Updated Surplus Numbers

Updated Surplus Numbers
Updated Surplus Numbers: Actual surplus 2018 per audit was $85,163.
Boards 2011-2018 implemented policies and procedures with specific goals:
stabilize owner fees, achieve maintenance objectives and achieve annual budget surpluses.
Any surplus was retained by the association.
The board elected in fall 2018 decided to increase owner fees, even in view of a large potential surplus

Average fees prior to 2019

Average fees prior to 2019
Average fees per owner prior to 2019:
RED indicates the consequences had boards continued the fee policies prior to 2010,
BLUE indicates actual fees. These moderated when better policies and financial controls were put in place by boards

Better budgeting could have resulted in lower fees

Better budgeting could have resulted in lower fees
Better budgeting could have resulted in lower fees:
RED line = actual fees enacted by boards,
BLUE line = alternate, fees, ultimately lower with same association income lower had
boards used better financial controls and focused on long term fee stability

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Rumor of a Large Fine is Inaccurate

Several days ago, while talking with neighbors, I was advised that a large fine had been levied on another resident at BLMH. This was purported to be $157 for a BBQ left on the grass, or so the neighbors stated. The Director of Rules and Regulations was walking by and she was asked how the Board could allow this.

Her response was that she was unaware of the alleged "fine" and she stated that it simply did not make sense, and that even the amount seemed strange. Violations are usually noted with a letter, but occasionally preceded by a verbal warning. After the letter is issued, if not corrected in a reasonable time, an initial fine is levied. Failure to pay or continued violations will result in increases in the fines as the amount of each is ratcheted upwards. She stated that she was unaware of a violation, of a letter or a fine. The initial amount of the fine is relatively low, as the goal is to encourage compliance with the rules.

The Director of R&R agreed to check into this. After she departed, the discussion with the neighbors continued. They were skeptical of management and stated so. They felt this was another example of "injustice" at BLMH. They stated that the person who was fined was experiencing a health issue, and stated in effect that they felt the Association should take this into account when enforcing rules. However, they agreed that the amount seemed strange and stated they would talk further to the individual who had been allegedly "fined". The conversation devolved into a re-hashing of the truck incident. The tractor portion of a tractor trailer had been towed off of the property several months ago. This, they stated was "unjust". etc., etc.

I have since been informed by another resident that the amount was not a fine, but was a charge for services. To explain, it is not uncommon for certain types of work by contractors which includes common elements and unit owner responsibility to be billed to the Association. In such a case, the contractor bills the Association and the management, in turn, bills the unit owner for their portion of the work. In essence, the Association makes a short term "loan" to the unit owner, who then repays the Association for the money advanced to the contractor. For example, this is the approach that is being used for the "dormer" style windows which are being replaced as part of the roofing projects.

I'll post further information on this particular issue, as it becomes available. However, Association financial information as it applies to individual unit owners, or fines, are treated as confidential matters by the Association, the Board and the Management.

2 comments:

  1. "I'll post further information on this particular issue, as it becomes available. However, Association financial information as it applies to individual unit owners, or fines, are treated as confidential matters by the Association, the Board and the Management." Than as a BLMH owner I am very concerned that you have access to such information without being a board member. Care to comment.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Another item of interest, if you had a chance to watch the news this evening, you might have heard of a pending lawsuit regarding a Twitter post against a buildings management company. I believe the suit was regarding "defamation".Very interesting news since it mentioned Twitter and blogs.

    ReplyDelete

Please leave a comment!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.