Dear HSVPOA Board of Directors, administrative staff, and the powers that be,
In speaking for myself and hopefully other Villagers, I would like to emphasize we are not anti village, we are pro village and pro ALL property owners. The current issues at hand appear to be:
- Hiring of new GM
- Assessment increases
Let’s discuss assessments first. When you come to us with a request for additional assessments, what are you offering on your side of the balance sheet? Perhaps if you said: “we will increase revenue by x percent and decrease expenses by y percent in exchange for a modest assessment increase of z dollars” we would feel a concerted effort is being made to properly spend our money. But, it appears there is no long term plan put in place to help the bottom line.
For example:
- Mid level manager salaries
- Expense accounts
- Bids that seem to change daily
- Offering our restaurants at zero rent for not one year, but three years.
- Golf that needs to increase rates or decrease overhead.
Now, following this thought process, what is the salary range for new GM?
This person can’t earn less than the mid levels and so the unsupported large salaries continue. Salary expense doesn’t stand alone, it affects taxes, life and disability insurance, 401(k) matches and unused vacation pay.
It is a significant income statement item and directly affects the bottom line.
Show the people you are proper stewards of our money and we will see if assessment increases are then needed, and to what extent.
Respectfully,
Jama Lopez
Published May 26, 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).
Mark Oliver
05/27/2021 — 12:35 pm
Amen.
Tom Blakeman
05/27/2021 — 1:01 pm
Excellent letter and points. Wonder if anyone on BOD will respond?
Larry Lewis
05/27/2021 — 8:47 pm
I hope so. But I doubt it, unless it is just double talk.
Kathy Henderson
05/27/2021 — 1:47 pm
I don’t think we need an increase in assessments until the pay of the highest people who work for the POA take a 20 percent drop in pay. The bottom “worker bees” should get a 20 percent raise in pay. Also, everything needs to be gone thru as far as what is spent. New million dollar items should be removed until we have the funds to pay for them. I think we could keep the workers at the bottom if we would just pay them MORE!
Barry Juaire
05/27/2021 — 3:19 pm
EXCELLENT REPLY. And I would like to see proof.
Larry Lewis
05/27/2021 — 8:48 pm
Amen.
Brian Castleman
05/27/2021 — 1:52 pm
Spot on.
Larry Lewis
05/27/2021 — 8:51 pm
Very well written letter. I believe the POA already knows what they want to do. This FRAFT is just a way to push it. IMO. Honesty is a better approach.
Steve Bender
05/27/2021 — 10:57 pm
Very good letter, but there is one thing missing, there has to be no more secrecy
Lloyd Sherman
05/28/2021 — 10:21 am
While I agree with everything that has been stated by Jama, the moment of truth is right around the corner. Next Thursday is scheduled for the Future Funding Task Force to present information to the property owners. While I am anxious to hear what they have to say, I can’t help slapping myself right back to the “shows” that were put on for the CMP and trying to change the Village into something it could never be. I trust we are not going down that path again. If we do, you can fully expect another grass-roots movement from the very people who the Board and POA are in place to support. So let’s give them an opportunity to present their case, but as I’ve stated before and am still 100% in support of: Not one dime of assessment increases until we have proof that steps have been taken to show that they are prudent stewards of our money.
Sandy Allen
06/01/2021 — 9:45 am
Exactly
Gene Garner
05/28/2021 — 2:55 pm
Does anyone still believe the BOD will listen to reason? Even tho Nalley & company are out of power and new Directors have taken their place, we have the same situation as before.
It seems no matter who’s elected to the BOD the outcome is always repeated, lots of promises but no effort to control the spending. And now we’re talking again about an another raise in resident property owner assessments.
Unless CCI refuses to go along and votes no, we will have another assessment increase within the next year.—Gene
Tom Blakeman
05/29/2021 — 9:03 am
I believe it is simply how out BOD is set up and the rules established for their behavior which none have wished to change. Examples: Too few bod members; should be 9 or 11. No requirement for each bod member to represent a specific constituency; such as East side West side, etc. So they have no accountability. And then there the “board speaks with one voice” BS; no dissention, debate, post mortem or anything after bad decisions are made. Plus there is the fear of “interfering” with staff issue; also BS.
Mary Szczepaniak
05/30/2021 — 12:20 am
Agree, & those we elect quit. They don’t get their way so instead of staying the course, they tske their toys & go home. And then we find ourselves right back where we started. So disappointed. What’s the point?
Lloyd Sherman
05/30/2021 — 10:31 am
To Gene’s point but with a little different view, while we did abandon the ill-conceived CMP and changed management at the highest level, we did not change the culture. A hiring decision that turned out to be the wrong one, resulted in most of the senior management team remaining in place as evidenced by the new GM keeping the same people in place. Not condemning those individuals but the reality is they were simply operating under the same culture as had been in place and immediately adopted by the newly hired GM. And please do not misinterpret my comments regarding our employees; they work hard and are doing the jobs they have been taught to do. But without a real “change agent” you can rely on things pretty much continuing as they have in the past. The board did what they thought was the right thing at the time, but the reality is that hiring mistakes are made, but if you continue making them, then shame on you. It takes too long for an outsider to understand the culture they are walking into and that combined with no turnaround experience simply leads to where we are today. More will be coming within the next week on our culture and suggestions for changing it. But giving more money to the people who have a track record of not being responsible with it just has to be the definition of insanity. Much change must occur first.
Gene Garner
05/30/2021 — 3:44 pm
I make this reply to both Tom and Lloyd.
Tom, you’re right one of the main problem are the legacy rules that should have been abandoned when Nalley resigned. I don’t know how many we should have but if we elected Directors that represented a geographical area of HSV they’d be more responsive to their constituents opinions and problems.
As it stands now, it appears the only driving force behind the Directors election process is to get elected and then coast until the next election. There’s no incentive to perform well and there’s no penalty for doing poorly. But there is a way to change that situation.
The Arkansas Nonprofit Corporation Act of 1993 has a provision in a statute, ACA 4-33-726, that allows the election of Directors by “region or other geographical unit”. That would identify a Director to his neighbors when voting on a bill and give them an email address to respond to. There’s also ACA 4-33-808 that allows removal of a Director by a vote of the members “without cause” . This makes it possible to “unelect” a Director with the same number of votes it took to elect him/her.
Llyod you’re also right, one of the main problems is the culture and most of that culture springs from the Arkansas Nonprofit Corporation Act of 1963. These are the Articles Of Incorporation we’ve been operating under since 1970 and there have been a number of changes since then.
The 1963 Act provides very few details and allows the BOD virtual “free rein” in their decision making, kind of like Bernie Madoff on steroids. Because of the lack of details the POA has been allowed to make really poor decisions with no consequences. It’s time to change our culture and our Articles of Incorporation.
If we could make one investment that would give us the biggest return, it would be passing the 1993 Nonprofit Corporation Act. That’s what we should be negotiating for.—Gene
Tom Blakeman
05/30/2021 — 6:22 pm
Excellent points Gene. Thanks. Unfortunately, few are listening.
David Kirsch
05/28/2021 — 7:00 pm
I’ve yet to see a concise list of action items with priorities, deadlines and costs. Once the property owners have that information an increase to the POA dues can be considered.
It’s as simple as that….
Tom Blakeman
05/30/2021 — 6:21 pm
One other thing. Consequences for failure.
Richard Qualls
05/31/2021 — 6:42 pm
Why do POA emoyees pay less for golf, fitness center, etc. than a resident. I can understand allowing them to use the services for the same price as a resident as part of their benefits but not less.
Tom Blakeman
06/02/2021 — 8:10 am
Because the operational protocol for at least a couple decades now is: Of the POA, By the POA, For the POA. Property owners are just here to pay the bills.
Tom Blakeman
06/02/2021 — 8:13 am
It is the same sickness that has permeated our Federal government.