2021 Board candidates reveal to HSV TV assessment increase positions
The HSVPOA Board of Directors has the authority to increase monthly assessments in line with inflation by using the Southern Consumer Price Index. For the past few years, this has resulted in modest increases in monthly assessments for Property Owners. According to the HSVPOA bylaws, any monthly assessment increase over the Southern CPI or Special Assessment must be voted on by Property Owners.
There have been questions from numerous Property Owners as to whether the Board will authorize a property owner vote for a monthly assessment increase. Below please find statements the current Board Members made about an assessment increase, most of which were stated in pre-election interviews by the Chamber of Commerce and also other sources. This will give you an idea of where they stand on this issue. (These statements were all made prior to their being seated on the Board.)
Click here to go to the HSV TV website and watch these interviews and more.
JoAnne (Joanie) Corry on an assessment increase
Joanie Corry has stated she will vote in favor of an increase if it is needed. In her interview by HSV TV, Chamber Director John O’Brien, Corry was asked,” Our [Chamber of Commerce] members want to know if you would propose a monthly increase in our assessment? If yes, how much increase would you consider? If no, why not? And would it make sense to have a detailed audit and review of the amenities before increasing an assessment?”
Corry replied, “As you probably know we have a task force that is working on that very thing. And what they are looking at, or analyzing and researching is the infrastructure such as roads, water, sewer, buildings. And so, they are looking into that. They are looking into that deeply. So, when you talk about an audit, I feel that they are going to perform that, maybe not as other people think it should be performed. But they are actually working on that. I believe that they are going to come up with some interesting observations and they will be presenting their findings to the board when they complete everything. I can’t say now if there is going to be an assessment [increase] need or not. I don’t think anyone can until they complete their work. If they come out and say, ‘we do need an assessment [increase], I will support that assessment [increase]. That’s what the Village needs if that is what they say it does.” Click here to watch Joanie’s full interview on HSV TV.
Gary Belair on a monthly assessment increase
When asked in a pre-election interview by HSV Chamber member, Alanna Owen, if he would support a monthly assessment increase, Gary answered, “Yes, is the short answer. We absolutely need one, speaking of an increase. The exact amount is under discussion, under research right now. The Finance and Planning Committee is reviewing the infrastructure needs of the community and as soon as those numbers are available, the committee will make a recommendation to the Board. And the Board will, of course, either recommend that either it be put to the owners for a vote or delayed. But my opinion, it is time.” Click here to watch Gary’s full interview on HSV TV.
Pam Avila on a monthly assessment increase
Joe Stewart of Trademark Realty and Chamber of Commerce Treasurer, interviewed Pam Avila. When Stewart inquired as to Pam’s opinion on a monthly assessment increase, this is her response. Pam said, “That’s a really interesting question. And I am not going to answer it with a yes or no and there is a reason for that. There is a task force in place right now that is studying the finances of the Village, the needs, the financial needs of the Village, the revenue and for someone to sit here right now and to say, ‘yes, we need an assessment increase’ or ‘no, we don’t,’ is really premature. So I am going to wait until I see what their analysis comes up with. I am going to wait until I hear what options they propose, which ones are legal, which ones aren’t before I could ever say ‘yes’ or ‘no.’”
In December, 2020 in Pam’s resume, which was required to run for the Board, she stated, “The Village is at a crossroads – mired in its past history and without a plan for moving forward. We are facing major challenges. We must prioritize and address the infrastructure maintenance that has been put off for far too long – aging roads, culverts, buildings, our water system and more. We need to find better ways to create the revenue to pay for keeping our Village sound and beautiful. Current assessments don’t come close to covering today’s costs for maintaining the Village. But in addition to creating a reasonable plan for assessment revenue, we need other sources of income.” Click here to watch Pam’s full interview on HSV TV.
Chris Jones on a monthly assessment increase
Chris shared his vision regarding an assessment increase with the HSV Chamber Director, John O’Brien. Chris stated, “I think it is important that an audit be performed before any substantial increase or any sort of proposal of an increase. I believe that is what the task force that is already out there is doing. They are performing that audit, looking at those things, looking for future revenue, things like that. But realistically, I do believe that an assessment increase is necessary. Can I speak to how much that should be? No, not really. I don’t have enough information at hand to really make an educated decision for that. But, I do think that the money from Cooper going away, however many years ago that was, we’re really trying to live that same lifestyle that had all of that subsidy, that no longer exist and we really just need to understand that in order for us to keep the livelihood and maintain the infrastructure and do all the things and keep all the amenities, there’s just costs involved.” Click here to watch Chris’s full interview on HSV TV.
Robert (Bob) McLeod on a monthly assessment increase
When Bob was asked the same question by John O’Brien at the pre-election Chamber interview, he replied, “Yes, I think absolutely you need to have a complete audit done on all the areas. You need to drill down to all the details. I don’t think you can determine an increase until you determine what we are spending all the money on and if all the money is being spent properly. I’ve been involved in many cities, states, counties, school districts. There’s always room for improvement. I’d like to hope that there’s not a lot of room for improvement. But if there is, we need to drill down and find it, to begin with. Then we need to take a look at what we need as far as revenue. And then if it doesn’t match, we’re going to have to have an increase. And I have no idea what that increase would be at this point. But we need to take care of back maintenance. We need to know what that is and we need to have an idea of what the costs are, what we’re behind on, how we’re going to catch up and we need to…I think there probably should be an increase. But I don’t know what that is, at this point.” Click here to watch Bob’s full interview on HSV TV.
Tucker Omohundro on a monthly assessment increase
Of course, Director Omohundro was not interviewed by HSV TV as the Chamber only interviewed candidates. Tucker was already seated on the board with two more years remaining to fulfill his term, but it seemed only fair to also include his pre-election stance on assessments. In follow-up questions from the Village Voice in February of 2020, Tucker Omohundro had this to say about an assessment increase:
“If cost of living continues to go up, we have no choice but to raise the assessments. I think we all understand that. I would rather do a special assessment than raise assessments permanently if there was ever a case this made better sense in the long term.” [Click here to read this article.]
Of course, I do not have a crystal ball and cannot foresee the future. What do you think the Directors will recommend?
By Cheryl Dowden, May 10, 2021
* * *
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, also known as POG (Property Owners’ Group).
Tom Blakeman
05/10/2021 — 7:12 am
The FRATF was appointed with an implicit assumption that more ‘new funding’ needs to be identified for the future (and current) benefit of Hot Springs Village. This assumption may or may not be accurate at all.
Before FRATF comes forward with recommendations on ‘new funding’ there are several long standing problem areas within the Village and POA that must be addressed. These include General issues, Expense and Cost Reduction issues, Management issues, Governance issues, Employee & Staff issues and Capital Allocation issues.
All of the problem areas are addressed in my April 24 report. Assuming that all are resolved, generating ‘new revenue’ may not be needed at this time. If not resolved, or if there is still a desire for more funding, the report outlines several Plans that have the potential to raise significant new revenue streams.
Readers can find my complete report, done on April 14, 2021, on this website. Just scroll down.
Andy Kramek
05/10/2021 — 9:29 am
So, if I am reading this correctly we can summarize it as:
[1] All members of the Board believe an increase is necessary
[2] No-one can say what the size of the increase should be
[3] They all ASSUME that the “task force” will do a full and complete audit
[4] The Task Force, not the Board will be making the decision
If that is not a total abrogation of responsibility by all concerned I am not sure what would be!
Rebecca Stodghill
05/10/2021 — 10:12 am
Please keep in mind those of us that are on a limited income…..that has not gone up. All the while the cost of living continues to climb, more fees may not be the only answer. I moved here not quite 3 years ago & the fees were $55.50; they’re now almost $14/mo extra….that’s an additional $168/year more out of limited income. This may seem a small amount to some, but an enormous amount to others.
Bob Medinger
05/12/2021 — 10:27 pm
Rebecca, The fees were not $55.50 3 years ago. It was more like $65.
Lloyd Sherman
05/10/2021 — 11:00 am
Andy Kramek has done an excellent job summarizing the insanity of the process being undertaken by the board. FRATF was assigned. No property owner input; no application process. Granted they are not finished yet, but the “spin” blasts that have been sending out informing us of how complex our operations are seem more like indoctrination propaganda than they do “auditing” techniques, or process and procedure improvement, or cost reductions, or even new sources of revenue. What was proposed was a direction of dissecting each and every amenity and operations. The quickest way to improvement is through a concentrated cost reduction process. For every $1,000,000 that can be cut out of the rising costs of our operations, means approximately $10 a month lower assessments required from the resident property owners. The two-tier should have proven by now that the approach was faulty and resulted in more properties turned back in than we ever got with the two-tier approach. This is why we need a GM who has “been there and done that” in their actual work and not to continue down the eventual disastrous path we are on.
The warning signs are all there. If the property owners don’t become involved before it is too late, no one will be to blame except those who wanted to continue down a path that is NOT WORKING.
Gene Garner
05/10/2021 — 11:36 am
The yearly Southern District CPI increase should compensate for the inflation of the past year. But what have we received from the last Two-Tier increase of 2016? Offhand there’s the ill conceived CMP, the cook’s loan that was never repaid, a new part-time swimming pool in need of repair, a pickle ball court that’s falling apart, the “former CEO’s golden parachute” and the gate software contract that went to court and was resolved in their favor. There’s also the million$ De Soto Club restaurant, the Luxury RV Park and the 100 ft ladder truck –and the list goes on.
It appears the Two-Tier increase is needed to offset the BOD’s many questionable decisions. If the above fiascos had never happened and that money was used to maintain our infrastructure we wouldn’t need another increase.
The only way to force the BOD to economize and stop making these obviously bad decisions is to deny another Two-Tier increase. Then require them to fully complete all the deferred maintenance that should have been funded by the original 2016 increase.
Ms Stodghill is right, there are many in the Village that can’t afford another Two-Tier increase and the BOD shouldn’t be targeting the Property Owners to pay for their mistakes.—Gene
HSVP J
05/10/2021 — 12:53 pm
Our board and staff, by just exercising a little fiscal responsibility would go a long way in keeping our village financially strong and healthy. Raising assessments before eliminating waste, frivolous spending, and bad project contracts will do nothing for a sound financial future for HSV. We do not have to follow the government’s spend and tax financial model.
Elizabeth H Berry
05/11/2021 — 11:29 am
Fiscal responsibility…an excellent suggestion. But without the people speaking up regarding the new trash pickup trucks there is nothing even close to fiscal responsibility happening within this board. Most of the discussions regarding the leasing of trucks have not included the leasing of a multiple purpose grapple truck. The use of a grapple truck would require a pickup truck to carry off the limbs and branches picked up by the grapple truck. This project was never analysed or investigated regarding the routes the trucks will have to make. Up one side of the street and down the other or people on one side brings their cart across the street for pickup. I could write more regarding the problems with these rental trucks including the expense involved, but instead I will close with this, this project lacks intelligent consideration and should be put off until the village is in a better financial situation along with all details worked out.
Nancy Jag-Nathan
05/11/2021 — 10:00 pm
Why are the Villagers punished for the bad financial decisions made by previous boards by having their assessments increased? Because it’s an easy fix. The board are able to pick-pocket the residents in broad daylight and will continue to do so because they are not forced to come up with cost saving options for existing operations nor proffer any new revenue generating ideas. The mention of shutting down any of the subsidized golf courses or restaurants is DOA. If there are any progressive ideas to bring new revenue to the Village those are likely shot down immediately because the fear of outsiders getting in our gates is too big a threat.
Getting extra revenue from the captive audience (residents) doesn’t require any work, any analysis, or justification. It’s easy money and it’s guaranteed additional monthly revenue.
None of us should have to pay 1 more red cent for an assessment increase until we know the cost saving options that have been explored, the profitability and estimated gains on subsidized businesses and are given the plans and ROI for new revenue generating businesses. If we don’t demand that alternative ways in which to garner revenue is created or that cost cutting on lost leaders is required no matter how painful, the assessment increase will occur every year and eventually kill the affordability and attractiveness of living here. Raising the assessment fees is not a sustainable answer to the revenue problems that need to be solved. It’s only kicking the can down the road. Hard decisions must be made regarding what to cut and quit subsidizing instead of thinking the solution can be solved by nickel and diming the residents every time they need more dollars.
Lloyd Sherman
05/13/2021 — 8:54 pm
Many of us understand that we are stuck in a vicious and recurring nightmare. While the FRATF does seem to be digging into and understanding our backlogged infrastructure issues, but thus far I see absolutely no mention of process and procedure improvement, cost savings, or the simplest of tasks and that is review, rewrite and proper benchmarking of jobs. HR says they are working on it, but what does that mean? They claim they are benchmarking jobs. We have done that in the past and we remain top heavy with managers at salaries that are just too high for Arkansas. You have to face it, we have a lower cost of living in AR and jobs need to be reflective of that. I read somewhere today where our entry level jobs were referred to as grunt jobs. Really? These are the jobs where the real work gets done and because of low pay, we can’t attract enough entry level people. And while we are reorganizing, rewriting job descriptions and right-sizing salaries, we also need to address the culture issues that face any rural community, face it and deal with it. What the Village needs in addition to the work going on is a turnaround specialist GM, who is committed to addressing the issues of cost reductions and process improvements. Until that is done, give years down the road we will be having these same discussions. I want to remind everyone of some pretty simple math. For every $1.00 saved; $1.00 is dropped through to the bottom line. If you happen to be lucky enough to be running at a 6% profit level, for every $1.00 you increase revenues, you drop $.06 to the bottom line. To make your machine run properly, you have to have a program that attacks both. You can’t and won’t get those capabilities out of our existing staff structure and that is where the culture change needs to occur.
Karen Bump
05/20/2021 — 6:30 pm
I don’t see how fixing up the building and moving the the golf department and the Discovery Center to an isolatd Balboa Club that is not easy to find (for those who haven’t lived here forever) is going to do anything but cost more money. If we want it repaired, and I think most do, make it a profit center. Instead of wringing their hands about not having a “lodge” here for bigger golf outings, turn it into a small lodge – 40-50 rooms with a meeting room and food service. Capture all the revenue – lodging, golf and F&B for the POA. OR alternatively, lease the building out to an operator to fix it up and operate. But just spending millions to make it more offices? Doesn’t seem smart to me. It will take a lot more than infographic communications to justify an assessment increase for my vote. I agree with others, I don’t think there has been enough cost cuts orreturn to use of volunteers instead of employees and outside consultants. What has been done in the past – pickleball, swimming pool etc can’t be undone, but certainly more money for projects, leases and new trucks that will not pay for themselves does not make sense.