Hot Springs Village Board Considers Special Assessment Discussion

NO to a special assessment! Our monthly POA fees were just raised for the next two years!! Is purchasing this property REALLY so important that we have to further burden our residents who are feeling the pinch of inflation, along with increased taxes and large increases in our monthly POA fees! My vote is NO!!

Association board can impose restrictions as in covenants and policies, impose fines for violation of such. Collect assessments imposed annual for regular maintenance of and special for upgrading of current common properties, facilities and infrastructure. Board of non profit association has fiduciary duties of care, loyalty, and act by governing documents. Board has proxy on POA elections to cast my choice in my absence, but no power of attorney durable or springing for any board to purchase real estate with any members money, you can’t without member This is a NON PROFIT you have no profit to use. Can’t impose us to pay to buy titled real estate without all 100 percent signatures entering into a sales contract and closing. Common areas, amenities, lakes, facilities and infrastructure weren’t purchased by association can not be sold by association those were part of the developers developing for use fees as member privileges to those who purchased their improved and unimproved lots. Only the reserves of the developer within here can be sold. Assessments are not for expansion that would be a for profit which property associations are not. Go take a hike and not on a trail.
PS: As for commitment board made to owners on recent assessment increase doesn’t make it a loop hole to a new self dealing money grab. I distinctly remember us home owners committing to CCI developer 2018 when that board and that GM who self appointed themselves as an unlicensed developer, threatened declaration amendments that would have affected CCI and he asked us home owners to vote no and we did. So Tucker maybe you should go ask CCI to donate that trail in return for favor. So called Cortez beach that island was never common property developer developed to this association. He let people use it but was never common property never always owned by him. When a developer develops a HOA/POA they always develop part with given common properties ie clubhouses or amenities along with roads etc only sell residential and commercial platted to individuals for title from their reserved land not an association thing to do.

This board is pushing forward where the former leadership left off (I’ve already warned you).
1. Suspending development in certain areas.
2. A significant assessment increase over a three year period.
3. A promise to request more assessment increases after the three years.
4. A mention of changing our declarations to give future boards power to raise assessments above SCPI without a vote of property owners.
5. Now a mention of a special assessment, right after the assessment increase, which will raise your monthly assessments by, what, another $20 to $50 a month, maybe more.
All of this spearheaded in my opinion, by Tucker Omohundro. I believe, as I’ve stated before, that this board is more dangerous than the CEO and previous board.
But you go ahead and keep believing them, you will regret it.

Geez folks, before coming out against it, can we first find out how much it will even cost?

When the recent assessment rate increase was up for vote, I went to the POA office and asked for information about which projects or infrastructure the increased funds would go to. I was informed no such info existed. So my assumption is the money will be used without any tracking . A suggestion was made that if I could not afford to live in the village then I should move.
So here we go again. Should we raise assessments because it’s more affordable here? There should be no accountability? No transparency? Also with ownership comes responsibility. So let us raise the assessment (tax) because living here is cheaper than living a similar place in the Hamptons. This was the logic of the last election.
Why own it? Is something undesirable proposed for this land. Or does the board have something they wish to do with it. Are the many comments over the concerns about losing the beach at DeSoto? Real estate deals proposed by governing bodies should be fully transparent including what the land is to be used for along with future proposed uses. Then put to a vote.

Let me combine multiple threads and respond to inquiries about tax records.

In preface however, I again assert that Mr. Omohundro is correct. He is obviously now the point man on this issue, attuned to the wants of “many Villagers.” I look forward to his further public statement.

Further, I believe we, the POA, should own the property even if it does require a special assessment. At some point, we must be allowed to finally chart our own course, rework our governmental processes, and form the real community that many believe we already are.

But again, these aren’t the true issues and the expense may not be worth the return.

Public property tax records are available to you at https://www.arcountydata.com/ The primary parcel number for Cedar Creek, excluding the piece that comes all the way to Minorca, is 001-14257-000. The total area appears to be approximately twenty acres. You can also find an interactive GIS system which will show you who owns what (You might be interested to know that the original Cedar Creek parcel included facilities directly across the street from the trailhead.)

If you’re comfortable with data collection, synthesis, and extrapolation, or you’re interested in link analysis, tax records are the place to start. Each county is somewhat different, but property ownership, dates / costs of transactions, and both the amount and status of taxes is available to the public. From this information, links and nodes between companies, organizations, and individuals are aided.

Granted, assessed property taxes have very little to do with the parcel’s value in a speculative market. The cost is ultimately determined by what the market will bear. In the case of the former Cortez Beach, the market bore a significant amount, upwards of $550K, due to the location, accessibility, and infrastructure already in place. CCI paid roughly $12.00/mo in taxes during their ownership period in case you’re wondering how that might relate to larger tax issues like the provisioning of our schools.

One could argue that this was just good business. Perhaps, but it did result in the removal of a highly treasured facility in the amenities suite as Ms. Street points out. There wasn’t so much as a public statement from the original owner, despite knowing the value of that location to the community. And coming on the heels of a highly contentious period in our hybrid governance, where the former developer chose to re-engage, and the nearly overnight listing of parcels along DeSoto, it gives one pause.

None of this is the case with Cedar Creek. While some small ridgelines might have the potential for housing development, the soil codes for the entire parcel in the tax and GIS records suggest otherwise.

Despite external assessments to the contrary, I am not opposed to profit. Developers, entrepreneurs, and businesspersons of every stripe are what drive our world. They develop capital, offer products and services, and obtain a profit for their efforts. The public is served. Good for them. Go team. Yea, America!

But when profiteers begin to leverage a closed fiscal engine without true market forces for personal or small group obscene profit, then we come to realize that we are not a community. We’re simply a cash cow for the few. Nowhere is this truer than in the case of CCI properties now magically offered for sale.

This was all tried years before. The quoted cost of the Cedar Creek parcels was astronomical; so far out of line as to make those who participated in the discussion laugh.

Lastly, CCI holdings are not nearly as great or valuable as some would have you believe. A comprehensive list of those holdings was available to the POA years ago. To believe that this is now all coincidence, driven by emails from Villagers is folly. There are many truths about HSV, but this isn’t one of them.

Again, I wish for us to own that trail system, but not at the cost of doing business with CCI and it’s internal allies, unless the property can be acquired through direct deed exchange or nominal payment.