$7.8 Million Dollar restaurant
FAQ'S
Q: Doug, what is the “Financially Prudent Plan?”
A: I developed the “Financially Prudent Plan” in response to what I consider the utter financial foolishness of the Board’s plan to build a $7.8 Million Dollar Restaurant. The “Financially Prudent Plan” uses the exact same amount of money the Board is proposing for the restaurant. That is not to suggest that $7.8 Million is not a lot of money - it most certainly is - but as the name implies it is a far more prudent expenditure of that money.
“The Financially Prudent Plan” consists of:
- $3 Million for a Rebuild of the Restaurant
- $3 Million for a Rebuild of the Community Center
- $1 Million for Dredging the Lake
- $800,000 for a Rebuild of the Maintenance Building
- $7.8 Million – Total for all
(for more information on this please see the file, “What does $7.8 Million Dollars Buy?” located on the Home page)
Q: Doug, how much did it cost you to develop your “Financially Prudent Plan”?
A: It took me three minutes, and did not cost me, HVLA, or the Membership one penny to develop. It did not require the assistance of a Committee or the services of an outside consultant costing the Members hundreds of thousands of dollars. It did however require the application of a very complex analytical technique known as… “Common Sense”.
Q: Is there a law requiring the Board put their decision to build a $7.8 million dollar restaurant to the Members for a vote to approve?
A: There are sections of the Davis-Stirling Law governing California HOA's that would appear to address this that could potentially be cited in a court challenge if it came to that. Let's hope the Board behaves sensibly and puts it to the Membership to approve in a vote so as to preclude the necessity of a legal challenge.
In addition to a legal challenge to determine whether the Members are entitled to a vote to approve the $7.8 Million Dollar the Members also possess the right to call for a Recall Election (subject to obtaining the required number of verified signatures necessary to initiate the process). A Recall Election seeks the removal of Director(s) and is not something that should be frivolously considered as the process is both costly and very divisive to the Community, but it would be a potential option available to the Membership to consider under such circumstances.
Common Sense would certainly present the most compelling argument in favor of the Board putting the single largest and most expensive construction project ever contemplated in HVL since 1968 up to a vote by the Members to approve. I believe that would far and away be the smartest and fairest way for the Board to handle this situation, and I believe most Members would likely agree with that.
One might ask, “why would the Board be unwilling to put it up for a vote?”. I believe the most logical answer, and probably the most accurate answer is they fear they would not get approval from the Members for such an extravagant project so they don’t want to risk putting it up for a vote.
Q: Can the Board encumber the Membership with debt to build the $7.8 Million Dollar Restaurant?
A: Our Bylaws limit the Board's ability to assume debt on behalf of the Membership, but the Board says it is not planning on using debt to build the Restaurant, so that would not apply in this instance.
Q. Doug, how would you recommend a vote take place?
A: I would recommend that in our upcoming Election this fall there be a Ballot in which Members are given a choice between the $7.8 Million Dollar Restaurant or the $7.8 Million Financially Prudent Plan (discussed at the top of this page). Let the Members - those who will be footing the bill - make the choice.
If the Members vote in favor of the $7.8 Million Dollar Restaurant then full marks to the Board for having proposed it and getting the backing of the Membership in a fair vote. If the Financially Prudent Plan is selected then the Board must accept the will of the Membership as expressed in that same fair vote.
This is the "Common Sense" way to handle this.
