Special meeting Question:
(3) No procedures or policies in place to provide checks and balances, or otherwise prevent corruption/abuse, for the above
Embedded Files
Jim's Answer from the Board:
The SHHA Rules and Regulations for the Association, Approved December 9, 2020, Section 4.2 (page 9 of 13) Code of Conduct for Board Members ... have been posted on the SHHA website for some time.
This Board passed a motion at the January 2025 meeting to establish a Governance Committee to sustain a focus on good governance on behalf of our members.
Insight: NOT THE CHECKS & BALANCES ASKED FOR
The R&R provide how the Board will conduct themselves. It doesn't provide checks & balances toward a misguided decision, ie. on how the Board is conducting meetings, or on an inconsistent ACC application decision. An independent APPEALS group , not made up of Board members, will do this.
GOVERANCE COMMITTEE: The Governance committee is replacing the Nominating committee. These two committees have different responsibilities and should not be c0-mingled. Keeping them separate is a perfect check and balance system for representation. The Governance committee will also replace the Bylaw committee. This is not providing checks and balances.
Combining the Nominating, Bylaw committees into Governance only consolidates control for Eric who is running this.
Governance on Board operations and actions shouldn't be evaluated by the Board members.
And remember, the Board will choose who gets to participate on the Governance committee. Yikes!
Special meeting Question:
(5) The Board's progressive assertion of having the authority of a Homeowners Association (HoA), when in fact it is not an HoA under the New Mexico HoA Act.
Jim's Answer from the Board:
This Board has spent much time over the last year studying this issue. It appears that amongst the 38 Units of the Sandia Heights, in some Units it appears the SHHA may be an HOA as defined under the NMHO Act, while in other Units it may not be. More research and legal consultation are required to confirm the exact status for each and every Unit.
Whether defined under the HOA act or not, it does not affect SHHA’s validity or legality as a voluntary association of homeowners but affects what powers the association has over the property owners, and obligations each property owes to the Association. Nor does it affect the declaration establishing the ACC as the final arbiter of architectural appearance included in the larger set of said restrictions, reservations and covenants that are binding on all each and every subsequent owner of land in Sandia Heights subdivision.
Insight:
SHHA is NOT declared a HOA in any of the 38 units. NTE and HL - have their own independent HOAs. SHHA is mentioned in these 2 covenants solely for mandatory payments SHHA. These mandatory payments do not make SHHA a HOA under state law NM Statute 47-16.
More research is more money into the Cuddy & McCarthy attorney, Scott Turner. Get an independent opinion as the community is asking.
This does affect SHHA validity and legality. SHHA's existence is publicly announced as a NM HOA. Yet, they cannot hold themselves out as a HOA if they can't meet the state law. This is corporate impersonation, and fraud.
SHHA's existence is separate and doesn't affect the overall covenants or the ACC in said covenants. Covenants are independent of SHHA, and the property has no obligation to the SHHA- Association. The property's obligation is with the covenants and they are self-enforcing. Some covenants existed before SHHA, and SHHA isn't the entity enforcing the covenants .
The Board also says: "...including the larger set of said restrictions, reservations and covenants" Good question for the Annual meeting. What is the larger set?
Special meeting Question:
(6) The use of workshops where Board business is discussed and conducted but where minutes are not required to be kept and reported to the SHHA membership.
Jim's Answer from the Board:
This Board has conducted one workshop in the last year, at which no decisions were either proposed or decided upon. Workshops are essential to the effectiveness of Board's because they allow Board's to study issues without taking action. Board workshops do not require minutes because they are strictly about studying information and no actions.
Notifications of any future workshops, along with the topic, will be disseminated to SHHA membership.
Insight:
The answer is a lie and totally inconsistent. Read the Aug meeting minutes. There were decisions: Phil to get with the attorney. Charles and Jim will talk to 3rd parties to get the best way to start.
This is not studying issues, this is action - a plan about unifying covenants, damage assessments, and using a marketing firm to sell this to the community.
This is a ploy!
Anytime or place a Board meets to discuss community business is a Board meeting. This is a Breach of Duty and candor to the community.
STOP THIS NONSENSE!
Special meeting Question:
(7) The use of Executive Sessions where minutes are not required to be kept and reported to SHHA membership.
Jim's Answer from the Board:
This Board commits to only conducting Executive sessions as necessary for the well-being of the organization and in accordance with the member approved bylaws.
Requiring that minutes be disseminated to SHHA members negates the purpose of an Executive session. The Board will ensure that the general topic of any Executive session is included in all minutes henceforth.
Insight:
The answer is another lie. The Bylaws allow: The use of executive sessions are allowed for only 2 purposes as stated in the Bylaws, they are to:
protect an individual or
if the Boards feels threatened.
The Bylaws do not mention anywhere the well-being of the organization. In fact, "well-being" isn't mentioned anywhere in the Bylaws.
The Board closed the meeings for numerous other reasons that are a breach of their fidicuary duties in upholding the Bylaws. For instance, see the minutes of the past 10 Board meetings. In fact, the last closed portion at the Jan 8th meeting was to discuss a Guest comment when he said "I'm the enemy". The Board went into closed session to understand what he meant by this, instead of just asking the guest. It would have been that simple but instead the Board members choose to defy the Bylaws.
On 2.22.25 - The Board wants the authority to go into executive sessions whenever they want. There is a Bylaw change coming up at the Annual meeting which will read: “Board meetings may be closed…if the Board member deems it in the best interest of the corporation,”
STOP THIS NONSENSE!
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse