Declaration Version Comparison
How the Amended & Restated Declaration changed from the first attorney draft to the latest, presented as an interactive explorer.
Heritage Estates Declaration — Version Comparison Explorer
How the document changed from Swanson’s first draft to his last · Internal Board analysis · May 20, 2026
Swanson01Jul 8, 2025
First draft
First draft
Committee02Aug 5, 2025
First edits
First edits
Swanson03Aug 15, 2025
His revision
His revision
Committee04Sep 29, 2025
Member feedback
Member feedback
Committee05Nov 23, 2025
Final committee
Final committee
Swanson06Dec 8, 2025
19 bullets
19 bullets
Swanson07Feb 19, 2026
Returned
Returned
Swanson08Feb 20, 2026
Feb final
Feb final
Swanson09May 19, 2026
NEW FINAL
NEW FINAL
Kept / applied
Removed / lost
Reworded / question
Added by Swanson (not discussed)
Update — a newer final arrived May 19, 2026. Swanson sent a new final version (doc 301070.7). Questions 1–6 describe the history through his February final (08); the new version is analyzed in Q7 below.
Q1
How do Swanson’s first and last versions compare?
▶Short answer: His last version (08) is his first draft (01) plus the cleanups he accepted from us in August 2025, plus two sections he rewrote on his own in February 2026. None of the substantive member-feedback changes are in it.
Group A — ~30 cleanups he accepted from our August redline
Deleted the standalone Leasing section and the Access section; outbuildings now “approved by ARC”; rewrote Signs, Pets, Parking and Trash; cure period 30→90 days; “average use”→“occasional use”; added HUD-label language to the mobile-home ban. (Full list in Q2.)
Group B — two sections he rewrote on his own in February added, not discussed
§3.01 Community Use — appended a long paragraph giving the Board broad rule-making authority over the Common Elements and making any exclusive or limited use of them subject to advance written Board approval. Our “standard sized real estate sign” allowance is gone.
§7.02 Subdivision / Combination — replaced the committee’s one-line “combine as they see fit” rule with a detailed Combination Plat / Combination Instrument procedure requiring Association sign-off. It still preserves voting/assessment rights and keeps the no-subdivision and no-outside-access sentence — the genuinely new part is the recordation procedure and the Association’s approval power.
Group C — housekeeping
- Initial annual assessment shown as $200 in draft 01, $425 in the final.
- Notary year updated 2025 → 2026.
Q2
The version that came from meeting with Swanson over his original
▶What happened in this round.
The Board sent Swanson a tracked redline of his first draft on August 5, met with him in mid-August to review it, and he returned a revised version (03) on August 15 that adopted about 30 of the Board’s ~40 edits.
On landscaping: the August 5 redline did not ask to remove landscaping from ARC approval, and §6.02 still required ARC approval for landscaping in his August 15 version. Removing the broad “approval of plans… landscaping” requirement was a later committee change (November 23), and it did not survive into the final version.
The Board sent Swanson a tracked redline of his first draft on August 5, met with him in mid-August to review it, and he returned a revised version (03) on August 15 that adopted about 30 of the Board’s ~40 edits.
On landscaping: the August 5 redline did not ask to remove landscaping from ARC approval, and §6.02 still required ARC approval for landscaping in his August 15 version. Removing the broad “approval of plans… landscaping” requirement was a later committee change (November 23), and it did not survive into the final version.
What he changed from his original (01) to his Aug 15 version (03)
| Section | Change he made |
|---|---|
| 3.02 / 3.03 | Deleted the right to charge fees for Common-Element facilities and to limit an owner’s guests. |
| 5.05 | Updated stated initial assessment $200 → $425 per lot. |
| 5.09 / 5.10 | Allocation “against all Owners” → “against all Lots”; late interest 18% → 10%. |
| 7.02 Leasing | Deleted the entire standalone Leasing section. |
| 7.03(a) | Added “HUD-labeled units… manufactured mobile homes” to the mobile-home ban. |
| 7.03(e) | Outbuildings: “same style/materials” → “approved by the ARC.” |
| 7.07 Signs | Rewrote to the statutory for-sale / political-sign rule. |
| 7.08 Pets | Dropped 3-pet limit, “housed inside,” “defecate/urinate on shrubbery”; added breeding/puppy-mill ban. |
| 7.09 / vehicles | Deleted “move sanitary containers”; “average”→“occasional use”; “enclosed structure”→“out of sight from streets.” |
| 7.10 Parking | Rewrote the parking restrictions. |
| 8.02 | Owner-maintenance cure period 30 → 90 days. |
| Easement / 11.02 | Deleted “developer multiple-lot purchases”; deleted the entire Access section. |
What he declined (and never came back)
- Lots 5/34 single-vote carve-out; the “indivisible vote” concept.
- Line-item operating budget tied to a Reserve Study with annual member approval.
- The three-subsection Special Assessments rewrite; “by Lot” allocation.
- ARC easement/setback guidance; “cinder block may remain exposed.”
Several of these are the same items the committee re-developed with member input in the Sept–Nov round (Q3).
Q3
What changed from his Aug 15 draft to our Nov 23 version (member feedback)
▶Captured precisely in the committee redline: 53 insertions, 38 deletions, all authored “Committee.” Grouped by section:
| Section | What the committee changed (member-driven) |
|---|---|
| 3.01 Signs | Added allowance for “a standard sized real estate sign.” |
| 4.01 Governing Body | “Shared interests of all Owners”; “oversight… of current and future improvements on the common elements.” |
| 5.04 Reserves | Reserve fund sized “as determined by a Reserve Study.” |
| 5.05 Annual | Replaced with NC statute §47F-3-103(c) ratification; cap 20% → 10%. |
| 5.06 Special assess. | Three categories (≤50% emergency; other authorized; legally mandated) + ban on special assessments for predictable expenses like road repaving. |
| 6.01 / 6.02 ARC | “Members-at-Large”; report to Board before owner; NC code standard “not unreasonably withheld”; bonding power; owner appeal right; Lot 31 grandfather; heated-SF minimum. |
| 6.03 (new) | Construction Impact Fee = one annual assessment. |
| 7.01 Residential | Short-term rentals = residential; leases in writing, subject to the Declaration. |
| 7.02 Combination | Kept no-subdivision + no-outside-access; added combined lots keep voting/assessment status. |
| 7.03 Building | Setback exemption extended to Lots 17, 54, 55; cinder-block clause → general code compliance. |
| 7.08 / 7.10 | Pets “clean up any discharge”; parking “temporary shelter (motor home, trailer, yurt, tent).” |
| 8.02 / Art. X | Cost of Association repairs framed as a special assessment. |
| 11.01 Easements | On combining lots, interior utility easement extinguished; original lot lines govern voting/assessments. |
Q4
Swanson’s 19 bullets reviewing our Nov 23 version (Dec 8, 2025)
▶Most are clarifying questions or small cleanups. Only two are substantive: remove the predictable-expense ban in 5.06, and reword the 7.02 combination sentence. He did not ask to remove the Reserve Study, the 10% cap, the impact fee, the Lot 31 grandfather, or the three-category structure.
| § | Swanson’s comment | Type | Handled |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3.01 | Permit real estate signs in common areas? | Question | Kept (yes) |
| 4.01 | “Property” broader than “common elements” — include both. | Edit | Applied |
| 5.04 | Commit all reserves to an actual reserve study? | Question | Kept (yes) |
| 5.05 | Revise “to whit” → “to wit.” | Typo | Applied |
| 5.06 | “a Lot or Lots” conflicts with “uniform rate among all Lots.” | Edit | Applied |
| 5.06 | “may not be levied for predictable… expenses” — “I would remove this.” | Substantive | Removed |
| 5.06 | Subsections (a) and (b) seem inconsistent. | Question | Left for board |
| 5.07 | “Declaration” already inside “Management Documents.” | Edit | Applied |
| 6.01 | Why “Members-at-Large”? Why must ARC report to Board before owner? | Question | Left for board |
| 6.02 | Building-code reference near plan approval confuses; ARC = aesthetics only. | Edit | Applied |
| 6.02 | Remove comma before “for major construction projects.” | Edit | Applied |
| 6.02 | Do all existing homes meet the heated-SF requirement? | Question | Left for board |
| 7.01 | This has already been established by the court. | Comment | Left as-is |
| 7.02 | Reword to: “If any lots are combined, they shall continue to be treated as separate lots for purposes of voting and assessments.” | Edit | Applied |
| 7.03(b) | Same heated-SF as 6.02 — remove it from 6.02. | Edit | Applied |
| 7.08 | Not sure “discharge” is the correct term. | Edit | Applied |
| 8.02 | Parallels G.S. 47F-3-107 — these are “assessments,” not “special assessments.” | Edit | Applied |
| 10.02 | See 8.02 above. | Edit | Applied |
| 11.01 | Seems redundant with 7.02; probably okay to keep both. | Comment | Kept both |
Q5
What the final would have looked like if we’d just applied his bullets
▶Short answer: The November 23 committee document, intact, with about a dozen small lawyer cleanups. Almost everything the membership asked for would still be in it.
This version has been reconstructed: the Nov 23 document with Swanson’s 12 actionable bullets applied as tracked changes — file Q5_Reconstructed_Final_Nov23_plus_Swanson_bullets_TRACKED.docx.
What it keeps (that the actual final lost)
- Reserve Study standard (5.04)
- Statutory budget ratification + 10% cap (5.05)
- Three-category Special Assessments (5.06)
- Construction Impact Fee (6.03)
- ARC appeal right, bonding, Lot 31 grandfather, code standard (6.01/6.02)
- Real-estate-sign allowance (3.01)
- Short-term-rental-as-residential (7.01)
- Simple lot-combination preserving voting/assessments + no-outside-access (7.02)
- Lots 17/54/55 setbacks; easement extinguishment on combination (11.01)
The only substantive changes his bullets would make
- Removed the one 5.06 sentence banning special assessments for predictable expenses like road repaving (“I would remove this”).
- Reworded the 7.02 combination sentence and removed the NC Building Code phrasing from 6.02 (the general code-compliance clause in 7.03(d) still covers it).
Everything else was a typo, a comma, a redundancy, or a question for the Board.
Q6
What we expected as our final vs. our actual final
▶Expected: our Nov 23 document, lightly cleaned at the Feb 16 meeting (the Q5 reconstruction). Got (08): his Aug 15 draft plus his own Feb rewrites of §3.01 and §7.02.
Why the gap exists
At the Feb 16 meeting Swanson was editing his August 15 draft on screen, not our November 23 document. We worked bullet-by-bullet; when he couldn’t find language we had added, we read it as “already removed” rather than “never in this file.” Our member-driven changes were never carried into the version he finalized.
At the Feb 16 meeting Swanson was editing his August 15 draft on screen, not our November 23 document. We worked bullet-by-bullet; when he couldn’t find language we had added, we read it as “already removed” rather than “never in this file.” Our member-driven changes were never carried into the version he finalized.
Member-feedback items in our expected final but missing from the actual final
| Section | Expected (Nov 23 / Q5) | Actual final (08) |
|---|---|---|
| 5.04 Reserves | Sized by a Reserve Study | Reverted: “adequate,” no study |
| 5.05 Annual | Statutory ratification; 10% cap | Reverted: 20% cap, old structure |
| 5.06 Special | Three-category structure | Reverted to his original wording |
| 6.02 ARC | Appeal, bonding, Lot 31, code standard | Reverted to original Approval of Plans |
| 6.03 Impact fee | Included | Absent entirely |
| 3.01 Signs | Real-estate-sign allowance | Dropped; broad Board sign control added |
| 7.01 Rentals | Short-term = residential | “single-family residential” instead |
| 7.02 Combination | Simple “combine as they see fit”; voting/assessments preserved | Heavy Combination Plat/Instrument procedure needing Association sign-off (voting/assessments & no-outside-access still kept) |
| 7.03 Setbacks | Lots 17, 54, 55 added | Reverted to 38, 39, 52, 53 |
| 11.01 Easements | Extinguished on combination | Absent |
Two provisions in the actual final we never discussed
§3.01 — expected
Real-estate-sign allowance kept; no new Board powers added.§3.01 — actual
New paragraph: broad Board rule-making over Common Elements; any exclusive/limited use needs advance written Board approval. Real-estate-sign allowance dropped.§7.02 — expected
“If any lots are combined, they continue as separate lots for voting/assessments.” Owner combines as they see fit.§7.02 — actual
Heavy Combination Plat + Instrument “reasonably acceptable to the Association,” recorded within 30 days. Voting/assessments and the no-outside-access rule are kept; the new burden is the Association sign-off.Correction: an earlier committee write-up (Drafting_Process_Overview) said Swanson deleted the outside-access prohibition. Version 08 actually retains it in its original 1999 wording (the April 14 mailed version later reworded it). The deletion claim does not hold for the last version Swanson sent.
Q7
How the new final (301070.7) compares to what we expected
▶This version is a tracked-changes redline. It has 63 insertions and 30 deletions, and every insertion is Swanson’s. The notes below describe it with all changes accepted (its proposed final form). In the raw redline, deletions and insertions appear run together (e.g. “twenty ten percent (2010%)”) — those are not errors; accepted, the cap reads cleanly as “ten percent (10%).”
Short answer: A real step toward the committee’s version. Accepting his redline adopts several member items that were missing from the February final — though a few important ones still aren’t in it.
What his redline now adopts — member items the February final lacked
- The 10% no-vote increase cap (5.05) — the committee’s number, replacing his earlier 20%
- Statutory budget-ratification process, N.C.G.S. §47F-3-103(c) (5.05)
- An owner’s right to appeal an ARC decision to the Board (6.01)
- Real-estate-sign allowance (3.01)
- Short-term rentals treated as a residential use (7.01)
- An impact fee on new construction (6.03)
- “Rent” on the for-sale sign (7.07); yurt/tent/trailer parking (7.10); combined-lot voting/assessment preservation (Art. XI); governing-body “shared interest… Property and Common Elements” (4.01)
What is still missing — versus what we expected
| Section | Expected (Q5) | New final (301070.7), accepted |
|---|---|---|
| 5.04 Reserves | Sized by a Reserve Study | Still only “adequate” — no Reserve Study |
| 5.06 Special assess. | Three-category; no special assessments for predictable road repaving | His original — still allows special assessments for “repaving of capital improvements, including roads”; 51% vote for capital improvements |
| 6.01 / 6.02 ARC | Members-at-Large, appeal, Lot 31 grandfather, code standard | Appeal right added; but no “Members-at-Large,” no Lot 31 grandfather, and Approval of Plans still his original |
| 3.01 Community Use | Committee’s simpler section + real-estate sign | Real-estate sign added, but his broad Board rule-making paragraph kept |
| 7.02 Combination | His own one-line bullet wording | His heavy Combination Plat / Instrument procedure kept |
Bottom line. Unlike the February final, this redline was built on a base that carries the committee’s direction, and accepting it gets much closer to what members asked for — the 10% cap, statutory ratification, the ARC appeal right, real-estate signs, short-term rentals, and an impact fee are all in. The remaining gaps are specific and worth raising with him: the Reserve Study (5.04), the special-assessment restructure (5.06 still permits special assessments for road repaving), the Lot 31 grandfather, and the committee’s ARC composition language — plus his own 3.01 and 7.02 rewrites.
Companion files in this folder
- HEPOA_Declaration_Version_Comparison_SixQuestions.docx — the full written report.
- Q5_Reconstructed_Final_Nov23_plus_Swanson_bullets_TRACKED.docx — the reconstructed “intended final” with tracked changes.
All comparisons were verified against the actual document versions in the Version_Chain_Timeline folder; the Aug 15 → Nov 23 changes were read from the committee’s tracked-change redline, and Swanson’s bullets quoted from his Dec 8 email.