Villages of Westcreek (San Antonio, Austin, Eagle Pass: architectural, financed, population)

[codeblue]

Originally Posted by guyo

the boards term is 2 years. Two are elected in one year and 3 are elected the following year with all serving a 2 year term.
I agree with the boards acquiring the homes that we have they were not purchased but taken for back homeowners assessments. My problem with this is it was not showed in the financial as assesses and the lack of willingness of the board to disclose this information. We have asked repeatedly and been stonewalled and do have records showing ownership.
As for the 4 students, in the karate, that the board forced to leave . The instructor is paying rent for the community center and each student is paying for the lessons. The majority of the children as residence of westcreek therefore, this was costing the villages of westcreek hoa nothing and was income to same. It goes back to, if i rent the community center should i only be allowed to have guests that are residences if so then there should not be guests allowed at the pool,etc. If i want to start a baseball team for the children of westcreek and only have 8 children that want to play is it right to tell them no because they needed on more player and were not allowed any outside people. Eventho, the program would be paid for by the players on the team and cost to vowc nothing?

The reason for the 1000 signatures on the petition is to show the board that there is enough interest in having a special meeting to recall the board and hopefully they would schedule said meeting. Ref. To the 1994 by-laws to see the requirements.

I realize that some of the people at the last meeting had gone to the hoa office and asked questions regarding different items on the flyer and were told what the board wanted them to hear which were not whole truths. Which is par for the course because we have been getting nothing but the runaround and half truths.

thank you guyo for enlightening us.

codeblue

[BamaSailor]

Originally Posted by guyo

The reason for the 1000 signatures on the petition is to show the board that there is enough interest in having a special meeting to recall the board and hopefully they would schedule said meeting. Ref. to the 1994 by-laws to see the requirements.

I see what you are saying about the Bylaws in paragraph 6.03. Couple of points related to that article:
1. It says "majority" when talking about the Members signing a petition. 1,000 still is not a majority of over 3,200 so be sure you're numbers are IAW the Bylaws to be legitimate.
2. That paragraph talks about how to call a Special Meeting but paragraph 7.05 does not say that a Special Meeting is required to remove Directors. That can be done at a Regular Meeting or at a Special Meeting. Directors are elected by a majority of Members present at the annual meeting and thus should be able to be removed by a majority of Members present at any meeting where they are desired to be removed.
[LEFT]Removal of Directors. At any regular or special meeting duly called, any one or
more of the Directors may be removed with or without cause by a majority of Members
entitled to vote, and a successor may then and there be elected to fill the vacancy thus
created. Any Director who has three (3) consecutive unexcused absences from Board
meetings or who is delinquent in the payment of assessments for more than thirty (30)
days may be removed by a majority vote of the Directors at a meeting in which a quorum[/LEFT]
is present.

[JCDrupiewski]

Originally Posted by wc2005

I see what you are saying about the Bylaws in paragraph 6.03. Couple of points related to that article:
1. It says "majority" when talking about the Members signing a petition. 1,000 still is not a majority of over 3,200 so be sure you're numbers are IAW the Bylaws to be legitimate.
2. That paragraph talks about how to call a Special Meeting but paragraph 7.05 does not say that a Special Meeting is required to remove Directors. That can be done at a Regular Meeting or at a Special Meeting. Directors are elected by a majority of Members present at the annual meeting and thus should be able to be removed by a majority of Members present at any meeting where they are desired to be removed.
[LEFT]Removal of Directors. At any regular or special meeting duly called, any one or
more of the Directors may be removed with or without cause by a majority of Members
entitled to vote, and a successor may then and there be elected to fill the vacancy thus
created. Any Director who has three (3) consecutive unexcused absences from Board
meetings or who is delinquent in the payment of assessments for more than thirty (30)
days may be removed by a majority vote of the Directors at a meeting in which a quorum[/LEFT]
is present.

THANK YOU SO MUCH!

[firstclassflyer]

If you are able to take this board out before April, do you have replacements in mind? Also, I'm quite sure that at least one of the board members does post here.

[guyo]

Originally Posted by firstclassflyer

If you are able to take this board out before April, do you have replacements in mind? Also, I'm quite sure that at least one of the board members does post here.

I believe you are right about a board member posting here and they do read the posts

I think it would be a real fight to remove the board before April, but we have to keep trying. Yes we have some replacements in mind that believe in good service and open meetings

[firstclassflyer]

Will the rest of us be able to vet these replacements? Maybe a town hall or a webinar at some point? After all, if I'm going to help remove folks...I want to be sure that we get better, more qualified folks in there.

[Steel Man]

Originally Posted by guyo

...I agree with the boards acquiring the homes that we have they were not purchased but taken for back homeowners assessments. My problem with this is it was not showed in the financial as assesses and the lack of willingness of the board to disclose this information. We have asked repeatedly and been stonewalled and do have records showing ownership....

The HOA has not seized houses before. Do the research on BCAD and you find out that:

The house on Point Summit was transferred to the HOA on 7/8/2008. The owner purchased the house on 6/14/2006. Now, why would you transfer a house that is behind only 3 years of dues (current rate would be $840 plus misc. fines) on a house worth at least $159,000?

The house on Barkston Drive was transferred to the HOA on 6/11/2009. The owner purchased the house on 5/17/2005. Again, why would you transfer a house that is behind only 4 years of dues (current rate would be $1120 plus misc. fines) on a house worth at least $155,000?

Something just doesn't sit right. There is more to these transactions and may be why the BOD is evading questions on these houses.

[firstclassflyer]

Call me a skeptic...but how would they hide these homes once new board members are placed? Sooner or later the details will come out.

[guyo]

Yes when it is closer to time we'll all get a meeting and I think you will know them

[rd2007]

look at the news FCF. People really aren't as bright as we often give them credit. I always read stories and then ask WTF these people were thinking and it usually turns out that they were not thinking at all. The good criminals are the ones you don't read about..

BTW, if you still aren't back, your lawn probably needs mowing and you're missing some amazingly low temperatures. My SeaWorld Weatherbug has the current temp at 60.6