HPP Special BOD Meeting Tuesday, May 5th at 6pm

[JerryCarr]

At one time we heard serious concerns (lawyers got mentioned) over the equitable distribution of the funds collected from the membership of HPPOA at large when it was known that only about a third of the roads would be paved. I have heard two versions of how this equity would be achieved.

One was to pave only those roads with the most expensive maintenance costs, thus allowing for the maximum amount of maintenance savings to be reinvested in better upkeep of the unpaved remainder. (The gentleman from the bond company who addressed us seemed to strongly suggest this course.) This could easily result in most of the paving being clustered near the highway and near the shore, which is where the highest traffic and population densities are.

The other idea to achieve equity was to create a grid of paved cross-subdivision roads spaced so that no one would be more that a few blocks from a paved road. As I understand it, this was the original rationale for paving 16th. This philosophy also assumes that most of us have a significant interest in ease of cross-subdivision movement, which some people question. IIRC, this second concept was put forward by the previous board and the now defunct Paving Committee. I was at a meeting after the current Board was came into office where a presentation was made supporting the "pave the worst first" concept. I clearly remember loud complaints at that time from people on 16th who felt they had been promised paving. So a few months later, 16th is back on the list.

IMHO, the shift back and forth and/or effort to balance between the two philosophies has created difficulties. We have paved much of 19th based on its horrid condition and are now about to pave 16th, just three blocks away. That kind of undoes the even spacing equity and leaves us with a mixed philosophy which is confusing to some.

And just to show that you should always watch what you wish for, we are already hearing complaints from people on the newly paved roads about speeding and reckless driving. As a result, I think there is a speed bump policy in the works.

I am convinced that the current board is more functional, rational, and approachable than the previous versions I have seen. Unfortunately, it is hard to undo past decisions and change momentum in the middle of something like this. I support the efforts of Jeff and others to make things work rather than engage in the theatrical arguments we have seen in the past.

Cheers,
Jerry

[Seeb]

I think there's a third option, stop paving the side roads, return whatever moneys left over.so that there will be money left in the road fund after the smaller bond payment to maintain the rest of the roads in a better than orchidland condition.
whoever was telling people that all the roads were going to get paved when this thing went to a vote was delusional or deceptive, anyone that could do the math knew it was going to be a "cluster" from the start.

[Punatick]

Youser.....you are right about the contradiction. That is why we had to tack a few steps back and put things in alignment. The BOD majority in fall 2008 agreed that we needed to get control and focus. Then came the ultimate problem; there was no plan. It was at that point the BOD supported changing the streets on the paving contract to move more in alignment with the premise of the bond and the alleged reason we borrowed the money.

The dilemma as I saw it and the BOD agreed, was that without cost figures how the heck can you construct a budget that actually allows for a realistic and fair application? Ok now let's get some costs. The original paving specification was reviewed and subsequently modified via contractor and engineer input to allow for an application that would allow us to save approx. 20% per mile cost. That's great, but with the eminent failure of the lower main roads and accepting the premise that this impacts a substantial portion of the membership......why after a couple of years of discussions had this figure not been ascertained? That caused some more grey hairs.

Now we know the cost per mile on the "cross roads" and in two weeks or so we will know the overlay cost. Logic is to apply those to a budget projection to get the most bang for our buck ( remember the bond criteria) . Yes, it has taken six months to get through this, but the end result will be a new reality, not the speculation of the past few years.

Please note that I personally paid for two attorney's opinions to educate myself beyond the point of common sense and the OMG feeling I had back in Aug. 2008. After those meetings two things became clear:
1 There is nothing contractual that mandated which streets we pave.
2 We needed a plan that followed the only premise stated in the indenture; “The priority order in which roads will be paved will be determined by the avoided cost of road maintenance, the amount of vehicular travel and the number of residences adjacent to the road.”

Seeb....That was an option until we confirmed that it would cost us another few million in penalties to return the money.

Aloha,

Jeff

[PaulW]

Hi Jeff, thanks for the information and thanks for being willing to serve as President on the BOD.

So if I understand it correctly the bond issuers DID provide guidelines as to which roads should be paved,
and these guidelines need to be followed, but that the guidelines leave room for interpretation (eg give
more weight to one factor than other).

[jade]

Thank you Jeff for coming forward and providing us with the information.

I feel to drain the funds and not have any money to maintain the roads that have not been paved unexceptable. We were mislead from the beggining. Not only do you not get your road paved you will have to drive on a terrible road. How many of us would have voted for that?
I only hope that the roads being paved next are the roads with the highest cost to maintain/residence.

Jade

[Youser]

Jeff

Thank you for the clarification. I don't even want to think of how much money has been wasted while previous boards/committees, etc argued about what roads to pave all the while not recording anything or agreeing on anything. And time and money continued to dribble away.

So with regards to timeframe - assuming you get all the costs you need within the next 2 weeks is it fair to say the next phase of the paving plan of roads to be paved and in what order should be made available to members within the next month?
(After all of our discussions here I'm still not clear on whether 1st and 16th are going ahead.)

Jade, as I understand it there will be money for maintenance from annual fees, but the annual fees will have to cover both road maintenance and paying back the bond. So there will be less money for maintenance, but if the high maintenance roads are paved the maintenance costs should go down. Fingers crossed.

[jade]

Thank you Youser. I had read this:

When, I went in to the office to pay the road fee, I was told by the woman working there, that the Board of Director did not follow the Bond Plan. Yes, I was also told their was no more funds for purchasing material to further maintenance the roads. I ask her what was being done about the Property Owners, that are not paying their road fees, her reply, we are putting a lien on their property, and if, they are two years behind, then they will start foreclosure on the owner. Now, their continues to be a 15% increase in our road fees, for the [b]next 15 years, but for the next 5 years, no material will be purchased for our roads and now I am reading we are in default on the Bond Payment.

From the HPP website. It is so wonderful that Jeff is letting us know what is really going on.

[Punatick]

Youser.....everything will always be transparent and provided to the membership. When I have information or the BOD has information, you shall have it.

1st and 16th to be disscussed on Wed. Bids were only opened and there was no intent of action at that time.

Jade....I would not have voted that way either. If I can immpact it, then the high maint. roads will get paved.

Paul W. ......yes that is why we had to qualify/ quantify in some reasonabel fashion and that was done late last year

[Punatick]

Jade,

I just read your last post....OMG

Please tell me who told you this. At least a description if you don't have a name. This is more opinion than fact and God only knows what agenda this came from. More sabotage?

Board of Director did not follow the Bond Plan (Wrong)
I was also told their was no more funds for purchasing material to further maintenance the roads(Wrong)
I ask her what was being done about the Property Owners, that are not paying their road fees, her reply, we are putting a lien on their property, and if, they are two years behind, then they will start foreclosure on the owner.(Right)
Now, their continues to be a 15% increase in our road fees, for the [b]next 15 years( Absolutely Wrong)
But for the next 5 years, no material will be purchased for our roads (Wrong)
I am reading we are in default on the Bond Payment.(Wrong)

I'm shocked but not surprised. If you would like to help me eliminate the problem of all this misinformation just drop me a line at JeffSpaur@Gmail.com or call 987-7655

I'm very sorry this information is out there, as it is just simply nonsense and very harmful.

Aloha,

Jeff

[Youser]

Jade,
By the sounds of it most of what you heard in the office was rumour, exaggeration and scaremongering. Perhaps you were chatting to the same folk who suggested Jeff's 1st street lot was not exactly desirable. Sounds like some unsavoury characters who should be ignored.

I've heard from different sources that our road fees go up by 10% a year, 15% a year and 20% a year, as per "the bylaws" (???) but the only way I can tell for sure is by calculating the past increases I have had on my own bills. I don't know what the future increases will be but if they raise them by 15% for the next 15 years we'll be paying around $1560 a year by then. A 20% increase will bring it to almost $3000 a year. Gee, before too long we'll have road fees that hardly cover basic maintenence but we'll be out of pocket by more than our annual property tax.

OK I'm getting ahead of myself.....but you raised a good point - by what percentage will our fees rise in the next 15 years?

To me the worst thing at present is we borrowed money and then sat around for several years bickering about how to spend it, all the while paying massive amounts of interest to service the debt. That stinks. The quicker our BOD can get on top of the situation and start using the funds (wisely and after careful planning) the better we will all be.

Jeff,
Thanks for keeping us informed.