image

Email, Print or Share this Article:
  • email
  • Print
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • TwitThis

127 Comments to “Revised POASC Dues Increases from 2002 through 2010”

  1. Gary W says:

    Dick, I do not like it either. Last year I printed out some pages, and after several months of them laying around my office, I shredded them. Not good for moral as many of my managers and other staff compare the salaries with their counterparts, and they all get paid differently because of years of service, promotional steps, and in some years the legislature approved small pay raises. Ben, yes, all public records.

  2. ben says:

    I think you are debating public records vs. private records!

  3. Dick Junkins says:

    Gary: I defer to your experience, then. In my opinion, it ought not to be that way, though, and it shouldn’t be that way in the Cove.

  4. Gary W says:

    No stretching of the truth, know my facts. As a long term state employee (still employed and going on twentysix years), my full name and salary of 2007, along with thousands of others is listed, for all to see…….

  5. Dick Junkins says:

    Gary, you might be stretching it a bit. Most public employers follow the model of the Federal government. They establish pay Schedules that will disclose a range of salaries based on experience and qualifications. Then they add side tables for additional duties or qualifications. One can get an idea of a maximum and minimum range of compensation, but you’re not going to find out what Miss Arbuckle makes vs. Mr Jones. As for churches, they can do pretty much what they want.

    Bottom line: Your salary; my salary; anybody’s salary is a private matter and ought to remain that way. Certain people within organizations are authorized out of necessity to know and control those things. But we average Joe’s don’t have that authority. As I said earlier, salaries of specific, highly paid executives are sometimes disclosed, but that’s an exception.

    Bottom line #2: I think we ought to leave the individual salary issue alone. The Budget and the Balance Sheets tell us what we need to know.

  6. Gary W says:

    I guess then ….that Federal Law does not apply to State Employees, teachers, law enforcement salaries. All that is public information and is posted on the web. On the various churches I have attended, salaries are also made availble.

  7. Dale Morsette says:

    Sam, it probably has not changed a great deal. Just more transparency and a forum for people to express their opinions to a larger audience than a Kitchen table.

  8. Sam says:

    Fred,

    I miss it as it was. Thak you for the thoughtful comment.

  9. Gregory Wade says:

    Dave,

    Thank you for your information.

    Do you see any way to decrease the projected increase? You being involved so long in the association I would think that if anyone would know it would be you.

    Let’s have coffee some day soon.

    Regards,
    Greg

  10. Dave says:

    Frank, I hate to disagree with you, but Spanish Cove is not a Corporation, POASC is. I guess there is legal differences but from a practical standpoint there is none. Also, are you sure that POASC under federal law can not release payroll records? I believe it could if it wanted to. That being said, I am not necessarily in favor of that, but many would be surprised at how low our employees are paid. Competitive, I am afraid not, probably more than a little on the low side.

  11. Dave says:

    Gregory, I thought I answered your question. POASC owns POASC. POASC owns the roads etc. Spanish Cove is just a name for a platted area in the official maps and records of Baldwin County. POASC technically is no more than a property owner, just like you and me, with certain rights and obligations which are the Covenants which we all agreed to follow when we bought our property here.

  12. Gregory Wade says:

    Frank,
    I disagree with your interpretation of the Act, ,I am not familiar with that provision of the act and as a specialty company in payroll,workers compensation, benefits and employee rights and employer rights and compliance .

    My original post was only questioning someone’s post about salary’s and I really do not care what people are paid as long as the wage is in line with the industry and area. Let us get away from the question of payroll and benefits and concentrate on the main question of the increase.in dues.

    My last question was and is who owns POASC not Spanish Cove.

  13. fred says:

    Sam, you must miss the Cove?

  14. Dave says:

    Gary, you ask a good question. I guess the answer is that POASC owns POASC. If the Corporation were to fail, God forbid all of the assets of the corpration, which would be the cash in the bank and the amenities including the roads, pool and clubhouses would go to the State. If anyone has a better answer, or explanation that that please help me.

  15. Frank Lennox, Chairman of the Board says:

    Spanish Cove is a corporation. The Federal Privacy Act prohibits any company or individual employer from revealing among other things the income of any employee in their company. Our covenants also prevent us from revealing private employee information including salaries to the public. This is the law and regardless of recordds being public these particular records are not public,. I hope this answers your question, Gregory.

  16. Dick Junkins says:

    Funny, my angel made me BUY here!

  17. Sam says:

    I must have had an angel on my shoulder when I sold my lot in SC. Good luck to all of you!

  18. Gregory Wade says:

    Error in spelling : POASC

  19. Gregory Wade says:

    I appreciate all the responses I received from my post and now I understand how a Property Owners Association works. One last question. Since we only own our land who owns POSAC? Thanks again for the information.

  20. Dick Junkins says:

    Donna: I like to read dissenting opinions. I may or may not consider them whiney. One may or may not consider my opinions rigid, inflexible and uncaring. But that’s part of what this site is about, and I trust we can convince one another to look at issues from different perspectives.

    There is another site where I am criticised and castigated no matter what my opinion is. I hope that no one has that feeling here. If I agree with you I’ll tell you, and you’ll know it’s coming from me. If I don’t, well, I’ll tell you that too.

    Now here are a few points:
    1. The “boogey-man” of special assessments is real. If we run our AR&R savings account down, we could easily be in that situation.
    2. I don’t think anyone wrote that it was “expected” that folks would be in hard times as they aged – only that it does happen for a variety of reasons and that there are organizations out there to assist.
    3. Questions about Budget line items can all be answered. The Board meeting last Thursday was a good opportunity to ask them. But a call or e-Mail to the Treasurer or Finance Committee Chairman might clear things up. You may not agree with their logic or position, but there are reasons for their decisions in each of those categories.
    4. I don’t think we’ll need this sort of increase next year. The 2009-2010 Budget takes into account projections for reduced income, and the Expense side has been adjusted for improved realism. The Assessment increase is anything but “piddling” [though from an SSI standpoint 5.8% IS "munificent" (good word!), but not from a recipient standpoint]
    5. Finally: Please don’t take away my heated pool! In fact, the temperature is a little low. (Not being facetious. I, and many like me, really enjoy the year-round availability and the water’s too cold). The pool is one of the many reasons I bought here.

  21. ben says:

    We received considerable help from FEMA in the form of road cleanup and tree removal(from the road areas). Had the Cove been required to pay for those services, we would have had a MAJOR problem…………..As it were, our major expense from Ivan was tree removal and disposal, above and beyond what FEMA provided.

    In fact, trees continue to die today-4 years later-from salt water intrusion and wind damage. They are only removed if a dwelling is threatened.

  22. Dave says:

    Donna, none of the tree removal, or drainage expenses were reimbursed by either FEMA, or insurance. I was at the meeting you spoke at and I did not hear any questions asked about those items. I attend most Board Meetings, and once again I have never heard a question asked. I do know that I have heard the Treasurer and Manager report that we have sought help from FEMA and also Baldwin Copunty and I believe the Corp of Engineers on the drainage. Apparently no money is available. As far as Insurance is concerned. We did receive reimbursement for repairs required at the Cove Clubhiuse. and that was deducted from the costs associated with the storm. We do not carry insurance on the pier. It is cost prohibative. Miscellaneous expenses are just that. Items to small to be budgeted for individually, and unknown as to what they might be. The contingency item is there to cover unforseen major needs or price increases. For example, will there be a increase in electric rates, propane costs are based on best guesses as are insurance costs.
    When you bought your home you knew that there were amenities. In fact, the chances are that you bought here because of them, whether it be the pool, or the paved roads. These items cost money. I am sure you knew that. Our amenities, and our employees are what make Spanish Cove the wonderful place that it is. I, for one, do not want to lose either of these assets. The increase in assessments will affect my life, as will loss of income due to the economy, however the sacrifice that $12 or even $24 a year in assessments will cause is well worth the great life in The Cove. Use our amenities, I am sure you will find you asgree with me.

  23. Sandra says:

    Donna, thanks for your comment and, if you had a chance to talk with a member of the Board, what questions would you ask?

  24. Dale Morsette says:

    Section 13.1 of our By-Laws clearly state that personnel records are not available to members – which would include income.

  25. Donna says:

    I have read all the comments regarding the Budget with interest and awe -

    On the one hand we are nudged to the idea that an 8.3% assessment increase is “piddling” and the 5.8% SSI increase is “munificent”

    One the one hand we are encouraged to agree/disagree and then are thought of as whiney when we disagree and the boogey-man of “special assessments” is waved at us

    On the one hand when suggestions are made to expense cutting or labor saving we are to be thought of as ogres for wanting our fellow neighbors on the payroll to either be fired or asked to live on a pittance, or other neighbors to be deprived of the heated pool

    On the one hand when it is suggested that some are finding it hard to survive on SSI alone we are told it is “expected” as we get older or lose a loved one by someone who has a part-time income in addition to other income – even better, it is suggested we further degrade their dignity by naming suggested charitable organizations that might help them out with a meal

    On the one hand the spectre of Ivan related damages to the bottom line AR&R figure is frequently mentioned but the question of whether some of these expenses were defrayed by insurance and FEMA reimbursement is never answered – also,other line items in the budget such as $10,000 for Misc. Expense, $28,00 for Contingency Expense, and $30,000 Weather Related Expense must be accruing and adding up somewhere

    Yes, people, I guess I’m running around all “henny-penny” because it ain’t going to get better – next year we will see another hefty increase needed for all the same reasons we are hearing this year since the economy is not expected to get that much better, expenses again will go up, home/lot sales will probably not improve. Right now I have letters to write to my insurance company(s), utility company, grocery store of choice, gas company of choice, pharmacy of choice, medical doctor(s), etc., regarding their fiduciary irresponsiblity

  26. Dick Junkins says:

    That’s true, Dave, and my explanation may have confused others. Since Mr. Wade was CEO of a corporation, I used the “shareholder” term, with which he would be familiar. We in Spanish Copve are not shareholders, or owners, as you state, but the membership status is similar with respect to voting on key issues.

  27. Dave Danson says:

    Gregory, I think you may have an incorrect concept of what you are as a member.. Members are not owners of any more than the land they have title to. They are not owners of the Corporation. and own none of the amenities.