What the New Two-Year CAMS Contract Means

In October the Board of Directors (BOD) of the HOA decided to stick with CAMS and entered into a two-year contract for management services.

The vote by the BOD was 4-3. The four who voted for CAMS were Justin Martin, Mary Ann Game, Vernell Butler, and Greg Thomas.

Voting against the contract with CAMS (and therefore in favor of the second bidder) were Brenda Bryant, Dennis Rybicki, and Tanisha Holmes.

The second bidder was William Douglas Property Management Company, founded in 1980 and serving HOAs in 13 communities in South Carolina and North Carolina. Looking at its website, they would have been my choice.

Why might the CAMS renewal backfire?

Two of the four directors who voted for CAMS just a month ago are no longer on the BOD. Mary Ann Games resigned from the board between the October and November meetings, after the vote on the CAMS contract. Why? Did she believe she would not be re-elected?

The other director who voted for CAMS and is no longer on the BOD is Justin Martin, who served as BOD President from January 2017 to this month.  He liked CAMS. CAMS would do business the way the HOA wanted (which, two years ago, no other bidder would). 

The "old" BOD voted to renew the CAMS contract. The "new" BOD is stuck with it for two years, unless they figure out how to cancel it. Could the termination penalty in the contract be worth it?

I anticipate that the "new" BOD (Bryant, Butler,  Potter, Holmes, Rybicki, Thomas, Trapp) will be taking a hard look at the many areas where the old board failed to comply with the HOA's By-Laws. 

CAMS should have been providing "professional HOA management services" and advice to the BOD regarding By-Laws compliance, publicity, community relations, etc. Either CAMS wasn't doing that, or they were doing it but the majority on the board would not accept their recommendations. 

The BOD should be examining what CAMS did (or didn't do) in recent years that resulted in increasing uncollectible accounts. As of 9/30/2023 outstanding Accounts Receivables total $462,211.36.

CAMS works for the HOA. That's why the HOA pays them. And pays them well. The BOD should more closely monitor exactly what CAMS does (and doesn't do). What could be done in-house (at the HOA office by the clerical workers there), instead of farmed out to a CAMS subsidiary in North Carolina? The financial statements need improvement. Communications with homeowners and residents could be much better. 

I believe the "new" BOD will do things differently and better. And I believe they will be more transparent. Time will tell.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Annual Meeting, Barony Place Neighborhood - continued to 5/4/2024

Barony Place Neighborhood (Barony Place I and Barony Place II attempted to hold a Neighborhood Meeting this afternoon. Of the 78 homes, seventeen (17) homes were represented, and that was not sufficient to meet the quorum requirement of 26. The meeting was continued to Saturday, May 4, 2024, 1:00PM, at 44 Barony Place Circle. An effort will be made to have at least 26 homes represented in-person or by proxy. Three homeowners have volunteered to be on the Neighborhood Committee: Tracy Manderino (Barony Place II), Della Glynn (Barony Place II) and Gwen Hayes (Barony Place I). If a quorum is present on May 4th, those present, including by proxy, will elect the Neighborhood Committee. Once the Committee has been elected, it will select one of its three committee members to be the Voting Member for the next 12 months. The other two members will be Alternates. A new announcement will be distributed to your newspaper box, along with a proxy. If you will not attend Saturday's meeting, plea
Read more

Open Letter to Barony Place "Voting Member"

An open letter to the "Voting Member" of Barony Place Neighborhood. Good morning, Billie, If you and/or an Alternate attended last night's board of directors meeting, will you please send out a recap of the meeting to Ann Stirlen and me (and to all the homeowners and residents in Barony Place)? About a dozen homeowners from throughout The Summit showed up for the board meeting  at the church  last night, only to learn from one person that it had been switched to Zoom, which allowed the board to meet in secret. Many of them had not received the email from the office that the board was (illegitimately) closing the meeting to homeowners. There are only about 1,800 (73%) email addresses of the 2,480 Members in the website database. I attempted to join the meeting on Zoom, as I am Attorney-in-Fact for Ann Stirlen, but I was not admitted to the meeting. The HOA's attorney has quoted a section in the By-Laws that she believes allows the Board to close the meetings. That spec
Read more

Special Assessment Possible?

How would you feel about a $3,000 Special Assessment levied by the HOA against you and every other HOA Member (homeowner)? Article X, Section 4 in the CC&Rs allows this. Are you aware of that? Should the Board do everything possible to eliminate the possibility of such a Special Assessment? What is the Board doing that might just lead directly to such an Assessment? The HOA, by actions of the President (Justin Martin), the Treasurer (Vernell Butler, and the Safety Committee Chair (Dennis Rybicki) entered into a contact with the Richland County Sheriff's Department, effective February 1, 2023. They arranged for special patrols in the Summit at a cost of $48.00/hour. In the Special Duty Agreement is a Liability clause. It reads,  "The Requestor will hold harmless the Richland County Sheriff's Department from any and all claims or liabilities resulting from service and indemnify RCSD for any loss due to any injury of its employee unless there is a determination of neglige
Read more