By Patric Hedlund, TME
“I believe the board is trying to control the election by their efforts. It is obvious that they have an agenda that I believe is in disagreement with the majority of the homeowners. It is disgraceful the way they have acted throughout the whole procedure.” —James Allen, PMC resident
An amazing group of neighbors has come together to try to answer questions that the Pine Mountain Club Property Owners Association’s Planning Committee left unanswered at its January 14 presentation of a 25,364 sq. ft. new clubhouse with a large pool, a plan now fondly referred to as the ‘Taj Mahal.’ The questions, in retrospect, seem rather basic:
•How much is this likely to cost per square foot to build?
•What has it cost to build comparable buildings in California?
•What kind of financing structure would be available for such a plan?
•How much will that cost me?
•Are the clubhouse and pool part of our reserve fund?
•Why not?
•What impact might the expense of this plan have on the make-up of our community? •Where is the usage data that justifies the size of this plan?
•Can we talk about it?
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
We learned the answer to that last question on April 29 when a jam-packed assembly of members crowded into the clubhouse to learn about the ideas behind the proposal, and were told: “You cannot ask questions. You can submit something in writing and we will answer it at a later time.”
Ben Salazar then went on to give a PowerPoint presentation that was like a defense attorney’s closing argument rather than a neighbor sharing excitement about the project he had been working on for three years. Why is that?
From the beginning everyone could see why John Cantley and the planning committee were excited about the plan. It was fun. “When can I move in?” asked Lee Dunnavant, and our imaginations had most of us already paddling around in that lovely pool and playing virtual golf.
But then Mel Weinstein asked, “Is there another option, maybe something that is not so large and expensive, that won’t harm the people in our community who have to choose each month between paying for their medicines or buying food?”
That is when we all began waking up from our daydream. And that is when the nightmare for the current board began.
Fact is, the community had been promised that there would be three options. But that is not what they got. Salazar’s presentation made it very clear that the committee has no credible estimate of the cost of construction or of financing. He spoke about making it smaller, he threw out new numbers for the size of a loan, and new numbers for the impact on assessments. He abandoned what had been sold to the members January 14, online, in the Condor newsletter, and in the clubhouse lobby for two months.
So….why is there a question on Ballot #1? There is no plan. The committee itself has backed away from the January 14 plan.
Vote ‘NO’ on the clubhouse question on Ballot #1
There will still be a design upgrade, ADA compliance and a new pool at the clubhouse, but we need to come up with a Plan B with a more plausible financial structure. Don’t give the board a blank check to your bank account. Tell them there is still more work to do.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
“I am so furious!” said Katherine King as she submitted the OpEd on page 6. She found the board and the general manager had sent us all a misleading ballot packet with a dishonest account of a vital bylaw. Vote No on the 10.03 amendment on Ballot #2. We have not been told the truth. Read King’s OpEd.
This is part of the June 2, 2017 online edition of The Mountain Enterprise.
Have an opinion on this matter? We'd like to hear from you.
