ARS10-708/Virtual Attendance:Solution Re: Problematic Lack of Quorum at Annual or Special Meetings?

A serious mistake was made by not raising assessments for 6-7 years. It made no sense. Equipment that cost $300K now costs $500K. The cost to pave a parking lot? The cost to replace a vehicle? Maintence isn't just routine day to day fixes - it's those items that don't qualify for PIF funds (over $300 K with a life expectancy over 15 years). The recent adoption of the CIF fee was an important and necessary step. The budget process started to make changes in 2023, and as the deadline approaches for the draft five-year budget plan approaches, members will soon be introduced to an entirely new budget model, beginning with development, who has input/process, how information is presented/forecast, and much more.

 

At the meeting today, our General Manager stated that the deferred maintenance is more than likely in the $16M - $17M range. Since we are spending $6M+ this year, it will cut that down to $10 M.

I can't believe that a capital improvement/reserve study has not been standard practice for RCSC all these years. When I was on the hospital board, we had a running list of equipment, repairs, etc. For example, if a new CT scanner was purchased, it had an estimated life of say 10 years. Therefore, another scanner was put on the list for 10 years later. If it was still operating well at 10 years, it was delayed another year or more. I don't know how many times I heard management say we needed to purchase something and it had been on the capital improvement list for purchase for four years and we didn't need to get it until now. Very rarely did we need to replace something before its estimated replacement was due. I hope RCSC isn't buying new equipment just because it is on the list. Example, a pickup's estimated life may be seven years. That doesn't mean we have to buy one in seven years. It might last 10 years.

I go to Lakeview several times a week. I have noticed two private contractors there this week. One is a painting company and one was doing tree service. I hope this is fiscally responsible.

 

RCSC has sometimes been guilty of doing the opposite in many cases - trying to extend somethings beyond its useful life and spending too much time or money making repairs (often because the budget wasn't available). On the other hand, if fleet vehicles are maintained and still running efficiently, management has responsibly said "why replace them?" There have been many discussions about the decision process by the planning team.

It's been an important part of the planning process to bring the last reserve study up to date. Moving forward forecasting replacements will be more accurate; if equipment fails earlier than anticipated, adjustments can be made. Likewise, if other items are being under utilized or performing better than expected, decisions can be made to rearrange purchases/projects.

 

This will be an unpopular opinion that I've stated before. I hear repeatedly that we should raise fees for everyone else to maintain our community. We live here. We use the amenities. We signed an agreement. We should be paying more as well. $50 more quarterly or $200 not $50 a year. I know there are many on fixed incomes including myself but we have to at least keep up with inflation.The last thing anyone needs is a large special assessment! Too many are able to pay it but don't want to. That mindset is setting us up to be a sinking ship. Times have changed unfortunately.

 

Utilization data which shows much lack of use for some facilities would suggest RCSC consider closing the facilities to save money. To much of a good thing often causes problems.

 

Would want to see the F&B and LRP reports before talking about fee increases. Reports I believe are due next month.