What is before the property owners of HSV currently is a historical problem. Most of us here in HSV were raised during a time when American Patriotism was very high. We were taught to be respectful of our country and all the sacrifices of the many generations of our ancestors that built it. One of the cries of the people who formed our nation was, “No Taxation Without Representation.”
I see many similarities in our situation here in HSV. We do not want to pay into a system that is not honest, open, and transparent with us and a leadership that does not respond to the will of the very people whom they are obligated to represent.
I will NOT vote for all these future increases and vague promises as to what will be done with the money. I’m sorry, but my trust quotient for our governance of the Village is on a par with my trust quotient for our nation’s powers-that-be… which is zero.
If the FRATF and our leaders wish for a favorable vote from me on an assessment increase, you are going to have to provide me with assurances of several things:
- What, specifically, the money will be used for, and when that project will be completed. In writing and well-publicized and recorded publicly in an enforceable way.
- Any contractors involved are above reproach and have a successful track record… and this has been verified! Verifying proof must be made well public – not hidden behind a wall of subterfuge and red tape.
- There is a binding contract in writing which specifies the work to be done as well as the expected lifespan of the work, required maintenance involved, and a meaningful and enforceable WARRANTY on that work.
- NO MORE BLANK CHECKS.
- NO MORE VAGUE DATA.
- NO MORE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY.
- NO MORE UNENFORCEABLE PROMISES.
- NO MORE PORK BELLY SALARIES AND BENEFITS PACKAGES AT THE TOP END OF POA MANAGEMENT.
The POA’s history of fiscal irresponsibility and untrustworthiness speaks for itself and I intend to learn from it.
I certainly have NO intention of voting for 5 increases… and I own more than one property in HSV. The very most I would expect to be asked to vote for is ONE increase. We’ve been down this road before and recently… sell a vote based on the need for infrastructure repair, with accompanying biased infographics and scare tactics, then blow it all on fripperies like the failed CMP and padding for the top POA management, AND IGNORE THE INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIRS.
Even as this whole Village is in an uproar over finances and infrastructure, we now have a new archery facility and new trash trucks and trashcans! Was this fiscally prudent and responsible? If so, prove it.
I respectfully request that I not be sent a scripted, vague, generic response. My email to you is personal and important and human courtesy and your job descriptions demand you respond in kind.
Respectfully submitted,
Missy Masterson Hale, August 24, 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.
Tom Blakeman
08/25/2021 — 7:40 am
I believe you speak exactly how most of us feel. Good work.
Brian Castleman
08/25/2021 — 9:22 am
Amen!
Missy Masterson Hale
08/25/2021 — 8:01 am
Thank you, Sir.
Minn Daly
08/25/2021 — 9:19 am
Missy Mastetson Hale, YOU are to be congratulated for being on target with all you stated! Know there are a lot of members who are feeling the same as you & have the same issues. Declarations need to be changed to reflect our concerns on these issues before there is an assessment increase. What Board members are listening to membership? Answer. NONE! Respectfully, Minn Daly
Alan Jordan
08/25/2021 — 11:42 am
It’s not reasonable to think that all the individual wants/needs can be accommodated even though they may be well thought out. It’s also not justified to blame this board and management for all of the failures of their predecessors. At some point we are going to have to compromise because a decision cannot be put off indefinitely. I think we all realize that kicking this can down the road is like eating a cheap piece of meat… the longer you chew it the tougher it gets and harder to swallow. It’s time to have some faith in our BOD/POA and give them the opportunity to fulfill their goals. We have a beautiful place and all the basics, let’s pull together and help it prosper.
Gene Garner
08/25/2021 — 12:38 pm
Obviously the BOD believe the non-resident property owners will vote to increase their own assessments but as we’ve seen in the past they consistently voted down any attempt until the 2tier came along.
If they’ve misjudged the non-residents the first vote will fail and the BOD will have to adjust the numbers and try again. That will be time consuming and expensive–but what the heck it’s just money.–Gene
Minn Daly
08/25/2021 — 1:01 pm
Agree with you totally MR Jordan we do live in a beautiful place. I have lived here for 34 years & I do support an increase on assessments. I do not support a 5 year increase. I will consider a three year increase with substantial language included as to where & what all monies will be spent on. To some the word INFRASTRUCTURE is a very inclusive word. This needs to be defined. All expenses need definition, should be documented for future BOD members to be adhered to. We have had enough of BOD members allowing Managers & so called CEO management throw money away on personal projects of a few. With due respect I want this place to be successful, with successful Managers & Board members that care for our community instead of personal agendas. I think our current BOD is trying to do this but it certainly needs clarification, before a vote request goes out. Respectfully, Minn Daly
Bob Medinger
08/25/2021 — 1:18 pm
While it’s easy to criticize and make posts about how we demand a perfect world from the POA, it is difficult in real life. First, the CMP was 5 years ago! Stop using THAT as an excuse to take action today. And nobody is getting a “pork belly salary” at the POA, in fact we just a lost a valuable 30 year employee with vast knowledge of HSV history because she took a better job elsewhere. What “blank checks” have been written? All spending is voted on and accounted for in the budget. Watch all the videos of Board meetings on YouTube. What “lack of transparency, vague data, and unenforceable promises” are you talking about?! Stop complaining about the past, take a real honest look at HSV as it today and what we do for the future. We just had ANOTHER water main break TODAY on the west side of HSV. If you vote “no” then all future water breaks, culvert collapse’s, and other problems due to neglect and procrastination will be on you!
Lorri Street
08/29/2021 — 5:28 pm
Correction Bob M. The CMP was voted down in November 2018. Thus…it has NOT been five years as you’ve stated! The outcome of MANY POA Top Management shenanigans is still very fresh in MANY HSV Property Owners minds…including nonresidents. Go back and check your historical timeline.
Lloyd Sherman
08/25/2021 — 2:09 pm
Kudos to the board for at least realizing that the property owners want accountability for what increased assessments will be utilized and accounted for. The test now will be that plan but more importantly the actual implementation. Least we not forget that the two-tier carried with it a promise that the money would not be spent on new projects. That was also stated and not carried through with.
With that said, a missing component in what was discussed today, and that being any new or increased fees which the board has total control over. I understand one board member indicated today that the discussion was getting off target. Really? How so? They are absolutely linked together. New fees or increased fees impact the property owners to exactly the same extent.
Part of the discussion revealed what was most likely discussed and decided upon in Executive Session, which on this subject should never have been held behind closed door. It became obvious (to me anyway) that the strategy was to separate these levels of what constitutes an assessment fee vs what the board can get away with by increasing or adding fees.
While I am acutely aware that we need some type of an assessment fee, I continue to find myself unable to support the current direction. They ask for a three-year commitment on raising assessments, with an open statement that increases existing fees or adding new ones are still on the table. And if they are not on the table this year, they certainly could be next year or the year after.
As a Realtor, the other reason I can’t support this approach is that we are in an unusual real estate market and if we want to cool it off, charging potential new residents a buy-in fee is not in the best interest of the growth of the Village. Raising assessments and introducing will impact decisions to make a move. And the ludicrous statement that it won’t impact existing home owners is totally off-base. If you have fewer buyers, you will likely have fewer sales of existing properties. Closing costs have gone up; now we increase assessments (which by itself I am okay with) and then we add a buy-in fee. Too much for many to handle.
My other huge concern is that none of this comes with any discussion regarding reform or changing the culture that got us here. All we appear to be doing is pouring money into exactly the same machine that has up to this point mismanaged those funds.
Marc S Bayer
08/25/2021 — 3:15 pm
Nonsense
Earl Fitzgerald
09/10/2021 — 11:35 am
Back at you Marc………..
Mary Kennedy
08/27/2021 — 7:44 am
Two realtors objected to the $1,500 buy-in fee at the board meeting. One expressed concern for prospective $70,000 town-house buyers because they couldn’t afford it. No one should purchase property in a place they can’t afford.
Many of us purchased interior lots for $25,000 or more in the ’80s, based on what HSV would one day become. All of the amenities are in place and a $1,500 buy-in should be a very easy sell. I’m sure our realtors are as skillful at their jobs as the realtors who sold lots when HSV was only half-developed. A buy-in fee, considering there are few pre-owned homes available and builders can’t keep up should increase the incentive to live here, not detract from it.
Jim Warren
09/23/2021 — 10:04 am
If someone is buying a house on a shoestring, just barely able to afford payments, and a rate increase or buy in fee, ( of which they are informed in advance) causes the purchase to be unaffordable, then they should not purchase that home. This is exactly what caused the real estate bubble to crash and burn.
Lloyd E Sherman
09/23/2021 — 11:59 am
Jim,
So regardless of what others say should be an easy sell for Realtors, the reality is adding a buy-in fee for both lots and homes is going to have an impact on the generation of sales. People are now paying more for houses than they are being appraised for so they immediately are upside down. Closing costs are going up. Now assessments are projected to go up. Then we add a buy-in fee, projected at $1,500 for homes and $250 for lots. On a sector of the population, these charges will mostly go unnoticed, but for a larger portion, it may be the difference between buying or remaining where they are. People move to Arkansas largely because it is cheaper to live here than in other places. Not knowing what the board is going to do with fees before we are asked to vote, will result in many Realtors taking a NO stance on the assessment increase, although we know it is needed. This is not an easy task for the board, but it now appears they may be adding too many layers, too quickly.
Jim warren
09/23/2021 — 2:19 pm
Lloyd, your comment that the buy in fee would have a negative effect on a portion of the home buying public is well taken and supports my position. You note that homes are being purchased at prices inflated above their accessed values and people are immediately underwater. That was one of the prime causes of the housing values crash of last decade. Making it possible for people to bury a home they can’t afford and will probably lose to foreclosure does them no kindness. People simply need to live where they can afford. If that sounds cruel, then tough. It is simply reality.
Minn Daly
08/25/2021 — 2:23 pm
Mr Medinger, NO one is requesting a perfect HSV, world or make a demand, as a member it is a request. So sorry for your water break, but within my area we have had 4 of them in past 18 months. I did not blame you or other members for the break. It was because of INFRASTRUCTURE not being taken care of. We are a 50 year old community, that needs repair, not special projects. This should have been defined for membership after tier 2 assessment. Instead monies was wasted on Failed projects, Not INFRASTRUCTURE. After hearing the BOD today it appears they are attempting to correct this issue, however they will not be the same BOD next year or the year after unless documentation is not adhered to by NEW BOD. Again sorry for your water breakage, but that is INFRASTRUCTURE! Respectfully, Minn Daly
Kent Ballew
08/25/2021 — 2:57 pm
I’m not in favor of the drastic 5 year increase. I was more in line with the Option #3 that had been proposed. That being said I will not be voting for the increase.
Mrs. Katherine Miller
08/27/2021 — 5:29 pm
What if your lack of a “Yes” vote defunds our police?
Karen Bump
08/25/2021 — 6:39 pm
1.) I agree there needs to be an assessment increase. But I am not convinced yet that I will vote for it. Something that really seemed to be glaringly missing in the recommendations to the board and in the option they chose is the use of bonds to catch up on maintenance. It was mentioned in the overall review, but not in the final options. Why not?? I would like to understand how that might fit into the other revenue considerations first, before I vote. I hope the board will address this soon.
2.) I am not a realtor, however when we bought our house here, Diamante’s “buy-in” cost and details were not pointed out to us up front. I discovered it after reading the fine print after we made an offer. Shame on us and shame on the realtor for not addressing this. Luckily the offer was rejected and we found a better house and neighborhood. We would not have considered it with a “buy-in” fee. I know, we are tight with our money. Whether that policy is common in exclusive golf communities are not, many potential owners may be turned off by it as well. It is a risk for HSV. I hope the board gives serious consideration and discussions with the realtor community before doing something like that. I believe it will put a pause on the growth we are experiencing.
Mary Kennedy
08/27/2021 — 8:10 am
Karen, with all due respect, your comparison isn’t even close. Diamante’s “buy-in fee” was multi-thousands more and it continued annually with country-club membership requirements. Their residents took responsibility and turned it around. It’s an entirely different situation than we are dealing with today.
We’re off-topic since the matter at hand is a reasonable assessment increase which most agree is critical. Most of the failed infrastructure is on the west side of The Village, so they will benefit greatly with this increase – we ALL will. There was an article on this site recently that praised our street department for their quick response and fine work. If we expect to have that kind of service available in the future, there’s no question we’ll have to pay our workers to retain them and buy equipment for them to work with. No realtor will be able to sell homes and lots if our roads are not maintained and roads are closed because there’s no money to repair our culverts and water mains. Security is a top priority for buyers – that could be gone in the near future without an increase. How can ANY resident property owner consider a “no vote”??? Our board and committees have done their part and we need to do our part after a 50-year history of grossly inadequate funds. We all need to vote “yes” to restore our community to attract buyers to invest with us.
Karen Bump
08/27/2021 — 2:31 pm
Not to be disrespectful Mary, but did you see that I am for an increase in assessments? And I don’t think what they propose is unaffordable, at least for me. However, my point was, we now need the board to communicate with us before the vote on how they plan to utilize these alternative sources of revenue (buy-in, amenity increases, issuance of bonds for maintenance, expense reduction, etc). I do not think that is too big of an ask and would go a long way toward getting the yes votes they need. I just want to understand the whole picture/vision of this board. And yes I have read everything the FRATF put out, but they are not the board – I want to know what the board plans to do before I vote. I think there is time for that.
Lloyd E Sherman
09/23/2021 — 11:52 am
Karen,
I believe as you have stated, many realize that an increase is needed to take care of our infrastructure. However, those who are choosing to support the increase BEFORE they know how the money will be spent and how it will be accounted for, are doing nothing but providing a blank check to the POA to spend as they have for the last 10-12 years. It is time for ACCOUNTABILITY; not just blindly accepting that we need an increase. That is irresponsible.
John M Szczepaniak
09/03/2021 — 10:26 am
Ok, so what if it is voted down? What do you propose to move us forward?
John M Szczepaniak
09/03/2021 — 4:02 pm
Some folks say they will vote yes if it is another “cheaper” option. You do not have that option. The board voted for option 1 and that is what is going to be on the ballot. I do not know if people realize it or not the increases over time seem rather small and they may not even be adequate in the light of much higher projected inflation and emergency repairs. We have to maintain our 50 year old Village. Will there be waste? Perhaps so but I do think that most of it will be used properly to the benefit of us all. We might not golf, or hike or play pickle ball or boat but it all benefits the community as a whole.