Notes from irrigation meeting — August 19, 2015

For those of you who did not attend the meeting, following are the highlights. About 50 people from all three HOAs attended.

Introduction of presenters: Teri Buhl, (moderator), Marcia Kaplan, Bruno Keller

Purpose of meeting — Teri Buhl

• Inform residents regarding water recycling system
• Discuss Molzen Corbin Engineering Recommendations Report
• Present Funding Options
• Stress importance of participating in October Homework group

First Presentation: Irrigation system–Bruno Keller, RVN participant in committee to review community options

Map of entire Rancho Viejo community (slide) — What is critical to understand is that the use of recycled water is an Interdependent System that requires all communities to cooperate.

• 10 years of Irrigation Issues–original contract for recycled water was w/SunCorp and then transferred to Univest
• Over the past 10 years, coordination of volumes, cycling schedules between the North & South experienced many difficulties
• Spending on improvement has been minimal
• Different landscaping services contribute to complexity of the system
• Cost of recycled water significantly higher than fees charged by Ranchland to homeowners; compare w/Santa Fe City fees charged ($1 per 1,000 gallons vs. $3.26)

Technical Information (slides)

Qs & Responses following presentation:

Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) Statistics

Constraints:

• 2 tandem pumps, high powered are installed but only go off/on, thus pumps can burn up quickly if run continuously,
• designated days for irrigation – 3 days for South; 2 days for North, but no clocks to monitor schedule
• limitation of 120,000 gal/day amount
• La Entrada (LE)-150 house (current)
• Windmill Ridge (North and South) – 755 home
• Village 1 & 2 (North)- 330 home
• Distance & Elevation

Village 1 & 2, North – pressure too much, so frequent breakage of pipes

Windmill Ridge (South) – not enough pressure

MolzenCorbin study:

Recommend 3 pumping stations w/3 holding tanks (one for each community); one 500,000 gal tank at the Waste Water Treatment Plant – constraint pump 120,000 gal/day

Advantage:

-possibly less smell and sediment

-ease of choosing any flow rate of convenience, but the same limitations of 120,000 gal/day

-elimination of cycling of tandem pumps

Could also use much smaller pumps that run all day instead of 2 powerful pumps

Q: What is the life cycle of the pumps, of tank…rehab costs, life cycle of pipes that feed the individual units and the feeders?

Depends on usage and pressure issues; North – the pressure is too high; they have installed pressure reduction pipes and now have much less problems.

Q/Comment: Previous Landscape committee chair suggested 2 solutions: 1-for the utility company…install a drive to control on/off feature of pumps; 2-dredge the pond at the end of each season to remove sediment, install high capacity filter as water enters the pond…

South: because of lower press–install booster pumps at WR4…& clean filters

If effluent cannot be deliver have individual homeowners water their landscape, and employ buffalo tank to water common area….cost $200 a year for each homeowner…

Response Cass Thompson: Pond is a lined pond so can’t be dredged; The direction given to MolzenCorbin was to solve the all the irrigation problems for the entire community

Q: Paul Keaton: We must all agree…who is not agreeing to work together?….

Response: Major interference came from South board members.

Q: Judy Reinhart: How much money has North spent to correct pressure problems? Response: $12-15,000 to install pressure reduction piping.

Qs … Are there any other consumers?

R:Amy Biel school has requested to be put on line.

Q…La Entrada will have more houses that are not currently being counted – 1250 total houses…

R: They will be providing effluent that will add water to the system.

Q: John Crawly LE…What areas do the associations water? R: Common areas only, not individual houses. Estate and Conservation lots receive no recycled water. They are responsible for all their landscaping

Q/Comment: Jerry Wells, N…Water should go by acreage.

R: The acreage is basically the same, equal areas for all association common areas

Q: Susan Knight N…Any survey done to determine which of our landscape are xeric?

Deciduous trees take water and are in front of houses. Charlie Brown LE … In LE, tree in front of house is watered by the homeowner.

Q: Jim Johnson S…Is there a job order for maintenance of the filters?

Yes, in the N, in the S … not certain of what is in the contract w/landscaping company

Q: Jessica S…Why does Ranchland want to get out of the business of delivering gray water? Response: Warren Thompson: Ranchland is in the business of processing effluent, not providing gray water. We have done it in the past, and continue to date, but there have been too many problems working with 3 different associations.

Q: Laura Trujuillo—Why would the associations want to be in the recycle business?

Second Presentation: Financial Aspects–Marcia Kaplan

What’s not in the MozenlCorbin Report:

• Operating cost estimates
• Maintenance costs estimates
• Reserve funding estimates
• Future growth estimates
• Management structure for all 3 HOAs

Proposal suggested that there be a master HOA to handle irrigation, a superstructure. Questions that occur are: Who would run this superstructure? and what would the developer participation be? What would a joint management agreement look like and much would it cost per year? Who would actually manage the Wastewater treatment plant.

Options:

• Use no irrigation for common areas.
• $1.9 million purchase price of proposed system.

How to pay for it? Special assessment? Loan from Ranchland & pay over time? Bank loan? Bond? (County extends its bonding capacity on community financing projects, so bonds are tax free, but they are not backed by county. Bonds are paid through property taxes levied, based on property assessed value. Bonds have additional fixed cost, usually 20% over and above the money needed plus interest, and because attached to property taxes, it means homeowners with higher property value pay more. This is particulary inequitable because Estate lots which have no street scape, would pay the most. Have heard rumors that this is the preferred way to finance, but very costly

• It might be prudent to hired a financial expert to advise on best way to finance.
• Explore other options.

Qs & Responses following presentation:

Q: Chris …This is the physical cost going in. What about the cost for deferred maintenances? and it is not an attractive purchase, so there may be additional cost.

Response: Cass Thompson: We don’t know what’s the best way to go. That’s why we would recommend participating in the Homework group.

Comment: Jerry … N The associations are putting away reserve funds for replacements In the N we are putting away $33,000 a year but it is being used for current repairs.

Carl Moore Homework Group facilitator

How the Homework group works:

All residents are invited to participate; dates scheduled for the end of October management will participate along w/residents; through learning, planning, choosing, can make decisions through consensus.

Meetings schedule for last 2 weeks of Oct…1st mtg Sat, the 17th, all are invited. Then those who want to participate in 4-5 small group meetings following

Comment...Homework group can’t decide on this type of issue for the entire community. It is an educational process, not a decision making group.

Q: Marty from LE: What’s the timeline, before the Utility company needs an answer?

Comment: Dick W… S…I thought the Board has the power to take out a loan on our behalf.

Q: Kathy…would this system have any warranty?

Comment:Risks of Not Resolving Irrigation Issues

Systems are aging and failing

Main irrigation pump failure could drive Ranchland to ask for money to replace

Ranchland could stop providing irrigation water

Ranchland already uses irrigation pond water for construction use.

Comment: Bill..Previous developer was using the pond for construction, and we asked that they not continue, and they obliged.

Comment: Larry Peppers N…what would be the problem of converting to potable water,

Bruno slide…

Cost for N $25,000 for irrigation water and repair; .divide by 50 trees equals … (see slide) county code, requires that you put the water into the system…will be much more costly

Comment: Judy…V1&2. We paid for the boulevard, and getting into the bond business, is quite expensive

Q: Chrystal … I’m confused. How does homework group help us get to decision?

Q: Paul…Does this technical solution solve the political problem? 

Response: Warren Thompson: no, must be equitable for all.

Comment: Chris S…There is an undercurrent. But get some other alternatives out. There is a lack of knowledge. The homework group may be able to provide that knowledge to assist the boards make a decision. Once we finance any system, we are married to it.

Comment: RVS Landscape Committee needs to work w/landscape contractor on improved scheduling of irrigation timers, and continue educating residents regarding xeriscaping which is still an issue.

Comment: Charlie B… LE. I am astonished at how quickly these pipes have failed. We don’t have the expertise.

Q: Kathy…Who will operate the WWTP? Q..Who will operate the irrigation system?

Comment: Warren Thompson: It is critical to come up w/an email list for all the HOAs so that information can be sent out in a more cost effective manner than mailings.

Next Steps

• Develop other operating and equipment options
• Continue refining cost figures to build an accurate water treatment budget; include operating costs and facility management costs; include long term maintenance budget figure; include detailed reserve funding needs;
• Develop funding options other than a public bond

Why Doesn’t the RVS Board Want Residents to be Informed?

Residents of Rancho Viejo South received an e-mail blast from Vince Montoya on August 17 stating that the Board of Directors has not “sanctioned” the August 19 meeting about changes in the provision of recycled water for irrigation. Last time I checked, Rancho Viejo was in the United States, a country founded on the principle of freedom of speech. Nobody who lives here needs permission from the Board to hold a meeting, share information, or express an opinion.

The Boards of Rancho Viejo North and La Entrada have both sent out notices about this meeting to all residents via e-mail. Although requested to do the same, the South Board refused.

I invited the RVS Board member who attended all the meetings with Ranchland Utility regarding the sale of the irrigation system to speak at the August 19 meeting twice and never received the courtesy of a response. Our Board seems to be committed to doing everything in private and providing as little information as possible to homeowners.

Why is our Board so hostile to the exchange of information?

Although a few Board members have given lip service to an atmosphere of greater transparency, their actions show they have no real interest in dialog. Rather their attitude is one of, “We’ll tell you what you need to know, if we think you need to know, and if you don’t like it, move.” Yes, Board members have told residents to move if they object to Board views. If these individuals have such scorn for residents why are they on the Board? They are supposed to represent our interests, not scold us for exercising our rights.

The reason we are holding this meeting is that the Board has consistently failed to share information that affects the interests of RVS homeowners. They have created an environment of distrust.

In this instance, homeowners could be paying a substantial amount of money for taking over the ownership of the irrigation infrastructure. Doesn’t that deserve a discussion?

Yes a homework group is planned. I have participated in such a group. They usually involve a major time commitment over several days or weeks, precluding working people from attending. It is also possible that only certain alternatives will be presented, while the August 19 meeting will cover a wider range of options.

I encourage all RVS residents to attend this meeting. Dialog and dissemination of information is never detrimental.

INFORMATION MEETING NOTICE: IRRIGATION – BIG CHANGES ON THE WAY?

ALL RESIDENTS OF RVS, RVN, AND LA ENTRADA INVITED

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19^TH 6:45 P.M.

FIRE STATION ON RANCHO VIEJO BOULEVARD

 Ranchland Utilities, which provides recycled sewage water for our common area irrigation, intends to get out of the recycled water business. The three HOAs are in discussions to buy the infrastructure and water for the irrigation.

Molzen Corbin, an engineering firm, has performed an evaluation of the current effluent reuse system. Molzen Corbin has made recommendations for improvements and provided cost estimates.

 Estimated costs just for infrastructure are $1.9 million for the Molzen Corbin suggested improvements. This does not include operating costs.

Rancho Viejo residents would have to pay for infrastructure improvements and ongoing operations if we buy the system. How we would pay has not yet been determined.

Residents who have been involved in the process will provide an assessment of where we stand and some technical information. Alternatives for funding will also be discussed.  

If you care about our neighborhood trees, plants, and green areas, please attend.

The final Molzen Corbin report is available for RVS residents on the community website under Community Documents: A(E)ffluent System Recommendation Report

http://www.hoamcoweb.com/ranchoviejosouth/document_view.asp?id=224

You must be logged in to access it.

The Board of Directors Again Tries to Limit Resident Input

The Board has moved both the time of the monthly meeting and the location. The next Board meeting is Tuesday, January 27 at 1 p.m. at the Firehouse on Rancho Viejo Boulevard.

The Board’s intent is clear — to limit the number of residents who can attend by making it nearly impossible for anyone who works a regular job to be there. Also on the agenda is a motion to change the meetings from bi-monthly to quarterly. If they find monthly or bi-monthly meetings too onerous, they should not be on the Board.

This change is serious as it means that both minutes and financial documents will be available with a three month lapse because they need to be approved by the Board. On a national level, HOAs with issues of fraud or embezzlement are most likely to have quarterly meetings rather than monthly meetings, which we had until July 2014. Embezzlement by HOAs, either managers or Board members, is one of the fastest growing crimes in our country. Take a look at some of the stories in the links below.
Unfortunately, these cases are usually not uncovered until years after the crimes started, resulting in huge financial losses. And it is one of the easiest crimes to get way with because of resident apathy.

• OK: Bixby man charged with embezzling from homeowners’ association
Prosecutors have charged a Bixby man of embezzling nearly $18,000 from a homeowners’ association….
• FL: Merritt Island HOA Treasurer Charged With Theft and Fraud
Brevard County Sheriff’s Office Economic Crimes Unit investigators say that they have determined that a former treasurer of the Marsh Harbor Homeowner’s Association, Merritt Island, stole funds from the HOA account from 2009 through 2012….
• OH: Gorski sentencing continued
• Judge Lou D’Apolito on Tuesday continued for 30 days a sentencing hearing for a woman accused of stealing $100,000 from a Boardman condominium association….
• MO: Man who stole from condo association pleads guilty 
A man who stole more than $70,000 from his condominium association has pleaded guilty to the scheme…..
• Embezzlement and Community Associations: Do Not Let It Happen To Your Associatio
 Unfortunately, there is fraud and embezzlement being committed at community associations throughout California as well as across the country every day. We have written about this issue in the past; follow this link to an article we wrote that describ…
• FL: Former Longboat Key condo mgr gets 3 years in prison for stealing more than
Manatee County Judge Thomas Krug sentenced the former manager of a Longboat Key condo association convicted of stealing more than $200,000 of the association’s funds to three years of prison abd 10 years of probation and ordered her to pay restitutio…
• CA: Solana Beach woman accused of $900k embezzlement
A Solana Beach woman faces charges that she used her management company to embezzle about $900,000 from a Simi Valley homeowners association, authorities said….
• GA: Stratford treasurer indicted for stealing from homeowners association
 A Columbia County grand jury has indicted the former treasurer of an Evans neighborhood association on felony theft charges after she was accused in May of stealing more than a quarter-million dollars from the organization….
• FL: Former Volusia sheriff’s deputy gets 2 years’ probation in HOA cash thefts
  A former Volusia County sheriff’s lieutenant was sentenced to two years probation after he was accused of stealing thousands of dollars from his homeowners association in Port Orange….
  NJ: Condo head linked to $400,000 embezzlement
  The embezzlement of at least $400,000 from the treasury of a local condominium association has been linked to its property manager, who authorities said killed himself after he admitted he stole the missing money….

I don’t know about you, but I would prefer to not let that happen here in Rancho Viejo South. The only thing that can stop it is an active resident community that does not let itself be dictated to by a Board that wants to act in secret without resident input, and does not represent the best interests of residents. We are particularly vulnerable in that our Board is backed by an attorney who will do whatever they ask, often in violation of bylaws, because she is receiving about four times the amount of money in legal fees as are budgeted. This is a financial bonanza for her. You probably don’t know this because the Board refused to make the 2014 expenditures available to residents at the annual meeting, even though Carol Thompson promised to do so at the September Board meeting.

The Board is also backed by HOAMCO, a management company that is supposed to represent the interests of residents who pay their salaries, not just a seven member Board. The president of HOAMCO, Justin Scott, publicly said at the annual meeting that the interests on RVS residents are not important to him, he listens only to the Board.

Those of you who can, please attend the Board meeting next Tuesday at 1 p.m. at the Fire House on Rancho Viejo Boulevard. Ask your neighbors to attend. Voice your opposition to the meetings being changed to quarterly. Otherwise, things will get worse than they already are and in a few years we may see RVS listed on a website that reports HOA financial malfeasance. And if you think the laws of NM will protect us, you are wrong. We are on our own.

..

Another HOA Mismanaged by HOAMCO

Residents at Ventana Ranch in Albuquerque fight back against abuse.

http://krqe.com/2014/12/10/homeowners-association-boots-residents-on-city-streets/

The Election Fix — Who Cast the Most Proxy Votes in the Board Election?

Someone who isn’t an owner or a resident of Rancho Viejo South. The Community Manager.

How to Fix an Election

It’s really simple. You allow the person who is supposed to be acting in a neutral capacity — collecting the proxies, reviewing the proxies for accuracy, and making sure there are enough proxies for a quorum — to vote the proxies. That’s what happened on Tuesday night. In all previous elections, designated proxies could only be RVS homeowners in good standing.

When an objection was made at the meeting about the community manager being allowed to vote proxies, Association Attorney Lynn Krupnik stated that anyone could be designated as a proxy; the person did not have to be an owner.  Anyone off the street could walk in and attend our meeting and vote on behalf of an owner. That’s interesting because the ballot form requires an address or lot number of an owner. What address did Vince Montoya write in?

What’s wrong with letting non-owners vote? Plenty. RVS owners who are in arrears in paying their assessments are not allowed to vote. Individuals who have no ownership interest do not pay assessments. Let’s say an owner in good standing designates as his proxy (perhaps unknowingly) an owner who is in arrears on his assessment. According to attorney Krupnik’s opinion, since anyone can be a proxy, that person who cannot vote for his own unit, can vote as a proxy for someone else. The attorney’s opinion severs the relationship between ownership/payment of assessments and voting rights. That’s a very bad precedent.

Last year the Board decided to hire neutral ballot counters because they did not believe residents could be trusted to honestly count ballots. Proxy ballots are mailed to HOAMCO; the address is the office of the Community Manager. As the recipient of the proxies, the management company is supposed to act in an unbiased and neutral manner. The Bylaws (Section 2.8) actually require that proxies be mailed to the Association Secretary, who is an owner. Again, this is a blatant disregard for the Bylaws. As a neutral third-party, the community manager’s responsibility is to open the proxies, ensure there are an adequate number to attain a quorum, and ensure that the owners who submit proxies are in good standing.

There is no way the person who is performing these administrative tasks as an employee of HOAMCO should be voting. Mr. Montoya, via his inappropriate e-mail blasts, had made clear his preferences for the Board. Allowing him to cast ballots makes a mockery of the supposed neutral and fair voting process. Mr. Montoya has been rewarded for his unethical behavior with a $9,000 raise starting in January.

The proxies that were submitted without a designated person to vote the proxy were supposed to be used for quorum purposes only. A few of us were watching how the proxies were being handled at the registration desk. There was a pile set aside and we asked the ballot counters if these were the “quorum only” proxies. They said yes.  During the committee report part of the meeting Mr. Montoya brought several proxies/ballots to Jim Kerr, the Secretary, who wrote on them. This was in full view of all attendees.

Then Mr. Montoya went outside to where the ballot counters were. I was outside and saw him with a stack of about 15 stapled yellow proxies and blue ballots, signing the ballots as quickly as he could and handing them to the ballot counters next to him. (See the picture in ELECTION FRAUD.) Could he have put his name in as the designated proxy on the “quorum only” proxies and then submitted a ballot? Could Mr. Kerr have written his name in as the designated proxy on the “quorum only” proxies?  Did the quorum only pile make its way into the counted ballot pile?

Last year it was suspected that something similar occurred and a resident asked to see the paper proxies and ballots, and was refused by former President Thompson and Community Manager Montoya (see Oct 8th comment). I presume the same thing will happen this year.

The Board attorney and HOAMCO, who should be neutral and adhere to professional standards and ethics, willingly participate in this charade. The current Board can serve for life if we let this continue.

Watch this video to see what can happen when a few people have absolute control. The Board in the video approves expenditures after the fact. We already have that. The Board uses intimidation tactics. We have that, too.

http://www.local10.com/news/community-president-buys-car-pays-self-salary-with-neighborhood-money/27853208

In January 2015 our Board will be voting to possibly change Board meetings to quarterly. That would mean that minutes and financials would not be posted for three months. That’s even less transparency than we have now.

Is this the future you want for Ranch Viejo South?

REMINDER: ANNUAL MEETING – TUESDAY NIGHT, NOV. 18TH

Many people think the meeting is tonight, Monday. It is Tuesday night, Nov. 18th — registration starts at 5:30 p.m. The meeting starts at 6:30 p.m.

Remember, if you are not going to the meeting and are submitting a proxy, your vote will not count unless you designate someone to vote on your behalf. That person’s name should be written in on page one of the proxy form under “Designated Proxy.” As it is too late to mail in the form, find someone who is going to the meeting and give them your form.

If you want to go to the meeting and need a ride, let us know via a comment here.

 

 

 

Mr. Montoya Channels Mr. Rogers

Yes, let’s all sing along;  “It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood.” I hope all of you are enjoying the missives from the HOA manager with the subliminal message that all is well in our community and the blissful situation can be attributed to the good deeds of the Board, especially the president. For those of you who have walked our cracked, disintegrating trails lately, please be aware that you are seeing an optical illusion. The asphalt is actually smooth. Just hum, “It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood,” and all will be well.

The latest communication is about the audit, which Mr. Montoya says merits another gold star for the Board. When I requested a copy of it, he did not respond. And  I know that at least two Board members have not seen the audit. So I wonder how the HOA manager, who is not an accountant, knows so much about it when it has not been reviewed by the Board.

It is the Board that has a fiduciary responsibility to residents, not the HOA manager. It is the Board that should be communicating with us. While we receive lots of budgets, residents have still not been provided the actual year-to-date expenditures for 2014. And while others may be satisfied with Mr. Montoya’s assurance, I want to see a copy of the audit from an objective, qualified third-party firm. My assessment paid for it and I deserve to see the results.  Don’t tell me everything is wonderful. Show me the proof.

 

 

 

Unethical Behavior by our HOA Manager

Our HOA community manager Vince Montoya continually acts in an unprofessional manner by interjecting himself into Board elections and misusing the HOA e-mail list.

On October 30, the four Board candidates who attended the Candidate Forum received the following e-mail from him.

October 30, 2014

Vince Montoya <VMontoya@hoamco.com>

To: Vince Montoya <VMontoya@hoamco.com>

Cc: Marcia Kaplan <marcia.kaplan@q.com>, David Pfeifer <djpfeiferrvsca@gmail.com>, Madelene deRollo <mderollo@yahoo.com>, Teri Buhl <scoobagal@gmail.com>

Board Candidate Question

Dear Board Candidates,

The Communications Committee on behalf of concerned residents have requested the candidates to responded to questions they felt relevant to the upcoming election. The questions are listed below and the candidates responses will be distributed to the community.  Responses are requested back by 2 PM, Tuesday, November 4^th.

Thank you for your interest in the community.

1. Homeowners are often unclear on the governance and policy making roles and responsibilities of the HOA Board vs. those of the property management company. Share your perception of the roles of a volunteer HOA Board as part of governance vs. the management responsibilities of a professional community manager provided by the property management company.

2. The maintenance and upkeep of our community common areas and infrastructure such as parks, walking trails and roads are paid for by homeowner assessments.  Under the guidance of current HOA Board President Carol Thompson increases to these assessments are no longer automatic. What is your philosophy regarding homeowner assessment: do you favor regular annual increases; need based increases or cutting services to maintain current assessments. Please explain your philosophy.  What is your philosophy regarding homeowner assessment: do you favor regular annual increases; need based increases or cutting services to maintain current assessments. Please explain your philosophy.

3. RVS offers its residents common area maintenance and a variety of related amenities such as free doggie bags and a shade structure near the our icon windmill, and a newsletter, which advertising covers part of the costs of publishing.   Amenities are paid for by the homeowner assessments the same as care for the commons. Do you feel that amenities add value to the community and if so why.

It appeared that the other four candidates were not sent these questions. When I questioned Mr. Montoya about this, he said those four were sent blind carbon copies. When I objected he said he would send the message out to all candidates with a CC. I also asked why the Communications Committee did not send out this message itself.

His response was, ” All correspondence from the Committees should go through the manager.” Unlike me, Mr. Montoya sees no irony in the fact that the Communications Committee is not allowed to communicate directly with residents. According to our HOA charter, committee members are allowed to communicate independently of the management company.

Question 2 is hardly objective. In nice bold letters, it says Carol Thompson has prevented dues increases. I have lived here for five years and I do not believe increases were ever automatic. Some of us have asked previous Board members about this claim and automatic increases have never been the case.

Ms. Thompson is running on this one trick pony platform – no dues increase. That is not always a good thing, and in this case, can be misleading.

How do we know the HOA does not need a dues increase?

A few facts:

• Despite promising to do so at the September Board meeting, Carol Thompson did not include the 2014 year-to-date expenditures in the annual meeting packet. There are several categories that are very much over budget. She does not want residents to know that.

• With persuasion from some residents, the Board commissioned its first audit in three years. It was supposed to be ready at the beginning of October. It is still not done. When Madelene DeRollo, a candidate for the Board, called the firm doing the audit, she was told it was delayed because the firm was waiting for information from Vince Montoya. It appears to me that the audit results are being held up so results are not available until after the voting and the annual meeting. The same is true for the reserve study that was also commissioned – delayed beyond the original delivery date. If that study shows that our reserves are underfunded, the assertion that our dues not being increased is a wonderful thing suddenly does not look so great. We have aging infrastructure here in RVS, combined with shoddy work by the developer’s chosen contractors. We need adequate reserves.

• Thompson’s claim that assessments have not increased during her tenure is incorrect. Town home assessments have increased substantially to cover roof repairs. This is normally an expenditure that is covered by reserves, but the reserves were not adequate.

When Univest took over Rancho Viejo from bankrupt Suncor, the original developer, there were outstanding issues over shoddy work by the developer’s chosen contractors. To settle these claims Univest and RVS arrived at a settlement, with Univest giving RVS $150,000. All of this money should have gone into the reserve account. Instead, $50,000 was allocated to operating expenses.

And that is how the Board can overspend the budget and not have to raise assessments. They are using that cushion. It has nothing to do with prudent financial management. That was a one-time payment. We can’t go on forever overspending budgets and pretending the HOA is being run in a fiscally sound manner.

And by the way, once those questions were sent to the entire list of candidates, Mr. Montoya came back and said.

” Dear Board Candidates,

I have attempted to reach all candidates with this request from the Communications Committee but due to varying reasons I was unable to do so in a timely fashion. Therefore, in order to remain fair to all candidates this request has be withdrawn.”

I don’t buy that. I think the questions were only for the four candidates who attended the Candidate Forum.

Mr. Montoya acts in an entirely unprofessional manner by endorsing candidates. The HOA manager should be neutral. Previous complaints to Justin Scott, HOAMCO president, have gone unanswered. Instead he says he does what the majority of the Board tells him to do. This occurs even when those Board members who are running for office tell the manager to send out e-mail blasts that support their own candidacies. That is totally unethical.

If you find this disturbing, contact Justin Scott at justin@hoamco.com and voice your displeasure.

Ranchland Utilities and Our Irrigation System – An Update

The future of RVS’s irrigation situation was discussed at the recent candidate forum. It was mentioned that at the annual meeting a brief presentation would be made by Ranchland Utilities, the owner of the system.

A few issues have become clearer since last week. The engineering study now underway will not be finished until December. Therefore no costs will be available in time for the annual meeting. Warren Thompson will discuss the history of the irrigation system and the reasons why he wants to sell the infrastructure to the three HOAs in Rancho Viejo. Financing will not be discussed.

SHOULD HOA BOARD MEMBERS LIVE IN RANCHO VIEJO?

Our Bylaws were written by SUNCOR, the original developer, so they obviously were designed to benefit a developer. The Bylaws state that Board members need only be owners, not residents, of Rancho Viejo South. The Bylaws were written this way because until a majority of the units were sold, the company had a majority on the Board and their representatives did not live in the community.

One recently appointed (not elected) member of the Board who is a candidate —John Zipprich — works in Texas and has his primary residence there. When asked at the September Board meeting how much time he spends in New Mexico, Mr. Zipprich told the individual who asked that it was none of her business and accused her of stalking him for doing a Google search of publicly available information.

Another candidate, Jonnalyn Grover, states in her bio, “I have owned property in Rancho Viejo since 2004.” However, she does not say that she lives here. The line next to her photo states that she has been a resident for 10 years. Ms. Grover did not write that statement and I believe it is incorrect. Residents cannot ascertain if she does live here, and, if so, for how long.

I was hoping these residency issues could be clarified at the Candidate Forum on October 30th, but neither of these candidates attended.

I would like to see our Bylaws amended to require that Board members reside in Rancho Viejo for the majority of the year. People who actually live here have more at stake, are more attached to the community and attuned to its needs. Changing the Bylaws is a long process. For now, I urge residents to vote for candidates who have Rancho Viejo as their primary residence.

Annual Board Meeting Agenda —A Closer Look

At the annual meeting, our HOA Board intends to continue its practice of excluding resident input into HOA governance. We are going to be spoken to, not listened to, like children who should be seen but not heard. Look at the agenda. Item 4 lists two guest speakers in a 15-minute period. Lynn Krupnik will be paid her full hourly rate of $225 for the 7-10 minutes she will speak, according to Carol Thompson.

Usually at least 60 residents attend the annual meeting. We will have a paltry 10 minutes to ask questions of Ms. Krupnik and Justin Scott, president of HOAMCO. Since Mr. Scott never responds to residents who contact him by phone or e-mail, there may be many questions for him. And let’s make sure that Ms. Krupnik earns her full hourly rate.

At the last Board meeting in September, president Carol Thompson promised to provide a 2014 year-to-date budget/expenditure analysis in the Board packet. It is not there. Only the 2015 budget is included. A budget is just a plan. What is more important are the expenditures and whether there are categories that are over budget. Those who attended our last community meeting were shown the categories that were heavily overspent, the most notable being the legal expenditures. I am certain that the reason that the expenditures are not included is that the current Board does not want residents to see those figures.

CONTACT CAROL THOMPSON carolath@msn.com AND DEMAND THAT THE BOARD MAIL OUT THE 2014 YEAR-TO-DATE EXPENDITURES TO ALL RESIDENTS AS PROMISED.

At the end of the meeting, residents are allocated 10 minutes for comments and questions. That is a ridiculously inadequate and insulting amount of time.

RESIDENTS: YOU ARE THE HOA. THIS IS YOUR ANNUAL MEETING. DON’T LET THE CURRENT BOARD TELL YOU THAT YOU SHOULD BE SEEN BUT NOT HEARD.

A sheriff’s department representative will be present at the meeting. You are paying for his presence. The Board is doing this to intimidate us. Don’t let that happen. If you have questions that don’t fit into the 10-minute allotment, stand up and demand that your question be answered. Support other residents who also want to ask questions. Be polite and non-threatening but assert your right to have your questions answered. This is your meeting and your Board is answerable to you.