|
|
Post by leokeeler on Nov 29, 2015 20:07:59 GMT
NOTE: Changes in the Declaration language are denoted with BOLD italics (new language) and strikethrough (removed language.)
Lawyers’ input: Since “necessary” is too nebulous and hard to defend in court, the better language is “would create a reasonable hardship” since it is easier to define and is in keeping with intent of this Section.
12.01. Variances, Waivers. The Association reserves the right to waive or grant variances to any of the provisions of this Declaration, where, in its discretion, it believes the same to be necessary would create a reasonable hardship and where the same will not be injurious to the rest of the Community.
SIMILAR RECOMMENDED CHANGE TO THE MASTER PLAN 4.2 CRITERIA FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE:
Lawyers’ input: Waivers are never good, but waivers are necessary at this point since the Master Plan has problems that need fixing/eliminating, and members voted in favor of the Master Plan because there was a variance provision for unusual circumstances. (For instance, there is at least one property that is 100 feet wide that cannot be built upon due to the increase in setbacks in the Master Plan.) Until the Master Plan is changed the proposed language is better by establishing this as criteria to consider. Since not all situations requiring a waiver will meet all five criteria, the current language defeats the intent of the section.
4.2 Criteria for Granting a Variance. A variance may be granted upon finding compliance with all of considering the following criteria:
1. Exceptional or unusual circumstances exist over which the Landowner has no control (for example, topography).
2. The requested variance is not materially detrimental to neighboring properties; or if the requested variance may adversely affect neighbors, the Landowner requesting the variance may offer mitigating actions to help offset any detrimental effect of the requested variance, subject to review by the affected Landowners and the Association Board.
3. The variance requested is the minimum variance to remedy a particular circumstance.
4. No more than one (1) variance process will be allowed per Original Parcel for reducing acreage size below the minimum acreage or that would increase the number of Tracts/Lots beyond that which is established in the Residential Topographical Areas and Density Schedule (Section 3.5).
5. All variances must meet local, county and state requirements.
|
|
sally
New Member
Posts: 3 
|
Post by sally on Nov 30, 2015 14:28:25 GMT
Before any changes in any of the governing documents we should come to a screeching halt. If this corporation was run like a business, which it should be, until the board has finished reviewing what the actual income of the corporation is it can't move forward. That is just being prudent. There should be no more spending money or time on ANYTHING except maybe another truck for snow plowing. It's not about kids getting to school or people getting to work, but the ability of emergency vehicles being able to get to landowners in life or death situations. For to many years the Board of Directors have neglected the main issue that drives any business...INCOME. Knowing your bottom line is the basis of all operations. Debbie Blais and others have shown that we (landowners also) have been negligent in our responsibilities. ALL OTHER INTERESTS AND OPERATIONS should stop immediately until everyone's time and energy is put into getting our assessments straightened out. How can we move forward without having a base line??? Other than paying our current bills and payroll and road maintenance...STOP. No more wasting time and energy on community property development, software issues, committee meetings, whatever else is coming up. EVERY BOARD MEMBER should be helping to get this corporation on a sound footing before planning anything else!! By doing this it will give every board member a lesson in how a business is run if the financial health is not looked after. How can you you possibly come up with a long term road plan or anything else without comprehensive knowledge of your income??? Income is derived from landowners and how they have developed their property and only that source.  Sally Muto |
|
koz
New Member
Posts: 3 
|
Post by koz on Dec 3, 2015 22:20:02 GMT
It will be advantageous to start the new year with landowner discussion and board member discussion focused on creating a simple monthly balance sheet or accounts receivable / payable ledger that reflects what actual money is on hand. I agree with Sally "Other than paying our current bills and payroll and road maintenance...STOP." I think it comes back to what is the first priority? Roads How is our road maintenance funded? Assessments
These three topics seem to be what needs to be the focus as Sally says "EVERY BOARD MEMBER should be helping to get this corporation on a sound footing before planning anything else!!" When we stay focused on these three topics (until we come to a resolve) we can create ways to secure finances. Maybe the way to do that is to put all other committee business on hold. Ask for a cease fire concerning law suites. Know what money is actually on hand (not a drafted budget based on money we do not yet have).
We can then move forward without any distractions.
Some ideas might be; to generate a monthly income source (collect assessments monthly from landowners that are on a quarterly payment plane). Maybe offer a monthly interest only payment on past due assessments. Figure out an equitable allotment for districts and if different districts need more work then create a GLA special district fund. Create a Road Research and Development fund for trying out new products.
What else can be done without having the assessments going through the roof?
|
|
marks
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by marks on Dec 4, 2015 15:24:27 GMT
I don't see any gain and a lot of pain involved in looking at monthly vs quarterly payments. Most of us run our family finances based on expected income rather than money in the bank, so as long at the proposed budget is reasonable based on previous year's income, that's a fine way to start the year (obviously adjustments may need to be made during the year, as actual events unfold). I do agree that it's important to focus on critical elements like roads and collecting assessments and especially going after past due assessments. I also think that making the payment process easier (such as online or credit card payments) is likely to be useful. Should credit card (or Paypal) payments be authorized, the extra charges should be added to the payment, not taken out of GLA funds. Taking a careful look at where money is currently being spent is an important part of coming up with a long term roads plan.
Sadly, given what I'm confident is now written in federal law regarding accounting, the concept of "a simple monthly balance sheet..." won't fulfill the legal requirements. In addition, based on my limited experience with non-profit bookkeeping in the early 90s, most bookkeeping is not the intuitive approach that we use for family finances, so hiring professional help is required.
|
|
koz
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by koz on Dec 4, 2015 19:23:17 GMT
"Sadly, given what I'm confident is now written in federal law regarding accounting, the concept of "a simple monthly balance sheet..." won't fulfill the legal requirements."
Good to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by leokeeler on Dec 5, 2015 1:24:43 GMT
I agree there is a real need to improve our financial process both in collecting and recording assessments and planning and tracking what money is spent on. The move to hire a book keeper is a good first step, but only a step. What is the plan for making sure we don't run into accounting problems in the future -i.e. where is it written who is responsible for what and how often it is checked? How do we check on how well we meet federal, state and county standards and requirements.
I cannot believe we have over $250,000 in back assessments and there is not regular discussion on this at monthly Board meetings. I think it was Sept., maybe Oct., that during a phone in meeting, the Board had a quick discussion on a "Collections Policy". Nothing since then. Are discussion going on without meetings? Many Board members have said they were not in support of foreclosure as written in the Covenants. Are they being selective of what covenants they will enforce - it's not personal, it's business. Dwellings being properly assessed is another major concern. How do we get a handle on all of this, and under what timeline?
The roads seem to have many problems as they are what I hear the most complaints about. Yet nobody is talking of making a plan to follow to fix the problems. We need to keep the snow off this winters, but next spring there should be a lot of effort put into a Road Management Plan - not just a policy. I would hope a plan that identifies and prioritizes work to be done would let people know when to expect improvement on the problems they see. Having a plan would allow Members to determine if/where/when increases in assessments should be made. Until such a plan is in place, with a vote of support by the Members, those with unattended problems will feel left out, or even targeted to be avoided.
Is it worth taking the time and allocating the money, even hiring professional help if needed, to be able to see the road ahead. If our Board does not have the time and/or ability to make such plans, how do we move forward with confidence?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jerry L on Dec 11, 2015 16:13:13 GMT
Leo, the number I heard at the Dec. 7 board meeting is $271,000. This includes dues thru the remainder of 2015. Many people are on a quarterly payment plan. it does appear many on our board plan to conduct business as usual rather than get into the real need of establishing firm policy and priority infrastructure.
|
|
