violations were approved through compromise, those standards should be clearly documented and made available to all.
   
6. Publish Clear Guidelines for Approvals
   Develop and distribute written guidelines that describe how commonly requested structures — such as workshops and fences — can be approved in accordance with the deed restrictions. These should include clear, objective criteria rather than blanket rejections. There should also be a clear appeals process.
   
7. Acknowledge Invalid Decisions
   Formally acknowledge that decisions made by the AC without a qualified architect were procedurally invalid, and clarify how you will address this moving forward.

Final Thoughts

This letter is not a personal attack on any individual. It is a collective request for integrity, transparency, and accountability from a body that affects the lives and property rights of everyone in this community. We do not seek confrontation — only clarity and correction.

We ask that the IHHA and AC respond in writing and provide a timeline for implementing these steps. A proactive and humble response will go a long way toward restoring goodwill and avoiding further escalation.

Respectfully,