Timberdale Ranch Owners Association
Board of Directors Meeting Minutes
Location: Timberdale Ranch, CR 504, CO
Date: 11/19/2019
Time: 6:00 PM
Tim Block, Lucy Bryson, Jamie Enns, Elizabeth Lutes, Jim Tencza, Brad Treadwell
Pam McCarthy, Cindy Moore and James Thomas
2) Annual letter review. Jim presented the annual letter draft to be sent from the President of the Board to homeowners in December.
a. Because our legal expenses are high this year (almost $5,000) due to the lawsuit, and we anticipate a similar amount or more in 2020, Jim proposed a special assessment to homeowners to cover this expense.
i. His initial thought was for a $10,000 special assessment which would be approximately $175/residence. Some voiced concern about that amount being high.
ii. After a reviewal of the Protective Covenants, it was determined that the Board may institute up to $5,000 as a special assessment but needs 67% approval of the homeowners for a larger assessment, thus the Board agreed that a $5,000 assessment for the year 2020 will be implemented.
iii. After much discussion, the Board determined that all owners should pay an assessment: lots with homes will pay a higher percent than undeveloped lots. Vacant lots will be assessed 55% less than occupied lots, exactly how dues are allocated. Elizabeth made a motion to determine the assessment in this method, Tim seconded, and the motion carried and passed. Elizabeth made a motion for a special assessment of $5,000 for legal fees which will be charged on the annual HOA invoices. Brad 2nd and the motion carried and passed.
iv. The Board will evaluate the need for an additional assessment in 2020 as we get a better understanding of future legal expenses. Two ideas were discussed: 1) having a vote at the annual meeting for a larger assessment; 2) implementing another $5,000 assessment in 2021.
v. We also discussed refunding any of the special assessment which is left over at the end of the year if for some reason our legal fees aren’t more than $5,000. This is an option but we all agreed that the legal fees will probably be much higher than $5,000.
b. All other topics in the letter were approved. Jim will send out the annual letter with these revisions to all board members again and asks for comments to be sent back ASAP.
3) Governing documents
a. Jamie pointed out that our CCR’s are really called protective covenants so when we’re updating the governing documents, we need to re-title them CCR’s. Elizabeth brought up that the board can change the by-laws and Architectural Review Standards but is uncertain what % of homeowners is required to change the CCR’s name. Jim offered to find out what the state statute is for that. Elizabeth asked if we have a sample of CCR’s to look at for ideas while rewriting ours and Jim hasn’t found any. There isn’t a basic template so we have to start with what we have. We all agreed to keep them simple, measurable and observable. We will get advice from Tracy Cross with wording on the document.
b. Jim discussed CO Revised Statutes Title 38 (38-33.3-308). Colorado has defined new laws for HOA’s that TROA isn’t up to date with. Since our governing documents are old and we haven’t been following these new guidelines our liability is high until we re-write our CCR’s and by-laws.
c. Kelly and Tim have sent out a revised copy of the Architectural Review Standards to each board member to review.
i. We all agreed that overall whatever we come up with has to be something we’re willing to enforce. We can’t try to be too specific on every little detail.
ii. Two changes we considered making to the ARS’s was dealing with lights and landscaping
1. We discussed limiting outdoor lights to downward facing, no dusk to dawn lights unless they are motion sensitive lights which won’t remain on all night.
2. With landscaping we agreed that a homeowner can’t alter the terrain of their property if it will affect the drainage without approval of the board.
iii. Elizabeth pointed out the we should have three separate lists for the A.R.S for clarity:
Checklist, process and guidelines
iv. Our goal is to have the A.R.S. done by the end of the year, the by-laws by end of January 2020 and the CCR’s by April 2020.
4) Treasurers Report
a. We all reviewed the report and our largest expense this month was for legal fees. Legal expenses so far have covered the initial meeting with Tracy Cross for advice on governing documents and the Hedemark/Kaminsky lawsuit. She charges $225/hour.
b. We then reviewed the P&L and income is below budget because of reduced gas royalties and expenses are higher because of legal fees.
5) 2020 Annual Budget review
a. Gas royalties are down by almost 50%. Since we’re a non-profit Jamie is curious as to why we pay taxes and will do research on this issue.
b. Since special assessment has been approved, Jamie will add an income line item for the special assessment and increase the amount for legal expenses to $6,000 instead of $1,000.
c. After much discussion with Preston about whether or not TROA should buy equipment to maintain our own gravel roads, we felt the conversation of buying equipment was premature but we’re not opposed to thinking about it. Elizabeth recommended we budget for roads based on past experience and then see how the year goes.
d. Brad and Preston brought up the idea of haying the meadows as an added revenue source. They’ll look into this in greater detail next year.
e. Administrative and general expense account was lowered from $2,000 to $500 for this new budget because Jamie realized that a lot of the expenses under this heading were one-time expenses. We all agreed with that.
f. Jim moved we accept the budget for 2020 with the special assessment, Elizabeth 2nd and the board all approved. The budget for 2020 is approved.
6) General discussion
a. We all agreed the prior meeting minutes will be approved by board members via email and then posted on the website, therefore their reviewal doesn’t need to be an agenda item.
b. Cindy Moore brought up that she was approached by the Hedemarks with regards to the Kaminsky matter but she chose not to talk to them about it. But she does acknowledge that the Kaminsky shed will be in her view so she would like to see what the shed is going to look like. Jim told her we have a site plan, a set of drawings for their house but there aren’t any drawings for their shed or garage. We can send her the site plan because it’s public but we don’t have anything that shows what the shed will look like. She looked at the site plan Jim had in his folder.
7) Next meeting is scheduled for December 17 at 6 p.m.
8) Meeting adjourned at 8:31 p.m.