The proposed amendment to Wintergreen’s covenants to create a buyer’s transfer fee has raised some basic questions
by Jay Roberts,
Executive Director, Wintergreen Property Owners Association
The idea of a “covenant” has ancient and biblical origins. It’s defined today as a formal, solemn, and binding agreement or promise between two or more parties.
Covenants in communities such as Wintergreen are formal, written agreements attached to each property's deed. The agreement runs with the land, and the responsibilities pass from one owner to the next.
Because covenants place restrictions on property ownership rights, they require a specific, some could argue burdensome, process to amend. Given that the results of an amendment can significantly alter an owner’s property rights forever, I believe that this process should be burdensome.
Wintergreen’s covenants are administered by the property owners’ association. They require 60% participation (quorum), and 75% of participants must vote in favor of an amendment. Putting the specifics of any issue aside, reaching quorum is the most difficult part of the process.
In 2026, Wintergreen had roughly 3,815 voting accounts. This number includes commercial, improved, and unimproved parcels. Therefore 60% of 3,815 equals 2,289 votes to reach quorum and 1,716 voting in favor to pass an amendment. When you consider that the annual WPOA board elections see only about 1,200 votes, reaching that 60% number is a significant challenge.
For owners who live at Wintergreen full-time, or are extremely active within the community, the lack of participation may seem strange.
However, full-time owners represent roughly 30% of owners; 70% visit on vacation, weekends or holidays, with many still working full-time. Disengagement is normal in a resort community. Many owners see Wintergreen as a place to get away from a hectic life and welcome not being connected to its operation, the news, the politics, or the process.
The 60% hurdle is not impossible. The community successfully amended the covenants in 2017 during the Atlantic Coast Pipeline issue.
Unlike the ACP, this year’s amendment is a simple choice between two OK options: A “no” vote funds reserves through assessment increases; a “yes” vote creates a new independent funding alternative.
Having analyzed and debated the alternatives, the WPOA board is recommending the Buyer Transfer Fee as the better long-term solution. This requires, however, a change to the convenants.
I believe that deciding which choice is better should have less to do with the numbers and more to do with funding philosophy.
Many of us save for our future by allocating a portion of our income to other accounts. Saving for the future is difficult, especially when routine expenses are growing. Tying future reserve funding to the yearly operating budget requires an unwavering commitment to protect these allocations every year. The amendment addresses this reality.
Creating an independent funding mechanism creates a layer between the current year’s operational needs and the long-term needs of the community.
Recognizing a home purchase at Wintergreen is a large investment, I believe the future of that investment is better protected having a dedicated funding layer that is independent of the operating budget.
By bringing this amendment forward, the WPOA Board is asking property owners to decide how they want to address Wintergreen's long-term funding needs. Do you want to continue to pay as you go, or do you support a different funding approach? The quorum requirement is real; you simply must vote. Not participating is the same as voting “no.” It’s best if this decision isn’t decided by lack of a quorum; every property owner should vote. Here’s how.