Archives for February 2017


Special Community Meeting

Posted February 28, 2017 at 9:59 AM
Two meetings are scheduled in March for the BCA Board to explain the Pool Compromise, which will be on this spring's ballot. Please plan on attending one of these meetings to learn about the BCA Board's 2017 "Pool Compromise".
  • Thursday, March 2, 7 p.m., The Brandermill Church
  • Saturday, March 4, 10 a.m., Harbour Pointe Clubhouse.

FAQ on the Pool Compromise and Universal Pool Access

Posted February 28, 2017 at 9:56 AM
Message Courtesy of Brandermill Community Association
Updated March 17, 2017
If the "Pool Compromise" is approved:
Q1. Will all three pools remain open?
  A: Yes and for seven days a week during the same hours as last year.
Q2. What will the family pool rate be?
  A: $300 for 2017, but if you want to be a permanent member, the rate drops to $250. That rate requires you to be a member year-after-year and subject to any increase in rate as the regular assessments go up.
Q3. What are the other rates for membership?
  A: The daily rate is $15 or you can buy a coupon book of 10 passes for $100 or 5 passes for $65.
Q4. Why aren't there more pool membership options like last year?
  A: The operational costs of the pools are budgeted to be paid for by the user fees. Last year the pools lost $58,000 so changes had to be made.
Q5. Why has the family membership been increased?
  A: In 2013, the family rate was $435. The BCA then tried for three years to significantly reduce the membership fees to see if a much lower rate ($195) would generate the same revenue because of more members. The total members did increase, but the pools lost $108,000 during those three years.
Q6. Will non-residents of Brandermill be able to join our pools?
  A: Yes, but only as a family membership, which costs $335.
Q7. How many Brandermill households were pool members?
  A: In 2016, there were 695 family memberships, which represents 18% of our homes.
Q8. How do the pool fees for 2017 compare to other area pools?
  A: Other area pool rates are at least $400 for families, so Brandermill has the lowest rate and with a choice of 3 pools to attend.
Q9. Why is the BCA Board proposing the "Pool Compromise"?
  A: Brandermill's pools are more than 30 years old and need more than a facelift. When the BCA took control of the pools back in 2001, a commitment was made that the operational costs would not be forced on members who didn't want to join the pools. It's a compromise between those who want everyone to pay for the pools and those who expect the BCA to honor its prior commitment.
Q10. Other amenities – like bike paths and parks – are maintained by all members. Why not pools?
  A: There are 29 amenities that are supported by user fees. They include the marina, and rental use of the clubhouse, a pavilion, Sailing Center boats or a T-rack.
Q11. Will current residents be required to join and pay for the pools?
  A: No. Only those new homeowners starting May 1 will automatically become pool members and pay $250 annually.
Q12. Why start on May 1?
  A: The results of the Covenant vote change will be announced on April 17; and if approved by 75% of those voting, it would become effective on May 1.
Q13. If I sell my home and buy another home in Brandermill, will my new home have to pay the pool fee?
  A: No.
Q14. If I move away from Brandermill and choose to rent my Brandermill house, will my tenants have to be pool members?
  A: No.
Q15. Is it fair for the "Pool Compromise" to shift the costs of pools to new homeowners?
  A: At closing on their homes (if not sooner), the pool fee will be explained to the new buyers. Other planned communities – like Magnolia Green, Hallsley and Hampton Park – require higher assessments that include a pool.
Q16. Is it the Board's intention to move over time toward Universal Pool Access with the "Pool Compromise"?
  A: Yes. In 2016, there were 217 Brandermill homes sold. Using the figure of 200 new homeowners annually, in ten years that would total 2,000 new homeowners generating $500,000. Since the pool the fee would increase along with any assessment increase, actually it would be considerably more than $500,000 – plenty to operate and provide for capital improvements.
Q17. The "Legal Language for Pool Compromise" terms specifically define the concept of a "Pool Fee," and the proposed new Section 14 Item (f) states that "The Pool Fee shall be $250 per Pool Lot for 2017, subject to increase or decrease in subsequent years, as determined by the Board." Given this definition, how is an increase in the Pool Fee is capped in any way for for 2018 and beyond?
  A: The Pool Compromise ballot question states: The 2017 Pool Fee shall be $250, and it shall increase year-to-year with any increase in assessments. This means that any pool fee increase is capped to an amount consistent with the annual increase approved by the Board of Directors. The last two years the Board of Directors approved a 5% increase in the annual assessment. Since this is a change to the community Covenants, the Board of Directors is legally bound to follow this language.
Non-Binding Survey on Universal Pool Access
Q1. Why hasn't UPA been in effect since the BCA bought the pools?
  A: In 2001, when the BCA Board voted to buy the pools, to keep support of most of the community, the commitment was made to non-pool members that they wouldn't have to pay for pool operational costs.
Q2. Since buying the pools in 2001, has any previous Board put UPA to a community vote?
  A: No. This Board recommends the "Pool Compromise." However, if it fails to get 75% [of the votes cast] to change our Covenants, the Board will consider the results of the non-binding survey on UPA on this spring's ballot for next year.
Q3. If the "Pool Compromise" doesn't achieve 75% approval and the non-binding survey doesn't support UPA, what then?
  A: That will indicate that the only remaining option is to continue user fees to pay for the pool's operating costs. They would continue to increase over the years.
Q4. Has the Board studied the cost of implementing UPA?
  A: In 2012, Club Source Design issued a report paid for by the BCA. It recommended UPA after first upgrading and improving the pools to meet a 60% increase in attendance and meeting federal requirements for renovation to become compliant with the American Disability Act. The projected cost back then was $1.7 million. Residents may view the Club Source Design Report.
Q5. Can't the BCA Board simply increase the assessments to start UPA this year?
  A: No. The BCA attorney has said the 5% increase already implemented cannot be increased.
Q6. Could the BCA increase assessments by $75 next year and implement UPA?
  A: $75 (a 16% increase) for each homeowner is not enough to upgrade the pools to handle the 60% higher attendance, according to Club Source Design. Moreover, in the past 25 years the BCA operational budget has not been increased more than 5% annually. Members are likely to object to such a hike for just pools in addition to any other assessment increase.
Q7. What would the increase to the commercial assessment under UPA?
  A: There would be a 26% increase to commercial members' assessments.

History of Brandermill Pools

Posted February 28, 2017 at 9:54 AM
Message Courtesy of Brandermill Community Association
For more than 15-years, the issue of how to finance Brandermill's three pools has been an annual exercise. The Board believes a historical timeline of those developments will help you better understand and answer the question of "how did we get to where we find ourselves today?"
  • October 1997 – BCA referendum to obtain financing to buy and improve the three pools is defeated: 71% against and 29% in favor.
  • August 2001 – Needing to get a 2/3 majority to mortgage BCA assets for a loan of $1.2 million to purchase and refurbishing the pools, the referendum vote falls short by achieving 65%.
  • August 2001 – BCA Community Manager arranges a $1.2 million loan without having to pledge BCA assets as collateral, which means the purchase can be approved by a simple majority of the Board. The Board votes unanimously for the pool purchase with the understanding that the operations of the pools will be borne by user fees and not by members who choose not to be pool members.
  • August 2008 – Board votes to set a referendum on Universal Pool Access in November using an annual fee of $80 per residence and requiring a 50% approval. Shortly thereafter, the Board cancels the referendum, saying it wanted to wait for recommendations of its pending Brandermill Master Plan by Design Forum for the future.
  • March 2009 – UPA is among the recommendations of the Board-approved Brandermill Master Plan by Design Forum. To pay for the annual operational costs and refurbishing the pools, the report recommends higher assessments, increasing the capital fee, a special assessment, using the reserve fund, borrowing and/or issuing bonds.
  • December 2012 – As authorized by the Board, Club Source Design issues a report that UPA would cost $1.7 million to implement. Safety and accessibility was estimated to cost $459,000 and increased usage of the pools would add another $1,243,000.
  • May 2013 ‐ BCA committee of 5 residents recommends ongoing maintenance to keep all three pools open but opposes UPA mainly because of cost. Board agrees, and pool operating costs continue to be paid by user fees.
  • February 2017 – Board approves a referendum on "Pool Compromise" for the spring vote. Starting May 1, it would automatically make new home purchasers pool members paying $250 annually, which increases with assessments. Current residents would not pay for the pools unless choosing to be members at a family rate of $300 or becoming a "pool home" permanently and paying $250.

Residents can view the Club Source Design report on implementing UPA. UPA costs are on pages 20-22.

 

2017 NRC Officers

Posted February 17, 2017 at 9:14 AM
At its 2017 Annual Meeting held on February 16 at Harbour Pointe Clubhouse, NRC Representatives elected the following 2017 Officers:
 
Chair   . . . . . . . . . .   Erin Collins
First Vice Chair   . . . . . . . . . .   Mamie McNeal
Second Vice Chair   . . . . . . . . . .   Sean Rodgers
Secretary   . . . . . . . . . .   Sally Ragsdale
Treasurer   . . . . . . . . . .   Ahmad ("AJ") Mojaddidi

Background information on these officers may be found on the NRC website.

Thanks go to all attendees for participating in our meeting and especially the NRC Reps without whom the Board of Officers could not accomplished the NRC's chartered goals!


NRC 2017 Annual Meeting Reminder

Posted February 10, 2017 at 2:37 PM
NRC 2017 Annual Meeting
Thursday, February 16, 2017
7:00 p.m.
Harbour Pointe Clubhouse

Due to lack of quorum at its January meeting, the NRC Annual Meeting was rescheduled to Thursday, February 16 at 7:00 p.m., Harbour Pointe Clubhouse. NRC Reps are needed to vote on two agenda items. NRC Reps, please make every effort to attend this February 16 meeting. Also included on this meeting's agenda is a discussion on the BCA Board's recently adopted "Pool Compromise".
 

BCA Seeks Nominations for Board of Directors

Posted February 10, 2017 at 2:31 PM
Two positions are open on the BCA Board of Directors for the 2017-2020 service term. Nomination packets are available at the BCA Office. Nomination forms must be completed and returned to the BCA Office by Wednesday, March 1.

The BCA Annual Meeting for the membership is scheduled for for Monday, April 17, 7:00 p.m., The Brandermill Church. Election results will be announced for new BCA Board Directors at that time.

 

NRC Commentary on February 16, 2017 BCA Board Meeting

Posted February 10, 2017 at 2:26 PM
Important Note: The below highlights are reported based on unofficial notes taken by NRC representatives who attended the above BCA meeting. Although we believe the below reporting is reliable and strive for accuracy, we cannot assure 100% accuracy. It is recommended to all readers that they read the approved BCA Board Meeting minutes when published.

Member Voice

Speaking as Chair of the Community Services Committee (CSC), Bob Sempek (Cove Ridge) asked that the BCA Board postpone their decision on the Pool Compromise until CSC met on February 13 and could bring its recommendation to the Directors. President Davis commented that the BCA Board was slated to vote on the Pool Compromise at this Board meeting but asked Chair Sempek if he would like to share the feedback he has already received. Chair Sempek expressed the primary concern was whether this Compromise would pass. President Davis stated that passing of the Compromise would be left up to the residents when they vote their ballots and that it would be left up to the leaders of the Association to educate residents on the Pool Compromise and what other alternatives might be.

Meredith Robinson (Fox Chase), who is also a member of CSC, spoke as an individual resident. She feels the Pool Compromise is wonderful ? innovative and responsive to resident requests. The only thing she would like the Directors to consider is an earlier opening time of the pools during the day. She gave the BCA Board an A+ for their efforts.

Mamie McNeal (Planter's Wood) stated that she wasn't necessarily opposed to the Pool Compromise but had several questions. (1) How was the $250 fee for new Brandermill homeowners selected? Finance Committee's analysis of 2016 pool maintenance costs indicated that $260 was the breakeven amount, and the Compromise is proposing to charge $300 to existing Brandermill members. (2) How does an assessment of $734 impact the sale of Brandermill homes in the $150,000-$200,000 price range? Homes in that price range have been the ones that have sold the best during the recent financial crisis, helping to maintain other home values in Brandermill. (3) All homes will eventually be sold to first-time Brandermill homebuyers. Isn't this compromise an evolutionary plan leading to universal pool access (UPA)? If so, why do we need to ask residents if they're "for" or "against" UPA in a non-binding survey?

In response to the first question, Director Pearson commented that the $250 was meant to be an enticement for current homeowners to become a "pool home."

In response to McNeal's second question, President Davis stated that the Association has spent a lot of money revitalizing Brandermill and feels that the $250 is analogous to a fee charged by any community, club or organization. McNeal clarified that her question dealt with an annual assessment of $734 for homes priced in the $150K-$200K range. Director Gregory commented that the Directors had considered that, and he believes Brandermill will still be lower than other HOAs (see last page of handout distributed at this BCA Board meeting).

With regards to McNeal's third question, Director Pearson stated that from the Directors' perspective, the BCA Board will not be making the decision; the community will be making that decision based on their referendum votes. He commented that this issue has been "kicked down the road" for the past 15 years, and this is an opportunity – if 75% of the Association members agree to it – for existing Association members to resolve the question of how to financially support the pools. Existing residents may join the 2017 pools for $300 or become a "pool home" for $250.

Director Pearson continued to say that with regard to the non-binding survey question, if there is sufficient support for UPA on the ballot, the Directors would look into that for 2018, however, it will be difficult to achieve UPA with a maximum assessment increase of only 5% per year. McNeal asked if the $250 couldn't be raised to $260 as that was the breakeven 2016 pool operating cost jointly agreed by the Finance Committee (FC) and CSC. Director Pearson said that $250 was simply a "round number."

Brent Smith (Riverbirch Trace) stated his preference was for an in-door pool and recreational center, but feels that $75-$100 for UPA is a nominal cost. He said he definitely favored UPA.

John Francis (Gleneagles) asked if the cost of UPA would be $75-$100 or $250.

Director Pearson replied that it would depend on what passed. For new Brandermill homeowners, the cost of UPA would be initially $250. When the pools were initially purchased by the Association, Brandermill members were told (and they remember today) that they would not have the support the operation of the pools. Director Pearson feels that 75% approval of this referendum might be difficult.

In response to Francis' question, Director Hillman replied that if UPA passes, those homes opting to be "pool homes" would pay the projected $75-$100 UPA fee.

"Bottom line is," President Davis said, "we are forced to do something for a funding stream for repairs if we are going to get the pools opened this year. That's the objective, and I'm sure we'll do it."

Michelle Pease (Spring Gate) asked if the referendum passes for new Brandermill homeowners and existing residents opt-in as "pool homes", what happens if there is another crisis with the pools, or the pools just get old and need to be replaced? At that point, who will decide on those fees, what say-so will the membership have, and will the fees go up?

With the contemplated home sales multiplied by the number of existing pool memberships, President Davis anticipates a considerable amount of pool revenue for its maintenance.

Pease clarified her question by asking if there was "more than normal maintenance," what would happen if there was a significant change in the status of the pools?

Director Pearson stated that the BCA Board has three sources of funding for the pool operations: assessments, user fees, and special assessments. He noted that special assessments are voted upon and usually last for a short period of time, e.g., one year; and user fees are established by the BCA Board. In 2015, there were 215 home sales in Brandermill, making us the No. 1 Planned Community in home sales in 2016. He states it is conceivable that in 10 years Brandermill could have half of its homes be "pool homes," and when you add 5% assessment increase over those years, the amount of monies become quite large. Future BCA Boards will then have more flexible options.

Director Gregory remarked that it is extremely difficult to state a definite amount as that amount is dependent on the number of home sales.

President Davis expressed his gratitude to the members of FC and CSC for holding their recent joint committee meetings and for their efforts to formulate a joint recommendation.

Comments? >>

President's Report

President Davis thanked Director Friedel for his contributions as Treasurer and Board member. He described the hard work and long hours expended by Director Friedel in his service to Brandermill. Due to limitations on his time, Director Friedel has now resigned from his position as Treasurer but will remain on the BCA Board as a director for the remainder of his term.

President Davis nominated Director Bob Gregory for the position of Treasurer and Director Frances Hillman for the position as Second Vice President. Director Pearson seconded the motion, and the Directors unanimously passed the motion.

Director Friedel thanked President Davis for his kind words. He also reassured the members that he was not resigning from his Treasurer position because he was opposed in any way to the proposed financial direction the BCA Board was taking, especially with regards to the pools. He stated it was a difficult decision as it has been a rewarding and enjoyable year-and-half serving as Treasurer. He appreciates the opportunity and the confidence the directors bestowed on him. He expressed specific appreciation to Director Hillman who served as Treasurer before him, adding that she had lightened his burden as Treasurer and made his goals more achievable. He asked FC Chair Cardea to express his appreciation to FC members who have expended uncalculable hours of work.

President Davis expressed gratitude to Directors Gregory, Nardella and Pearson for developing and perfecting the Pool Compromise. He feels that the Compromise satisfies most residents' wishes for the pools and that it is a reasonble and rational approach to pool operational costs.

Comments? >>

First Vice President's Report

First Vice President Pearson announced that work to transfer the BCA website has begun.

Comments? >>

Treasurer's Report

Treasurer Bob Gregory supported President Davis' comments about Director Friedel, adding his special appreciation for Director Friedel's leadership and guidance in his first year as director.

Treasurer Gregory reported that the accountants have begun their process in auditing BCA financial statements for 2016.

With regards to the Budget Variance Report, Director Hillman asked for clarification of the "Dumping" expense and what "Security" (approximately $11,000 over budget) was added in 2016. President Davis responded that more security work was performed in 2016. Manager Wright replied that it may simply be a budgeting issue ? something she will look into, but security in Brandermill is phenomenal. President Davis explained that the Dumping expense reflects additional cost of disposing debris from our brush pick-up program during those days of the week when the landfill is closed.

Director Pearson asked that the Account Receivables Profile report be expanded to reflect a more detailed breakdown of the "361+ days" category. He also indicated there was a typo in the report.

Comments? >>

Members of the Board

Director Nardella moved and Director Hillman seconded the motion have Lyn Baker (Birnam Woods) serve as a voting member of the Hearing Panel for a 3-year term. Baker is a 7-year veteran realtor of Long & Foster and is a member of several realty organizations. The BCA Board unanimously approved Baker to serve on the Hearing Panel.

Comments? >>

General Manager's Report

Manager Wright reported that the majority of her time during her first month has been spent with BCA Staff, attending committee meetings, reviewing Association documents and software, and comparing Brandermill processes/procedures to industry standards. She also reported the following.

  • Marina renovations have been completed.
  • Sunday Park dock renovations are currently underway, and it is expected that those repairs will be completed later this month.
  • In reviewing our software, Manager Wright determined that there were a lot of bells-and-whistles that may be implemented without additional cost, and BCA Staff will be receiving training on those applications.
  • The auditors have been working in the BCA office for the past two days.
  • The pool management contract will be ending in 2017, and she will be meeting with our liability insurers to possibly consider managing our pools internally. She feels that $187,000 for pool management may be excessive.
  • Two additional pool contractors have been contacted to get additional estimates on the cost of pool repairs needed to open our three pools this season.
Comments? >>

Statement of Community Appearance and Maintenance Committee (CAM)

Based on a unanimous vote of CAM members at its January 25, 2017 meeting, Chair Steve Russek asked the BCA Board direct NRC to issue corrections to their October 27 2017 minutes. This request is based on CAM's belief that the NRC distributed mis-information to the community about CAM activities. Although Mamie McNeal was asked to speak on behalf of the NRC, she felt disadvantaged as she was not given the handouts distributed to the Directors by CAM. For more details about this discussion, listen to BCA recording of that portion of the meeting (beginning of "Audio Pt 2").

Director Hillman moved and Director Gregory seconded a motion to direct the NRC to remove the following sentences: "She recalled the incident of her reporting on CAM considering the re-landscaping of the roundabout, Community Manager Bailey distributing a landscape design by Rupert and his stating that the design would cost about $50,000 to implement. Residents who attended that NRC meeting disagreed with this consideration and commented directly to the BCA Board and members of CAM. This created quite a stir. Several meeting attendees asked if the project got funded. McNeal replied that ultimately the project failed in Committee." The BCA Board unanimously approved this motion.

Director Gregory feels that the NRC serves a valuable function on getting information out to the membership, but it should only report on decisions of the committee, not on committee discussions. McNeal said that this subject was mute as the BCA Board has directed her to not report on committee activities.

President Davis asked Director Ann Hunt for an update on the NRC Task Force's recommendation. Director Hunt reported that the NRC has not yet voted on the recommendation, since the last two NRC meetings did not have quorum. That meeting has now been rescheduled for Thursday, February 16 at 7:00 p.m., Harbour Pointe Clubhouse. Director Hunt stated that she has attended several of the Task Force meetings, and the Task Force members have worked very hard, including contacting other HOAs to find organizations analogous the NRC. One of the organizations contacted by the NRC Task Force was Lake of the Woods (an independent civic organization) and will probably be the model the NRC will use if it chooses to go independent. If the NRC remains with its current structure, the recommendation is that they have more autonomy.

President Davis asked for clarification of "more autonomy." Director Hunt replied that the NRC wants the ability to report on committee activities, and Director Gregory added "and report to other governments." President Davis asked if the NRC couldn't record committee meetings and post those recordings. Director Hunt replied that they could do so.

Director Hunt noted that the final recommendation of the NRC Task Force is that the existing NRC cease being a committee of the BCA. She also noted that as residents, they could still attend committee meetings but would then be free to report on those meetings.

Director Hunt also commented that some of the questions the NRC Task Force encountered included legal issues of not being a committee of the BCA, availability of BCA meeting places, and membership qualifications (whether it would be open only to BCA members). Hopefully, the NRC will have quorum at its next meeting and can vote on the Task Force recommendation.

Manager Wright commented that typically a committee like the NRC is found in the developer stage of a planned community. It is rare to find such an organization/committee in a developed planned community. She also cautioned the NRC to consider the liability issue if it becomes an independent entity. Members may become personally liable, as it will not be covered by BCA liability insurance.

President Davis asked what will happen after the vote on the recommendation. McNeal replied that because the NRC is currently a BCA Board committee, only the BCA Board can dissolve the existing NRC structure. It's an entirely different issue if the Task Force recommendation is adopted, as McNeal can foresee the independent organization taking some of the existing NRC members with it.

Utilizing her years of experience in community management activities, Manager Wright advised that the BCA Board minutes reflect only actionable items. Too much information may be misunderstood and opens the Association up for liability and law suits. Director Friedel emphasized to McNeal that Robert's Rule of Order is crystal-clear about what Manager Wright just stated. McNeal referred to the NRC charter – that it is to convey resident comments to the BCA Board. Director Gregory acknowledged that the value of the NRC is taking BCA Board information to the community. President Davis then selected Directors Hunt and Hillman and Manager Wright to review the NRC charter for possible changes.

Comments? >>

Future of Brandermill Pools

Director Pearson moved and Director Nardella seconded the motion to adopt the Pool Compromise as e-mailed to Association members on February 3, 2017. Director Friedel asked for clarification on the implications of the BCA Board adopting the Pool Compromise as it relates to the questions to be asked to Association members. Director Pearson replied that the Directors' passing of this motion would indicate agreement of the BCA Board to ask those questions to its members on the ballot, either in the form of a referendum or non-binding survey. The BCA Board unanimously passed this motion.

Comments? >>

Executive Session

As the amended agenda was previously approved, the BCA Board went into executive session.

 

Message from President Davis re: Pool Compromise

Posted February 4, 2017 at 2:52 PM
Message Courtesy of Brandermill Community Association

At this Monday's meeting, February 6, the Brandermill Board of Directors will consider a "Pool Compromise" that will keep all pools open as last year, while not requiring those who don't belong to the pools to pay for memberships they may not use. See the entire "Pool Compromise" below.

If approved, it would require new Brandermill residents as they purchase homes to automatically become pool members with a fee built into their assessments. It provides for a funding mechanism for the short term and even more into the future. New communities with whom Brandermill competes require all residents to pay for pools.

At the January meeting of the Board, and one recent community meeting, questions were raised about Universal Pool Access and why the BCA has not considered it. UPA would eliminate user fees for members to the three Brandermill pools and shift the operating expenses to all members. The estimated annual cost per residential household would be $75 (according to one proponent). If enacted, the higher BCA assessment would continue year after year.

A non-binding survey question on UPA is also proposed for this spring's ballot to determine what the current members' views are. Depending on the results, the new Board next year would decide what action, if any, to take.

The February 6 meeting of the Board will be at 7 p.m. at the Brandermill Church. If you want to provide input to the Board on the "Pool Compromise" and can't attend, please email bca@brandermill.com.

POOL COMPROMISE

FOR POOLS:

  • All three pools remain open.
  • All pools are open 7 days a week.
  • No change in hours of operation.
  • The spring 2017 election ballot will include a non-binding survey question on whether the BCA should consider Universal Pool Access.

FOR USER FEES:

  • The 82% of the membership that doesn't belong to the pools don't have to pay.
  • Family rate: $300.
  • For Brandermill members only: daily pass fee of $15.
  • Coupon book rates for all pool member guests: ten passes for $100 or five passes for $65.
  • Non-resident pool family rate: $335.
Reasons for member family rate increase:
  • The pools have lost money each of the last three years totaling $108,000.
  • User fees must increase because total membership is anticipated to decline due to higher fees and the loss of free print advertising.
  • 60% of the people at the Joint Committee meeting voted for higher fees over the other options.
  • Joint Committee recommended a fee of $285 for Brandermill families.
  • The family rate will be $135 less than in 2013.
  • Any profit from the pools' operation will go to the reserve fund, which includes repairing and replacing the pools.
  • Other area pool memberships are $400-plus for families.

FOR FUTURE FUNDING:

  • Effective May 1, 2017, all new Brandermill home purchasers will become pool members.
  • Their annual first-year assessments will be $484 prorated plus $250 (pools) for a total of $734.
  • Any 2018 increase in assessments for those new homeowners will be calculated from the combined total of annual assessments ($484) plus pool fees ($250) for a total of $734.
  • Homes purchased before May 1, 2017 will not be pool members unless the owners choose to be declared a "pool home." After becoming a "pool home," the home retains that classification. The pool fee for 2017 for those members will be $250.
  • Current BCA members who move from one Brandermill home directly to live in another Brandermill home will have the option of not automatically becoming a "pool home" even if that residence was a "pool home."
  • The BCA attorney will draft the changes necessary to revise our Covenants implementing the automatic pool membership for new homeowners with the combined higher assessment. It will be placed on this spring's ballot as a proposed Covenant change, which requires 75 percent of our members to approve.

RESERVE FUND:

  • Following our pool consultant's advice, all pools will be repaired for the 2017 opening without drawing down the reserve account below $1 million.

NOTE: Publication of the February issue of The Village Mill will be delayed until Tuesday, February, 7, as additional information needs to be included.

 

NRC Meeting

Posted February 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM
NRC Meeting
Thursday, February 16, 2017
7:00 p.m.
Harbour Pointe Clubhouse

Quorum of NRC Reps is needed to vote on two agenda items. NRC Reps, please make every effort to attend this February 16 meeting.
 

Information Packet for February 6, 2017 BCA Board Meeting

Posted February 3, 2017 at 12:21 PM
The information packet for the upcoming BCA Board meeting is now available for downloading.

Agenda item includes a 45-minute BCA Board discussion on the future of Brandermill pools.

The NRC encourages residents to read the minutes of the various BCA committees. These committees are hard at work; and your feedback and participation is important to them.

We also encourage residents to attend BCA Board meetings to learn of Brandermill "happenings."