HOA1 Candidates Display Different Visions

VIA SBINSIDER| October 17th

A crowd of 150 or so settled into the HOA1 Vermillion room Monday the 17th to hear the viewpoints of 4 candidates for 3 spots on the HOA1 board of directors. The four candidates expressed commonality on many issues including financial stewardship and listening to residents for direction of the association. Bill Bengen repeatedly pointed out that many ideas generated by the HOA1 sponsored survey seem to have been dismissed out of hand by the current board instead of trying to identify ways to implement those suggestions.

The key differences emerged when discussing the amount of effort on seeking merger talks with HOA2. Candidates Bill Bengen and Kathleen Sartoris were strongly in favor of a more formal and structured approach to HOA2 on creating framework for discussion. Candidates Steve Bellacqua and Tom Swikoski were not in favor. Both Bellacqua and Skofski raised the issue of the power and resistance to any changes on behalf of Robson Development. In their view, Robson has the veto power over any proposed changes due to the fact that it owns over 500 undeveloped lots (and could possible add more) in HOA2 and the development agreement today gives Robson enhanced voting privileges on any proposed changes. Bill Bengen answered this way:

As President of United SaddleBrooke, I had a telephone conversation with Jack Sarsam, VP Operations of RCI, who reports directly to Ed Robson. He said they could not support the merger of the two HOAs out of concern that prospective homeowners under contract with them to build homes could use a merger as an excuse to void their construction contracts. He said nothing about CC&R’s. I asked him how much longer they would be building in SaddleBrooke. He answered 4-5 years.

Kathleen Sartoris replied by email:

1. I believe it is too early to “use” considerations involving Robson as an insurmountable or deal-breaking obstacle. Robson indeed has more land to build out (part of HOA2) and he has many years to do it. Given his voting interest in HOA2 we would need to understand where he sees his plans in this area, and finishing? Or, if there may be time and circumstance that would give us insight.
2. Currently, it is also too early to know all the factors regarding potential unification between HOA1 and HOA2. There has been no legitimate inquest of the 2 HOAs increasing collaboration or exploring unification.
Inquiries from residents have yielded no data. So without information or a commitment to look into it, it’s hard to predict.
3. We do have a majority of residents in both HOA 1 and HOA2 that minimally would like to see this investigated.
What are the potential benefits and value or true challenges? At this time, the HOAs have demonstrated unstudied and unsubstantiated opinions, instead of professional due diligence.
As of this posting, Sikofski asked more time to answer, and Bellacqua had not responded. If and when they do, this article will be updated.


The voting information/ballot will come from  sa*************@iv******.com  this Friday Oct. 21st, and will give instructions on “How  to Vote.”

Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ron Bechky
1 year ago

Robson has about 125 lots left to sell. t last report he was limiting sales to 3/month
there’s no information on his future plans. It would be unprofitable to add small lots to HOA2 Any large land purchases would certainly require new amenities If you’ve visited the Ranch you’d know that these additions would be beautiful

Tom Swikoski
Thomas Swikoski
1 year ago

My name is Swikoski, and to clarify I did not ask for more time to answer this question.