Board of Directors
Regular Meeting
FEBRUARY 7, 2005

President Chuck Baker called the regular meeting of the Lake Moovalya Keys Board of Directors to order at 6:09 p.m.

President: Chuck Baker
Vice President: Chris Chambers
Board Members: Bill Risen, Bob Stroud, Jack Sweeney, Joe Maxwell, Squeak, Gary Svider, Joe Price, Trish Wikoff

Board Members: Tonya McPherson (resigned)

Guests: Ken Ferguson (lot 172); Barbara Risen (lot 184); Richard & Debbie Fevurly (lot 79), Theodore Kramer (Fevurly’s contractor); Larry and Kristy St. George (lot 26); Wade Ruhman (lot 64); Dean & Cecilia Tweedy (lot 173); Robert Gory of Robert Gory Realty
Legal Counsel: John C. Churchill
Bookkeeper/Recording Secretary: Sue Thomson
General Manager: Joanne Hugaert

Mr. Baker called for introductions by everyone present at the meeting.

Mr. Gory took the floor on behalf of his client who owns the 3.5-acre parcel to the north of, and adjacent to, the Keys. His client has listed the property for sale. Mr. Gory presented a map showing lack of ingress and egress due to his client’s recent quitclaim to the Association of the area where the mailboxes are located. Mr. Gory stated his client hasn’t been here for approximately twenty years, and thus did not object to the presentation of a quitclaim proposed by the Association’s legal counsel. Now that the property is on the market, it has come to light that there is no access to the property except via the Association’s gated entry, and Mr. Gory’s client is requesting the right to enter this property via the Association’s gate, and an easement document has been drafted by a licensed surveyor in which he is asking for 24’ of the original 48’-wide access that was in effect when he purchased the property, and before the gate was installed. The property is zoned R-3 (high-density, multi-unit residential), with river access. There was discussion among the Board regarding where access would continue should the Association give access rights, and it was noted that the easement area would be where the boulders are located (adjacent to the mailboxes). There was a question about future owners having access to the dumpsters, and that they should contribute towards trash collection expense.

Mr. Baker expressed his concern about the multi-units and the multiple owners accessing their properties through the gate. Mr. Gory stated that most of the land backs up to Miraleste Shores, and most of the land is not visible from the front. He stated that a road, a sewer system and power would go in on the property. There was discussion about the new dirt road to the property serving as temporary access, but the first 50’ of that road belongs to another property owner (Eunice). Mr. Gory stated that a lateral is already there.

Mr. Baker asked Mr. Churchill for his advice on any problems he sees with Mr. Gory’s easement request. Mr. Churchill stated that the easement represents a small piece of land, and that there may have been a mistake made in not reserving an access easement to this property. The mistake was not on the attorney’s part. Mr. Churchill asked Mr. Gory what his client planned on doing with the other 24’ of the original 48’ easement. Mr. Churchill recommended analyzing the situation, because of the high-density zoning, in an executive session of the Board. Mr. Gory stated that his client wants to resolve the matter prior to selling the property, and that there is no other access to the property because there is no other 300’ line of sight. Mr. Gory further stated that the Vista Del Monumento Acres parcel formerly owned by Graham was given access rights through the Association’s gate, and he stated that his client was not aware of the Association’s mailbox locations.

Mr. Ferguson updated the Board on the junk located on lot 226, stating just 30 minutes prior to this meeting he took a photo which shows that only one chair, one desk and one other piece of furniture had been removed from the property since his report last month. He stated that everything else is still there. Mr. Baker reported that Mr. Churchill sent a letter to the lot owner, and the lot owner is still within the 30-day removal deadline.

Mr. Ruhman stated that his attendance at the meeting was, first, to get more involved. He is also interested in the possibility of an absentee voting system, as he states that the weekenders want to get more involved, but they cannot do so when they are not here. He suggested video taping the meetings.

Mr. & Mrs. St. George expressed their concerns about lack of security that results in large parties (over 100 people) and excessively loud noise and music going on until 3:30 – 4:00 a.m. on holiday weekends. Because of this, the St. George family goes out of town on holiday weekends, and their absence over recent holidays resulted in three separate break-ins on their property, at the same time these parties were occurring. They believe that the gate codes are too available to outsiders, and access should be prohibited to the large number of partygoers. They also feel that homeowners who allow the large number of partygoers into the gate should be responsible for paying for security service. Police reports were filed at the time of each break-in. They stated that their neighbor, an elderly woman who just lost her husband, is afraid to even come out of her house.

Mr. St. George also questioned the policy on boat storage on one’s property, and it was clarified that if the boat is parked behind the property boundary (which is not the white line), it is allowed. He also questioned the fact that there are boats parked in the common lot for longer than is allowed, and many have not been cited. Mr. Baker responded that the Association has just been made aware of a tow operator who is willing to tow at the owner’s expense, something the Association has had difficulty getting implemented in the past. Mrs. St. George stated that keeping unauthorized persons from the premises is her major request. Mr. St. George also requested assistance in keeping “rice rockets” and four-wheelers from racing up and down the streets, which was the case last Friday night, stating that they were traveling 60-70 MPH. Mr. St. George said he stopped the riders twice. He also stated they were at it until approximately 3:30 a.m. Squeak stated that homeowners should call the Sheriff. If the Sheriff has to come out twice for the same problem, someone will get arrested. Mr. Churchill stated that the Association can’t be the “police” when criminal acts are committed, and such acts have in the past been deemed “disturbing the peace”.

Mr. Baker reported that the Board has discussed having security service every weekend. Mrs. St. George also expressed dismay over extremely profane, loud music being played even during daytime hours, which music is not appropriate for her daughter. Mr. St. George stated that he is tired of being a bad guy who has had to carry around a ball bat. Mr. Ruhman stated that he has always turned down his music when requested. Mr. Baker concluded by stating that the Association is working on the problem, and he recommended that homeowners call the Sheriff. In addition, the Sheriff will see that minors are not out after curfew.

Mr. Kramer had previously submitted a remodeling plan for the Fevurlys. The Board having previously reviewed the plans, noted that the building height shown on the plan is 21’3”, which Mr. Kramer stated is not structural, but merely decorative. He stated the main building height is 18’. Mr. Kramer further stated that the Fevurlys purchased the home for their retirement, and that the owners wish to enlarge the garage so that the boat fits inside the garage, which would be more aesthetic. Mr. Kramer asked the Board for some leeway on the height restriction. Mr. Baker explained that 18’ is the maximum height limit, and that other owners have had to tear down excess structure to comply with the height requirement. Mr. Baker also explained the history of how the limit came to be 18’ in 1995 when the CC&R’s were amended by a 75% vote of owners, in which the former rule of no two-story houses was abolished, and a new height limit of 18’ was established.

Mr. Churchill stated that the Board does not have the power to change the restriction. Mr. Baker stated that the only way a rule (restriction) can be changed is for 75% of all owners to agree on a rule change. Mr. Churchill stated that the 1995 amendment was a formal amendment to the CC&R’s, which was recorded with the County. He added that in 1995 the 18’ height restriction was a hotly contested issue, where many owners only wanted a 15’ limit. The amendment also took about two years to actually come to fruition.

Mr. Price and Mr. Sweeney reported that the Fevurly plans do not show the front setback, and Squeak reported that the side setback is indicated at only 4’6”.

Mr. Fevurly also states he shares a wall with his neighbor, and there is a tree planted in the center of their property line which is growing up into the utilities. He spoke with Ms. Hugaert about it, and Mr. Fevurly reports that his neighbor does not wish to move the tree. Mr. Churchill responded by stating that this is not an Association problem, as the tree is not on Association property.

Mr. Tweedy stated that he is in attendance tonight to get to know everyone and to present the Board with a conceptual drawing to enlarge the garage and to paint the house to better match the surroundings. He stated that he has not yet hired a contractor. Mr. Sweeney stated that the “concept” looks fine, but what he has submitted is not a plan. Mr. Baker told Mr. Tweedy to make sure his official plan meets setback and height requirements, and that setbacks and height are shown on his plan.

The Minutes from the January meeting having been previously reviewed, Mr. Risen made a motion to approve the January Minutes as presented. The motion was seconded, and the motion carried.

Mr. Sweeney stated that the Association is getting nowhere in its collection of security deposits from owners of rental properties. Mr. Baker stated that this item is on this evening’s agenda.

Mr. Baker discussed the county assessment notices, which were recently sent to all property owners. He stated that property values from Lakeside to Holiday Harbour have been reassessed and show a substantial increase for 2006. He has been to past meetings to fight reassessments, and as an example, he stated that one should not try to fight a $400,000 assessed value if one has paid $600,000 for the property. The assessed value of a property should be equal to other single-family homes in the area, and one could use the inequality argument to appeal an assessment. Mr. Baker also stated that the Assessor is bringing assessments up to about 80% of value. In interpreting the assessment notices, the top line represents fair market value, and the limited value is a mathematical calculation, which can only go up by a certain percentage. Taxpayers are paying tax on the top number. Like properties should be assessed the same (as they relate to size, age, location, etc.) Mr. Churchill stated that the Assessor knew properties were being substantially undervalued in the past. Mr. Baker stated that because of the building boom and appreciation, the State of Arizona told the counties to catch up.

Mr. Baker stated that he needs to research old Association minutes to identify specific, budgeted capital expenditures and add them to the capital improvements budget.

Ms. Wikoff reported that the asphalt patch job that was done on Papago by Verizon’s subcontractor is bad. Ms. Hugaert was asked to follow up with the subcontractor to get it properly patched.

January Financials. Mr. Price made a motion to approve the January financial reports. The motion was seconded, and the motion carried.

Mr. Risen asked if Mr. Vescio was paid for his work on the poles and cable installation on lot 198. Ms. Thomson stated that he was paid, but the pole did not fall until after he was paid. Mr. Svider reported that Mr. Vescio has fixed the fallen pole twice, stating that the rain loosens the ground and kids keep swinging on it causing it to fall. Mr. Sweeney reported that Mr. Vescio was working on the pole again today.

Mr. Svider inquired about the cost of laminating the visitor passes. Ms. Hugaert responded that she doesn’t have a price as yet and that she is still working on completing the passes themselves. Mr. Svider reported that Walmart has a laminator for about $25, with 20 letter-size sheets for under $8. Mr. Svider offered to obtain the laminator and sheets at Walmart. Mr. Baker approved Mr. Svider’s offer.

Mr. Maxwell made a motion to approve the January prepaid bills. The motion was seconded, and the motion carried.

Mr. Baker reported that Tonya McPherson resigned her position on the Board of Directors due to her son’s current health problems.

The oleanders behind the mailboxes are still in need of trimming and should not be put off any longer due to optional plans for the area.

Mr. Sweeney made a motion to have the oleanders trimmed by Parker Tree Service at its prior bid of $1,200. The motion was seconded, and the motion carried.

Squeak expressed appreciation for Mr. Sweeney’s time over the course of three days in obtaining and installing the new gate card reader. The Board also expressed its appreciation of Mr. Sweeney’s efforts.

Squeak made a motion that the Association buy dinner for Mr. Sweeney and his wife. The motion was seconded, and the motion carried.

Mr. Stroud updated the Board on his search for a contractor to resolve his flooding problems. He stated that he has not been able to get any contractors to return his phone calls.

Mr. Baker responded to Mr. Green’s (lot 112) claim of a discrepancy in what the Board told him would happen on the job versus what he claims Mr. Baker told him the Sunday prior to the Board’s approval of the job. Mr. Baker stated that he did not commit to anything with Mr. Green other than what the Board approved. Ms. Wikoff stated she spoke with Mr. Green, and that Mr. Green understands the Board’s decision, but he is not happy that all the neighbors’ water has been running onto his property causing damage for which he has to pay for the repairs.

Ms. Thomson reported on the website’s current problems in opening some of the web pages, stating that the webmaster told her some of the pages became corrupt. Ms. Thomson stated that she is working with the webmaster to recreate those pages.

Mr. Baker identified the mystery tile by the dumpsters as belonging to Mr. Cann (lot 251), and that most of the tile has been installed on his new roof, but that he needs to remove the rest of the tile.

With the relentless rains, weeds are accumulating on several lots, and Ms. Thomson reported that three weed/overgrown vegetation letters were sent last month to lots 5, 56 and 207. Ms. Thomson was asked to send a weed letter to lot 25 as well. Squeak reported weeds on one of the lots behind the lot (226) with the junk on it.

Concerning security deposits for rentals, Ms. Thomson stated that the local brokers are cooperating by informing her of their rental properties in the Keys, and she is keeping track of all known rentals and their agents, if any. Ms. Thomson also stated she informs new owners of their responsibility to pay the security deposit if they are renting their properties. Mr. Baker asked Mr. Churchill how the Association could enforce owners of rental properties to post the required security deposit, and Mr. Churchill stated that they could be assessed. Ms. Thomson stated that she would bill those rental property owners who have yet to submit their deposits on the next quarterly billing statements.

After a review of the calendar, Mr. Baker suggested that the annual membership meeting be set for Saturday, March 26, 2005.

Mr. Price made a motion to set the next Association Annual Membership Meeting for Saturday, March 26, 2005. Mr. Sweeney seconded the motion, and the motion carried.

Registration will begin at 9:00 a.m., and the meeting will start promptly at 9:30 a.m. The meeting will be held in the common parking lot. Lunch, soft drinks and beer will be served at 11:30 and will be free to all who attend the meeting.

Since the annual meeting is set for next month, the Board will fill the vacancy created by Ms. McPherson’s resignation at that meeting. Mr. Svider suggested that this be done in open-forum style at the meeting.

Mr. Stroud stated there have been conflicting statements regarding parking time limits. Is it 24 hours or 72 hours when parking in front of houses (between the property boundary and the white line)? It was clarified that 72 hours is the time limit for parking in this area; anything in excess is considered storage.

Ms. Hugaert responded to questions about boats and trailers parked over the time limit in the common lot by stating that she has tagged them, but if they have no ID sticker, she cannot cite them because the owners are unknown. Squeak suggested locking the trailers that have no ID. Also, there are a few boat trailers parked on private lots that are either over the property line, or the trailer tongues extend beyond the property line. Mr. Baker stated that those owners be requested to move them back inside the property line or else risk being towed away at the owners’ expense. Mr. Svider recommended proper documentation to homeowners (letter and photo) prior to towing.

Mr. Stroud mentioned that the oleanders by the common lot are still in need of minor trimming and shaping as discussed at a prior Board meeting. Mr. Baker asked Ms. Hugaert to meet with Angel to arrange for this to be done, including the oleanders by the dumpsters.

Mr. Sweeney made a motion to disapprove the Fevurly plans on the proposed lot 79 remodel based on height and setbacks. Mr. Price seconded the motion. Mr. Kramer stated that the setbacks are correct, and Mr. Sweeney stated that the setbacks are not shown on the plan. Squeak stated the property lines must be shown on the plans. There being no further discussion, the motion carried unanimously.

The Sapp plans for the remodel on lot 75 have been resubmitted, and Mr. Sweeney stated that they look good, but the owner needs to certify line, height and grade. Mr. Churchill agreed that Mr. Sapp needs to set line and grade to certify the 5’ setbacks and the 18’ height. Mr. Sweeney stated that the proposed structure might not comply with the 18’ height limit.

Mr. Sweeney made a motion that Mr. Sapp’s plans be conditionally approved, the conditions being that line and grade be set for 5’ and 10’ on the four corners and that a survey be done to certify the 18’ height of the finished structure. The motion was seconded. Mr. Churchill commented that the plans say 5’, 10’ and 18’, but he is concerned because the slab isn’t where it shows. Mr. Price agreed that reference points need to be set; that we need to know where the corner pins are on all corners. Mr. Svider asked Mr. Churchill if he didn’t say previously that the Association couldn’t force an owner to do a survey. Mr. Churchill responded by stating that it can be forced when justified. Mr. Sweeney reminded the Board that one side appears to be only 4’8” from the boundary. Mr. Churchill stated that he previously told Mr. Sapp that this project is considered a new construction, which requires him to confirm via a survey that the finished structure is what his plans propose it to be. There being no further discussion, the motion was carried by an ‘aye’ vote from all but Mr. Svider.

Mr. Tweedy inquired as to what he needs to do to get his plan going. Mr. Price responded by stating that his plan needs to show that it meets setback requirements.

The meeting adjourned to Executive Session at 7:55 p.m.

The meeting reconvened to regular session and adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Submitted by Recording Secretary, Sue Thomson