When did the BTMA decide to quit assessing the apartments?

Thank you to a homeowner for the recent question regarding the rumor that Mr. Henshaw just forgot to amend the covenants to remove the apartments and duplexes.

After in depth research into newspaper articles and public records we can assure you that is NOT the truth at all! It was three years from the time the BT One homeowners decided they did not want to be in the same water as renters before a lawsuit was even thought about.

There are two very important things to remember about Burning Tree Master Association that they are hoping you won't realize when they proclaim that they have amendments to the by-laws.

Burning Tree Master Association has no authority whatsoever to:

a.) change a subdivisions Covenants to do anything such as excluding the duplexes or apartments.  The Burning Tree Master Association by-laws cannot change what is in a subdivisions covenants.) 
NOR
b.) assess any subdivision, any homeowner, any duplex  or any apartment owner 

Simply put, the Burning Tree Master Association has no right to demand assessments from homeowners, duplexes or apartments. The subdivisions and homeowners are NOT tied to Burning Tree Master Association, no matter how red-faced a certain officer grasps the back of her chair and says through gritted teeth that she WILL be assessing homeowners.  Hollering that  the Burning Tree Master Association amended their by-laws to exclude duplexes and apartments in a subdivision is a pathetic smoke screen to try to confuse homeowners into forgetting that Burning Tree Master Association does not have, nor has ever had the authority to assess anything.
 

Mr. Henshaw would not have been the one to have amended a subdivisions covenants anyway as the homeowners would have had to have done it. 


Below you will learn how Burning Tree One homeowners decided they did NOT want the apartment and duplex dwellers getting into their pool. Heaven forbid! Note that it was three years before the homeowners sued Mr Henshaw the developer. (Mr. Henshaw was made loans from his own company to Burning Tree Master Association where he sat as president and obligated homeowners to re-pay them. Homeowners won the lawsuit.) 


In 1977, during negotiations  with the Hardesty Co. for construction of what was first known as the Burning Tree Apartments Hardesty the potential buyer/builder stated that he had been involved with other projects for renters to use the same leisure facilities as homeowners and it just not worked out.  Querying the homeowners in Burning Tree One (the first subdivision built) about sharing their recreational facilities with the  apartments and duplex dwellers  these homeowners overwhelmingly agreed that they did not want to share the recreational facilities with the duplex and apartment dwellers in their recreation complex and voted unanimously to exclude the renters. 
  

That was the response from Burning Tree One, in 1977,  However:

• Henshaw failed to amend the Covenants to do this. 
• INCOG advised no amendments to the PUD were ever filed with them to remove apartments or duplexes from the PUD (for zoning purposes). Thus, when wanting to make changes, the duplexes and apartments  continued to follow the guidelines, requesting approval and amending PUD 112.

1979 August 6 BTMA  Pres Mendes Napoli advised that the apartments were still paying assessments.

All was going on in 1977 but PLEASE NOTE THAT it was not until 1980-- three years after Burning Tree One voted to not let the apartments and duplex dwellers in  that homeowners even realized what Henshaw had done to them. It was after that the lawsuit started.

March 15, 1980 Tulsa Tribune: An estimated 120 residents of the fashionable southeast addition—admittedly dumbfounded by reports that each could be liable for parts of $120,000 in debts incurred while Nat Henshaw had control of their homeowners association gathered at Union High School to determine a course of action.


Henshaw, the developer, had membership in the Burning Tree Homeowners Master Association. Because his company 61^st St and Memorial Development Corp owned the lots, he had control of the master association and was, in effect, able to represent original and future homeowners in deals with his firm.


Henshaw controlled the Master Association. He set it up, determined how many directors there would be, he owned the property, kept the corporate seal even when others became president of the Master Assn, and to all intents and purposes, was the Master Association in 1979.


1980 April meeting- Henshaw placed 3 new directors to represent the apartments, duplexes and the not yet built BT Plaza.

1980 Oct 14, Nat Henshaw resigned from the Burning Tree Master Assn.

1984 May 15 Lawsuit was settled and the check given by Mr. Henshaw to the BTMA.

"Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth."
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt