In the previous post, questions were asked regarding the 8.89% monthly assessment increase. Was the increase a “regular assessment” which covenants allow to be used by the current or any future board for both operational and capital expenses? Or . . . was the increase a “special assessment” which may not be used for operational expenses and which also requires property owner approval? (1) Continue reading “An update on the $25/$16 assessment increase . . .”
Author: patricia
Assessments, budgets and more . . .
The December 31st POA member statement along with a two page memorandum from management (1) has just been received leaving this writer somewhat perplexed. Although the $25/$16 increase approved by the board in November to be used for Master Plan capital projects was included on this statement, Continue reading “Assessments, budgets and more . . .”
Governance 101 – New Information . . .
Although a property owner did indeed serve on three board committees in 2018 (election, finance and water), it has been learned that Board Policy 300.4 was actually revised in May 2018 in order to allow individuals to serve on multiple committees. (1) Unfortunately, the amended policy was not made available on the POA website, Continue reading “Governance 101 – New Information . . .”
Governance 101 . . .
With more than a month of chaos, canceled ballots and overturned elections all unfortunately intertwined with the holidays, we find ourselves as property owners facing a new year in Big Canoe with a self-appointed board and more questions than answers. Leadership responsible for the aforementioned calamities Continue reading “Governance 101 . . .”
Guest Spot: Cynthia Hendry . . . on voter ineligibility
Cynthia requested that her discussion on ineligible voters be posted at bcmatters.org. Thank you Cynthia for your thorough research. (Patricia) Continue reading “Guest Spot: Cynthia Hendry . . . on voter ineligibility”
Save the Postage . . .
The POA board is applauded for quickly acknowledging the significant “drafting error” (1) found in the proposed amendment and ballot package for the $5,000 Capital Contribution Fee that would have deleted the entire Article VI, Section 13 of the covenants dealing with the capital reserve fund and property owner approvals. Continue reading “Save the Postage . . .”
Property owner protections & controls in jeopardy . . .
As additional details regarding the $5,000 Capital Contribution Fee continue to trickle in, the information has dictated continual updates on the subject by this writer. Less than two weeks ago, dissimilarities between the twelve compared communities were noted along with the offering of alternative ideas and solutions to the proposed fee. (See “About that $5,000 fee”)
Several days later it was learned that the POA board had agreed to grant the developer an “exemption” from the Capital Contribution Fee (1) Continue reading “Property owner protections & controls in jeopardy . . .”
An Update to “about that $5,000 fee”
By now many have received the POA president’s letter to the community which was recently e-blasted. (1) The letter briefly discusses the Master Plan and outlines some of the provisions of the $5,000 capital contribution fee which will be included in the ballot package. Notable provisions include the discussion of exemptions such as transfers to family members, etc. , however, one very important exemption that pertains to the developer is not discussed in the letter. Continue reading “An Update to “about that $5,000 fee””
About that $5,000 fee . . .
After an impressive presentation at the recent Town Hall meeting that included photographs of rusted metal pipe and irrigation deficiencies, it is probably obvious to most all that our Creek nine golf course has a problem with those components. (1) Lydell is to be commended for doing an outstanding job of articulating and explaining the issues. Continue reading “About that $5,000 fee . . .”