Sierra Canyon, Somersett, Villages, The Vue – Your Community Forum

Per the Somersett Developer, homeowner money taken from SOA funds are not enough to “save” the Somersett Golf Course for the equity members.  Somersett United is working on plans to save the Golf Course for ALL Somersett Owners.

Scare tactics about the golf course going brown or the course reverting to the developer to be used to construct more homes have been most effective.   Somersett Owners have been conned into believing that the agreement entered into by the Developer Controlled Board and the private equity owned golf course, without first informing owners or allowing owners to vote on the issue, was a good one.

Somersett Homeowner Association funds are being disbursed to the Private 172 member owned golf course that will amount to SEVEN MILLION FIVE HUNDRED & THIRTY THOUSAND $7,530,000.00 over 10 years. (About $30 of your dues/month).

Many homeowners with financial expertise and SOA board members (including Blake Smith in the RGJ) have expressed the opinion that even with the current homeowner’s money the golf course cannot survive financially.  If the course fails, the Developer will end up owning the golf course, after ALL Somersett Homeowners have paid large amounts in maintenance and taxes for a number of years.

The 172 golf course private equity member owners seem to believe that they have the right to ask/demand that the rest of the 2,415 property owners bail them out so that their investment will be protected and they can maintain their status as private golf course members.

Most of the non golf course owners including the Somersett United folks, which the Golf course owners call “Kooks” and accuse of wanting to “split the community”, in reality want:

  1. The Golf Course to survive to the benefit of all Somersett Owners, and
  2. Value for their money in the form of an equity interest in the golf course for the entire community.

Another option, which results in a substantial reduction in expenditures, would be for the city to take over the Somersett course replacing the Rosewood course, which is losing nine holes to road construction.

If homeowner’s monies are going to pay for the course they should own it.

Furthermore many homeowners have expressed the opinion that in order to survive, the course needs to go 100% public, be 100% community or city owned. This is a plan which the entire community can support, rather than the present arrangement which supports the lifestyle and wishes of a small minority of 172 owners at the expense of the great majority of the owners in Somersett.

You be the judge, add your comments in the Somersett United Blog.

Advertisements

Comments on: "Save the Somersett Golf Course" (1)

  1. Ex-Country Club Member said:

    In 2010 we walked away from our SGCC membership for various reasons, one being that we did not believe the membership growth and rosy financial projections offered up by the Developer as a basis for early turnover of the Club to the equity members. As it turned out we were right, membership actually declined rather than grew, thereby increasing the financial liabilities of the remaining members. Hence the impetus for the SOA/SGCC Lease Agreement whereby the SOA Developer controlled board agreed to pay the SGCC $15/month of homeowner assessments to offset their operating losses, receiving in return some SGCC provided amenities of questionable value. Do not be fooled, if the SGCC membership growth and operating costs had been as projected at turnover, no such agreement would have been offered up by the SGCC for the “benefit of the community”.

    The SGCC equity members voted to accept early turnover of the club from the Developer, and therefore, needs to stand on its own two feet in meeting operating cost shortfalls. Such as; 1) increased member dues or assessments, 2) the current “preview membership “or other such programs offered to the Reno golfing community at large, 3) increased public play – casino, tournament or individual, or 4) sale to a third party. That is, they need to charter their own destiny without Somersett homeowner subsidies, especially without homeowner approval.

    Bottom line, until such time as the SGCC is facing bankruptcy, the SOA should not be involved in ANY manner regarding use of SOA assessments to help fund the SGCC. The SGCC is a privately owned concern separate from Somersett Unit ownership with no homeowner interest in or right to use. This is specifically stated in unit developer disclosure statements as well as Section VII Articles 5 & 6 of the Somersett CC&Rs. Hence, it is premature for the SOA to discuss any plans to “Save the Somersett Golf Course” until this event is inevitable. Only then should the Somersett homeowners (via majority vote) consider modifying the CC&Rs and entering into a mutually benefiting agreement with the SGCC.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: