At the recent Aspen Lodge Meeting, the BOD president refused to answer a question as to what would be the homeowner approval number required for passage of the re-negotiated Country Club Lease Agreement. We suspect that this was a deliberate evasion so as not to have to address the following provision that is part of the proposed amendments the CC&R’s:
“The Association, by majority vote of the Board, may lease real property if the Association can fund the lease payments out of the operating budget without increasing annual assessments more than the Board of Directors has the authority to increase regular assessments on an annual basis without the vote of the Owners. If the Board has to levy annual assessments in excess of the amount which the Board can increase assessments without the vote of the Owners to pay the rent under any lease, then the Owners must approve such lease and assessment increase by a Majority percentage vote.”
Read the above carefully and then consider the following facts:
- There is no limit established as to the dollar value of any lease
- The BOD’s current authority to increase assessments is 15% annually and $25% for a special assessment.
- Majority Percentage Vote is defined simply as the majority vote of a homeowner quorum, which is currently established in the CC&R’s as 20% of Homeowners or approximately 500 owners
How could this Amendment relate to the Country Club Lease Agreement?
- The BOD could enter into a long term multi-million dollar Lease Agreement with the SGCC , increase owner assessments to cover costs by the percentages indicated above, without a vote of homeowners
- If the costs are such that they cannot be accounted for by the increased assessments, then the Lease Agreement can be approved by as little as 250 owners based on the 20% quorum figure.
- If one considers the Lease Agreement concept presented by the BOD at the May “Information” meeting (I.e., 8.5 years, ~4.6 million dollars), then under the proposed CC&R Amendment, the BOD could enter into this agreement (or even longer and larger ones), without consideration or approval of Somersett homeowners.
Why did not the BOD discuss the preceding as an example of what could be accomplished by passage of the CC&R Amendment? Rather they used examples like buying the lot adjacent to the TCTC for increased parking space, (~$200K) and leasing the LOFT space for activities. By using simple examples they downplayed the significance of this provision.
In their ballot mailing, they also misrepresented that the proposed amendments would “limit their authority”. Nothing could be farther than the truth. It actually increases their authority with regard to the purchase, lease or annexation of real property.
Do you really trust the BOD with this increased authority? If not, you need to vote no on the proposed CC&R Amendment.