Montgomery West Homeowners Association

Annual Board Meeting

November 9, 2010

 

 

 

Attendees:  see sign-in sheet

 

Meeting called to order @ 7:35pm

 

Michele introduced Board members

 

Secretary Report - Stehlin presented synopsis of annual board meeting  [see hand out]

 

Treasurer’s Report [D. Terry]

1.       Treasurer passed out annual Financial Report as of 11/9/2010.29 [see hand out]

2.      As of November 9th, 2010:

·         The HOA has 6 rentals

·         3 units sold this year

·         1 unit currently up for sale

·         1 unit severely delinquent – a lien has been placed on the property

 

3.  The Board addressed homeowners’ questions about the budget proposed by the board:

a. Michele explained the new ruling for budget adoption.  While the budget must be presented to the members 30 days prior to adoption, it’s the board responsibility for adopting it.   The proposed budget was posted on the MWHOA website on 10/28/2010. Michele further indicated that at the November 30th board meeting, the board members would vote whether to adopt the proposed budget.   Homeowners are encouraged to attend.

 

b.      The proposed budget includes a dues increase of $10 to $110 per quarter.   This increase is driven by capital project fund requirements.

 

c.       The following is the response to questions on the budget:

o        Large ‘Repair/Capital Improvement’ payment - repaving Swallow Court.

o        Understanding of ‘in-kind’ – covenant allows for Treasurer to have annual dues waived in exchange of services rendered.

o        Explaining the Why proposed legal fees in 2011 will be lower than 2010 -   The board is budgeting based on expected expenditures in 2011.  

 

 

 

AERC presented the activities  [J. Patton]

1.       Creek erosion of homeowner’s property enlisted county’s help with solution and mitigation of costs for HOA.

2.      6 applications to the AERC were submitted and approved

3.      Application for a metal roof denied

4.      Street repavement discussion ensued – conditions; timing / scheduling for repair.   Board defined the HOA responsibility versus the county. When the County was contacted in December 2009, Michele was told Montgomery West was not on the schedule for repaving in the foreseeable future; however, repairs would be made if needed.   Michele offered to write letter to county about ‘cracks’ in the county maintained streets.

5.      Homeowner asked committee to define AERC; its activities, and responsibilities.

6.      Covenant non-compliance letter was discussed:

·         A Letter was modified by the HOA’s lawyer ensuring compliance with covenants and existing law and consistent with discussion at special meeting.

·         The non-compliance letter specifically encourages responses / interaction between the homeowner and board in violation resolution.

·         Discussion ensued about parking boats, trailers, etc on property within community.  Our covenants do not allow boats, trailers, etc. on homeowner's property, but they can be parked on streets since our streets are county roads.  However, recent county restrictions on street parking must be observed.

 

Nomination Committee – Heather Patton

1.       3 candidates for the 3 departing members

·         J. Hudson

·         J. Dale

·         H Kim

2.      Michele sought nomination from   the floor – none received

3.      Election of nominees presented

·         Vote was unanimous

 

General Discussion

1.       Tree in common area leaning on homeowner’s tree – requested to be removed

2.      Complaint about townhouses using plastic bags instead of covered trash cans.   Attending member offered to take pictures and identify address so AERC can respond.

 

The following were written questions submitted by a homeowner unable to attend meeting and corresponding answers:

 

Covenant Violation Letter Questions:

1)      Is this letter a legal letter?  The friendly letter is intended to notify homeowners of non-compliance to covenants.  Homeowners are asked to contact the board if they have concerns or questions and are offered the opportunity to have a hearing with the board.

2)     How can a “Friendly” letter end with the threat of foreclosure?  The description of the entire AERC covenant enforcement process included with the friendly letter is intended for informational purposes.  The mention of foreclosure is in the context if fines go unpaid and liens are placed on a property.

3)     Is the Board aware of the Director recall procedure should the Association attempt this?  Yes.

Budget Questions:

1)      Why was the MWHOA website modified on 11/05/2010 to include a new announcement of “Next Board Meeting to Approve 2011 budget will be held on Nov. 30, 7pm at 18901 Blue heron Lane?”  Is this because the new Maryland state law (HB695/SB416) requires a 30 day posting, or emailing, or written notification of a HOA Budget 30 days prior to its adoption?  The proposed budget was posted on the website on 10/28/2010 in accordance to the new provision included in the state law.  The meeting to approve was scheduled for 30 days later and also announced at the annual meeting as well as posted on the website.

2)     I thought approval of the MWHOA budget had to be done by a minimum quorum of the Member-Owners (11 out of 104) and at the Annual Meeting?  No, the development and approval of the budget is a board responsibility and does not need association approval.

3)     Why is there an 88% increase in the Repairs/Capital Improvements line item? The budget includes repaving Swallow Court parking spaces.

4)     Why is the above line item not subject of a Special Meeting as called for in the new HB695/SB416 Maryland state law (effective October 1, 2010) that calls for a Special Meeting if any increase is more than 15%?  This provision addresses increases in budgets that had already been approved and implemented.  This is a proposed budget which will not take effect until January 1, 2011.

5)     Have you accurately forecasted the Legal Fee/Covenant Enforcement at only $5,000? To the best of our knowledge, this is what the Board expects to expend. If not, why not?  What are the action (s) that are causing an expenditure of at least $5,000?

 

Fiduciary Responsibility Questions:

1)      Will Directors sign the recommended Code of Conduct? We comply with the Articles of Incorporation, the Bylaws and Covenants and any applicable laws and regulations.

2)     Will MWHOA join the Maryland Homeowner’s Association and the Community Association Institute for Director Training purposed?  We are open to educating the Board members and association members within the limitations of the budget.

3)     Why did it take 5 years to settle the accountant’s bill? It took them that long to bill us.

 

MWHOA Website Comments:

1)      Appreciate the new section on “Rights and Responsibility of HOA Homeowners and Board of Directors.

2)     Appreciate the new section for “Survey Results for the 2010 Special Meeting”.

 

 

Meeting adjourned:     9:40pm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Michele Heffner                                                              Ron Stehlin

President                                                                          Secretary