Get It Straight

We have initiated this page to post answers based on facts to the best of our knowledge.

This page is not limited to Q & A. All members are invited to share their opinions on any topics. You may submit your inquiries to cmslppoa@gmail.com. Submissions are subject to review for proper decorum.

Q. As of now, members have to wait months to see a posting of "old" news about a past board meeting. Why doesn't the board want to offer access to the zoom cloud recording of the board meetings?

A. The Board has been hesitant to release audio recordings of its Zoom meetings as statements contained therein can be manipulated by someone with the technical know-how to take those discussions out of context and present them in such fashion that would be unrepresentative of Board positions, creating more headaches than necessary.

Q. Regarding the Vacation Rental Policy, is the board overstepping its policy making authority by discriminately singling out property owners of short term rentals and imposing special regulations and requiring a permit and fee for these owners?

Q. How will the board and the attorney defend the VRP and how the board will enforce it.

A. The board has no intention of policing the violations. It will be the responsibility of the affected neighbors to take action.

Q. Rentals are legal in SLP according to the attorney. All property owners are subject to the same CCR's. Under what authority can the board impose additional "rules and regulations" for these legal activities?

A. From the president, I know from past experience as the park manager at Fenton Lake that visitors to the Jemez during those times of fire restrictions often do not have a clue that such restrictions are in place. It was the responsibility of my crew and me to make those visitors aware of any such restrictions. The Bylaws read "No trade or offensive activity of any kind shall be carried on upon any lot, nor shall anything be done on any lot, which shall constitute an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood," So, who do you think should ultimately have the responsibility to advise. (That didn't answer the question of whether the Board can legally define what "offensive activity" entails and not make it a restriction on all residents.)

Q. Relating to the Unit 6 lot sales, if the water well is in the SLP road easement, then the water well belongs to SLP not Unit 6 unless the deed stipulates otherwise. Regardless of the condition of the well, how will the board protect the ownership and water rights of this well?

Q. Our road maintenance costs fluctuate from year to year. It would seem prudent that the board would set an adjustable fee based on maintenance costs per year If we continue to improve the roads, add culverts, create secondary escape routes, possibly resurface this cost should be born by all who use the roads. Has the liability insurance, administrative cost for special billing, etc been considered in the assessment?

Q. The developer of SLP still owns lots within SLP that have never executed the restrictive covenants He could sell them and the new owners may opted to put in their own wells if logistics and OSE permit. I would expect the new owners of these lots could "cash in" on the same privilege of paying roads cost only, because a precedent would be set with Unit 6.

Q. The Board is negotiating a sale of the 5 lots in Unit 6. As the current owner is not considered a member of the association and do not pay association fees, I understand they are requesting a road only fee. What is the board decision on this?

A. We have estimated approximately 37% of the existing dues ($335/yr) now is attributable to roads maintenance. That would be adequate for a road fee.

Our Bylaws, with 2 exceptions, are currently exempt from the laws of the Homeowner Association Act (Act). However, compliance with the Act is mandatory if we amend our Bylaws. Not only will Bylaws Article IX and Article VI §2(g) be overruled by the Act altering the existing rights of SLP members but we will have no vote or freedom to change future legislative regulations that become burdensome to the community or member's rights.

A. It has been heard that certain delinquent owners have threatened to sue, if information is divulged. However, the information is public. Unfortunately, the balances and status cannot be accurately verified without Board input.

Q. I don't recall that Bootzin (developer of SLP) ever legally withdrew his 22 lot in Unit 9 from SLP. Would he have legal claim to SLP water rights should his well go dry? (The OSE commingle permit application includes Unit 9).

Q. A bit embarrassing to see that someone use the voting place as a venue to vent their anonymous mantra?

A. Most know what anonymous represents, however we did turned the complaint over to the local authorities

Q. I noticed that the date on the ballot was wrong. Could this invalidate the election?

A. CM noticed the same. A serious typo on an official document could be an issue. Ask the Board.

Q. Was a quorum met at the 2014 annual meeting and was any official business conducted?

A. No quorum was met. According to Roberts Rules of Order, which the board initiated in March and used

at the annual meeting, no quorum means no official business can be conducted. However a nomination from the

floor for a board seat, a resolve to allow a member's corrections to the annual meeting was voted on, and

the election of officers was conducted. Thus official business was conducted in spite of this ruling.

Q. Did you let members ask questions regarding reports during Board meetings when you were President?

A. Yes

Q How did members ask questions regarding reports during Board meetings?

A. Members concerned with an issue came to a meeting and asked their questions when their issue came up

during the Board meeting reports/conversations. This was acceptable procedure at past board meetings,

special meetings, or annual meetings. Past meeting minutes detail member questions and issues and the

Submitted by a Board Member to S Star

Q. How many of our residents owed money to SLPPOA when you were President?

A. According to the treasurer’s report at the 2011 annual meeting there was one foreclosure, 1 non-payer,

and 3 slow payers; 2% was uncollected.

Q. If so, what was the income of SLPPOA at that time so we can make a fair comparison, as you didn't really

leave the records in good shape.

A.    The association dues in 2011 were $642.40 or $99,572.00 expected annual income. The delinquency

collections process was diligently enforced and included a tampering policy and a water shut off procedure.

Submitted by a Board Member to S Star

Q. Our System 1 water supply is still not working properly properly, and we still have not heard back from

you or any of the Concerned Members regarding any help you could give us, even though you're drinking

the same water we are.

A. A CM member recently initiated the contact that led to hiring a new water system operator that has saved

Before the board alienated some CM persons, the CM group assisted with meter installations, meter readings

and reporting, and were involved with the board appointed oversight committee for meter installations. All

members of the CM group over the past years, have contributed many volunteer hours toward water system

maintenance; leak detection, meter installation planning, budgeting, and voting initiatives, state compliance

reporting, and field work to remedy deficiencies, well renovation, system repair coordination and oversight

The CM group has been equally responsible to help keep the water running in the past as those who serve

today. Most of the CM members also served at one time or another on the SLP Board of Directors.

Submitted by a Board Member to S Star

Q. When you or any of the other Concerned Members were Board Members, did you encounter a group

of your neighbors that just criticized from the sidelines and didn't work on any solutions?

A. Yes. There were criticism and anonymous letters from members about many issues including household

meters, stimulus funds for water system improvement, lack of professional engineering and project management,

special assessments proposals for water system upgrades, and issues brought up in water committee

recommendations. However, no member was restricted from presenting his or her issues, proposals or

Submitted by a Board Member to S Star

Q. Why didn't you comply with and respond to Drinking Water Bureau findings of problems with our Water

Supply? And no, the answer isn't that it can be blamed on the Water Operator, because it was your

responsibility to take care of our water, and you did not.

A. Compliance issues were mitigated as volunteers and money permitted in accordance with NMED

requirements. Deficiencies change as new NMED regulations are enacted. You should review who was

responsible as compliance chair and the NMED oversight officer at the time. Compare past Sanitary Survey

reports to determine whether deficiencies were old problems or new ones due to new NMED regulations.

These reports were posted on the SLPPOA website.