The Public Improvement District #30 (PID#30) for Poudre Overlook held a meeting on Friday August 5, 2022. The only clue homeowners got was a sandwich board placed there by Board Member, Buck Hammond, on August 2 – just 3 days prior. The meeting only announced the time and place, which was outdoors somewhere at the end of Headwater Drive in the cul-de-sac.
The meeting minutes are posted on the Larimer County website at this url: https://apps.larimer.org/engineering/impdist/Poudre%20Overlook/MIN_08_05_2022.pdf
It is unknown how many homeowners attended the meeting, but the POHOA Board was not represented at the meeting, nor was there any communication with the Board regarding the agenda, nor any request to make this meeting known through the HOA website, through the Bulletin announcement system, by email, or any USPS mailing. If you didn’t see or could not read Mr. Hammond’s handwriting on the sandwich board, you probably missed it. In an informal sampling of homeowners by going door to door down Headwater, I have yet to find a single homeowner that was aware of the meeting, let alone the agenda.
According the minutes in paragraph number 5: “Mr. Hammond then made a motion to raise taxes $40,000 annually for PID #30 to cover the long term operational costs for road maintenance (see attachment). Mr. Knight seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.”
I first became aware of the meeting minutes account of events when, after the PID Board asked the POHOA Board of Directors to post something about the replacement of sections of sidewalk on September 15 via email. I responded with some questions about the reasons for the replacement, the cost, and whether this was budgeted for at PID. The response from Mr. Hammond was that Mr. Knight had already made a post in the informal POHOA Facebook Group telling homeowners and residents about the scope and schedule – which really didn’t address my questions.
So, I inquired further about this topic, and in particular, about the $40k annual mill levy. The phrasing in the minutes made it seem like this was a new tax which would average an expense of $459 per household until 2045. The minutes described a “shortfall”: “Mr. Hammond then gave the homeowners that attended the meeting a brief review of the long-term financial outlook for the PID, including documentation from the county, detailing the need to raise revenue to cover the expected shortfall for road maintenance and paving in by 2045 as well as the revenue required to cover that shortfall. The homeowners were also informed that 5-6 stones of the sidewalk within various areas of the HOA will be replaced in Q3-Q4.”
I asked Mr. Hammond to provide the attachment and “documentation from the county”, but he did not actually respond with that documentation. Instead, he appears to have organized with one of the other Board Members and their immediate neighbors (literally 5 of the neighbors are in adjacent homes, with two across the street) to have me removed from the POHOA Board. A Petition with signatures from 9 households who are basically the same group who, in 2019, were known as “The Niners” because they demanded that the Board be expanded to 9 Board Members. That effort was shut down by a community-wide vote at the Annual Homeowner’s Meeting in November of 2019, with a resounding 44-17 vote against expansion of the Board.
The problem is, the action taken raises questions about the evaluation by Larimer County reported in the December 8, 2020 PID minutes, which is less than 2 years ago.
The url for those minutes can be found here: https://apps.larimer.org/engineering/impdist/Poudre%20Overlook/MIN_12_08_2020.pdf
At that time, it was reported that PID#30 had sufficient funding through mill levy taxes going forward indefinitely. According to those minutes: “Residents have probably noticed the wearing away of asphalt in certain areas of the subdivision. The layer affected is something called a slurry seal which was laid down about eight years ago to protect the original roadway. At this point in time that wearing away has been considered largely cosmetic. But in the near future the compromised roadway will need to be addressed. This could mean another top layer being applied like a slurry seal or a chip seal. But it could also mean a bigger operation which includes scraping off the top layers and applying a new 2” layer of asphalt. This is what was done in Solar Ridge a couple of years ago. Fortunately, our budget analysis indicates the PID account should be able to handle any of these projects.“
In those same December 2020 meeting minutes, it was acknowledged that the streets are degrading, and that snow removal has been a persistent issue. So, I asked the PID Board about whether better preventative maintenance could extend the life of the roadway, as well as the sidewalks. I noted that in 2021, the POHOA Board reported that contractors would charge the same amount for doing ALL of our sidewalks vs. just the short “common area” sections. But, that Board voted down that action on the grounds that some homeowner might complain about their sidewalks being cleared for them.
Since we just had to replace 7 sections at a cost that has yet to be revealed, it would seem that if we removed all snow sooner from the sidewalks, and perhaps prevented the bonding of ice on our streets, we could avoid having to raise taxes. So, I asked for the “attachments” mentioned in the 8/5/22 minutes, as well as any cost estimates provided by the County.
After waiting 3 weeks, instead, the answer came as a Petition: To have me removed from the POHOA Board of Directors. The petition itself gives no reason, but this appears to be a means of silencing a potential critic (although, after seeing the documentation, I might actually agree the costs are justified – and then simply advocate for better preventative maintenance).
As some of you may have noticed, any attempts to add to the agenda of the POHOA Board have been shut down by Director Ballweber, who also serves two Officer roles as President AND Secretary. This means she not only schedules the meetings (often with barely 2 days notice), but she is dictating the agenda. Any attempts to modify or amend the agenda have been completely rejected. And, while I have proposed Action Without A Meeting or even informal worksession discussions, Director Ballweber absolutely refuses to engage in even email discussions of such matters.
In the most recent reply from Mr. Hammond, he once again referred me to the Larimer County PID website. This was fortunate, as my questions about proper notice and representation before escalating our taxes led me to review the PID Bylaws. And, wouldn’t you know it, the PID is not actually following it’s own rules about meeting notification.
The PID Bylaws are published at this URL: https://apps.larimer.org/engineering/impdist/Poudre%20Overlook/Documents/Bylaws%20-%20Poudre%20Overlook.pdf
In Article VIII Paragraph B, the meetings “shall” be scheduled as determined at the Annual Meeting, which immediately follows the POHOA Annual Homeowner’s Meeting. The problem is, no schedule for meetings in the following year appears to have ever been published.
But, the PID Board is allowed to schedule meetings per Paragraph C of the same Article. The Bylaws require, however, that notice be posted at the mailboxes along Headwater – and there is no mention at all of “sandwich boards”. In addition, Article IX Paragraph C requires that when a Special Meeting is scheduled, which the August 5 meeting appears to be, the agenda “shall” be posted with the notice. The PID Board failed to do so, even though the criteria of “if possible” was obviously there. The PID Board could also have coordinated with the POHOA Board to post the notice and agenda on the Frontsteps website, they could have posted a Bulletin, sent an email, or mailed a notice.
Instead, they quietly set up a sandwich board for a meeting to be held at 5pm on a Friday, which perhaps is only exceeded in inconvenience by scheduling on a Sunday Morning. The outdoor venue, particularly when it was in the middle summer at peak temperatures, also makes it less likely that homeowners will attend and participate. It’s almost like the purpose of scheduling and avoiding posting the agenda was to keep away those who might comment or contest the action.
The fact that notice requirements were not followed actually creates an opportunity for homeowners who may question the decision and action to challenge it, including legally, because the Open Meetings Act requirements were not followed, as well as the Bylaws.
But, for raising these issues, instead of simply providing the documents, the response appears to be retaliatory – to have me removed from the POHOA Board. I visited one of the petitioners who would answer their door, and they refused to state even a single grievance, if there is some other explanation. And, when I asked Director Ballweber about whether any reasons were given, she told me to “resign”, which I believe indicates that she is taking direction from Mr. Flanary and other signatories to the petition.
Now, there are some details I’ve found within the minutes and budget that raise additional questions. However, I will table them for the opportunity to ask the PID Board directly. So far, questions by email have been dodged with various excuses. I’ve also contacted the Larimer County Engineering Department, which oversees PIDs, and they told me that they prefer not to give the documents directly to homeowners, and that I must continue to beg the PID Board for them. I do not find it reasonable that the numbers are withheld from inquiring homeowners.
The timing of this controversy could not be worse. We are in the middle of dealing with a sensitive issue regarding a dog-on-dog incident that has the whole neighborhood worried about what will be done. To now have a Board Member Removal meeting in the middle is not putting the needs of the community first. Mr. Hammond, Mr. Flanary, and Mr. Denenberg, who are the perennial leaders of this political group (at one time calling themselves the Poudre Overlook Advocates or POA) appear to be in a rush to have this Board Removal meeting as soon as October 19, and Director Ballweber appears eager to oblige the request. Mr. Clay Jones has attempted to mediate, as he has expressed the same concern with timing at the last meeting on 10/6, but has not received a positive response.
What’s even more nonsensical is that the POHOA Board has never actually determined which Board Members have which terms (1, 2, or 3 years). Usually, in these situations, the Directors draw straws (or some other manner of random choice) to determine terms. It’s quite possible that I would draw the short-term straw, making the need to rush into such a Special Meeting . . . moot. All these folks could simply run for the Board and probably get more votes than me. Instead, they appear to want to embarrass or defame me – and new evidence has emerged that Director Ballweber has spent the summer trying to make disappear (will be published at a later date).
And, it’s noted that the Petitioners all had an opportunity to serve on the Board themselves in May, while we continue to have 2 open seats. They’ve equated asking reasonable questions that are relevant with harassment, and convinced those who aren’t even attending meetings to sign petitions without stated reasons or grievances.
This begs us to revisit the 10% quorum threshold in our Bylaws for removing a Board member, when the state requirement is 20%. The statutes allow the Bylaws to supersede state law – in spite of Director Ballweber and Mr. Flanery repeatedly declaring that State Laws ALWAYS trump the governing documents. If just 9 homeowners (one of the signatories is not actually on the title, and is an apparent invalid signature) can put us through this without having to even list a single reason or grievance, our HOA politics are doomed to repeat this cycle every few years. It’s divisive and toxic, and appears to have caused at least one homeowner to put his house on the market this week.
I have gone door to door to talk with my neighbors, and encourage any who I have not yet reached to contact me with whether they have grievances about my actual performance as a Director. I would consider resigning if it prevented the homeowner who is going to sell their home to reconsider. However, I would like to remain on the Board and continue to serve. For those who cannot attend the Petitioner’s meeting, whenever it is scheduled, I’ve provided copies of a Proxy which they could give to me, or to anyone else they trust with their vote. Please contact me at pohoandy@gmail.com for a copy if you cannot find it on our HOA website.
In the end, it would be best to raise this taxing issue at the Annual Homeowner’s Meeting as an agenda item, and perhaps let homeowners vote on what they want. The cynical way the PID Board went about this with inadequate notice should not be our standard for how we do business.
One thought on “Taxation Without Representation: Poudre Overlook PID#30 Raises Taxes $40k Without Proper Notice to Homeowners”