Duties of Property Manager vs Board

I am on the board in my HOA. Even though the Property Manager says he walks the complex monthly, it feels like he is barely doing any proactive work like suggestions for improvement, saving-money programs, etc. We have to initiate everything and then he gets quotes. Is this normal? I always thought that this was the Manager's job and we as board members vote to institute or not. Anyone have any input? Thanks very much!

Your situation, Carmen, is not unusual. Does your PM work full-time on your premises? If so, it's more likely they'll come up with ideas because they're very familiar with your HOA.

If they spend few hours/week or month at your HOA, they won't know very much about it.

Anyway, read your HOA's contract with your board. Ours says our PM will advise us, but doesn't say she'll come up with new ideas. Still, she does and usually they are money savers.

We're an urban high rise and our PM meets with other downtown PMs regularly so they exchange advice & ideas. Our PM's company is very large, so they usually are up on new things that can help us.

We've had some boards that have been very intellectually creative, but, at the moment, I seem to be the only director who initiates anything new.

A director on the board across the street from us complained bitterly that his in-house PM never has any ideas, but we directors from other nearby HOAs said it sound like his boar was lazy and uninvolved.

Jared is correct, the relationship between an association and its property manager should be as a team.

Costs are a big part of the equation. For a 200 unit HOA, you might charge $2000.00 for service, while a 200 unit high rise can cost upwards of $10,000.00 per month The GM will pretty much run the day-to-day operation.

The other thing to consider, and this has happened to me, is one Board member may want to look at cost saving at their association, but the other Board members could care less. You can go through the motions, but nothing gets done until it falls apart or is broken.

It's a bit of a catch-22. If you do make proactive suggestions the board might say "who asked you to do that?" or reason that if you have time to come up with new ideas, it must mean you don't have enough "real" work to do, so why are they paying you?

In the neighborhood where I live of 315 single family homes of a variety of sizes, our MC does a fair job. They work hard at it, but there are so many variables in so many different neighborhoods that you can tell they get stressed.

My sense is that many neighborhoods just toss everything at them and hope it works out. Ours is better than most with a relatively active board.

We just did an updated Reserve Study - and, while there are a few things I think are a bit early, we recognize and are dedicated to increase dues a bit to fully fund it. Very broadly supported on the Board.

My previous neighborhood in Virginia of 52 houses on 5 acre lots with private roads always turned it into high drama with conflicting claims and just nonsensical BS. They were aging out and several were always angry. We eventually funded near the required level - after two years it was apparent they would have to generate a special assessment to cover the road repaving. Those that fought against the full funding still thought they did the right thing :-)

Every PM we've had has advised us to fund our reserves better and gradually we've increased dues so that we're over 70% funded now. Reseres analysts always tell us to try to reach 100% funded.

Our board hasn't chastised any PM for bringing us new ideas. I'd say we might if we've (the board) given them a lot of directions whig they haven't folioed and they bring us something out of the blu that took them a while to research.

Lately, we've assigned our PM too much and I can see it's wearing on her. In addition, some directors constantly ask her to look up things for them, etc., that they should look up themselves. More, there were some errors with assessment allocations from our MC that I discovered. The Finance Committee directed her to look into them, but she seems to be researching the wrong data. A time-wasting rabbit hole.

We're seeing that here, too, even though we're technically not a 55+ community (although in fact we are demographically). What are some ways to counteract that sentiment?

I saw a couple of good descriptions over the last few weeks that say reserves are not for future expenses, they're to pay for the everyday wear & tear and depreciation of current reserve items. Which is a good way to look at it but try telling that to a 75-yo couple who are faced with a $50 monthly increase spread out over the next couple of years because the painting fund is on track to be $100,000 short when it's time to paint in 3 years.

I've been having some success in talking a few board members into the need for increases now before TSHTF in 5 years. The newer people on the board who have only been here a few years are receptive to the idea because they want to preserve their relatively recent investment. The board members who have lived here for 15+ years are less accepting. We've never had a reserve study done (not required in FL), so I did one last year patterned after a few samples I found online. The numbers speak for themselves.

At the end of this year we'll have about $750k in our roof reserves. If we keep our fingers crossed and can wait another 5 years to begin re-shingling we'll be short almost $500k at the rate we're going. On top of that the tentative plan - they're very reluctant to talk about it - seems to be robbing Peter (the roof reserve) to pay Paul (the painting reserve).

Using the straight-line (component) method of reserves planning, those two items alone require a $100 a month increase next year. If we switch to the cash-flow (pooled) method my 30-year projection shows we can stay above 65% fully funded and get both the painting and roofing done by 2025 if we go up $50 a month, spread out over the next 3 years. After kicking the can down the road by underfuncing the reserves for over a decade we're running out of road. The $50 a month figure already has some running for the exits. Which I think is fine, if a little sad for some senior citizens, but pay now or pay later. If they can't afford another $50 a month now then how on earth will they be able to afford a looming $1,000 special assessment in 3 years followed by another one for $4,000 in 2024?

The clamor is LOUD from several dozen retired homeowners that they shouldn't have to contribute more now now for a million dollar re-roofing project that won't start for another 6 years.

My argument is holding water so far: the numbers speak for themselves.

If one accepts the numbers, the next question is whether to increase the full $50 per month all at once in 2019. If we spread it out over several years the fear is that future boards will decide to stop following the plan and then we'll be in a bad place again.