By George Sorrell, February 16, 2021 (Email to the HSVPOA Board Directors)
Dear Sirs and Madams,
Subject: Abandoned Vacant Lots
I would like to suggest there be a reexamination of the many abandoned properties in HSV. My thought is, we may be missing an opportunity to recapture much-needed lost revenue and bind up some old wounds. My specific reference is to the many Lots returned to the POA over the last years due to non-payment of dues.
Given the new reality of COVID and the continued effort of those who are trying to normalize POA politics, HSV may again appear to be the safe-haven that first lead our absentee owners to purchase their future retirement home sites. The argument that “modern” Americans no longer want to live in the woods but instead retire to the urban scene may have lost some of its allure.
I suggest we at least take a look at the “repatriation” of lost absentee owners. Restitution of the unpaid dues without penalty would be the price I would recommend. I would not recommend a “free ride.”
Unfortunately, I cannot offer a cost/benefit analysis for this undertaking because I have no detailed information from which an analysis could be derived. For example, how many lots are we talking about, and how much potential revenue would it bring? How difficult would it be to reach these former owners? I don’t know these things. This is just a suggestion which you may already have pursued and found to be
non-productive.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter,
George Sorrell
* * *
Click here to read an older article that addresses the lot issue, in addition to other things. This article was written by Diana Podawiltz a little over two years ago in February 2019 and some of this information is still pertinent.
Thank you for reading. If you like, please comment below. We love to hear your opinion, but comments must be made using your first and last real name, or they will not be accepted. If you would like to submit an article for publication, please contact us through this website. Be sure to bookmark this website. Click here to visit the Hot Springs Village People Facebook Group.
Tom Blakeman
02/17/2021 — 7:49 am
There are something like 11,000 non-paying lots in the Village. Our POA owns approximately 1/3 of those on which we pay real estate taxes. We get zero assessments from any of the 11,000.
Of the total, last I heard, only about 1200 or so are “grade A or B” (meaning relatively easily buildable) and have immediacy to either a golf course or a lake. The majority of the rest are either unbuildable or in the “middle of nowhere”.
Currently our POA has some sort of program to try and sell some of the more desirable POA owned lots. They are trying to do this through our Realtor community and offering a 50% commission with a minimum sales price of $5000. Nobody knows yet if this new endeavor will pan out.
Meanwhile, it continues to be POA policy that any lot owner can “rent out” their “privileges” for their lot to anyone they wish for any price. This enables the “renter” to benefit from our cheaper “member” amenity rates. POA even sells “memberships” similarly with the same benefit to the recipient. So, this scheme begs the question: What is the incentive for anyone, particularly those living “nearby” to want to “own” a lot, pay taxes and assessments and so on when they can get the same benefits for a song with no obligation?
Andy Kramek
02/17/2021 — 8:49 am
Tom, like you I have never understood the policy of simply selling membership rights to non-property owners. If nothing else it is self-defeating since it ends up costing more than it generates. However, the ability of a property owner to transfer their privileges is, of course, designed to accommodate those of us who own rental property – so long-term tenants can use “our” privileges. However, as we all know, it is often abused by property owners who (for whatever reason) don’t want to use their privileges and offer them for sale to anyone – even in the classified ads of newspapers. That practice needs to be stopped – their is no rationale for allowing it.
Gene Garner
02/17/2021 — 2:48 pm
Tom, does the POA advertise the sale of these “memberships”? I know there was once a listing on the POA website and the price, but I don’t see it now.—Gene
Tom Blakeman
02/17/2021 — 4:15 pm
Gene, I do not know if they are advertising them or not. The last 2021 Fee Schedule I saw showed the “Privileges” fees on the first page under Administration:
POA Membership Privileges – Couple $900.00
POA Membership Privileges – Individual $500.00
Same as it was in 2020. What I can’t find is how many of these they sell or what the revenue is. Regardless, it is a bad idea in principle.
John Szczepaniak
02/21/2021 — 3:19 pm
I wonder why they just do not revert the “unbuildable” sites to common areas and perhaps not to have to pay taxes on them anymore?
Tom Blakeman
02/21/2021 — 5:51 pm
I believe we do pay taxes on common property. Regardless, it is highly unlikely that more than 30 or 40% of all 36,000 lots will ever be built on ever. It has little to do with the build-ability. Now if Amazon were to build a mega distribution center just outside the East Gate everything would change. Don’t hold your breath.
John Szczepaniak
02/21/2021 — 6:09 pm
Could some of them be considered forest reserve land or something to that effect that might take them off the tax roles forever?
Missy Masterson Hale
02/17/2021 — 9:23 am
You folks have some great ideas… is there a group of people who would be willing to brainstorm ideas to address this problem and make recommendations to the new Board?
Sue Posner
03/08/2021 — 10:05 pm
No it’s not legal for owner to SELL membership privileges via their owner ship violation of association non profit IRS rules. Those that have rental on them can allow renters to buy through owner the discount but not sell their owner privilege. POA has only 3300 lots titled over by developer, rest are defaulted assessment and or taxes, default taxes state has those, default assessment those are written off as capital loss and forwarded each tax year. Lots with no road, water/sewer are not fully developed as the developer should never sold them without that development done and those who bought them shouldn’t have until road, water/sewer lines there. Bad developer bad buyer decision. Cooper had not finished his residential developing yet, still hasn’t still has non commercial reserves in here. He can continue developing or sell to another developer. AND NO association all of us owner can’t buy developer rights as it requires every signature to do so and that won’t happen. Board has no power of attorney over owner only fiduciary duty two totally different legalities! George has best idea to keep lot owners from defaulting more but doubt on lots not build ready. Turning into common property yet again 3300 lots titled over to could, rest nope developer could. Thanks