Welcome to the Doverbrook Unit Owners Association Website
Architectural Modifications

Given enough time... There are no secrets.
What a tangled web we weave.

On April 25, 2008, the Doverbrook Board of Trustees announced a letter written by Paul Rogers as a member of the Landscaping Committee. It was not stated as to the purpose of reading the letter at that time. The Board of Trustees has made his letter available to Unit Owners in the Doverbrook Office.

Paul Rogers was on the Landscaping Committee.

October 24, 2007:
The Landscaping Committee submitted an interim report to the Board of Trustees with recommendations including a budget.
Click here.

October 31, 2007:
The Board of Trustees decided to proceed with the liming as scheduled and to "hold off" on the fertilization until the spring because they were unsure what was going to happen to the rest of the property which was not fertilized.
Click here.

On November 1, 2007:
The Landscaping Committee unanimously decided to write an open letter to the Board of Trustees in response to the Board of Trustees decisions with regards to the recommendations of the Landscaping Committee Report.
Click here.

November 3, 2007:
Review of Letter to the Board of Trustees as drafted for review from a
previous Landscaping Committee meeting dated November 1, 2007. Paul Rodgers was not present and did not review the letter and his name was not attached.
Click here.

November 3, 2007: Click here.
Open Letter Sent to the Board of Trustees for the following reasons:

1. Non Payment of Services:
It was noted by the Landscaping Committee that Tree New England has still
not been paid for the Tree Report, as commissioned by the Board of Trustees. The Landscaping Committee has still not received the Tree Report
as of this date.

The Board of Directors and the Doverbrook Property Manager has made
multiple statement(s) that payment has been made, when in fact they have
not. This conduct is reprehensible and actionable. It denotes an attitude that is beneath the level of conduct required to serve on the Board of Directors, and represents the Doverbrook Unit Owners poorly in the community. The Landscaping Committee requests that remuneration and restitution be made immediately without delay and without excuse.

2. Liming a waste of money:
The Landscaping Committee came to the conclusion the liming will not significantly adjust the soil pH in the quantities being used. This is a total waste of money and resources as indicated in the Landscaping Committee Report as submitted to the Board of Directors.

Soil sampling dated October 5, 2006 by Wm. Sccareccia, LLC shows a report
with a single sample for the 94 acres, and recommends 200 pounds per 1000
square feet (4 tons per acre, or 136 tons per the estimated 34 acres of
lawn).
The Landscaping Committee has discounted this report as it is not possible
that a single sample report for 94 acres could be accurate. Moreover, anyone reading this report would realize that spreading 200 pounds over an area the size of 32 feet by 32 feet (100 square feet) over 3 years is irrational.

The Board of Directors provided no rational thought to the Landscaping
Committee as to why they decided to continue liming. This is unacceptable at least and at best indicates a lack of fiduciary responsibility by squandering the monies and resources of the Doverbrook Unit Owners.

3. Fertilization:
It was noted the by the Landscaping Committee that the Board of Trustees
decided to “…hold off on the organic fertilization until Spring…” (2008).
The Board of Directors indicated that “…--the main reason was that we
(Board of Directors) were unsure what was going to happen to the rest of the property (which was not fertilized)”.

After discussion the Landscaping Committee decided that the reasoning
provided as to why the Board of Directors decided not to fertilize was
ludicrous and did not warrant comment.

Discussion ensued as to why the Board of Directors would provide such an
irrational objection to fertilizing in the fall, as suggested by the Landscaping
Committee report, and then suggest fertilizing in the “Spring” (2008), when
the Landscaping Committee specifically recommended against fertilization in
the spring.

In the absence of any ration thought process, it was suggested that the only explanation under these circumstances, was that the budgeted monies are not available. The current Budget for Fertilization (which includes Liming) is $35,000. To date this year (2007), no money has been spent on fertilization. To date this year (2007, $6,000 has been spent in the spring of 2007 for liming. As of this date, the budget should have on account is $29,000.

It was decided that the Landscaping Committee make a formal request to the Board of Directors, a full accounting of the Fertilization Budget, an accounting of monies spend to date, and a full accounting of any and all monies that are not currently in the Fertilization Budget as appropriated in the Doverbrook Budget. It is the intention of the Landscaping Committee to hold the Board of Directors directly responsible. The Board of Trustees has not given out this information to date.

4. Maples and Crab Apple
The Board of Trustees decided not to treat the maples or crab apple trees.
Click here.

November 7, 2007:
Letter from Board of Trustees: Board of Trustees claims that the Landscaping Committee has become "hostile" and disbands the Landscaping Committee.
Click here.

November 18, 2007: Click here.
Letter to the Board of Trustees:
Paul Rogers wanted each and every member of the Board of Directors to known that he did not participate in the drafting of the November 2, 2007 open letter from the Landscaping Committee.

Paul Rogers states that "I consistently advised against taking a hostile stance toward the board..."  It seems that the landscaping committee has now identified where the concept of "hostile" originated from as it is used by the Board of Trustees to describe the Landscaping Committee.

Paul Rogers goes on to suggest "the only way we could be effective would be to maintain a collegial and supportive relationship with the board." This would certainly explain Paul Rogers position when it comes to his personal relationship with the Board of Directors (More to follow).

When Paul Rogers "saw a draft of the proposed letter he told the Landscaping Committee to take his "name off the letter" since he did not "want to be any part of such an inflammatory attack on the board." Paul Rogers name could not be "removed from the letter" since it was never there to begin with. Paul Rogers also states that the Landscaping Committee "set forth various negative and belligerent decisions".
See the negative and belligerent decisions here.

Paul Rodgers states that the Landscaping Committee had "no formal minutes". See "No Formal Minutes" here.

Paul Rogers goes on to say that he is "amazed at the degree of anger that seems to well-up within some people about situations affecting our community. The ill will that apparently lurks just below the surface in some people is a far more serious problem to the health of our community..."

Perhaps we could have a community sing along and sing coum-by-yah. Aww, I love you toooo. Coum-by-yah. Lemmings, Cows, Sheep and Hermits holding hands singing Coum-ba-yah. A single tear just rolled down my cheek.

Or, maybe we could stop the Board of Trustees from squandering our money and lowering our property values. Imagine that, Paul Rogers does not understand why people get "angry" just because the Board of Trustees wasted your money, devaluated your  property, and neglected the Common area and your maples and crab trees. The audacity of Unit Owners to complain.
Click here.

Postscript: The following is noted.
Paul Rodgers address is 28 Doverbrook Road, and is the unit where architectural modifications were allowed by the Board of Trustees.

Paul Rogers "needs to maintain a collegial and supportive relationship with the board" in order to gain their continued support for breaking the Massachusetts Condominium Laws and the Doverbrook Bylaws on his behalf.

Maybe the Board of Trustees should have accepted the large format flat screen television that Paul Rogers offered for the Doverbrook Clubhouse. No better way to maintain a collegial and supportive relationship with the Board of Trustees and the Doverbrook Community.

And how does Paul Rogers know the Massachusetts Condominium Laws and the Doverbrook Bylaws were broken? The answer is because  Paul Rogers is a licensed attorney and was admitted to the bar as an attorney on April 30, 1964. Paul Rodgers is listed by the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers in Boston where his current status is described as: "Clerk".

Follow-up
Doverbrook Unit Owners Meeting: March 31, 2008

At the Doverbrook Unit Owners Meeting of March 31, 2008, Rosemary Costa stated that she and/or the Board of Trustees, had not requested the "de minimis" defense from the legal firm of Bacon & Wilson. Rosemary Costa then stated that both she and Joanne from Appleton Corporation spoke with Bacon & Wilson on this issue.

Beverly Martin at the Doverbrook Unit Owners Meeting of March 31, 2008, stated that this was false. Beverly Martin stated that she had called the office of Bacon & Wilson, and that in fact Bacon & Wilson stated that " the Doverbrook Board of Trustees had gone too far", and that the architectural changes were not "De Minimis". In addition Bacon & Wilson stated that this has "opened a can of worms".

Rosemary Costa, Chairperson, evoked the "de minimis doctrine" with a legal opinion from Bacon & Wilson legal firm. Rosemary Costa stated that she did not ask or suggest this defense. To the contrary, Bacon & Wilson was contacted, and Mark Beglane stated that in fact Rosemary Costa did ask for this "de minimis defense". 

If Rosemary Costa did not ask for the de minimis defense, it begs the question who did. Who has a knowledge of the law, a vested interest in the outcome, and a willingness to violate the law as witness by previous attempts. Could it be Paul Rodgers? You decide.

Paul Rogers request for Architectural Modifications has been denied at least twice by previous Boards of Trustees. Robert Clary told Paul Rogers "not to worry because after the new Board comes in January, it won't be a problem".

April 18, 2008
Sixth Legal Opinion from Bacon & Wilson.
Rosemary Costa has requested yet another legal opinion from Bacon & Wilson to justify the Board of Trustees actions in violating the law.
Click here.

Mark Beglane from Bacon & Wilson states,
"if the Court found the changes to the unit not to be de minimis, then the Board would have exceeded its authority in approving the changes to the unit and corrective actions would have to be taken"

Summary:
The truth is Paul Rogers does not care about you or Doverbrook. If he did, he would not have subverted and conspired with the Board of Trustees to violate the Massachusetts Condominium Laws or the Doverbrook Bylaws for his own personal gain. Paul Rogers as a "Clerk" and "attorney" is classified as a civil servant. Instead he has taken advantage of the Doverbrook Unit Owners with the assistance of the Board of Trustees, and has violated his oath of office.