OUR COMMUNITY

A blog about life, current issues and governance at Cimarron Hills


Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Ballot mess update


Since my last post I have had phone conversations with Bill Fuchs and Doug Austin (Rossmar) about the ballot mess. Doug tells me that there was a problem with the mailing machines that Rossmar uses which caused some folk to receive two ballots. Fair enough. He assured me that only one ballot per home would be counted.
An interesting question is, I suppose, if two ballots are received from a home, one yes and one no, which will be counted?
I told Doug that I had never received a ballot. He seemed rather skeptical about my story, which is a shame.
What is really a shame is that in the letter Doug sent to the community, in which he deals with the issue of duplicate ballots, he is completely silent on what a homeowner should do if they, like me, never received a ballot from Rossmar.
The ONLY reason I have a ballot is because I obtained one from someone who received two. I suppose I should be grateful for small mercies...
I think, perhaps, the Three Stooges are running our ballot. No. That's not fair. Even they couldn't screw this ballot up as badly as Rossmar has.

Monday, December 27, 2010

If you didn't get a ballot


I did not receive a ballot today, even though other homes have received two. I have written to the Board about this ballot mess, letter below:

December 27th, 2010

Members of the Board

Cimarron Hills HOA

Gentlemen, good day.

I fear that what is already a difficult situation -- the January 6th special meeting to decide on the recall of Mr. Fuchs and Mr. Jurrow -- is going from bad to worse.

It seems to me that the ballot process is so tainted that its integrity cannot be retrieved. I would specifically like to know why some households have received two ballots each, yet some, i.e., mine, have not received a ballot at all.

I attempted to call Mr. Austin at Rossmar & Graham (R&G) today, however they have a very effective voice mail loop to deter human contact so I never did speak with him. Were I he, I too would be lying low.

I am a trained fraud investigator. At a conference once, one of our speakers made a very telling comment. That fraud and incompetence look pretty much alike. I do not know which it is in this case, but I do know something is wrong.

I call on you to convene an emergency meeting to cancel the January vote and ballot. It must be rescheduled and a new ballot sent out. Although they can apparently handle our annual elections without too much trouble, I am at a loss to understand why R&G can't get this ballot right. The task must be assigned to our auditor, who, I assume, can be trusted to execute the task competently and with integrity.

R&G should bear the cost of the new ballot.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

signature

Anthony C. Humpage MBA CPA



If you did not receive a ballot, please use the one I have copied here. You can print it off by right click, save and print.

It should be mailed to:
Homeowners Association
Attn: Cimarron Hills
9362 E Raintree Drv
Scottsdale AZ 85260-2098.

I suggest you keep a copy of your ballot and ensure it was counted.

Friday, December 24, 2010

What is going on with our ballot?

Some of you may know that Rossmar & Graham are supposed to have mailed our ballots to remove Messrs Fuchs and Jurrow from the board of our HOA. I use the term supposed loosely.
I have not received mine. Others have received two. It is hard to believe there isn't some monkey business going on, isn't it?
If you have not received a ballot please call Doug Austin at 480-551-4300.

Saturday, December 18, 2010

Those dueling letters

By now, I am sure that most if not all of you have received dueling letters from Terrie Bulkin and our HOA President, Bill Fuchs. I have always felt that it was just a matter of time, not if, we would receive a communication like Terrie’s. While I do not agree with all in both these letters, I do think Terrie’s letter brings some matters to the fore that deserves public debate.

In terms of the management of our HOA, Bill is correct in his assertion that the Board is mandated to run the HOA as it sees fit as an elected Board. Having served on the Board with Bill I must also agree that with him that HOA governance by referendum has the potential to be troublesome unless it is clearly defined. That does not mean that I do not think Bill hasn’t made a rod for his own back in this regard. There are ways to solicit homeowner input on an annual basis to assist the Board in getting some feedback from homeowners. An annual survey, printed, or online would be easy to distribute and collate and could give the Board valuable feedback on the desires of its homeowners. This is exactly what the HOA at my Tahoe home does and it works very well – as the Board pays attention to the feedback, even if they don’t always agree or act on it. While Bill is correct in stating that homeowners may attend Board meetings it is also a little disingenuous, honestly, as unless homeowners have an axe to grind it has been my observation that attendance can be spotty at best. In fact, I believe the insistence that homeowners attend meetings held late on Thursday nights is in fact, a very effective way to deter input.

What has to be decided is whether input is deliberately stifled so Board member agendas may be pursued with relatively little opposition.

Really, if our Board were to be at least somewhat responsive to a level of resident concern about proposed expenditures, we would not now be discussing the need for homeowner approval of major expenditures. Or, truth be told, a motion to remove members from the Board. The Board, and I think particularly, our President, has brought this issue upon themselves by lending a deaf ear to reasonable complaints. So be it. Looks like it’s time for some changes to be made in the leadership of our HOA Board. When I joined the transitional Board, one of my main reasons was to ensure we never had an entrenched fiefdom running our HOA. It gives me no pleasure to say it, but I think we are facing that now and the fix is in our hands.

So much of the rest of the mail-in debate between Terrie and Bill directly speaks to one central question: What is the role of our HOA? Is it to attempt to inflate property values and make homes easier to sell? Or is to maintain a quality of life at a common sense cost that we signed on for when we decided to live in CH?

Before continuing my commentary I should say that I think Bill is a hands-on President who takes his position seriously. He pursues his agenda for CH vigorously and consistently. The nub of the dispute that Terrie’s letter has surfaced is whether Bill’s agenda is necessarily supported by the residents of CH. I should also add that for the most part, our HOA is well-managed and unobtrusive. This does not mean it is perfect.

I believe it is fair to say – and he doesn’t hide this, I think – that Bill is quite open about wanting to increase the “value” of our property in Cimarron Hills. This raises a number of questions, particularly in the current real estate and economic environment.

Primarily, when we are facing such a stringent economic climate, as I have told them directly, it beggars belief that our Board would even countenance spending roughly $150,000 of our money on an expansion of our fitness facility.

Even if you agree that it is the role of our HOA to increase property values, to attempt such a thing now is completely asinine. With Zillow reporting that we will see over $1,000,000,000,000 wiped off property values in 2011, and with a forecast of an increase in short sales and, maybe, foreclosures, doesn’t spending >$150,000 on our fitness center strike you as pissing into the wind? Never forget that’s your money that’s being spent. As I have observed elsewhere, spending other peoples’ money is easy.

This goes further. I believe Bill Fuchs has an impossible-to-resolveinherent conflict on the issue of the expansion of the fitness center and other similar “cosmetic” expenditure. If you follow the multiple listing service, you will know that our community center and pool is almost always a focal point of home collateral material in an attempted sale. The better our community center looks, the easier it is to sell houses, and I think we all know that our community is a focus of Bill Fuchs’s professional efforts. This does not mean Bill sets out deliberately to enhance our community with the parallel goal of enhancing his business – but as a human being he cannot fail to be so influenced. I do not know how to resolve that conflict in practical terms.

Other issues: I am perplexed by the issue of reissuing our pool passes with a photo ID. It seems like a lot of work, expense and a considerable inconvenience to the homeowners too, UNLESS the Board can tell us exactly how they are going to enforce the access policy. Who, exactly, is going to check that the card goes with the person? I ask this because, some years ago, Board member Barry Werbelow was a strong advocate for volunteer pool monitors, which at the time, I don’t recall Bill being in favor of. So, I wonder what has changed? I will say, that at another home I own in CA, the HOA employs volunteers to control access to and conduct at our community pool and it works extremely well. I am a big advocate of controlling access to our pool – indeed I spoke up strongly for the annunciator on the pool gate (can’t say I much like “muttering Man” who left the current message). I just don’t see what problem new access cards fix, without knowing what the enforcement program will be. Still waiting on an answer on that from the Board.

While we are on the issue, I might add that I wish the Board would pursue access control to our community with the same zeal that they pursue access to our pool. I believe it’s a fair assumption that most of us chose to live in guard-gated community for a reason, security being probably a primary one. Are you aware that three times a week, including weekends, anyone can gain access to our community by saying they wish to visit an open house? Other local upscale communities require a realtor to collect the guest at the gate (open houses are always staffed) and return them there. I asked our Board to do the same and they declined. No surprise with a realtor as our President. Circle back around to the possible expenditure on the fitness center.

Let’s talk finances for a while. It is essential that our HOA has a very strong reserve built up. Should we fall short in the future the only answer is a special assessment of unspecified size (it could be a lot) or a levy or “sales tax” on home sales in the community. I do not know, but will find out, when our latest reserve study was done, what the required reserves are and what our current reserves are as a percentage of that number. In case you think this is an unimportant issue, let you remind you that we – our HOA – is entirely responsible for the roads in our community. If you are as alarmed as me about some of the ever-widening cracks in our streets, always remember that we are going to be paying for a new road one day.

We will be faced with a vote very soon that will clearly delineate the future of our HOA. The choice is clear. Common Sense? Or an agenda of spending without regard to homeowners’ wishes? Please vote for a change. I get no pleasure from asking for your vote to thin out our current HOA Board, but it looks like the only viable option presented.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Is it time for a Cimarron Hills tea party?

Isn't it interesting how the national political stage mirrors the goings-on of the Board at our homeowners' association?
Looking back a few years, I recall the State of Arizona having a budget surplus. A major question then for our State legislators was what to do with the money. It was easy to answer for me. That's OUR money. If you have over-taxed us, give it back. Of course, they didn't.
Other peoples' money. Easy to spend isn't it? I was greatly amused by the promotional material for the HOA party in October: "Brought to you by your homeowners' association". No, brought to you by you. That was your money. (A conversation for another day is whether it is the business of our HOA to hold parties. I personally don't think so. The HOA does not need to fund networking opportunities.)
The 2010 Congress ploughed ahead like the battleship Bismark spending (our) money on various projects despite vocal opposition. Our Board too, shows every intention of ploughing ahead with its ill-timed and excessive spending proposals, again in the face of substantial opposition.
Sixty-three members of the House of Representatives lost their jobs in the last election paying the price for their patrician arrogance. A similar fate needs to befall some of our Board members, I think.

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Conflicts of interest and good governance Pt. I

There are many definitions of a conflict of interest. One that I find apropos to our homeowners' association is this: "conflict of interest n. a situation in which a person has a duty to more than one person or organization, but cannot do justice to the actual or potentially adverse interests of both parties."
I wonder, then, how it is that an individual might serve on both our HOA Board and that of McDowell Mountain Ranch? Certainly it is both disingenuous and incorrect to assert that the interests of these bodies are always aligned. In my opinion, recusal from a conflicted discussion is an inadequate remedy. It robs one or other of the homeowners' association of the service of a Board member who was elected to that post to fully discharge their duties.
And, I might add, just because someone may serve on both Boards, doesn't mean that they should.
Our association manager has told me that one member of our Board currently serves on both Boards. I urge that person to do the right thing. Pick one.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Letter to the Board on current issues

As many of you are aware, there has been considerable controversy lately over proposed spending by our HOA Board, and other good governance issues. I will have a more detailed post on the various communications we have all received soon. Just busy. But I do want to share a letter I sent to our Board before their last meeting:

***********************

November 16th, 2010

Board members of Cimarron Hill Homeowners Association.

Gentlemen:

I would have chosen to attend your meeting of November 18th, however I will be in Washington DC. As an alternative, I am providing you input on two items on your agenda by letter.

Proposal to consider expanding fitness facilities.

Without discussing whether an expansion of our fitness facilities is necessary or desirable at some time in the future, I have to tell you that from my perspective it beggars belief that you would even consider discretionary spending of this magnitude in today's economic climate. It is not the role of our HOA to provide an economic stimulus program.

If there are sufficient surplus funds in the operating account for the year then I would question our budgetary process. If it is to come from reserves, then I think a serious review of our reserves should be undertaken -- for example, what percentage do our reserves make up of expected future expenses?

In any event, I fully understand that spending other peoples' money is quite an easy process. However I would urge you to remember, in our present economic climate that it is, in fact, the homeowners money. Using the number of $229 per household from Mr. Fuchs's recent letter, if indeed such an unexpected surplus has arisen, I would like it returned.

Pool access and photo IDs.

For many years I have supported or advocated for decent control of access at our pool and recreation center. However, in the absence of hearing how the Board intends to enforce access, even with photo IDs, I am left somewhat perplexed by this project.

Are we now to have pool monitors? (Maybe not a bad idea) When this was suggested by another Board member some years ago, I recall Mr. Fuchs, for one, was not in favor of it. If our homeowners are to be inconvenienced to the extent of some 1,200+ visits to obtain access cards, it would be good to hear how this work will be rewarded by workable enforcement.

As an aside on this issue, I will tell that as a homeowner, it is my opinion that my household should have relatively unimpeded access to the community center and pool. For example, I do not understand why it should be necessary for me to accompany my 60-year old sister-in-law if she wishes to swim here when she is visiting us.

Sincerely,

Anthony C. Humpage

**********************
Our community manager told me he included a copy of my letter in the Board packets. I received no feedback other than from President Fuchs who thanked me for my input.