Kim Rhodes Question 4 Platform Cont:

liability for our community and home values. Because I was told that the PVHA was difficult to work with before I launched our renovation project, our design involved very few changes to the home’s footprint, we did not make any major additions and did not change the roofline. Notwithstanding our intentionally limited project scope, the renovation project dragged on for 2 ½ year due in large part to the PVHA taking over a year to approve plans, and making our project as difficult as possible every step of the way. Ultimately, we had to let go of the first architect we hired because, even though ours was not his first project in PVE, the Art Jury refused to approve plans submitted by an architect that was not “known” to the Art Jury. When we then hired a preferred architect who submitted substantially the same plans, they were eventually approved - this is absurd. It was a horrific experience and I would like to change the way PVHA operates to make it more responsive to homeowner needs, more transparent, more accountable, more collaborative and easier to work with. No neighbor should ever have to deal with the kind of treatment I received from PVHA nor should members of PVHA tolerate the current environment. PVHA should serve homeowners and not a small group of residents and a board of architects who have unbridled power, can cross-refer, approve favored projects and benefit personally from their Art Jury role. It is a form of corruption and should not have been tolerated this long.