|
Protecting Our Community Spaces: Why CA's Proposal Hurts the Villages
Dear Residents and Friends of River Hill,
The Columbia Association (CA) staff recently proposed taking over management of the 24 buildings located across the ten villages. This would not only shift control of these vital community spaces but also the revenue they generate—impacting the events, services, and sense of community we've built together.
This proposal not only undermines the fiscal autonomy of the River Hill Community Association (RHCA) and the other nine Columbia villages, but also adds an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy, distancing our staff from the community members who rely on these facilities. I strongly oppose this plan, and here's why.
$$$ CA Controls Your Contributions
CA already decides your annual assessment and determines how those funds are used. While the assessment rate has remained at 68 cents for over 20 years, rising property appraisals mean homeowners continue to see their annual bills increase—capped at 3.5% per year. At a recent board meeting, I proposed lowering the rate to 65 cents, reflecting CA's strong balance sheet. Unfortunately, this modest change was rejected.
$$$ CA Determines How Much of Your Money Comes Back to Your Neighborhood
Despite collecting more in assessments, CA has reduced the percentage returned to the villages—from 8% in FY2019 to less than 7% in FY2026. This means our village is receiving $45,000 less annually, funding that could directly support local events and services.
$$$ CA's Proposal Jeopardizes Village Revenue and Services
In addition to the assessment share, the other source of revenue for the villages is facilities. Village facilities like Claret Hall and The Meeting Room have long been managed by RHCA staff to serve the community. These spaces host celebrations, meetings, and events, and the rental income funds traditions like the Annual Independence Day Parade, the pool party, and Haunted Hallow’s Eve. This plan puts these events in jeopardy.
Under CA's proposal, a centralized booking system would be introduced, and all rental revenue would be collected by CA. Yet, CA has provided no details on how—or even if—this revenue would return to the villages to sustain our community programs.
CA's proposal leaves critical questions unanswered, such as:
-
Facility Accessibility: Would Claret Hall remain open Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.? Could residents stop by with covenant questions or to pick up a copy of The Villager?
-
Community Engagement: Would Claret Hall still host activities like school supply drives, food collections, and other community initiatives?
-
Resident Support: Would community members still be able to meet with the Village Manager locally, or would they have to travel to CA offices in Columbia? Could meeting space be offered to community groups at reduced cost?
RHCA staff have always provided top-notch hospitality and a personalized approach, ensuring Claret Hall and The Meeting Room remain welcoming spaces for our neighbors. Revenue from paid events directly supports local initiatives and facility improvements that CA does not fund. RHCA has demonstrated its commitment to fostering community connections and reinvesting in the neighborhoods we serve.
Let’s work together to protect the resources and services that make our community thrive. As your representative on the Columbia Council, I plan to vote in opposition to CA’s proposal to assume management of the Village community buildings.
You can let the CA Board know how you feel:
Thank you for your support.
Sincerely,
Eric Greenberg
River Hill Representative to the Columbia Association Board of Directors
| 
