Given that TCTC is still operating under some COVID-19 restrictions, Owner participation will again be via “Zoom” videoconferencing.
The Board Packet providing background information on Agenda items is available on the SOA Website (www.somersett.org) under the SOA Documents/Board Documents/2021 links. Board Meeting Packet information (as of February 7, 2021) and comments pertaining to agenda items follow (agenda items noted):
3. January 27, 2021 BOD Meeting Minutes
The SOA published Draft Meeting Minutes for the January 27th BOD Meeting is available in the Board Meeting Packet referenced above, or one may access SU’s previous post of January 15th entitled “January 27th BOD Meeting Recap” for a summary of what was discussed and/or approved.
4. Committee Reports
The Board Meeting packet contained no supporting information on Committee reports. However, a carryover from the January 27th Board meeting was for the Finance & Budget Committee to review the five candidates for Committee membership and make recommendations for the two open positions. Perhaps this will be accomplished at the February 8th Committee meeting.
The Board Meeting Packet contained no supporting information for this topic. Perhaps deferred until the Board meeting scheduled for February 24th?
6. Unfinished Business
6.a Legal Updates – No update information was contained in the Board Meeting Packet. Suspect nothing new to report on either the Somersett Development Company Rockery Wall or Preston Homes Back Nine Trail Access lawsuits.
6.b Slurry Seal Proposals – Opening of contractor bids for slurry sealing of SOA roadways was postponed at the January 27th Board meeting. Assume that this will now be accomplished under this agenda item.
6.c. P-Card Resolution Club Manager – This item was also tabled at the January 27th meeting pending additional information on usage restrictions. It calls for authorization of a Purchase Card to be used by the TCTC Club Manager with a $1000/month and $500/ transaction limit.
6.d. 1880 Dove Mountain Common Area Slope Repair – This pertains to slope repairs to a common area hillside adjacent to 1880 Dove Mountain Ct. At a previous Board meeting, following a discussion on the opening of bids process, it was decided to reject two submitted bids and to rebid the project. Apparently the Board subsequently contracted Stanka Consulting, LTD to perform an independent analysis of remediation alternatives and make recommendations. The Stanka Consulting report is contained in the Board Meeting Packet. SU assumes that this agenda relates to a discussion of the Stanka report and actions moving forward.
7. New Business
7.a. Reinstatement of West Park Committee – At the January 27th Board meeting a representative of the West park Garden Committee recommended reinstatement of the full West Park Committee, which had been disbanded after turnover to the SOA, from the City of Reno, for ongoing maintenance.
7.b. – Garden Committee Fundraising Request – The West Park Garden Committee is seeking permission from the Board to publicize a fundraising exercise on the SOA website and e-newsletter. The fundraiser proposed being the sale of flower bulb packets in association with ABC Fundraising . The funds are apparently necessary because to quote the request “ From its discovery, the committee has found numerous items not installed, budgeted or planned for, such as irrigation parts, spaghetti line tubing, critter fencing and gardening tools. One such item, the fencing, has been approved to protect gardeners and plants from snakes and invasive small animals, respectively. The committee would like to conduct a special fundraiser to help purchase the necessary items …”. The request further states: “ The West Park Community Garden Committee wishes to manage the garden as financially independent from the SOA Board as possible, believing this fundraiser will accomplish this as the first step”.
SU Comment – The forgoing raises the concern that the Garden Committee, if unsuccessful in its fundraising activities, will come to the SOA Board for additional funding. SU does not believe that it should be the business of all SOA members to subsidize the operation of the 50 available garden plots, especially given that many may not be allocated to SOA members (the park is open to the public). There are already more than twice as many applicants as available plots, but how many of these are from non-SOA members is unknown. With regard to critter fencing (i.e., around plots), irrigation tubing (within the plots) and garden tools being the responsibility of the Committee, should not this be the responsibility of the individual plot owners?
7.c. Snow Removal Rules for Sidewalks on Homeowner Lots and Common Areas – The Board meeting packet did not contain any specific information regarding “rules”, only a map illustrating public vs private roads and gate locations.