Also, you may need to download the file(s) to your computer to enable printing in full 8.5″ x 11″ page format.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW/PRINT THE OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED CHANGES & INSTRUCTIONS
Fri, Sep 29, 2017 3:12 pm
 | Grace Stephenson on ArrowCreek Golf vs. Non-Golf P… |
 | paulwburkett on ArrowCreek Conspicuous Consump… |
 | arrowcreek411 on ArrowCreek Resident Clubs |
 | Kim Richards on ArrowCreek Resident Clubs |
 | Steve Buntin on An ArrowCreek Property Value U… |
 | 2dogsdad@gmail.com on An ArrowCreek Property Value U… |
| The ArrowCreek Sept-… on Newsletters | |
| An ArrowCreek Proper… on An ArrowCreek Property Value U… | |
| An ArrowCreek Proper… on An ArrowCreek Property Value U… | |
| An ArrowCreek Proper… on An ArrowCreek Property Value U… |
ArrowCreek411 
Pingback: A Minority View | ArrowCreek411
Paul is correct, it’s a simple yes or NO vote. However, before you vote ‘yes’ consider that you are expanding the purpose of the ACHOA by adding “When such action would benefit the community and the purposes of the Association, the Association may take such action to cooperate with Nonresidential Area Owner for any purposes detailed in this Declaration or NRS 116.” and maintaining the Boards authority to raise dues and Special Assessments by 15% without a vote of the community. One additional feature is the governance of the golf course/Non-residential area. This was expanded without mutual benefit to the ACHOA.
Just some things to consider before you cast your vote but PLEASE Vote!
Ron Duncan
LikeLike
Sounds like the homeowners will be funding the golf course. Article II, Section I, e and Article III, Section 3-reads as if they can assess the homeowners and then give the money to the golf course if the board feels it is in the best interest of the homeowners. You could easily argue if the golf course fails it would be in the best interest of the homeowners to bail them out.
LikeLike
There seems to be a misconception of how cash disbursement works in the real world of ACHOA finances. Arrowcreek has specific articles of incorporation that detail what cash may be allocated to. This is specified in Article 4 of the Articles of Incorporation which specify what the Board may spend cash on. “vote no” advocates an outlay of cash that would not be an exchange of cash for goods or services by “giving” cash to the Club. The Board would have to come up with a way to transfer cash that breaches the federally mandated accounting Internal Controls required for both Associa and Arrowcreek to produce certified statements. By starting this process, the Board is now in violation of NRS 116.3103 and several other provisions of the statutes. Mechanically, the ACHOA would have to invent a way to send money to the Club at Arrowcreek. The Board would have to influence the Associa General Ledger accounting group in Dallas to violate their rules for corporate governance.
There are 3 main ways to transfer cash without an explicit exchange of goods and services (generally supported by an invoice). The first would be to loan the Club money. This action is not supported by the current accounting system and violates NRS 116.3102 among others . A similar situation would be to “gift” the money to the Club. Again, a question for “vote no”; how would Associa and Arrowcreek design a mechanism that violates all of our internal controls and several NRS provisions? The last mechanism of transfer would be to treat the cash transfer as an investment. If this pathway would be selected, the Board would be in violation of all the above statutes plus violation of statutes on allowable investments.
I agree with “vote no” that s/he could argue about what pathway the Board may follow. The reality is that none of those thoughts are supported by the reality of the Board and the ACHOA operates.
LikeLike
IT is a simple vote – YES or NO.
Yes we move into the next century and we accept the revised Bylaws and CC&Rs.
No, we stay with the original 1997 Bylaws and CC&Rs.
Your choice but please VOTE.
LikeLike