AGENDA SMVE Homeowners Association BOD Meeting April 16, 2018 @ 3:30 PM SMVE Clubhouse, 5550 N Paseo Otoño, Tucson, AZ 85750 Overview: 1) Call to order at 3:30 PM 2) Approval of Minutes of March minutes as circulated previously by e-mail. 3) Resident Concerns (15 min) Reports: 1) President (Kathy Mitton) a) Real estate status 2 on market, 2 pending, 3 closed YTD (as of 4/4/18) 2) Treasurer (Tom Kelley) 3) Architecture (Bill Coan) a) Update to Architectural Design Notes b) Architectural fines 4) Communications (Kiki Cheney) 5) Landscape (Kathy Mitton) 6) Recreation, Pools, Tennis (Laura Franklin) 7) Maintenance (Steve Struck) 8) Roads (Steve Struck) 9) Security (Phil Mowbray) Unfinished Business: 1. Replacement of pool ladders (Laura Franklin) 2. Mission statement legal update New Business: 1. xxx Executive Session (if needed) Adjourn Next meeting is May 21, 2018 Att: Minutes, Financials, Architecture Design Note Change, and Architectural Fine Proposal
SUNRISE MOUNTAIN VIEW ESTATES HOA BOARD OF DIRECTOR S MEETING NORTH POOL CLUBHOUSE AT 5550 N PASEO OTOÑO MARCH 19, 2018 AT 3:30 PM DRAFT ONLY BOARD PRESENT: Kathy Mitton, Bill Coan, Steve Struck, Tom Kelley, Kiki Cheney, Phil Mowbray, & Larry Spencer. Chris Bruyn with AME Management was also present. HOMEOWNERS PRESENT: Jane Spalding. CALL TO ORDER / VERIFICATION OF QUORUM: President Mitton called the meeting to order at approximately 3:30 PM and verified a quorum w/ 7 Directors was present as noted above. APPROVAL OF MAR 18 SPECIAL BOARD MEETING MINUTES: Mr. Coan motioned and Mr. Struck seconded to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. RESIDENT CONCERNS: Nothing at this time. REPORTS: 1) President Report: Ms. Mitton noted there are 3 homes currently on the market and 3 sales YTD. 2) Financial Report: Mr. Kelley noted our financials had been distributed to the Board electronically and that the Chase account will be closed when balance is low enough and the monies transferred to Washington Federal. He also noted plans to create an additional spreadsheet vs prior year as well as current budget to identify % of specific line item expenses incurred as well as % of budget remaining. 3) Architecture: Mr. Coan noted 6 ARC requests the past month and all had been approved. It was also noted 50 homeowners participated in the recent project to paint garage doors. At least 20 garage doors are still in poor condition and these homeowners will be contacted in April if the doors haven t been refreshed. A recent meeting of the ARC was briefly mentioned and Mr. Coan noted the support and information received from Mr. Scharf regarding ARC policies and procedures and his willingness to assist the newer members. Various forms designed to help homeowners communicate with the architecture committee have been modified for clarity and consistency without changing their substance and will be uploaded to the website soon. Lastly, the Dunn-Edwards 37% discount off full retail was noted that is available to all SMVE residents. 4) Communication: Ms. Cheney noted lots of activity in the Community and it was also noted the Newsletter was ready for distribution. Discussion ensued on the reasons why only 50 of 70 residents availed themselves of the group discount offered to paint their garage dots and Mr. Coan will forward his list to Ms. Cheney to determine how many have already opted-in to receive more consistent communication vs. those who have not. Lastly, it was noted Page 5 of the previous minutes was missing on the website and Ms. Mitton will follow-up. 5) Landscape: Ms. Mitton noted pack-rat treatments in the Common Area are scheduled in April as well as some minimal tree trimming. 6) Recreation: Ms. Franklin was unavailable.
7) Maintenance: Mr. Struck noted the repair of the telephone at the South Pool was completed and brief discussion ensued on the reasons and value of maintain active phones at each pool. An activity report had been requested but Century Link failed to provide. Mr. Spencer suggested a wall-mounted cell phone that would only allow emergency calls as an option at an approximate cost of $500 and Mr. Struck agreed to consider in the future. Mr. Struck also noted the recent cuts made to the new asphalt by Century Link to repair a splice that failed and subsequent asphalt patches. He also noted a Message Center holder that would cost approximately $1200 to purchase and have installed at 6 various locations (group mailboxes) throughout the Community. Discussion ensued and Mr. Struck will order one and have installed as a test-case. He also noted the possibility of painting the North Pool wrought iron fencing which require a fair amount of vegetation to be cleared from the wrought iron for access by painters, as well as possible solar lighting and overall refurbishment of the North monument sign. 8) Roads: Nothing at this time as the Roads Committee is still gathering and evaluating proposals. 9) Security: Mr. Mowbray noted the requirements by the Pima County Sheriffs Department to maintain an active Neighborhood Watch which includes a sign-up sheet with a list of attendees as well as at least one meeting annually. He also noted that several of the phone numbers on his list were no longer active and recommended some sort of procedure to verify phone numbers. Ms. Mitton noted the recent theft of 5 cactus and that a police report had been filed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1) Replacement of Pool Ladders: Ms. Franklin was unavailable for an update. NEW BUSINESS: 1) Mechanism to Post Notices at Mailboxes: Previously discussed under Maintenance. 2) Vision Statement / Organizational Chart: Mr. Spencer noted the need to retain a volunteer for the Archived Records manager position, as well as a Sidewalk Surveyor, a South Pool Gate Monitor, and one additional Water Watcher. Brief discussion ensued on sensitive information that was stored including social security numbers, that needed to be blocked out in the event this was accessed without authorization. Mr. Spencer distributed an Organizational Chart which reflected the various responsibilities of Board Members as well as volunteer homeowners. He also distributed a proposed SMVE Vision Statement and discussion ensued on verbiage and other wording options. It was suggested to modify the opening statement to The mission of the SMVE HOA is to preserve and enhance property values by: 1) Protecting HOA assets 2) Ensuring aesthetics 3) Maintaining amenities 4) Cultivating Community 5) Providing prudent and transparent financial management. With these revisions, Mr. Spencer motioned to approve the SMVE HOA Mission Statement and Ms. Mitton seconded. The motion passed unanimously. CONFIRM NEXT MEETING: The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, April 16, 2018 at the North Pool Clubhouse at 3:30 PM. ADJOURNMENT: Being no further business, the open Board meeting was adjourned at approximately 4:43 to enter into Executive Session as there were legal matters to be discussed. Respectfully Submitted, Chris Bruyn
Chris Bruyn / Administrative Manager for Sunrise Mountain View Estates HOA / Approved on
Proposed Addition to Architectural Design Notes: Sunrise Mountain View Estates Homeowners Association Architectural Design Notes (ADN) Garage Overhead Doors Any replacement or alteration to a garage overhead door must be approved by the Architecture Committee prior to work commencing. When evaluating a request to replace a garage overhead door, the Architecture Committee will evaluate these criteria among others: Garage overhead doors must be all-metal, raised-panel doors, with eight raised panels across each section of door. (Older doors with six raised panels across each section are acceptable but are no longer manufactured.) Garage overhead doors cannot include windows or decorative elements. Doors and trim, including weather stripping must be painted Dunn-Edwards Cliff Brown in flat or velvet sheen. Two air-circulation vents are permitted in the lowest section of the door and must be painted Cliff Brown to match the garage door. Door and trim must not have shiny surfaces that could reflect sunlight or automotive headlights. Homeowners especially with doors facing West or South may wish to consider insulated door panels to reduce heat load in their garage. Updated April 16, 2018
Proposed structure and fines for Architectural Violations: Maintenance-related violations, such as a garage door that needs new paint or trim, which violates Article XIII, Section 1a, which requires each homeowner to maintain a first-class private dwelling, with first-class materials and workmanship ; and which also violates Article XIII, Section 1g, which stipulates that painted surfaces are to be covered completely, with first-class results. Fine specified in 2005 Reissue of CC&Rs, By-Laws, Rules & Regulations: No specific fine has been established for this type of violation. Proposed fine: A fine of $10/day shall be imposed for each day a violation continues beyond a 45-day remediation period, which period commences upon delivery of notice of violation to the homeowner by the Architecture Committee. Structural changes and/or modifications without prior approval of the Architectural Committee Fine specified in 2005 Reissue of CC&Rs, By-Laws, Rules & Regulations: Five Dollars ($5.00) per day beginning fifteen (15) days following written notification by the Architectural Committee that such violation exists Proposed fine: A fine of $1,000/month ($33.33/day) shall be imposed for each month or portion thereof that a violation continues beyond a 60-day remediation/restoration period, which period commences upon delivery of notice of violation to the homeowner by the Architecture Committee. Dumpster/Storage Container in Driveway Fine specified in 2005 Reissue of CC&Rs, By-Laws, Rules & Regulations: A fine of Two Hundred Fifty ($250) per day shall be imposed for each day a violation of the prohibition against placing of Roll-off Containers, Dumpsters continues. Some articles of possible interest on topic of fines: https://www.echo-ca.org/article/fine-policies-hoas-how-be-reasonable-and-follow-california-law https://www.ch-pm.com/blog/hoa-information-station-hoa-why-do-hoas-hand-out-fines Points from Bill Coan: Bottom line, infractions and fines are not fun for HOAs, homeowners, or the community, but they are necessary. If we want to create communities that work together for a better environment, then we should all feel responsible to resolve any issues that may arise. Two Factors to Consider When Determing Fine Amount Economic status of the community comprising the association is the first factor to consider when figuring out how much to fine. A $50 fine in a condominium project comprised of blue collar families may be sufficient, while the same fine in a community of $3 million single family detached residences may be essentially meaningless to the owners (but it may still accomplish some deterrence from the embarrassment factor discussed above). Seriousness of the violation can significantly alter the amount an HOA fines a member. Actions that create a safety hazard for other persons or involve actual or potential economic losses to the association (repair of common area damage, increased insurance premiums, etc.) justify a higher fine than actions that only have an aesthetic impact, e.g., improper window coverings.
Keep the Court in Mind When figuring out how much money to fine for a violation, a board of directors should keep in mind the court's potential reaction. Although there are no statistical studies on this issue, it is likely that if an association imposes any fine totaling more than a few hundred dollars for a single violation, it will, if challenged in court, face an uphill battle in proving that the fine is reasonable. This does not mean that an association will never be permitted to impose a higher fine than $200 or $300 for a single violation; depending on the factors discussed above and the particular judge, it is possible that significantly higher fines may be allowed. However, if an association wants to minimize the possibility that a fine will be found to be unenforceable by a court, it should limit fines to a few hundred dollars per violation at most. Some boards, in order to encourage owners to correct a continuing violation of the governing documents (such as improper window coverings or construction of an unauthorized improvement) may wish to impose a fine for each day (or week or month) the violation remains uncorrected. Such per diem fines are not improper so long as they are authorized in the association s schedule of monetary penalties. However, boards have to be mindful not only of the amount of each per diem fine but of the total of such fines. For instance, a fine of $5 per day for improper window covering may be reasonable, but if the Board waits until such fines against an owner have accumulated for a year or more before attempting to collect them, a court may decide that a fine of more than $1800 for improper window covering is not reasonable.