Contents
1. Road Reconstruction Project
2. Finance Committee – Budget Update
3. Ad Hoc Sidewalk Committee
4. Realtor Relations Committee
5. New Four Way Stop Sign
6. Council Property at End of Miller
7. Covenant Re-Write Project
8. Feeding the Deer
9. Info – Election of Directors
10. Suggested Q&A Section
1. Road Project
Neither the road project nor the financing for that project were discussed in this meeting. Detailed information on the status of construction has been sent to all residents, and no additional information on that issue was made available at this meeting.
2. Finance Committee
Mike Donoghue discussed the revised year-end budget forecast. Certain expense categories will be exceeded, but he feels that the budget should still be met by using roughly $15,000 of our total $50,000 contingency. It appears no mandatory cutbacks will be required in any budget category. Comments were made that seemed to indicate that we might not need to spend all funds allocated to the general drainage and road maintenance accounts (I believe I have that right…).
It was noted that, with damage from the recent windstorm, we will exceed our storm maintenance budget of $50,000. Over $40,000 of that was spent on the one snowfall we had this past January, and the remainder will now be spent on this most recent clean-up. Should there be any more storms this year that cause damage, funds will have to come from the contingency account to cover those costs.
3. Ad-Hoc Sidewalk Committee
The Board passed a written resolution (with no discussion) which formally created an ad-hoc “Walkways Committee”. According to the resolution, its purpose is to “study and advise the Board on issues relating to the construction and maintenance of walkways in the community, including, without limitation, considerations bearing upon whether, where and when additional walkways should be constructed within Governors Club.”
This “purpose” is slightly different from that in the infrastructure committee minutes last month; which stated that the purpose of the committee was “to consider alternatives for future community sidewalks and to make a recommendation which, when approved, will become part of the long range plan”.
I believe there is a difference between giving advice to the Board and creating something to be included in the five year plan. Advice might have little or no impact. On the other hand, programs included in the five year plan will normally be acted upon and executed. Therefore, if this committee’s work is to be included in the five year plan, I suspect many residents would have great interest in its recommendations.
Since nothing about this committee has ever been discussed in a meeting, I have written the Board asking it to clarify whether this committee’s recommendations will be part of the five year plan and, if so, whether residents will have a chance to review and comment on the committee’s recommendations before they become part of the long term plan. So far, I have not received a response. If I do, I will post that information separately.
4. Realtor Relations Committee
Gus Kolias invited three people from a marketing/advertising firm to make a presentation to the Board on the concept of brand creation. It was not an attempt to sell the company’s services. Rather, it was an attempt to show what steps are needed to create an effective and accurate brand image and how this process might be applied to our community marketing efforts. It was a very interesting presentation with very logical and sensible concepts. There was some discussion afterwards, but it did not appear to me that the Board was prepared to take any action on this issue at this time.
The QR tag program is slated to start July 1st. This will allow home sellers to voluntarily place information tags on their mailboxes; thus allowing realtors to easily obtain information on those houses.
5. Four Way Stop Sign – Governors Drive and Morehead
A resident suggested that a four way stop sign was needed at the intersection of Governors Drive and upper Moorhead (at the top of the hill). I believe the suggestion was prompted by the increased volume of traffic expected during the road reconstruction.
The Board passed a resolution calling for the placement of four way stop signs at this intersection only during the construction period. There was some mention of a previous study dealing with this issue; but the resolution was passed with the comment that this information would be dealt with after the fact and that the resolution could be rescinded if necessary.
(In fact, I recalled the issue coming up in the External Relations Committee three or four years ago. My vague recollection was that there were safety related reasons why a four way stop would not work at this intersection; which is, I believe, why the idea never moved forward at that time.)
Subsequent to this meeting and the passage of the resolution, the Splinters summary included the following additional information:
“Since that meeting, the Board has taken into account a study done by Wetherill Engineering Company. The additional information provided by the study may prompt an alternative solution to ensure safety at this location during the road construction project.”
For those that might not have understood that additional information, I suspect this study recommended against the four way stop signs, that the Board is now reconsidering its decision and that they are possibly considering other methods of dealing with concerns regarding high traffic levels expected at that intersection during the construction period. But that is just my guess; because this qualification was added after the meeting. I believe the only certainty is that the placement of stop signs at this intersection is now questionable.
6. Council Property – End of Miller
Several weeks ago, the Board sent out an announcement concerning property at the end of Miller in Wilkinson Park. The current owner, Mildred Council, was marketing approximately 6.5 acres for sale and representing both that it had access to Miller and that it was suitable for residential development.
I believe it is fair to say that this came as a surprise to many people; primarily because the Governors Club Realty promotional map had this land labeled as a “Nature Park”. This multi-colored, fold-out promotional map has been used for many years, and I suspect it goes back to the time when the realty company was owned by the developer. Most buyers have seen this map and, if they noticed the property at all, probably assumed that the “Nature Park” description was accurate.
The Board sought legal advice, the net result of which was its follow-up announcement in the most recent Splinters summary saying that the land had been pulled off the market due to questions surrounding ownership. No other points were discussed at this meeting.
This episode has, for obvious reasons, raised questions about the nature of this land and its ability to be developed. I believe the Board intends to preliminarily investigate these questions further. Until more is known, it wouldn’t make sense to speculate. I believe the Board will share information once it feels it has an accurate assessment of the situation (which may take some time).
7. Covenant Vote
Less than 100 votes are necessary to reach the magic number. Again, if you know of anybody who has not submitted their vote, please encourage them to do so. The proposed changes are in our best interests. Further information can be found here:
8. Feeding the Deer
It was mentioned during this meeting that complaints had been received about residents feeding the deer. The Board acknowledged that this was against our rules and that it aggravates an existing problem. It appeared that the staff was to contact those residents and ask them to stop this practice.
9. Election of Directors
I have had some residents inquire about the upcoming election of Directors to the Board and thought it might help to provide some background information. As noted below, this very timely information.
The Board consists of eight directors, and two of those will come up for election this fall. The election process works backward from the date of the Annual Meeting; which is in November of every year. Here is the very simplified version. (Translation: It does not include every permutation and detail. It is just a simplified summary.)
At least 90 days prior to the annual Meeting, the Board creates a Nominating Committee consisting of three Board members and two non-Board members. This committee is charged with nominating a slate of candidates for the election. It usually sends an e-mail to all residents asking for nominations. You can nominate a third party or nominate yourself; but there is no guarantee that the Nominating Committee will include your nomination. The purpose of the committee is to look at all available prospects and determine, in its view, the best people to be nominated.
At least 60 days prior to the Annual Meeting, the names of the candidates are announced.
In addition, anyone can run as a write-in candidate. That requires obtaining signatures from 10% of the property owners. The language in the by-laws is far more complicated than what I just wrote, but it is close enough. I suggest that anybody who is interested in this avenue double check that information with the Board. But I believe the rough number of required signatures is around 120 to 140. (And that is one signature per lot. In other words, a husband and wife living on the same lot cannot count as two signatures.)
Write-in nominations must be received at least 30 days prior to the Annual Meeting; at which point those names will be included on the ballots mailed to all property owners.
Looking at the 2012 sequence of events should clarify why this is a current issue. Last year, the Nominating Committee was formed in July. The notice from the committee requesting nominations went out in late July with a deadline of August 1st. The announcement of the candidates was made on September 7th.
So, the timing on this is very current. The Board should form the committee this month (July). If you or anybody you know is interested in running, those names will most likely need to be given to the committee by the beginning of August. Now is the time for people to decide if they are willing to serve on the board.
If you have any questions at all about this process, please feel free to contact me directly ([email protected]). I will do my best to provide you with the necessary information.
10. Suggested Q & A Section
Somebody suggested that I start including a “question and answer” section within this site. I thought the idea had some merit; primarily because I occasionally have trouble deciding whether certain information should be posted.
I try to avoid writing about matters that may already be relatively well understood. But my assumptions in that regard could be mistaken. A good case in point is the likelihood, amount and timing of future special assessments (above the $300 we just paid) to cover the cost of the road project. I believe most people understand the various possibilities, but perhaps I am wrong. (If I am, please let me know….)
Therefore, I would like to give this idea a try on the following basis.
First, I have always been willing to field questions privately and will continue to do so. Anyone with a question should feel free to contact me, and I will reply privately. It is not a bother.
Second, if anybody wishes to ask a question, and they feel the answer would be of interest to everybody reading this site, please send it to me with that request. If it appears the information will be of interest to everybody, I will post the question and answer (assuming I can provide an answer) and not disclose the name of the person asking the question.
Third, if enough people ask the same general question, I will also post the information; again without disclosing the names of those posing the questions.
I am tossing this out in case the interest is there. I will only create this new section and post information if the demand exists. If not, I will let the matter drop.
Please feel free to send your questions to me at: enwiggen@ nc.rr.com