Home › Forums › Anthem Voices › PART 2 WHAT ARE WE ARGUING ABOUT?
- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 week, 4 days ago by Robert Stern.
March 11, 2023 at 12:58 am #7933Robert SternParticipant
Mike Quinn( Finance Committee Member) in his video to explain Reserves and Reserve Studies does an excellent job in explaining what goes into a reserve fund. He also explains Full Funding and Threshold Funding as acceptable methods to do the necessary calculations.
So what are we arguing about? There seems to be a dispute as to what constitutes adequate reserves.
I argue that the current 71% funding level is not adequate. Mike cites an NRED ( Nevada Real Estate Division) position paper that states that 70% is adequate.
It is true that NRED did at one point in time did issue and Advisory Opinion that a 70% funding level for Reserves was adequate but they dropped it after they discovered circumstances that proved in a number of cases that it wasn’t. NRED no longer takes a position as to what constitutes adequate Reserves. That is left up to the Association.
Prior to NRED weighing in and out of the definition as to what was adequate ,SCA’s Reserves were maintained at the 90% level. That constitutes adequate. In my operational time as a Director (Anthem Highlands) we maintained 100% fully funded reserves to be super cautious in protecting homeowners. It was a good policy.
Many of you have heard about the $10,000 assessment plight of each of SCA’s Villa owners, right? Some of their pain would have been lessened had there been adequate reserves. That was partially the board’s responsibility.
I have been advocating for a return to the 90% level. Your board and the Finance Committee argue that 70% is adequate. That’s what we are arguing about. And the higher the Reserves are funded the less likely there is money around for the spenders to use on pet projects. Solar Car Ports is the next pet project under consideration by the spenders. We need to replace the spenders on the board with those that will be better stewards of our money. That’s what we are arguing about.
Vote for Pamela Williams and Rick Ernest in 2023 and then in 2024 two more new board members hopefully creating a new board majority. And finally get control of our finances to better protect the homeowner from the prospect of ever increasing assessments while providing an inadequate Reserve funding level. That’s what we are arguing about. Do you want financial responsibility? Your votes matter.
The pocketbook you save may be your own. Please vote. Ballot positions #1 and #2. Pamela Williams and Rick Ernest. Ballots being mailed Friday March 24.
Part 3 WHAT ARE WE ARGUING ABOUT? on Monday.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.