By Ron Duncan
The following comments are mine in reviewing the draft AFHOA CC&R document. Some of the comments won’t make sense unless you open a copy of the DRAFT CCRs WITH GOLF Draft with Summary of Amendments. There are some real deal breakers in here and although no one has ever labeled me a libertarian, turning over power to the ACHOA Board doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
Comment 1: Witnesseth: Paragraph 3, Third “No such adjustment shall affect the rights and obligations of any party hereto or any lot Owner, and the “Subdivision” and the “Nonresidential Area” shall mean the real property so defined herein, as adjusted by such boundary line adjustments.”
How do we guarantee that the adjustments do not affect the ‘obligations’ of the owners? Do we not all pay fees and taxes? And aren’t those ‘obligations?
Comment 2: Witnesseth; Paragraph 4, “The provisions of this Declaration are intended to create mutual equitable servitudes upon each of the lots and parcels in the Subdivision and the Nonresidential (as applicable) in favor of each and all other lots and parcels; to create reciprocal rights between the respective owners of all such lots and parcels; to create a privity of contract and estate between the grantees of such lots and parcels, their heirs, successors and assigns; and shall, as to the owner of each lot or parcel, its heirs, successors or assigns operate as covenants running with the land for the benefit of each and all other lots and parcels in the Subdivision and Nonresidential Area and their respective owners, present and future.”
The intent of the CC&R’s is NOT to provide ‘equitable servitudes’ between the subdivision and the Non-residential area. Most definitely it is between the lot owners solely. The Non-residential area is to be held separate per Article VII and thus has no place in the definition of the CC&Rs between ‘subdivision lot owners.’
Comment 3: Article 1, Section 2, subsection d; “”Association” or “ACHOA” means ArrowCreek Homeowners Inc., the Homeowners Lot association, which is a Nevada corporation.”
This definition is in error. ‘The Homeowners Lot Association’ is NOT part of the Articles of Incorporation. Please change the definition.
Comment 4: Article 1, Section 2, subsection f; “”Builder” means any person who purchases one or more lots for the purpose of construction of a dwelling and other improvements for later sale to homebuyers on parcels of land within the Subdivision.”
Put a period after the word sale and delete the rest of the sentence, it’s redundant and not needed.
Comment 5: Article 1, Section 2, subsection i;
Delete the two semi-colons following the word ‘hiking’ and delete the word ‘signage’ with the two semi-colons. Also, “certain;” makes no sense.
Comment 6: Article 1, Section 2, subsection m;
This does NOT belong in this document as the term is being eliminated with approval of this document.
Comment 7: Article 1, Section 2, subsection n;
The definition of “Golf Course” appears to be an old version. Under this CC&R revision, the ‘golf course’ may consist of 36 holes, the driving range, club house, maintenance facilities, restaurants, parking lots and ancillary facilities. PERIOD
Comment 8: Article 1, Section 2, subsection o;
To what is this definition applied? Is it to be applied to any property or is it applicable to the ACHOA or Non-residential property only? Improvements needs to clearly identify what it applies too. It would appear that it applies to ALL land within the Development Agreement.
Comment 9: Article 1, Section 2, subsection p;
Tentative maps no longer exist for the ArrowCreek development (that’s a developer term). Delete these references as only the ‘final’ map is pertinent.
Comment 10: Article 1, Section 2, subsection q;
“Majority” for purposes of voting power of Lot Owners eligible to vote means 50% plus 1 vote.” What’s trying to be said is, ‘Majority,’ for the purposes of voting power, means 50% plus 1 vote of all eligible Lot Owners.
Comment 11: Article 1, Section 2, subsection r; ““Nonresidential Area” when used herein shall mean collectively the portions of the Golf Course as defined in Exhibit D and as owned by FOA at the time of recordation of this Declaration.”
This should be reworded to read ‘‘Non-residential Area’ when used herein shall mean the portions of the subdivision, as defined in Exhibit D, owned by the FOA LLC at the time of recordation of this Declaration.’
Comment 12: Article 1, Section 2, subsection aa;
The last sentence of this subsection should be deleted as the ACHOA cannot develop lots as they are a Non-profit corporation.
Comment 13: Article 1, Section 2, subsection bb;
The “the location and boundaries of the Nonresidential Area are subject to change.” This statement is not true if this version of the CC&Rs is approved. The boundaries are specified by this approval.
Comment 14: Article 1, Section 2, subsection dd, item 4;
Please delete the reference to “Golf Course” (the ACHOA Does not anticipate owning a ‘golf course,’ only the property under a golf course) and Delete the word ‘Community’ from the Residents/Community Center as it is only a Residents Center.
Comment 15: Article 1, Section 2, subsection ee;
What’s meant by this entire subsection? ACHOA most definitely can exercise its right to guide/curb development on property under the jurisdiction of the ACHOA. We currently do this through the ADRC.
Comment 16: Article II, Section 1, subsection a; “…without limitation the funding, repair, replacement, management, operation, lease and maintenance of the following Common Elements: certain portions of the Golf Course, parcel 152-471-11 (commonly known as “the pit”)”
First objection is the reference to the Golf Course, shouldn’t that be a reference to the ‘Non-residential Area?’ Second objection is this parcel is “jointly operated,” Why is the ACHOA picking up ALL of the funding, repair, replacement, management, operation and maintenance of this parcel?
Comment 17: Article II, Section 1, subsection c;
Comment 18: Article II, Section 1, subsection d.16;
Replace “Golf Course” with ‘Common Area.’
Comment 19: Article II, Section 5, Budget: “Unless, at that meeting, a Majority of all Owners rejects the budget, the budget is ratified, whether or not a quorum is present.”
Question: How is a ‘majority’ going to reject a budget without a vote? We do not have a facility to accommodate 547 people.
Comment 20: Article II, Section 7;
Update the reference to NRS 116.3110 to read NRS 116.311.
Comment 21: Article II, Section 9; “Such right shall not apply to the personnel records of the employees of the Association, except for those records relating to the number of hours worked and
the salaries and benefits of those employees; the records of the Association relating to another unit’s owner, including, without limitation, any architectural plan or specification submitted by a member to the Association during an approval process required by the governing documents; or any draft document, including, without limitation, minutes of a Board meeting, a reserve study, a budget, and a business proposal if the document is in the process of being developed for final consideration by the Board, and has not been placed on an agenda for final approval by the Board.”
If this is the ‘law,’ then why or how is the community expected to comment on DRAFT materials (i.e. CC&Rs and Bylaws)? Paragraph needs to allow community input on draft documentation.
Comment 22: Article II, Section 12;
Add an ‘n.’ at the end of the sentence.
Comment 23: Article II, Section 15;
Add that this addition requires a majority vote, not merely a board action.
Comment 24: Article III, Section 2; “Subject to the provisions of Article VII, Section 2, a purchaser of a Lot shall be jointly and severally liable with the seller for all unpaid assessments against the real estate without prejudice to the purchaser’s right to recover from the seller the amount paid by the purchaser for such assessments.” Article VII, Section 2 has absolutely no bearing on this paragraph.
It’s unclear what was intended.
Comment 25: Article III, Section 5, last sentence; “…and with opportunity for hearing as defined in the Association’s collection policy violation.”
Why is the word ‘violation’ here? It doesn’t make sense.
Comment 26: Article IV, Introduction, First sentence; “As more particularly specified in Article VII, the Nonresidential Area is exempted from the provisions of this Article IV.”
Either remove the word ‘this’ or remove ‘IV’ from the ending of this sentence.
Comment 27: Article IV, Introduction, Last sentence; “Otherwise, all uses within the Subdivision shall comply with the conditions and restrictions of this Article IV.”
Remove IV from the end of this sentence.
Comment 28: Article IV, Section 11;
Shouldn’t we reference our effluent water permit here? It specifies we are not to allow that water to reach the drainage.
Comment 29: Article IV, Section 16, Last Sentence;
Why do we distinguish a “Semi-custom” home form all others in our subdivision? I’ve had at least one property owner complaint about discrimination between custom home and semi-custom homes.
Comment 30: Article IV, Section 19;
This section needs to cite NRS 116.325 and 116.31034. The ACHOA cannot interfere with political signs for Board candidates, size restrictions notwithstanding.
Comment 31: Article IV, Section 24, Last Sentence; “The Board may adopt and maintain a Fuels Management Policy Fuels Management Policy to effect enforcement of this Section.”
Delete one of the redundant ‘Fuels Management Policy’ wordings.
Comment 32: Article IV, Section 25; “However, native vegetation will be allowed on any lots as long as they conform to the Association’s Fuel Management Policy and ADRC requirements.”
This is not a ‘however’ statement. Some lots came with a covenant that they were to leave 2/3 of their property natural. For those lot/parcel owners, the Fuels Management Policy and ADRC need to conform to those particular lots not the other way around. Placing a ‘new’ burden on lot owners is not a good idea or forcing them to strip their property is equally obnoxious.
Comment 33: Article IV, Section 28, Last sentence; “Parking of a vehicle on a street is not allowed, except on collector streets at a minimum distance from the intersection of one hundred twenty (120) miles; feet; inches? where parking is only allowed during special events with prior notice to Association’s Security staff.”
Comment 34: Article IV, Section 35; This section starts out with “No animals” and concludes with “Upon request of a Lot Owner, the Board, in its sole discretion, shall determine for the purposes of this Section…”
So, which is it, NO or ‘the Board at its discretion shall?
Comment 35: Article IV, Section 39;
Association approval to access perimeter lots may also require written consent from Washoe County or the U.S. Forest Service as the land adjacent to ArrowCreek is not necessarily owned by the Association.
Comment 36: Article VII, Section 1, First sentence;
Delete ‘Golf Course’ and substitute ‘Subdivision’.
Comment 37: Article VII, Section 1, Second sentence;
Strike thru ‘s’ should be removed.
Comment 38: Article VII, Section 2, Second paragraph;
Delete the entire paragraph. This is a throwback to the ‘Community Club’ concept.
Comment 39: Article VII, Section 3, subsection c;
This easement should be bounded by the effluent water permit and restricted accordingly. The ACHOA does not want to be held in violation of that permit as it would endanger our ability to use the water on common areas.
Comment 40: Article VII, Section 3, subsection d;
This easement should also be restricted to piping smaller than 2 inches. ACHOA will have the responsibility for everything larger.
Comment 41: Article VII, Section 3, subsection g, First sentence;
Strike thru ‘s’ should be removed.
Comment 42: Article VIII, Section 3, First sentence;
Delete ‘the Declarant’.
Comment 43: Article IX, Section 1, Second sentence;
At the end of the sentence ADD the words ‘upon approval of a majority of the lot owners.’
Comment 44: Article X, Section 8;
Why isn’t the “Water Agreement, March 18, 1997” not one of the appendices? Where exactly do we find it among our governing documents?
Comment 45: Article XI, Section 10;
This section needs to be re-worded to remove references to the ‘Declarant’.
Comment 46: FOA LLC Signature block;
This block should carry the caveat that their signature is in recognition of the changes to Article VII and they accept those changes as written. They should then sign this before it goes to a vote of the property owners. They will all get a chance to then approve these changes through their respective owner votes.
— THE END Ron Duncan Review of Modified CC&Rs —
I very concerned with your comment #10. How are we going to ensure that the term “Majority” is not changed to mean other than “50% of the eligible lot owners plus 1”?