Do We Live in the Soviet Union? China? Or the Third Reich?

The below derogatory letter was received by Mr. Duncan, leader of the Concerned Neighbors of ArrowCreek (CNA), restricting the First Amendment right of freedom of speech to provide counter-arguments towards the purchase of the golf course/land or any other board issues.

The onerous restrictions being imposed by the ACHOA Board Of Directors applies to all owners within ArrowCreek. If we want property values to remain stable, actions needed to counter this policy/directive will definitely get the attention of local media.

Back in March CNA got the reading on this from the State of Nevada – The law is silent. There are no legal steps to prove existence of an organization under NRS-116. Please reread Speed Bumps and the Fog of Battle. So, the ACHOA believes it has pushed the issue back. We’ll just have to wait and see…..

ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY.

============================================
AC 7-22-15 RON DUNCAN – Response to Equal Time

July 22, 2015

RE: Nevada Revised Statute Section 116.31035 (Request for Equal Time)

Dear Mr. Duncan,

The Board of Directors for the ArrowCreek Homeowners Association, Inc. (ACHOA) have reviewed your numerous assertions concerning access to “Equal Space Communications” as detailed within Section 116.31035 of the Nevada Revised Statutes. As such, the ACHOA Board has determined that it is necessary to clearly state its position concerning the publication of written communications “under the same terms and conditions” and limited to the same “equal space”.

Despite your claims to the contrary, neither you nor anyone else has established that Concerned Citizens (“CNA”) is an organization of any kind recognized by any authority. At this time, the ACHOA Board has not recognized CNA as an organization under Nevada law. Therefore, there is no entity that qualifies to request any action to be taken by the Board under NRS § 116.31035. Furthermore, even if such an organization can be established, you will have to establish that you are, in fact, a representative of the organization and are authorized to act on its behalf. Unless, and until those two requirements have been met, your equal space written communications will not be published pursuant to subsection (1) of NRS §116.31035.

If you do eventually establish that such an organization exists to the satisfaction of the ACHOA Board and under Nevada law, and that you are its authorized representative, you must then provide the language you desire to have inserted or separately published in any ACHOA “official communication”. As unequivocally stated and required by NRS §116.31035, such language must be “. . . under the same terms and conditions” and is limited to “equal space”. There is NO PROVISION of Nevada law that allows you, even as a designated representative of an organization, to make any presentation at any meeting. The only remedy this section allows is that “…the official publication must, upon request and under the same terms and conditions, provide equal SPACE…” This request must be in writing and forwarded to the ACHOA Board for separate publication or inclusion in the ACHOA Official Communication. Proper vetting of the written request will occur prior to publication by the ACHOA Board. As a member, you are limited to member comments before or after a duly noticed meeting.

In addition, paragraph 2 of NRS § 116.31035 states that any ACHOA member may, if an official ACHOA Official Communication or Publication contains perceived views or opinions of the association that are contrary to the requesting ACHOA member’s views, request that the official publication provide the ACHOA member “EQUAL SPACE” under the same terms and conditions. The ACHOA member must cite, in writing, the specific view’s or opinion’s language from the Official Communication that the requesting member believes expresses a view or opinion that is contrary to the requesting member’s view or opinion. The ACHOA member must state in their written document the precise relief requested and detail the language under the same terms and conditions and within equal space as within the ACHOA Official Publication terminology. After proper vetting, the ACHOA Board will determine if the written request will be included within the Official Communication or Publication document or if the written document will be separately published as limited by the “EQUAL SPACE” requirements. The above is the current position of the ACHOA Board on these Official Communication or Publication issues pursuant to NRS § 116.31035, and as consistently cited by you in your direct communications to the ACHOA Board.

Sincerely,

ArrowCreek Homeowners Association, Inc, Board of Directors

Posted in ACHOA, ArrowCreek, CNA, CNAC, First Amendment, Freedom of Speech, Golf at ArrowCreek, HOA, Home Values, NRS, NRS 116.31035, Opposing View, Reno, Reno Real Estate | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

How Do You Spell NDA? How Did the ACHOA Spell NDA?

NDA is an acronym that stands for Non-Disclosure Agreement (or NonDisclosure Agreement) that is also known as a confidentiality agreement (CA), confidential disclosure agreement (CDA), proprietary information agreement (PIA), or secrecy agreement (SA).

If you want to read more about what NDAs are or what they are supposed to contain, continue reading below. Otherwise, click here to get to the pertinent ArrowCreek information.

According to wikipedia, an NDA is a legal contract between at least two parties that outlines confidential material, knowledge, or information that the parties wish to share with one another for certain purposes, but wish to restrict access to or by third parties. It is a contract through which the parties agree not to disclose information covered by the agreement. An NDA creates a confidential relationship between the parties to protect any type of confidential and proprietary information or trade secrets. As such, an NDA protects nonpublic business information.

NDAs are commonly signed when two companies, individuals, or other entities (such as partnerships, societies, etc.) are considering doing business and need to understand the processes used in each other’s business for the purpose of evaluating the potential business relationship. NDAs can be “mutual”, meaning both parties are restricted in their use of the materials provided, or they can restrict the use of material by a single party.

Types of NDAs

A non-disclosure agreement may be unilateral or bilateral, that is, it may bind only one party or multiple parties (typically two):

Unilateral NDA

A unilateral, or a one-way, agreement is where one party wants to disclose certain information to another party but needs the information to remain secret for some reason, perhaps due to secrecy requirements required to satisfy patent laws[More info in Understanding Confidentiality Agreements] or to make sure that the other party does not take and use the disclosed information without compensating the discloser.

Bilateral NDA

A bilateral, or mutual, agreement is where both parties will be supplying information that is intended to remain secret. This type of agreement is common when businesses are considering some kind of joint venture or merger.

Some practitioners insist on a mutual NDA in all cases, to encourage the drafter to make the provisions “fair and balanced” in case the drafter’s receiving-party client later ends up as a disclosing party, or vice versa (not an uncommon occurrence.

Content of NDAs

A nondisclosure agreement can protect any type of information that is not generally known. However, nondisclosure agreements may also contain clauses that will protect the person receiving the information so that if they lawfully obtained the information through other sources they would not be obligated to keep the information secret.[2][dead link] In other words, the nondisclosure agreement typically only requires the receiving party to maintain information in confidence when that information has been directly supplied by the disclosing party. Ironically, however, it is sometimes easier to get a receiving party to sign a simple agreement that is shorter, less complex and does not contain safety provisions protecting the receiver.[citation needed]

Some common issues addressed in an NDA include:[from Overview of Confidentiality Agreements]

  • outlining the parties to the agreement;
  • the definition of what is confidential, i.e. the information to be held confidential. Modern NDAs will typically include a laundry list of types of items which are covered, including unpublished patent applications, know-how, schema, financial information, verbal representations, customer lists, vendor lists, business practices/strategies, etc.;
  • the disclosure period – information not disclosed during the disclosure period (e.g., one year after the date of the NDA) is not deemed confidential;
  • the exclusions from what must be kept confidential. Typically, the restrictions on the disclosure or use of the confidential data will be invalid if
    • the recipient had prior knowledge of the materials;
    • the recipient gained subsequent knowledge of the materials from another source;
    • the materials are generally available to the public; or
    • the materials are subject to a subpoena – although many practitioners regard that fact as a category of permissible disclosure, not as a categorical exclusion from confidentiality (because court-ordered secrecy provisions may apply even in case of a subpoena). In any case, a subpoena would more likely than not override a contract of any sort;
  • provisions restricting the transfer of data in violation of national security;
  • the term and conditions (in years) of the confidentiality, i.e. the time period of confidentiality;
  • the term (in years) the agreement is binding;
  • permission to obtain ex-parte injunctive relief;
  • description of the actions need to be done with the confidential materials upon agreement ending;
  • the obligations of the recipient regarding the confidential information, typically including some version of obligations:
    • to use the information only for enumerated purposes;
    • to disclose it only to persons with a need to know the information for those purposes;
    • to use appropriate efforts (not less than reasonable efforts) to keep the information secure. Reasonable efforts is often defined as a standard of care relating to confidential information that is no less rigorous than that which the recipient uses to keep its own similar information secure; and
    • to ensure that anyone to whom the information is disclosed further abides by obligations restricting use, restricting disclosure, and ensuring security at least as protective as the agreement; and
  • types of permissible disclosure – such as those required by law or court order (many NDAs require the receiving party to give the disclosing party prompt notice of any efforts to obtain such disclosure, and possibly to cooperate with any attempt by the disclosing party to seek judicial protection for the relevant confidential information).
  • the law and jurisdiction governing the parties. The parties may choose exclusive jurisdiction of a court of a country.




ArrowCreek HOA NDAs

All that being said, the NDAs (Non-Disclosure Agreements) between the ArrowCreek Home Owners’ Association (ACHOA) and Arnold Palmer Golf Management (APGM) and the ACHOA and the Friends of ArrowCreek (FOA) have been finally released to the members of the ArrowCreek HOA. Here are the two NDAs governing the ArrowCreek HOA’s relationship with those two entities. Read them and note how comfortable you are that the ACHOA Board of Directors have your interests in hand. Read them and weep.

The NDA obtained July 24, 2015 by the Concerned Neighbors of ArrowCreek (CNA) between the ACHOA with APGM was signed August 1, 2014, — before the golf club went to bankruptcy court. It is here.

The NDA obtained by CNA on July 30, 2015, between the ACHOA and the FOA was signed April 6, 2015, and is here.

The Letter of Intent was signed December 5, 2014 between ACHOA BOD and FOA. It is available on the ArrowCreek HOA website if you login with your memberid. Section 4 of the agreement discusses the “signed Purchase Agreement must be executed no later than May 31, 2015 at 5:00 pm, or at a later date to be agreed upon in writing by the Parties. The close of escrow will take place no later than ninety (90) days after execution of the Purchase Agreement.”

LoIP

There has been no Purchase Agreement nor approved ACHOA Governing Documents to this date, at least as far as these homeowner authors are aware of. There has been no voting. We have heard of a proposal (that the ACHOA attorney has already charged the HOA for reviewing), but it hasn’t surfaced to normal owners yet.

Posted in ACHOA, APG, Arnold Palmer Golf Management, ArrowCreek, ArrowCreek Community Club, NDA, The Club at ArrowCreek | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

July 27 2015 FACT Update From the Washoe County Assessor Records

Here are UPDATED ‘FACTS’ from the Washoe County Assessor Records since the June 26, 2015 arrowcreek411.wordpress.com blog:

  1. ArrowCreek properties are still selling at a premium to those in Sparks and the North Valley.

    a.) Forty nine (49) properties were sold in ArrowCreek between 17 December 2014 and 13 July 2015 (This according to the Washoe County Assessor).

    b.) Eleven (11) of those properties were on the golf course (the property boundaries actually touch the golf course, not just have a ‘view’ of it). Eight (8) of those were homes with an average selling price of $220.19 per square foot. Three (3) were vacant lots with an average selling price of $190,117.78 per acre. (No change from last report.)

    c.) Thirty eight (38) properties sold that are not connected to the golf course. Thirty one (31) of those properties were homes with an average selling price of $227.80 per square foot. Seven (7) properties were vacant lots with and average selling price of $130,056 per acre.

    d.) Homes that do not have a boundary with the golf course are selling at a 3.3% premium to homes actually on the golf course.

    c.) Thirty eight (38) properties sold that are not connected to the golf course. Thirty one (31) of those properties were homes with an average selling price of $227.80 per square foot. Seven (7) properties were vacant lots with and average selling price of $130,056 per acre.

    e.) Vacant lots, however, are selling at a 46.18% premium if they have a common boundary with the golf course.

    f.) The trends for our property values indicates that over the past three months the values of homes off the golf course are trending to match those on the golf course, as shown in the table (see chart below). Green line represents homes NOT on the golf course. Blue line represents homes on the golf course.
  2. Prop_trends_AC072415

  3. The ACHOA (all of US) currently own 502 acres of vacant land. We haven’t implemented any of the already approved hiking trails or exercise stations on our land or improved the Residents’ Center.
  4. Only twenty one (21%) percent of our community identify with ‘golf.’ (Based upon the ACHOA sponsored UNR Demographic survey which reflects the National trend)
  5. The ACHOA Board is spending an awful lot of resources, especially legal hours at $275 per hour, to continue to look for a way to acquire the golf course should the Friends of ArrowCreek offer it for sale.

  6. Given ALL of the above ‘FACTS,’ do we really need another 525 acres? Especially when we’ve done nothing to enhance the property we already own.

    Let’s focus our energy on improving the amenities we currently have and expand those amenities by using our already available acreage. Let’s stop the wasteful energy and expenses of trying to purchase another 525 acres, NOW!

    By Ron Duncan


    Updated from June 26, 2015 posting Fact Update: Here Are Facts

    …which updates the June 4, 2015 posting You Want Facts: Here Are Facts.

    June 2015 Study on Golf Course Closure Impacts On Home Values in Northgate and D’Andrea.

Posted in ArrowCreek, Golf, Home Sales, Home Values, Truth | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Reminder: ACHOA – Community Informational Meeting #3 Today!

To: All ArrowCreek Homeowners,remember

You’re invited to Community Informational Meeting #3, pertaining to real estate challenges facing the ArrowCreek Homeowners Association (ACHOA).

Date: July 28, 2015
Place: The Club at ArrowCreek
Time: 5:30-7:30

This meeting will focus on real estate issues facing our community and not those faced by the Northgate golf course community or D’Andrea golf course community. Like past Communications Committee Informational Meetings, this meeting will provide factual information to ACHOA community members about numerous real estate issues that impact the value of your home or lot.

Home values and the stability of the real estate market within the gates of ArrowCreek.

Everyone who is a homeowner in ArrowCreek has the basic concern as to home value and market stability. What are the factors that make up home value: Square feet, lot size, views, condition of the home, and “how does two golf courses in the middle of the community impact the value of my home” and what factors within the community add or detract from market stability. Learn what buyers look for, and what impresses them when looking at our community from people who specialize in the marketing and selling ArrowCreek homes and properties.

The Communications Committee has invited a cross section of the leading real estate professionals all of whom have extensive experience in selling properties within the gates of ArrowCreek and surrounding areas. This will be a panel discussion format with time for questions and answers.

Guest panelists

David Morris, – CBR, CRS, CLHMS – President of the David Morris Group affiliated with REMAX Realty.

David has over thirty-five years in real estate and is recognized as being in the top 1% nationally. David has been involved with ArrowCreek properties since the inception of the community having consulted with Monterey Development in the planning and lot layout of Granite Pointe. He is a social member of The Club at ArrowCreek.

Scott Shandrew – Realtor, Dickenson Realty.

Scott is a 13 year ArrowCreek residential homeowner and has specialized in ArrowCreek properties since the beginning of ArrowCreek. Scott has been a realtor for the past 10 years and consistently ranked in the top 1% in Northern Nevada

Tim Flynn – ABR, e-PRO, – Realtor, Coldwell Banker Select Real Estate.

Tim has over 28 years of real estate experience. Tim’s expertise is in selling properties in and around golf course communities having specialized in ArrowCreek and Montreux homes. Since the two communities were developed.

Diana Renfroe, – CRS, CDPE, ABR, SFR, NAR Green – Broker/Salesperson, Dickson Realty.

As a licensed broker for 27 years Diana is one of Dickson Realty’s top producers. Beginning with her first ArrowCreek transaction in 2003, Diana has specialized in ArrowCreek properties.

Donna Spear, CRS, CLHMS – Realtor, Chase International Real Estate.

Donna is a returning member of The Club at ArrowCreek. She is a former resident of ArrowCreek from 2001-2009 and is considered one of the leading real estate experts when it comes to ArrowCreek and surrounding areas.

Cristy Silverman, – Realtor, Keller Williams Realty.

Cristy is one of Keller-Williams top agents and has been for the past 15 years. She has sold multiple ArrowCreek properties.

Tom Reardon, SFR – Realtor, Trans Action Realty

Tom is a 15 year ArrowCreek homeowner and resident. For the past 10 years Tom has been one of the leading realtors specializing in ArrowCreek properties. He has served on HOA committees as both a volunteer and member.

This is the third community informational meeting presented by the Communications Committee in an effort to provide information and answer questions from homeowners. We invite you to attend and listen to knowledgeable professionals who will give their views on the marketability of ArrowCreek properties and what factors affect the buying or selling these properties. If you would like to see more community informational meetings and have a specific topic in mind that hasn’t been covered contact Jeannie Tarantino at the ASSOCIA website.

Sincerely,
ArrowCreek HOA Communications Committee

ArrowCreek Informational Meeting 3 7-28-15
AC 7-28-15 RE Informational Summary Update

Posted in ACHOA, Communication, Communication Committee, Real Estate Value, Realtor View 0f 89511 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Abandoned Golf Course Turned Into Solar Farm

New Use for old golf course…
solar-750x483

Incredible news: An abandoned and bankrupt golf course is being transformed into a solar power station by the Kyocera Corporation.

Last week, the business announced it would turn the former golf course in Kyoto into a 23-megawatt solar farm.

Once the solar power farm is finished and online (in 2017), it will generate enough electricity to power 8,100 homes. 

But the Kyocera Corporation has no intention of  stopping there: it aims to join with several other companies and build a second 92-megawatt solar plant on a golf course that was never completed in Kagoshima Prefecture.

As the Independent shares, there are plenty of golf courses than can be converted in the future. In the 1990’s, Japan experienced a sudden “golf boom,” and ended up constructing more than 2,000 new courses in just a few years. But since the fad has passed (some might say as quickly as it started), many golf courses have gone bankrupt and now hundreds exist – abandoned – across the countryside.

Thankfully, golf courses are the perfect place to build solar farms. The wide-open spaces receive plenty of sun making them prime real estate for the installation of solar panels.

Because many golf courses shut down in the US during the 2008 recession, cities in Florida, Utah, Kansas, and Minnesota are discussing ideas for turning many of those into solar power stations as well. It seems the owners recognize the potential for selling to energy companies and are looking to put their abandoned courses to good use.

Read more here .

Posted in Golf Course Closure, Land Re-Use, Land Use | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Proper Governance of ArrowCreek At Stake: Secret Shenanigans

By Don Smaltz, July 13, 2015

My sense of what is at stake is: It is not just the HOA’s purchase of the golf courses, but rather it is the very governance of our community, not only on the golf course purchase issues but future matters as well.

When we purchased our homes in Arrowcreek, we agreed to be bound by and comply with the CC&Rs, which together with the relevant Nevada Statutes provide the governance procedures and requirements for our community. In the past year,we have learned that:

1. In 2014, 36 residents of Arrowcreek who are golfers formed an LLC, Friends of Arrowcreek (FOA), and made a deal to buy the golf courses out of Bankruptcy – and sell it to the HOA. That deal was made with the Board’s officers and its Directors with the connivance of the Boards lawyers, Maddox, Segerblom, Canepa, and its Community Manager, Associa Sierra North (“Collaborators”).

Note Attachment 1-April 14, 2014, Email from Paul Burkett to Messrs. Kenny, Fox, Rakusin, Robertson,Reeder, Anderson and Tarantino,
Re: ACC Committee Meeting with Arnold Palmer Golf …Short term management issues for the management of the courses? …

Impact and duties for ACHOA as the leader in these efforts…Legal review and recommendations? …Transparency issues and information for the ACHOA membership? Town Hall meeting subjects?…

2. The fact of this deal was kept secret from the homeowners, and no survey or sampling was undertaken to determine if there was a consensus that the HOA should consider, let alone pursue, the possible purchase of the golf courses prior to the time the announcement was made to the HOA.

Note Attachment 2-Email August 24, 2014, Subject 8/26 BOD mtg; from Robin Hoa a/k/a Rakusin to Messrs. Kenny, Smith, Reeder, Burkett, Fox, Gurnee, Dickinson, Kirsch,Elliot, Ross, Tarantino- Since the cat is/will be out of the bag on Tues, and we expect a lot of people, I suggest a simple focus (probably golfer biased) survey to hand out and collect at the meeting …cost would be negligible to get a sense of support by the community and give us an idea of marketing work cut out for us…
E mail Response of Norm & Jan Reeder to Hoa a/k/a Ruskin and Kenny et al re 8/26/ board meeting:
I am reluctant to conduct a survey at this very early stage …most likely the response we get this week will be based more on emotion vs. thinking through the issue which will take some time coupled with additional meetings. I would de-emphasize golf and focus on the benefits of being a social member of the new “Community Club”…

3. What the Board disclosed to the homeowners at the August 26, 2014 meeting was that the HOA may have to purchase the golf courses from the Bkcy court and that the HOA had only 3 options – It could let the courses go brown, keep them green, or operate them as golf courses and joint venture with Arnold Palmer Golf. These three options were expressly premised on the assumption that the Gulf Club went to Chapter 7 and no buyer came forward so that in order to control the future use of the property the HOA would purchase the course by assuming the $1.4 current of Aspen Sierra to the County. But that was not the situation – as the Board then well knew the property was in fact going to be purchased by either the FOA or a former affiliate of the Bankrupt– depending upon who the court decided made the higher bid. In that resentation the Board never discussed that when the property was purchased it would be operated as a golf course by the new owner and that the concerns that the HOA would have to buy the property to keep it green and operational were the responsibilities of the new owner and not the HOA . In effect the HOA would have to do nothing – but instead it stated Do nothing was discussed but dismissed due to lack of control over land use and threat posed by unmitigated fire risk. See Recommendations for Dealing with the Aspen Sierra Bankruptcy presented August 26, 2014.

4. The Board represented that the FOA agreed that, after its acquisition of the courses, the HOA would have a limited time to purchase them from FOA, which would sell them at a profit – and the HOA would joint venture the operation of the courses with CGMI which had the right to use the name Arnold Palmer Golf.

5. While the Board and its collaborators were aware of the identity of the 36 members of the FOA, they agreed not to identify them to the HOA membership – lest allegations of conflicts of interest be made to the effect that the members of the FOA were making a profit from the sale.

6. Since Dec 2014, this group has been contesting the Boards efforts and procedures to have the HOA purchase these golf courses. However, in opposition to our efforts the Board and its collaborators have willfully and knowingly:

A. Misrepresented the facts;

B. Misrepresented the law;

C. Ignored the provisions of our governing documents;

D. Refused to recognize the rights of our opposition;

E. Repeatedly violated their obligations as fiduciaries to represent the best interests of the HOA members;

7. While our efforts have caused the Board to change its tack – and apparently they now propose to buy it and not necessarily operate it as a golf course – the Board will continue to push the HOA toward a purchase proposal.

8. Absent a court order, my expectation is that the Board will ultimately get this matter to the home owners for a vote, claiming that it only needs an affirmative vote of 50% plus 1 to succeed. When it fails to achieve that number on the first ballot, it will seek to hold the vote open until at least 50% of the entire HOA has been received.

9. In the interim – what has occurred in our community is unfortunate, to say the least. Consider what a schism has occurred between the members: those in favor of the purchase – primarily golfers – vs. those opposed. Statements uttered by some proponents, “Those opposing the purchase of the courses shouldn’t live here if they can’t afford it,” and others of similar ilk, have ghettoized our community. Aside from the adverse economic consequences which will occur if we purchase these courses,thus acquiring unlimited liability, this derisiveness alone can have an adverse effect upon
the desirability of buying a home in a community where such enmity prevails.

10. At stake is not only how the Board is able to disregard its legal obligations and procedures in this matter, but also the manner of our future governance.

11. Those Board members assuming that their costs of defense are covered by the Directors & Officers insurance policy–so they are effectively immune from financial liability–may be shocked to learn that the policy doesn’t cover intentional illegal acts.

Sincerely,

Don Smaltz

July 13,2015

Posted in ACHOA, FOA, Friends of ArrowCreek | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

ACHOA Still Pursuing Club at ArrowCreek Purchase In Spite of “Everything is off the table.”

The subject invoices indicate that the ACHOA Board continues to pursue the acquisition of The Club at ArrowCreek. The invoices indicate that a Tax attorney has been engaged to assist in this effort and that a ballot proposition has been put forward for evaluation. In the months following these invoices the Letter of Intent to the Friends of ArrowCreek has expired and the ACHOA Board is now pursuing the issue behind closed doors using a Non-Disclosure Agreement as their cover.

Enjoy the reading and spending of our money.

AC Maddox Invoices May 8 2015

AC Maddox Invoice May 21 2015

Posted in ACHOA | Tagged , | 1 Comment

TMWA Water Bill Not Less Even Though Saving

Have you tried to save 10% or more of your water only to get frustrated when the water bill comes and it is the same $$ amount as last month’s water bill?

Mark Robison of the Reno Gazette Journal researched what is going on. We are billed by the thousands of gallons we use. If you used 9,900 last time and 9,001 this time, they both get “rounded down” to 9,000 gallons. You do not get the rest for free. The truncated part gets added to your next month’s gallon total billed. If you continue to use less and less water, you will eventually knock down to 8,000 gallons billed. Of course, if you use 20,000 gallons a month, and you cut back 20 or 15%, you will see results faster.

See the article here.

TMWA says its average water customer uses 20,000 gallons a month during the summer in large part because they are watering outdoors.2015-07-15 07.24.17

This week’s question is about how the Truckee Meadows Water Authority calculates customer water usage.

Short answer: TMWA rounds to thousands of gallons because that’s the industry standard, it always rounds down, and, yes, sometimes you can’t tell how much you saved because of the rounding.

Full question

RGJ investigative reporter Anjeanette Damon once again provides this week’s question. She said she sometimes has trouble telling how much water she’s saved because TMWA’s bills are rounded to thousands of gallons. She wanted to know why.

As we discussed the issue, an example was formulated about why this matters: If you use 4,000 gallons in a month and you save 10 percent as requested, that means you used 3,600 gallons. Does TMWA round this up to 4,000 so it looks like you saved nothing?

Full answer

To find out, TMWA was contacted. Kim Mazeres, director of TMWA customer relations. responded via email. Here is our back and forth:

RGJ: Why does TMWA round to thousands of gallons instead of finer detail?

TMWA: Industry standard is to bill in either increments of thousand gallons or hundred cubic feet. Gallons are easier for customers to understand, so TMWA (like our predecessor) bills in thousand-gallon increments. Also, billing in smaller increments is not practical. For example, one thousand gallons costs $1.72. If we were to bill by the gallon, it would cost $.00172 cents per gallon.

RGJ: At what point are the gallons rounded? For example, does TMWA say you used 2,000 gallons when you reach 1,001 gallons on your meter? Or at 1,500 does it round to 2,000?

TMWA: We always give our customers the benefit in billing — gallons are always rounded down to the nearest thousand. For example, even if the water meter registers 19,999 gallons for the month, the customer is only billed for 19,000 gallons. The other 999 gallons is carried over to the next month.

RGJ: Is there anything customers can do to get more exact usage figures such as call customer service? If not, does TMWA have any other suggestion for how people can tell if they’ve been successful in saving 10 percent if their usage stats aren’t refined enough to show it?

TMWA: Since all monthly bills have the same standard and are rounded down, all customer usage is calculated the same way. Customer Service does not have access to any finer detail.

If a customer uses a small amount of water, it is true they may not see their savings in a given month as it may take several months for their reduction to reflect on their bill. However, these are typically not the customers who are using water outdoors, as our average residential customer uses over 20,000 gallons of water a month in the summer. Whether or not they are saving 10 percent is readily identifiable on every monthly bill.

Posted in Mark Robison, Reduce Water Use, Reno, Reno Gazette Journal, TMWA, Truckee Meadows Water Authority, Washoe County | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CNA Response to Segerblom Opinion of June 17

Concerned Neighbors of ArrowCreek have sent a response to ACHOA counsel Eva Segerblom’s unprofessional reply to Mr. Duncan’s query to the ACHOA Board concerning assuming additional debt to acquire the golf course/common land/destiny or whatever it is called these days:

Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 11:55 AM
Ms. Tarantino and Mr. Fox,

It has come to the attention of the Concerned Neighbors of ArrowCreek that there appear to be further limitations placed upon the subject acquisition.

The additional prohibition is contained in Article VII in the Articles of Incorporation. The prohibition states “The corporation shall have perpetual existence. Members of the corporation shall not be liable for payment of any corporate debts of any nature whatsoever nor shall any of the property of the members be subject to the payment of corporate debts to any extent whatever, except to the extent valid and proper assessments for corporate purposes provided herein create such liability or subject members’ property to assessment liens.” (Emphasis added)

The corporate purposes are defined in Article IV, a thru d. Hanging the organization’s hat on the phrase in paragraph d, “The Association may have purposes other than those specified here-in, but shall expressly be prohibited from representing the lot owners and residents within the subdivision on issues of land use, planning, municipal annexation, master plan amendments, growth, area development, or similar matters.” The purpose of the subject acquisition has not been articulated to the association nor has it been incorporated into the articles. The meaning of these articles is clear. Unless our purposes have been altered, no debt shall be taken-on by the members of the ACHOA Corporation other than that needed to fulfill Article IV.

I’m certain you’d like to get clarification of this issue from our ACHOA attorney prior to a vote on an acquisition. Currently, such a vote would certainly appear to violate our Articles of Incorporation as the proposed incurrence of debt does not fulfill any stated purpose.

With best regards,
Ron Duncan

The ACHOA Maddox, Segerblom and Canepa opinion received via Jeanne Tarantino e-mail on July 1, 2015, is here.

The CNA Spiegel, Liao & Kagay response sent via email July 14, 2015, is here.

Posted in ACHOA, ArrowCreek HOA, ArrowCreek411, HOA | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Caughlin Club and The Lakeridge Tennis Club

FOR SALE: The private Caughlin Club athletic club offers a 23,396 square foot clubhouse and 5,000 square foot preschool adjacent to the clubhouse. The site offers 9 championship tennis courts, a complete health center, a 25 meter swimming pool with children’s pool and whirlpool, and a full size gymnasium.

The Caughlin Club is part of Caughlin Ranch, in Reno Caughlin Ranch was developed in 1984 and is a 2,400 acre master planned community. This community is made up of ponds, walking trails, and extensive landscaping in the common areas, to make it one of Reno’ s most premier and sought after residential communities. …more

FOR AUCTION: Lakeridge Tennis Club is also in foreclosure on a $10M loan and headed for the courthouse steps on the 25th.

Posted in Caughlin Club, Lakeridge Tennis, Reno, Reno Real Estate | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment