To be honest, after the June 3rd post noting that the beginning balance in the restricted Capital Reserve Fund as shown on the updated Capital Reserve Study was approximately one million dollars LESS than the balance disclosed on the year end financial statements, it was anticipated that leadership would provide some type of public response or explanation.
Unfortunately that has not happened. After receiving inquiries and feedback from some property owners, an email was then forwarded to the POA President reciting several questions found in the original article. (1) https://bcmatters.org/ask-the-board/
The Response . . .
Without giving any specific answers to all of the questions, the POA President responded last week by characterizing the million dollar discrepancy as a “misunderstanding of the Capital Reserve Study and the Restricted Capital Reserve Fund”. What an unacceptable choice of words. And although, the president did state that “no funds have been removed from the Restricted Capital Reserve Fund”, she would not confirm the balance in the fund while also REFUSING to provide written answers to any of the following questions regarding the reserve study.
-
-
-
Is this a typo? If so, why hasn’t the board requested a correction as an incorrect beginning balance renders the study results meaningless.
-
-
-
-
-
Or did “Association management” purposefully provide the reserve specialists information that was inaccurate? (Remember – As stated previously, any erroneous reduction in the reserve fund beginning balance on the reserve study will artificially lower the Reserve Study recommended levels which are used to determine the amount to be repaid if and when reserve funds are used by the POA in the future.)
-
-
Private meeting requested . . .
Instead, stating that an email exchange on the Capital Reserve Study was “not appropriate”, the president stated there was more to communicate and requested that this writer meet privately with her and the POA Treasurer.
Another clear example of non-transparency . . .
That offer has been respectfully declined for obvious reasons. With numerous articles posted on this site opposing leadership’s lack of transparency and use of closed door meetings, this writer does not wish to become part of that problem.
These are simple questions. Yet these are very serious questions that can not be ignored. And these questions should be addressed and explained for the benefit of all property owners. Please urge leadership to do so.
. . . . .
To see additional articles posted in the future, please check back frequently or subscribe for an email notification. Likewise, please feel free to contact me at thepcrosses@gmail.com for questions or further discussion. Meanwhile . . . take care and stay safe.
Patricia Cross (10438 Big Canoe)
References: