Reorienting the BOD and its followers – wanting the truth ?

Col. Jessup shouting to Lt. Kaffee (A Few Good Men).

YOU CAN BE LOYALTY THE HOA “CONSTITUTION” — THE CC&Rs — OR THE US CONSTITUTION, BUT YOU CAN’T BE LOYAL TO BOTH.

Mgmt case study #1 – update2

Management Case Study #1 update2 — BOD good faith conduct

George K. Staropoli, December 31, 2021

MUST READ FOR CONCERNED MEMBERS

SCG BOARD UNEQUIVALLY DEMONSTRATED THAT IT’S A ROGUE BOD

SCG members, as a PUD, do not have title to any of the assets of the association. SCG, as represented by its board, owns title. Members have  beneficial interest, but not title to some $22 million in revenues, $21 million in reserve funds (cash equivalents), and $64 million in assets as reported on its IRS 990 filing for 2019.

The tone of  Thursday’s board CHAT meeting was clearly secretive for the Directors only and to say as little as possible for member consumption — on a “need to know basis” and the members didn’t need to know.  The president came across as the man-in-charge and making statements that ignored the statutes and governing documents; misstating that the CHAT was not a legal board meeting, just a chat amongst the directors, with a few acceptable attendees allowed to speak. 

Much to the arrogance and  naiveté of the president and the directors, I have had over 10 years dealing with Arizona legislature, proposing bills, and testifying for HOA reforms.  I played an important role in the establishment of OAH hearing HOA member complaints, vehemently opposed by CAI. The SCG “clique” has some 13 CAI members, former and current.

Read this important update that serves a warning to all those large active-adult or master planned HOAs that this could be happening to you.

Management Case Study #1 – update1

Events at the HOA featured in this study continue to unfold. The board has been silent since the Dec. 16 email from the president. A question was addressed to the Executive Administrator of CAM asking whether or not she was in charge. The general manager (GM) had quit and there was no announcement whatsoever as to the status of CAM. She was listed on the staff of CAM, without any statement regarding the status of the GM.

In 2 days of this writing, Dec. 30, the SCG will hold a planned Q & A session where members can ask the BOD questions, sort of a townhall meeting. Would you advise the BOD to hold the meeting? If so, how should it deal with hard questions concerning its past performance?

January 2022 will see the campaign and election of board directors, and the right of members to write-in names of members not approved or subject to the SCG election and voting process. The BOD controls and approves the selection of “candidates” and regulates their campaign procedures — can they speak at clubs, what can be said, failure to attend a meeting disqualifies a potential candidate, etc.

A majority of the directors will be elected at this time, as a result of resignations, permitting an organized membership to gain control of the board. As in the case of our national politics, should the old BOD deny the results — as it seems to be the posture it is taking — or accept the reality of the vote?

Management Case Study #1 — BOD good faith conduct

George K. Staropoli

December 22, 2021

“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”

(Wizard of OZ)

As applied to HOA-Land, the “man” is the BOD manipulating and controlling the images, propaganda, and marketing designed to placate the wants and desires of the members.

The task

For this case study, you have been engaged to advise the BOD as to its conduct in deciding these difficult and controversial  issues, and are free to comment on any or all aspects of the problem situation. What will you advise?  The  value of your recommendations lies in the quality of your supporting arguments.

Put your management/BD skills to work and join the study. It is very important for the learning process to share your recommendations with others here, and to accept their constructive criticism. You can reject, modify, or remove your recommendations. This approach sharpens your thinking and helps you make a more solid case for HOA reforms.

What does “HOA” really mean?

What are we talking about when we hear “I live in an HOA” or “what are my HOA fees?” Allow me to clarify some important concepts and definitions that I have employed to help in understanding what we are really talking about.

  • The term “HOA” is commonly used in 2 different aspects.
    • While commonly used to refer to the alleged community, in reality the “community” is a real estate “package” of homes, landscaping, amenities, and rules.
    • “HOA” more aptly applies to the association itself, which is the de facto – in fact – political governing body of the subdivision or real estate “package.”
  • “Government,” meaning political government, is defined in its general sense as “the person or group that controls and regulates the people within a territory.” Since your subdivision is a territory, that makes the HOA a truly political government.
  • “Private government” is a de facto government as defined above not incorporated under municipal statutes but under nonprofit corporation statutes. As such, it is a functioning government unrecognized by the state as Cuba had been for years.
  • “Quasi-government” simply means for all intents and purposes having all the attributes of a municipal government, except the names have been changed to mislead the innocent public.
  • “HOA-Land” is my descriptive term for “the collection of fragmented independent principalities within America, known in general as “HOAs,” that are separate local private governments not subject to the constitution, and that collectively constitute a nation within the United States.”
  • “Structured tribalism.” Tribalism is a term currently in vogue to describe divisiveness in America. “Structured tribalism” extends that view to describe the intentionally planned policy for the acceptance and control of HOA-Land.[1] It views the fragmented HOA-Land as distinct villages and clans.

When I speak of restructuring the HOA, I am referring to the authoritarian, undemocratic body functioning outside of constitutional protections, and making it a democratic government subject to homeowner constitutional protections.