The Board’s “Splinters” summaries for the December 2nd and 16th meetings were emailed to all property owners last month. If you have not read them, I encourage you to do so. These summaries are, in my opinion, far better than anything previously distributed by the Board. All important points are covered in a concise manner.

These summaries can be found on the POA web site here:

12/2/2014 Splinters            12/16/14 Splinters

Alternatively, check your email. The summaries were sent on December 4th and 19th respectively.

Please take time to read these Board summaries carefully. They include important points and information which I would have included in my write-ups; but there is no need to repeat the information here. Particularly noteworthy is the section entitled “Road Project Phase 2” in the 12/2/14 meeting summary along with the “Marketing Plan” sections in both summaries.

Additional Comments

Possible Road Financing

The December 17 summary included the following:

• “The Finance Committee has begun to explore financing options available for the potential acceleration of the road project. Several residents have requested clarification on the potential usage of these funds for other projects. The intent is to use any funds raised by financing only for the construction of the roads. The project scope, cost and proposed financing will be presented to the residents as soon as the plan has been completed.”

I am not certain many residents are concerned that the proceeds of any loan be used “only for the construction of the roads”. I strongly suspect that any bank would make that a requirement of its loan anyway.

Rather, based on copies of communications I have received, I believe others share the concern I expressed in my previous write-up; namely that most or all of our $490,000 annual allocation to the Reserve Account be used to pay down the loan as quickly as possible and that, in the meantime, none of that allocation be used to finance amenities. The statement above regarding “use of the loan proceeds” does not address that issue.

However, the Board has committed to provide the community with all details related to any proposed project and financing. Therefore, the proposed repayment schedule should be clarified before any loan is obtained.

Marketing

This topic was covered in both meetings, and the following points come from comments made in those discussions.

• This issue was opened by proposing the overall goals of the POA with the idea of then relating those to marketing strategies. Nothing was firmly decided, and this will be a topic of future discussions.

• The concept of building community amenities appears to be on the table for discussion. Bill Colton gave his view that building community wide amenities should be considered. Based on his comments, he believes this is important both to market the community and to keep it competitive with other communities; particularly those slated for development as part of the Chatham Park project. He also suggested that the Community Appearance Committee, chaired by Becky Berrey, do an inventory of all available common land to assess potential sites for amenities.

• The amenities to be considered would not directly compete with the country club.

• Les Stuewer expressed the desire to obtain feedback from the community before considering expenditures on amenities; perhaps through community wide polls.

As noted in the December 16th summary, the Board intends to hold a separate, full-day meeting to discuss marketing strategies in more detail.  More information should be available after that session.

Additional Miscellaneous Items (from the meeting papers)

According to the minutes of the Communications Committee, publication of the POA monthly electronic newsletter has now ceased.  This electronic newsletter had replaced the print version which the Board terminated in October 2013 (See item 7 here:  10/15/13 Summary)  Other options for disseminating news are to be explored in 2015.  As to why this was done, the minutes note two things.  First, the current editor of the newsletter was unable to continue in that role.  Second, the committee discussed whether the monthly newsletter has “outlived its relevancy” and whether there might be better alternatives; such as weekly e-blasts with current information.

A note in the November 2014 Financial Report indicates that the total cost of the Mt. Carmel gate re-landscaping project was $54,000; which is less than the original estimate of $60,000 to $65,000.