Happy Birthday, ArrowCreek411.com !!

Posted on December 1, 2015 by arrowcreek411

Today is ArrowCreek411’s 1st birthday!OneCanCake

Supposedly no one reads ArrowCreek411.
Ha! That is certainly hogwash!
We have lots of followers!
Thank you very much!!

It has even been suggested multiple times that we sell ads!

Today we have have a total of 68,191 hits as I write this.
That is 68,191/365= 186.8 hits on average per day.
That is 68,191/52= 1,311 hits on average per week.
That is 68,191/12= 5,683 hits on average per month.

First blogpost: Painted Vista Neighborhood Meeting Held Nov 29, 2014

We have done a pretty good job of accomplishing what we set out to do!

Happy Birthday, ArrowCreek411 – May you have another great year!

Posted in ArrowCreek 411, ArrowCreek411 | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Comments on the ACHOA Bylaw Draft Changes

Posted on December 1, 2015 by arrowcreek411

Sent: 18 November 2015

To: Governing Documents Committee

From: Ronald Duncan

Subject: Draft Bylaw Changes for Golf – Comments

Comment 1: Article I, Section 1.04:

This should be amended by adding the phrase ‘as further restricted by the Articles of Incorporation and NRS 82.’

Comment 2: Article II, Section 2.02, subsection b:

Change “…as authorized or directed by the Board.” to ‘…as authorized by the Board of Directors in conformance with the approved budget.’

Comment 3: Article II, Section 2.05:

Change “Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the chairman’s rulings on procedural matters shall be conclusive and binding on all members, unless at the time of a ruling, a petition request for a vote is made by a majority of the members entitled to vote, in which case a decision of a majority of such members shall be conclusive and binding on all members.” To read ‘ …unless at the time of a ruling, a member in attendance, calls for a vote by a plurality of members present and entitled to vote, in which case a decision of the majority present shall be conclusive and binding…’ The need for a petition and the calling out of a majority defeats the purpose of a meeting. Adherence to Roberts Rules would be the easiest way around this issue.

Comment 4: Article II, Section 2.06:

Why was the reference to NRS 82.321 deleted? Which is more restrictive, NRS 82 or 116?

Comment 4a: Article II, Section 2.06:

For ArrowCreek, in addition to the name and address of the grantor, we would also need the Lot number to ensure the voting proxy is from a member in good standing and those should be recorded at the time the vote is cast.

Comment 5: Article II, Section 2.07, subsection a:

Delete the phrase “…without a meeting…” it makes no sense.

Comment 6: Article II, Section 2.07, subsection a.4:

Delete or significantly re-write. It totally makes no sense.

Comment 7: Article 2, Section 2.10:

Absentee ballots are not defined. Either we need to get them defined, and what role they play, or delete the term from this Article.

Comment 8: Article III, Section 3.01:

First sentence; What ‘Articles’ are being referenced? We have the Articles of Incorporation, we have the Articles of the Declaration, and now we have the Articles of the Bylaws.

Comment 9: Article III, Section 3.01, Second sentence: “The Board may delegate the management of the activities of the corporation to any person or persons, a management company or committees however composed, or otherwise delegate any owner or authority of the Board, provided that the activities and affairs of the Association shall be managed and all corporate powers shall be exercised under the ultimate direction of the Board.”

Need a comma after ‘committees. Delete or make clear what the phrase “delegate any owner or authority of the Board” means. I could see the Board delegating its power to the FOA, for instance.

Comment 10: Article III, Section 3.03, Second paragraph, First sentence: “Not less than thirty (30) days before the preparation of a ballot for the election of members of the Board, any director shall cause notice to be given to each member of the member’s eligibility to serve as a member of the Board.”

Insert after “…given to each member of the Association the…”

Comment 11: Article III, Section 3.03, Second paragraph, Last sentence:

Delete the words “or a nominating committee established by the Association”

Comment 12: Article III, Section 3.03, Third paragraph, a:

Change the word “unit” to ‘lot’

Comment 13: Article III, Section 3.03, Third Paragraph, b:

Change the word ‘secrete’ to secret

Comment 14: Article III, Section 3.03, Third paragraph, e & f:

“The secret written ballots must be opened and counted at a meeting of the Association.” The term ‘meeting’ has not been defined. In fact the voting is announced as being done in the presence of the community but not at a “meeting” chaired by who?

Comment 15: Article III, Section 3.03, Last paragraph:

Who’s this administrator that’s called out? I don’t recall a definition of that position.

Comment 16: Article III, Section 3.04, First paragraph:

Delete it as it’s redundant with the last paragraph of Article III.

Comment 17: Article III, Section 3.04, Paragraph a, Last sentence:

Add “be appointed by the Board with a majority vote of all Directors before such time to take office when the resignation becomes effective.”

Comment 18: Article III, Section 3.04, Paragraph b, First sentence:

Add “Vacancies in the Board shall be filled by appointing the highest failed candidate from the last Board election and ratified by a majority vote of all directors.”

Comment 19: Article III, Section 3.04, Paragraph f:

Add “Any director of the Board may be removed from the Board, with or without cause, if at a removal election is held pursuant NRS 116.31036, the number of votes cast in favor of removal constitutes at least 35 percent of the total number of eligible voting members of the Association; and at least a majority of all votes cast in that removal election are in favor of the removal.”

Comment 20: Article III, Section 3.06, First sentence:
“Regular meetings of the Board may be held on such dates and at such times as may be fixed by the Board, to occur at least once every quarter, and not less than once every one hundred (100) days.”
This makes absolutely No sense. A quarter is only 90 days so why the 100 day statement?

Comment 21: Article III, Section 3.06, Last sentence:

Change “Regular meetings must be held at a time other than during standard regular business hours of 9 a.m. to 5 6 p.m. at least twice annually.”

Comment 22: Article III, Section 3.08:

Last sentence; Change “A meeting at which a quorum is initially present may continue to transact business notwithstanding the withdrawal of directors, so long as a Quorum remains, if any action taken and is approved by at least a majority of the required quorum for such meeting.”

Comment 23: Article III, Section 3.09, Last sentence:

Change “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 member, 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.” The best time to change documents is prior to their respective approval. Final draft documents, at the request of a member in good standing should be available for review.

Comment 24: Article III, Section 3.10:

Change “In the event that the Board determines that the management of the Association would be benefitted by the establishment of one or more standing or special advisory committees, the Board may from time to time establish one or more such committees. The establishment of a standing or special advisory committee shall be effected by a resolution of the Board approved by the vote of the majority of the directors then in office, which specifically sets forth the charter which addresses the powers and duties delegated to such committee. Each such committee shall consist of one or no more than two directors, one of which shall serve as liaison to the Board. The term “standing committee” or “special committee” shall mean any committee appointed by the Board, which is authorized by specific delegation, without further Board action, to work at the direction of the Board pursuant to guidelines established by the Board. Notice of meetings shall be posted to the ‘official’ ACHOA calendar. , and Procedures for, meetings of standing or special committees shall be as prescribed by the chairman of each such standing or special committee and shall follow the same protocol as prescribed by the ACHOA. , and Meetings of standing or special committees may be called by the Board, President, or Board liaison of the standing or special committee.”

Comment 25: Article III, Section 3.11:

Change “The Board or the President may from time to time create and appoint such advisory committees as it deems necessary appropriate with specific charters that consist of no more than two directors or persons who are not directors, but such advisory committees shall not be deemed committees having the authority of the Board and shall not exercise any powers of the Board. Notice of, and procedures for, meetings of advisory committees shall be as prescribed by standard ACHOA practices. The chairman of each such advisory committee may call and announce, for public participation, and meetings of the advisory committees that may also be called by the Board, or the President or the chairman of the advisory committee.” The version submitted in the draft gives too much power to the president of the Board without appropriate over sight.

Comment 26: Article III, Section 3.12, subsection i:

Change “the amendment or repeal of the Articles, or adopting adoption of any plan or merger or consolidation with another corporation.”

Comment 27: Article III, Section 3.13:

ADD after last sentence ‘Such documented actions are to be made available for any member of the ACHOA’s review 9 calendar days prior to the aforementioned Board meeting.’

Comment 28: Article IV:

Comment ‘What’s missing are the specifics on which Board member is responsible for Operations and has the job of over sight of those duties. Additionally, the responsibility for over sight of the management company seems to have been overlooked. If the entire Board is responsible, then there is no over sight.’

Comment 29: Article V, Section 5.02:

ADD ‘as well as sound governance practices.’

Posted in ACHOA, ACHOA BOD, ACHOA Bylaws, ACHOA Governing Documents, ACHOA Governing Documents Committee | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

REBLOG: What Concerned Neighbors of ArrowCreek (CNA) and Better Friends of ArrowCreek (BFA) Forgot

Posted on November 30, 2015 by arrowcreek411

WHAT CONCERNED NEIGHBORS OF ARROWCREEK (CNA) AND BETTER FRIENDS OF ARROWCREEK (BFA) (WHOEVER THEY ARE) “FORGOT”

Posted on December 1, 2015 by ArrowCreekTruth

The reason this blog has taken so long to write is that it was assumed that the above two entities would do what is expected of groups before they send information to the community. However, they did not report to the community important facts about the sale of golf course to the HOA. Or they “forgot” to relate those important facts.

The $1,972,398 referenced is ONLY the court administered cost. Both of those entities “forgot” to tell the community about the FACT that the FOA has assumed and will pay six Special Assessment District (SAD) payments totaling $761,130. That the FOA has to pay these payments is manifestly obvious because it is in the LOI in paragraph 3 where it says “Subject property will be free and clear of any taxes or penalties and SAD to be paid at or prior to settlement by FOA.” Clearly CNA and BFA knew or should have known that the FOA had to pay the SAD but “forgot” to tell the community.

Did the CNA or BFA think there would be no attorney’s fees or costs for the bankruptcy or fees to close the sale? The FOA incurred #101c168 attorney’s fees, $9978 sales tax deposit, $7487 SD&O insurance, $7125 escrow costs, and $2987 miscellaneous costs. CNA and BFA “forgot” to tell the community about these costs totaling $889,575.

THE TOTAL COST TO PURCHASE THE COURSE IS $2,773,314 NOT $1,972,398. The CNA AND BFA “FORGOT” $899,575 of costs to purchase the course.

The next big cost the CNA and BFA “forgot” is the $1.3 million the FOA is spending in good faith to repair past damage due to neglect and upgrade the course, in order to build a thriving entity that enhances the overall value of our community. The investment will benefit all of us, if ArrowCreek is the premier 36-hole golf course community in the area.

****************************************

Note to ArrowCreek Truth from ArrowCreek411:

Maybe what FOA and ArrowCreek Truth “Forgot” was that FOA hasn’t told the WHOLE ArrowCreek Community any of the above dollar “Facts” in writing before! So, THANK YOU!! Those who have access to time and computer systems have been able to get at FACTS that are out in legal documents in the judicial system and have shared them – but those facts have been denied and denounced without any explanation by “the other” side. However, the FACTS according to the FOA? Well, we are still waiting for them! Bring them on! Do tell! How about telling the WHOLE ArrowCreek Community how much of the $1.3 million is going towards the DIRT that we are being pushed to buy? So, given the breakout exposed above, the ArrowCreek Community is expected to reimburse the FOA for all its expenses of the last year? So, whose idea was this any way? What exactly was the idea? Why wasn’t the ArrowCreek Community asked at the begnning of this mess what the WHOLE COMMUNITY wanted?

Assumptions?? Speaking of assumptions, who is assuming the WHOLE ArrowCreek Community is willing to assume this prize package? What is the break out of the one year track record the FOA has just finished? What is the FOA one year plan, five year plan? Why should we ArrowCreek owners make this investment? Give us undeniable facts, please! The “Truth” on ArrowCreek Truth is JUST AS opinionated as what can be found on ArrowCreek411. At least ArrowCreek411 does not censor or twist opinions that do not match our own! So far, people are surmising that the FOA Plan is to get as much money as possible and laugh all the way to the bank! PLEASE DO TELL US THAT ISN’T SO! The ArrowCreek Community is much bigger than the little group that meets at the Golf Clubhouse! The WHOLE community has been waiting for MONTHS to get the details of this secret story! PLEASE DO TELL!!!!

Posted in ACHOA, ACHOA BOD, ACT, ArrowCreek, ArrowCreek 411, ArrowCreek Golf Property Tax Burden, ArrowCreek HOA, ArrowCreek411, Better Friends of ArrowCreek, CNA, Concerned Neighbors of ArrowCreek | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

ACHOA 12/01/15 BOARD MEETING CANCELLED!

Posted on November 30, 2015 by arrowcreek411

ACArrow

The ACHOA SPECIAL BOARD MEETING FOR DECEMBER 1, 2015 HAS BEEN POSTPONED.

The informational packet materials to be discussed at the meeting are not yet finalized. Therefore, the board meeting has been postponed. A new meeting date will be announced as soon as it is scheduled.

Sincerely,

The ArrowCreek HOA Board of Directors

For questions regarding the ArrowCreek HOA or the information in this note, please contact Associa Sierra North at acservice@associasn.com. Or by phone at 775-626-7333. Thank you.

Posted in ACHOA, ACHOA BOD, ArrowCreek, ArrowCreek 411, ArrowCreek411 | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Letter to the Candidates: Dave Steele, Robert McDonald, Bob Kirtley

Posted on November 29, 2015 by arrowcreek411

November 27, 2015
From: A team of neighbors

Thank you Dave Steele, Robert McDonald, and Bob Kirtley for your candidacy and your commitment to this community, offering a new perspective and new direction for Arrowcreek. We certainly appreciate your pledge to maintain low HOA fees, and improve the amenities we already have as a community. Thank you also for explaining your views on why the current proposal for the purchase of the golf course land is not in the best interest of Arrowcreek homeowners, and for offering to at least look at different options.

Two of the Friends of Arrowcreek (FOA) supported candidates, Mr. Paul Burkett and Ms. Robin Rakusin (current board VP), as committee members and board member, already have had years to achieve most of the goals and fullfil the promises listed on their candidacy statements and on arrocreektruth. Both are members of the Arrowcreek Community Club Committee (ACCC), the committee negotiating with the FOA. Both have been advising the HOA board and Ms. Rakusin has been voting with the HOA board on its path towards a vote regarding the purchase of the golf course land that has polarized this community. There was no obligation to bring this proposal to homeowners by the board or its committees.

Mr. Burkett also currently is a co-chairman of the Communications Committee (CC). As such, he has been in a leading role guiding the strategy of informing homeowners regarding the golf course land purchase. The CC’s recommendation to finally allow an open debate format for the upcoming informational meetings was rejected by the board. We will be limited again by the old, regimented format of presentations followed by Q&A’s. This format has not worked in the past during HOA meetings. It has left many questions unasked and unanswered, prohibiting homeowners from knowing all the possible implications of the purchase of the land under the 36 holes the golf course. In addition, multiple public requests during HOA board meetings by homeowners for more detailed information were rejected, denied, or left unanswered by the ACCC’s spokesperson, Rich Kenny, and the current board. This hardly satisfies the need for transparency, open communication and discussion. We feel we truly need to replace the old ways with a fresh approach as envisioned by you three gentlemen.

Because you stand for open communication and transparency, we hope with you as new board members, we homeowners will have a chance of getting answers to the most immediate and pressing issue this community is facing: the golf course land purchase. Some of the main questions we have for you are:

1. What is the market value for the 475 acres of golf course land we are supposed to buy for $ 3.3M plus over $1M in interest? The Letter of Intent (LOI) does not include a purchase contingency based on a current assessment of the property’s value. Homeowners are expected to pay more for 475 acres than the FOA paid for 545 acres that also included the assets of the club house and other buildings/ facilities. Will you, Mr. Steele, Mr. McDonald, and Mr. Kirtley look into the option of negotiating a better purchase price for homeowners?

2. Homeowners will have no control over the FOA’s golf course business, nor will they have any control over when the FOA decides to downsize or declare bankruptcy. However, if the HOA ends up owning the golf course land, the failure of the Golf Club will directly increase homeowners’ financial liabilities in those cases. Is there a possibility of renegotiating the related terms of the purchase proposal?

3. What are the cost estimates for maintenance and replacement of the golf cart paths, bridges, viaducts and, most importantly, the base irrigation system we homeowners will be assessed for on top of the initial $31/m for the loan/reserve fund/property tax?

4. What is the basis of the recurring argument that we homeowners need to buy the golf course land to preserve our fire prevention zones? Is the FOA not responsible for that as the current owner of the land?

5. What is the basis of the recurring argument that homeowners need to buy the golf course land to prevent development? There are many obstacles to rezoning and development: https://arrowcreek411.com/2015/11/07/debunking-the-myth-of-developing-new-homes/. Would another obstacle not be the fact that the FOA LLC would have to decide who of its own shareholders, or who of its AC golf club members would accept having houses built on the golf course which they see directly from their homes, and accept the purported loss in home values? Would the HOA have any control over possible lawsuits that could once again taint the image of the AC community? Incidentally, Paul Burkett and Mark Toomey (the third candidate endorsed on arrowcreektruth by Mr. Gary Pestello, FOA chairman) were among the former litigants in 2006 as was Mr. Pestello.

6. What is the basis of the recurring argument that we homeowners need to buy the golf course land to prevent the courses from going brown? Would that not reduce the resale value of the golf course land for its current owners, the FOA LLC? The FOA’s chairman, Gary Pestello, did say that the FOA is prepared to do it on their own. This statement quoted in the RGJ has not been retracted to my knowledge. Will you Mr. Steele, Mr. McDonald, and Mr. Kirtley look into the option of taking Mr. Pestello up on his word and let the FOA own and manage the golf club like the golf club members in Montreux?

7. What is the basis of the recurring argument that we homeowners need to buy the golf course land to preserve property values? Month after month, the Washoe County Assessor reports have indicated that homes off the golf course trend to market price.

Secondly, proximity to open space, not necessarily golf courses, appears to be of increasing value these days (http://www.wsj.com/articles/luxury-home-developers-latest-pitch-unspoiled-nature-1446734336). However, the positive effect of golf courses or other kinds of green or open space diminishes very quickly, as “rapidly as 100 feet” (see: Do and Grudnitski (1995), referenced in the UNR Literature Review of Home Values). Buying and maintaining the golf course land is costly to homeowners. If we end up owning the land, what other options of nonprofit use do you see that would limit the financial burden of repurposing, and improve quality of life for all homeowners?

8. Why would allowing free enterprise to prevail not be the best option?

Mr. Steele, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Kirtley: We hope you will be elected to the HOA board. We hope the upcoming informational meetings will allow you three gentlemen to provide homeowners with some much needed answers.

Donna, Ellie, and a team of neighbors

Posted in ACCC, ACHOA, ACHOA BOD, ACHOA BOD Candidate, ACHOA Communications Committee, ArrowCreek, ArrowCreek 411, ArrowCreek Community Club, ArrowCreek Community Club Committee, ArrowCreek HOA, ArrowCreek411, Board of Directors Practices, Communication Committee | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

Giving Thanks for All Our Friends and Family

Posted on November 26, 2015 by arrowcreek411

TG

We are thankful for all of our friends and family on this day and every day. There are those who left us too soon that we think about often and fondly – especially when something happens to trigger a memory. Then there are those still here whose friendship we treasure – and some we don’t! No matter what, we want to wish you all a fine Thanksgiving!

Remember to share kindness with strangers as well. We all can mellow with some peace and tranquility.

AshlandOR112515(Mark Swegar)

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

Posted in ArrowCreek 411, ArrowCreek411, Thanksgiving | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Here Comes the Truth!

Posted on November 26, 2015 by arrowcreek411

hctt

Gottcha!

Posted in Reno Entertainment, Truth | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

TMWA: Summer Water-use Savings Paid Off

Posted on November 25, 2015 by arrowcreek411

Today’s Reno Gazette Journal had a front page article about Truckee Meadows Water Authority (TMWA) proclaiming that the Summer Water-use Savings Paid Off! We did good! Groundwater made quite a difference this year.
watercycles2
What is the water cycle?
The water cycle is the continuous process water goes through on earth shown in the diagram below. Surface water, primarily from oceans or other freshwater storage, undergoes “evaporation” into the atmosphere. Along with evaporation is “transpiration” (or evapotranpiration), where water vapor is also released from plants and animals. Also, “sublimation” occurs when frozen water vaporizes without first melting. All this water vapor is stored in the atmosphere until finally undergoing condensation when the air becomes sufficiently saturated, forms into droplets, and falls to the ground by way of “precipitation” in rain, snow, etc. Frozen precipitation is generally stored until it seasonally melts and joins other liquid water in streams, rivers, and other surface runoff as it makes its way back to the oceans or other freshwater storage areas. A portion of this surface runoff also sinks into underground aquifers, or groundwater, that also is eventually released into the oceans. The cycle then begins all over again. A printable PDF (11×17) of the USGS Water Cycle poster below can be found here.

Posted in ArrowCreek 411, ArrowCreek411, Conserving Water, TMWA, Truckee Meadows Water Authority | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Reblog: Transparency

Posted on November 25, 2015 by arrowcreek411

Posted on November 22, 2015 by ArrowCreekTruth

I attended the Meet the Candidates night on November 17, and the issue of “transparency” was repeatedly mentioned. A group feels that the current BOD is not being “transparent”. In the last year I have been to many HOA Board meetings and at virtually every meeting Ron Duncan is present with a group of friends. They are repeatedly recognized and are often the most vocal people in the room. Wayne Kruchen is also present with the same result.

I have been appointed to the Communications Committee and Mr. Duncan and Mr. Kruchen are present at virtually all of our meetings. Susan Duncan is actually on the Communications Committee, as is John McGhee. Mrs. Duncan is also on the Communications subcommittee that I chair, so Mr. Duncan knows immediately what occurred at the subcommittee meetings.

I also attended the last meeting of the ACCC and Mr. Duncan was present with several others who were again recognized and spoke. The importance of Mr. and Mrs. Duncan, John McGhee and Wayne Kruchen being present and recognized is that they are involved with the people who are opposed to the purchase of the golf land by the HOA from the FOA, so they are apparently getting plenty of opportunity to express their side and provide input.

The complaint of a lack of “transparency” is never accompanied with specifics, so I wanted to state that it appears that notice of the meetings is being given and people with various views are accorded the right to present their positions. I believe the current BOD is being very transparent and is giving the community plenty of opportunity to provide input to help guide the policymakers to proper decisions.

Harold Albright

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
A Response From Mr. Duncan:

Mr. Albright,

Thank you for bringing this important issue to the community’s attention. However, the above article is short on facts and long on personal observations.

The facts are that the ACHOA BOD became more transparent due to the participation of the very people referenced in this BLOG post. Prior to their participation, decisions of the BOD were totally hidden and only announced at the bi-monthly BOD Board meetings or in the ACHOA Newsletter. Committee meetings were not regularly posted to the ‘official’ ACHOA calendar so that citizens could attend those meetings, even though they are still scheduled between 9 and 5 Monday thru Friday which prevents working families, who compose a majority of the residents of ArrowCreek, from attending. Thus, a couple of people cited above are able to make those meetings and represent the majority that cannot attend. Transparency in ArrowCreek, still has a ways to travel.

Since last April, there’s been a marked increase in the visibility/ transparency of meetings, which has allowed some of the residents to attend the ‘during the day’ meetings. Prior to last April, e-mails reveal that ‘secret’ meetings were held with respect to the ‘elephant in the room (e.g. The acquisition or not of the 475 acres of Non-residential property).’ Those e-mails reveal that in April 2014 Mr. Burkett set up a meeting with Mr. Pestello, Mr. Kenny, Mr. Fox, Ms. Rakusin, Mr. Reeder, Mr. Anderson and Arnold Palmer Golf. Until a request was made by an ArrowCreek owner for these records, this meeting was shielded from ArrowCreek owners view and knowledge. Subsequent e-mails have revealed that the ArrowCreek Club Committee (ACCC) was meeting ‘in secret’ sessions, even though they were supposed to be open to ALL owners.

It’s true that this practice of not announcing committee meetings has improved and we now have greater visibility/transparency. However, the practice of holding unannounced meetings, although less frequent, continues today. A recent example was the very committee referenced in the above BLOG. The Communications Committee, which the author of the above BLOG attended, derived and put forward a balanced schedule of events to get to a vote on the acquisition of the Non-residential 475 acres. Following that meeting the Chair of the Committee took the information to ‘The BOD.’ You won’t find any minutes of that meeting. However, subsequent to that meeting the ACCC announced that they over rode the Communications Committee recommendations and came up with a ‘Holiday’ schedule to have the community vote by late December. The body of work required to support this tight schedule did not and does not match the need for the community to have enough information, or completed documentation, to make an informed decision.

So, have the BLOG named individuals enhanced ‘TRANSPARENCY’ of Committee and Board actions? YES!

Is there still more to be done? YES!

Mr. Steele, Mr. Kirtley and Mr. McDonald are committed to improving that ‘transparency’ as noted at the candidates forum on 17 November.

Ron Duncan

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
A Response From Mrs. Duncan:

So Hal Albright, you make the above statement: “Mrs. Duncan is also on the Communications subcommittee that I chair, so Mr. Duncan knows immediately what occurred at the subcommittee meetings.”

I pity your low mores. I was a “middleman” between two conflicting parties. My being on the communications committee or your subcommitte had nothing to do with when Mr. Duncan knew what occurred. My original stance was to wait until things got posted to the Associa website. The one-sidedness of the situation got out of hand. Communication was not a matter of fact. I had to fight off the lies and assumptions. I am still fighting.

Posted in ACHOA, ACHOA BOD, ACHOA Communications Committee, ACT, ArrowCreek, ArrowCreek 411, ArrowCreek HOA, ArrowCreek411, Transparency | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

FAA Releases Proposed Drone Regulations To Take Effect Before The Holidays

Posted on November 25, 2015 by arrowcreek411

By Mark Lelinwalla, Tech Times | November 23, 2:08 PM

Can the Federal Aviation Administration beat out the blitz of drones sold this holiday season by installing several strict rules?

Well, it seems like it’s going to try. The New York Times is reporting that the FAA outlined proposed drone regulations in a report released Monday, with the aim that they’re approved ahead of an influx of new drone owners expected this holiday season.

With the Consumer Technology Association estimating that 400,000 drones will be sold this holiday season, such proposed regulations would see to it that every one of those unmanned aircraft would have to be registered with the federal government with the machine’s information stored in a national database, according to the Times.

The rules would have owners registering their unmanned aircraft with the federal government with the machine's information stored in a national database. Each drone would have to have a registration number marked on it. (Photo : Bruce Bennett | Getty Images News)

The rules would have owners registering their unmanned aircraft with the federal government with the machine’s information stored in a national database. Each drone would have to have a registration number marked on it.
(Photo : Bruce Bennett | Getty Images News)

The process will mark each drone with a registration number, while the Times reports that owners will have the option of submitting their names, addresses, email addresses and phone numbers for the federal database as well.

The newspaper is also reporting that the FAA created a special drone task force within its agency to help make these proposed regulations.

Despite this appearing as a crackdown on drones, the FAA’s task force seemingly wants the public to know that it compromised with tech companies to not have the rules be as strict as they might appear.

“We tried to write it in as generic a flavor as possible,” said head of Google X’s drone project, Dave Vos, to the Times.

He added that, with the “consensus we reached, everyone is quite happy here.”

Posted in Drones | Tagged | Leave a comment