Social Committee Funding

I'm in a 130 house HOA with $300 a year assessments...on the board.

I've heard different opinions with this.

In some older posts I saw people mention that they had fundraisers for the social committee and that those funds were kept separate from the association. I've heard of others having a budget for it.

Right now we don't have a budget for ours, but they can ask the board for surplus money in the budget.

Obviously there are the issues of some people will not want to participate etc.. My own personal position is that I'm OK with the HOA providing it if the owners have had a chance to have a say in it. To that end I suggested that this be a part of the budget so that it is now a nebulous figure. My guiding principal is that it attempts to be inclusive to all and that people outside of the board can have a chance to have a say. Well that and don't do something that we are not insured for, against the law etc. IE: serving alcohol (we currently do not have coverage for that).

I was also reading a post about there being a limit on the amount you should spend out of association funds because it technically doesn't benefit everybody. There was a no more than 10% rule there.

What are other groups currently doing?

To give you an idea about the temperature of the community etc..

Ours does not have any amenities except for a walking trail.

There are some people that definitely want to have it, but like any community you always have that group, but its tough to tell if it is a majority or not.

Our assessment just went up this year from $150 to $300 and before I got on the board, last year, some security cameras were added without community input (which partially lead to the increase). A decent number of people were upset about this. The cameras were a controversial issue in the community, and I think the board members personally wanted them, so instead of putting it in front of the community in a meeting for a vote etc. they did it on the down low and then sprung it on the community (which is permitted in our docs). I personally would have been much more comfortable with that if they had at least tried to hold a meeting to discuss and/or did something to get community input, especially because it was controversial.

I joined to address that and push for transparency and community input. IE: if I'm going to spend other peoples money, don't do it because I happen to be on the board and want it, do it because it actually is what the community wants (and I've made a good faith effort to allow them have a say in it) or is something that it is required to do (IE: insurance, taxes, maintain the trail etc...)

With the cameras there was a rash of break ins, that part was public knowledge. Every couple of years it happens. Incidentally we just had another rash, but the perps were on foot and the cameras didn't really do much to help. The crimes that have involved cars often are with stolen cars. Some people are against them because of this. Some are against it because of privacy reasons. Some are like you and feel that they are a benefit.....Lots of differing opinions and it adds to everybody's assessment cost. That's why I was of the opinion to have some form of a vote at a meeting or via mail in ballot....and let the majority speak.

With the social that is the other problem....the challenge is coming up with a middle ground where everybody has a voice.....I do wonder if a survey might be a good idea again....I hate to do surveys for everything, but it allows people to give input. Of course the underlying thing here is transparency and the ability for others that want to pitch in and organize to be able to, yet keep the legal and liability guardrails on.

Lance

We used to have an active Social Committee with an annual budget of $200 which they never even spent. They set up activities to be self-funding. Many volunteered to make decorations, donated their own food to picnics, and sometimes charged $10 or $15 per couple to defray the cost of better food for a couple of events a year. Even with that, people complained that their money was being used for parties they themselves didn't attend. Despite the fact that association funds were never spent on these affairs.

After being criticized anonymously again and again, the committee members all resigned 2 years ago. One attempt at revitalizing the social committee happened last year. A couple of people organized a pot-luck dinner. Pork & Beans and Deveiled Eggs. About 15 people (out of 100 homes) showed up. They tried to organize another one a couple of months later and no one was interested. We now have zero social budget to match the number of committee members.

RE: Cameras, that is where things get murky IMHO. One factoid I left out is that we did a survey a three years ago when we had more incidents than we have now and by no means had a majority of homeowners who wanted it. One of the biggest problems IMHO is when boards take the attitude of, "I think it's important and because I made it on the board I'll do it, vote me out if you don't like it when my terms up" vs "Let's try to actually see what the community wants".

For me, part of the definition of "Benefit of the community" needs to actually be that you are doing what hopefully the majority of the community wants or are striving to get there.

Lance,
I totally agree with George on the camera situation. No one things they need them till they need them. Do they realize vandalism is very expensive? I bet not because they do not have all the facts. IF someone on your walking trail gets raped, mugged or killed Heaven Forbid you will want to do all you can to get justice. In my old HOA in Ca. we had 23 very well placed cameras and 2 of them were license Plate capture cameras that recorded every plate that entered and left our Property. We were lucky to have only 1 entrance point. We did not have a gate and from time to time bad things happened. If people had personal cameras and could give us a decent time stamp and make or model of the car sited. We were able to quickly give PD the plate of the criminal. Trust me when I say word gets around when the cops are waiting at the bad guys door before he gets home to arrest them that cameras work.

At my new Association in Texas the previous board decided before I was elected to add 10 additional cameras to our pool area. They gave the project to the PM who contracted with a local company who did a very bad job. The cameras are very cheap and coverage is horrible. I am in the middle of rectifying this with this poor vendor and it is a struggle. I view cameras as a Insurance policy. You hope to never need to make a claim, but if you do you need the right coverage. I am probably one of the cheapest guys in HOA land. I spend peoples money as if it was my last coins with the exception of cameras because I have seen how successful they are when done right.

I'll pull that into a new thread.