Proposed CC&R Amendments

Posted by Joe Bower

Comments and questions on BOD letter to homeowners regarding proposed changes to he SOA CC&R’s  (Para = change letter paragraph reference):

Owners should not vote for or against something they don’t fully understand, especially when their money is affected … BETTER TO ABSTAIN!!!

Para 1 . . . Why don’t we have the actual text of the proposed changes?

Para 3  . . . Should BOD even have the authority to acquire, purchase, lease and annex property without association members (owners) approval . . . this is one of the first questions to ask!

Para 5 . . . talks about controlling the Town Center . . . Town Center is a commercial development and Somersett Owners Association (SOA) Board should stay as far away from it as possible (unless we own it) . . . Have heard the Center has its own CC&R’s which should make it a sub-association of SOA . . . they need to be enforced by SOA . . . do they pay dues to SOA or is it just a unique stand alone association within  Somersett?

Para 6 . . . re example about buying a second lot . . . that would only give SOA 2/5 lots . . . that still doesn’t give SOA  control of the Town Center. Is BOD planning some purchases?

Para 7 . . . leasing loft … that should be put to an owner vote. There is nothing wrong with owners voting on what they do and don’t want. That is what happens in well-run openly managed associations.

 Proposed Changes:

1 … Where owners vote on these issues the outcome will be determined by majority of votes cast as long a minimum quorum of votes is cast. A quorum is 20% therefore only a positive vote of 10% plus 1 of owners would be needed to spend 100% of the money of all owners. All owners need to be able to vote.

2 … Says that BOD could spend $500,000 as long as assessments aren’t raised more than NRS116 allows. What NRS 116 section is that? The CC&Rs say assessments can’t be raised more than 15% without a vote of the members. Is this an attempt to circumvent the 15% that is already a large number?

3 . . . What stops BOD from making multiple $500K deals?

4 … For a lease it must be within normal assessment authority … and what is that in $ and %. If the same 15% number is used, it seems that it could be in the $600,000 range … assuming a $4M budget. The present budget already has $750,000 for Somersett Country Club so it seems that you assume that it could be at least as large as that.

5 … seems that this has the same problem as about only takes 10% of homeowners to approve.

6… says two provisions in item 4. Where and what are these? ….is vote in this section again a 10% vote?

7 … What are sections 16 and 17… appears owners are being asked to vote on changes we haven’t seen or read!

8. . . says BOD has authority to operate and maintain common elements …including capital improvements in the operating budget may be a violation of NRS 116  which says that BOD shall repair, replace, maintain and restore…..doesn’t give any other authority . . . also this would probably be a violation of IRS tax exemption for the association …. on reserve funds

Owners would have to be crazy to give away their right to vote on how their Association is run and their money is spent.

 

SOA Candidate Assessments

Posted by Jim Haar

In a recent email blast to Somersett residents,  Somersett Country Club President Pat Gaskill, recommended voting for Board of Director candidates Kirby and Huff, which as a Somersett homeowner he has every right to do so. However, in evaluating his recommendations one should consider the following:

1         Mr. Gaskill has advised us to “Stay tuned for subsequent communications”, this raises the question as to why and for what motive is the Country Club President undertaking a tandem campaign for these particular candidates?  It is well known that Ms. Kirby is a party to re-negotiating the current SGCC Lease Agreement.

2         Mr. Gaskill identifies the others as “excellent candidates”, but because they are retired, he dismisses them by saying:  “clearly at this time, as a group, not representative of our diverse Somersett Community”. The irony here is that in last year’s election, Mr. Gaskill and the Country Club endorsed, three Country Club members, a realtor, and a retiree, all of whom were supporters, at that time, of the Country Club Lease Agreement.  Where was the diversity in these recommendations? Another irony is that out of the current five Board members, the two who have been most engaged in devoting their time and energy to association affairs are both retired.

3         Mr. Gaskill implies, without addressing other qualifications, that we should vote for Kirby and Huff because they have young children. However, I suspect most of the candidates have had experience with raising young children and related community issues. Having young children does not in itself qualify or disqualify one for serving on an association Board of Directors and should not be a determining factor in who to vote for.

4         Mr. Gaskill closes his endorsement letter by encouraging “Happy Residents” to take action stating, “Otherwise, the direction of our community, …, is always at risk of being dominated by a disgruntled and vocal minority with plenty of time on their hands just waiting to dictate direction to those of us who are too busy getting on with our lives …” . What is the implication of this statement and how does this relate to the other, as he describes, “excellent candidates”?

I consider much of Mr. Gaskill’s comments to be somewhat disingenuous and perhaps self serving. Therefore, I would encourage all to put aside his endorsements, and on your own, become familiar with all five candidates (Fadrowsky, Huff, Kanyr, Kirby, and Myerson), their experience, background and skills, and subsequently vote for those you feel most qualified to serve.

Personally, based on the individual candidate statements and what I observed on candidate night, I consider the other three candidates (Fadrowsky, Kanyr and Myerson) to be much more qualified to serve than those endorsed by the Country Club President.  However, you be the judge!