HOA2 Turns to Option #3 $4.2k over 4 years

VIA SBINSIDER | March 16th, 2024

At the beginning of this decade, HOA1 transitioned from Robson’s control and management to a newly formed association. The new board discovered that many of the amenities had been allowed to deteriorate by Robson Development. The situation presented forced them to ask the residents to step up financially and raise substantial amounts in order to bring those amenities to their proper level. Ergo, the Board of Directors asked the membership to approve several years special assessments. In short order with some debate, the residents approved the extra fees and today, HOA1 has very healthy reserves and the facilities at a level expected by an upper-end retirement community.

Fast forward to a few years ago and HOA2 is transitioning to s self-governing community and surprise! Many of the buildings and other amenities were in left substandard condition by, Robson Development. For example, the tennis courts at Mtn. View were constructed with the least expensive understructure possible. Eventually, constant surface cracks had to patched and two of the courts were recently replaced with the industry standard construction. And, of course, the Mtn. View golf course was in terrible condition and getting worse. An outside consulting group, Trilogy, was brought in to manage the course and after an evaluation, it was decided that many repairs had to be made, which are underway.

A message from Matt Kambic, President, HOA2 this week:

The outcome of the work of the last 10 months is Option 3, an assessment ask of $4,200 to be paid over four years. This assessment will ensure that our community can meet all Reserve Study maintenance requirements over the next 10 years, pay off the Mountain View Loan in September 2024, pay cash for the Preserve renovation in 2027, and most importantly, stop the escalation of dues increases we have experienced over the last six years.

Now the decision is going to put to the residents who will vote. The extra fee amounts to a bit less than $90 a month and residents have options on how they want to pay.

We await the votes of the residents.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sherri Grupe
1 month ago

Someone needs to check their math. The payments for the $4200 assessment are from 7/15/2024 through 7/15/2027. That is 36 months. As long as we are still using 12 months in a year that is 3 years and the cost per resident averages at $116/month for 36 months. Also what is not mentioned is the Preserve course work is already in the budget for 2029-2031 with some minor work scheduled in 2026. The reason the assessment is so high is because the Board is asking to move the entire project up 2-4 years against the advice of the RRAG reserve experts whom we have paid many thousands of dollars for their expertise. We should either stop wasting money paying for their advice or actually listen to the experts we paid.

Donna
Donna
1 month ago
Reply to  Sherri Grupe

Is it true that 2 directors wanted only a $1500 assessment to pay off the MV loan? They were outvoted by the golfers on the board.
And three director slots will be up for election in October. Do we know which ones?

Charles Kill
Michael
1 month ago
Reply to  Donna

Denise, Mark and Dan

Sherri Grupe
1 month ago
Reply to  Donna

Yes, Larry Santora and Chuck Kill were in favor of a modified assessment of $1500 which easily pays off the MV loan and adds money to the reserve fund. They felt there was no justification to move the work on the Preserve course from 29-31 up to 2027 as there was not good reason to do so. Also that it would be more prudent to give the MV course time to prove itself. Just spent about $7 million on MV with promises of increased revenues and reduced expenses. We don’t know yet if that will happen. Premature to do the same work to the Preserve at an additional cost of close to $10 million in just a few short years. Yes they were outvoted on the decision. However they hope the assessment does not pass and they can encourage the board to move forward on a modified lower assessment.

Shannon Doyle
Shannon Doyle
1 month ago

I have yet to cast my ballot and am determing to understand if all lot owners under the current proposal would pay the additional assessment. I am clear that my lot is being assessed, and that all of my neighbors likewise. What I am unable to discover is that if the lots owned by the devloper, are subject to this assessment. That would seem unfair if they are not.

Can anyone, with cited authority, tell us all simply, will Robson pay the assessment on his 107 lots, (or will the eventual owners of those lots carry that as a liability), or nothing?

I am behind this initiative, and will add my “Yes” vote to the developer’s 107×3 votes, but first I would like to know: are we sharing this equally, or are we not?

Ron Bechky
Ron Bechky
1 month ago
Reply to  Shannon Doyle

Matt Kambic carefully explained that neither R CI nor home buyers (who close after July) will be subject to the assessment

Sherri Grupe
1 month ago
Reply to  Shannon Doyle

Neither Robson or any future buyer or Robson lots that close after July 15, 2024 will pay one dime of the assessment. Matt and the lawyer purposely structured the assessment levy so that Robson would not pay and then went to Robson and asked them to Vote their 300+ votes in favor of the assessment. An ethical President would have asked them to abstain since the assessment would not impact them or their future owners financially.

Ron Bechky
Ron Bechky
1 month ago

Robson is easy to blame as they have no reason to correct misinformation
The golf community in both HOAs is largely responsible for the financial issues respectively. H1 golfers created H2 by refusing to allow RCI to add new lots without adding 27 holes on what became the MyView golf course. There was so much animosity it was no wonder that RCI skimped on maintaining facilities. (I’m not even sure this was true.)
When H2 was considering the purchase of its courses, the BOD failed to consider the age of the courses and the need to redo them due to aging. Most egregiously the BOD ignored RCI’s unlimited obligation to maintain the courses forever, choosing the false alternative of local control.
Voting no on the current proposal is the best way to regain resident support over the reckless spending of its golf dominated BOD

David Streicher
David Streicher
4 days ago

What President Kambic intentionally declined to explain is that the $15M bill for the golf courses includes roughly $3M to redesign both golf courses. He characterizes all expenses as repairing or maintaining, which is not accurate. For example, as part of the Preserve redesign he is adding bunkers and tees and doing a total rebuild of six greens, including the practice chipping green. The golf course architect’s fee will be $450,000 for the Preserve course alone. That is why many of us refuse Option 3. We are quite willing to restore and maintain the courses we have, but don’t see the need to compete with Tucson National, La Paloma or Dove Mountain.