Community Leadership Requires Cooperation

I agree with the Mark and Jacob as candidates, as I have personally worked with them. I found that since their tenures over the years, things have definitely improved in our community. I see them as very level headed individuals who will represent our interests well. I also have found the maturity of them to be high. I thank them for their previous efforts and look forward to voting for them in the future.

Dear Members of the Board, I am writing to express my strong concern regarding the use of Nextdoor and other public social media platforms to discuss, manage, or conduct official SOA business. While these platforms are convenient for casual neighbor-to-neighbor chats, relying on them for association governance exposes our community and individual board members to significant legal, financial, and operational risks. Key Risks of Using Social Media for Board Business Open Meeting and Notice Violations: Most states and governing documents require transparent, noticed meetings for board deliberations. Conducting business or polling directors on public forums bypasses legal requirements for open meetings and official quorum. Confidentiality Breaches: Social media discussions can inadvertently expose private homeowner data, architectural requests, financial delinquency details, or ongoing legal disputes. Liability and Misrepresentation: Informal statements or promises made by individual board members on Nextdoor can be misconstrued as official association policy, creating legal liability or binding commitments the SOA did not approve. Neighborhood Conflict: Public online arguments between residents and board members sow division, damage community wellbeing, and erode the professional reputation of the association. Recommended Best Practices To protect our community, I urge the board to formally adopt a strict social media policy: Centralize Communication: Require all official announcements, requests, and board interactions to go through official channels, such as a secure management portal, official email, or the community's dedicated website. Cease Board Engagement on Nextdoor: Direct all board members to refrain from posting or responding to SOA matters on Nextdoor using their official capacities. Establish Formal Channels: If residents have complaints or requests, direct them to submit these in writing to the property manager or board secretary rather than attempting to engage online. Thank you for your time, dedication, and continued efforts to manage our community safely and transparently. Sincerely, Tim

Tim, I agree with you that the business of the Association which is a common interest community should not take place on outside public forums such as NextDoor. I would like to point out that I am not on the Somersett Board, and this is not official business. I am sharing my thoughts about the community in advance of the upcoming election as a independent candidate. Hopefully residents can use this information in making an informed choice. If elected, I pledge to use only internal official channels for the business of the Association.

Mark, Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Hopefully the Board will use this information to implement a clear social media policy that all members are held accountable. I appreciate your time. Tim

Mark, What’s your stance on the pattern of condescending and verbally-abusive communications directed towards Director Bill O’Donnell? Also, as Tim suggested, are you supportive of curtailing the First Amendment rights of Association Members? Do you think this would be spilling into social media if Board members conducted themselves ethically and with integrity, and if Members actually felt the Board addresses their concerns voiced at monthly Association meetings?

Hello Karl, I stated at the onset that I am not interested in personal conflicts, rumor, or speculation. I am here to discuss the issues, not the purported shortcomings of other people. I believe, however, that most readers know that such conflict is never one-sided, nor are the conversations involved. What you have posted elsewhere and on social media has been selectively chosen to tell one side of a story, which is neither journalistic nor equitable. It's time to step into the light, be forthright about intentions, and run a clean campaign. The issues are important. The personal allegations are manipulated. This time around, I'm asking everyone to take the high road. Including you.

Mark, It is telling that not a single past or current Board member has addressed or denounced the conduct. Likewise, only insinuations have been made about Mr. O’Donnell, not factually-supported assertions. So I’ll say it again: this situation is emblematic of an ongoing culture issue and pattern of behavior. Don’t you think it’s rather strange that Jacob Williams is so forceful about accepting turnover of the Cliffs when there hasn’t been a single documented discussion of the 117 acres of disputed common area during an Association Board meeting over the last two years? That’s just one example. How many other Association matters are being secretly, and possibly unilaterally, addressed outside the view of the Association’s membership?

Karl, It appears that asking you to take the high road was asking too much of you. That's too bad. People are not interested in discussing this with you because it is so obviously slanted and biased You are asking me to speculate on things that happened to which I have no access or knowledge, and all these things you allege was while I wasn't here. So how could I possible comment about something about which I have zero first hand knowledge? I prefer to stick to the facts I know, and not the accusations you make. Along those lines, regarding your final sentence, I can tell what I have first hand knowledge of: While I was on the Board and present at meetings, all business of the Association was conducted in meetings open to all homeowners, except those issues that were required to be held confidential under law. Matters required to be confidential concerned homeowner delinquent account and compliance issues, and open legal matters which pertain to current cases with information essential for the promulgation of the case. That's about homeowner privacy laws, and legal requirements. Period. Everything else was handled in full view, and meetings were organized and run in accordance with the agenda rules. Realizing that Board meeting agenda as prescribed by law only allow for limited comment periods, realizing that homeowner input is valuable, we also held several town-hall meetings and roundtable discussions on a variety of subjects including ATV policy, Ventana easement access, kids programs, and a couple on the Cliffs, at least one which included city officials. The facts show that this Organization has a history of including homeowners in discussions, on committees, and with constant communication. So this recent assertion that you make about conducting meetings in secret is factually unsupported and out of line. I see absolutely no evidence of this, aside from information that has obviously flowed directly from Bill to you and which you have taken up a 'cause' by publishing personal information on his behalf. Its one-sided, out of context, and very likely highly skewed by one person's perception. And you, Karl are spewing that bias everywhere. It's not a good look. If you want to run for the Board then make that public and run a clean campaign. But run your own, not Bill's. The title of this piece is "Leadership Requires Cooperation". It follows that "Poor Leadership relies on Conflict." Which approach are you using?

Mark, Perhaps the simple ask here is to get your minions under control—the same people you endorsed, whose campaigns and websites you funded, and with whom you maintain correspondence during your world sailing tour—before they further embarrass themselves with personal attacks and drag the entire community down. I only shed the light upon it. If you’re going to preach the high road, ask the same of them and correct the longstanding pattern of dismissiveness towards Members' concerns. I have no desire to serve on the Board. After all, you never anointed me. It’s your fiefdom, and I’ll leave you to it. Despite our differences, I still think you’re the best person to lead it, and I mean that sincerely. Wishing a good weekend to you and yours.

Oh, and one more thing—it has come to my attention that the Board is spending homeowner assessments on legal consultations concerning my lawsuit against Toll Brothers and the City of Reno. The Association isn’t even a party to that lawsuit. This follows Jacob’s unilateral messaging to Cliffs homeowners, which I believe misrepresented the facts and sought to suppress a homeowner-organized town hall on the same issue. So whose interests are those legal bills serving—the Association’s or Jacob’s? Homeowner assessments are not a personal damage-control fund. If members are being billed for efforts to undermine their own pursuit of answers, you would do well to use that influence of yours to nip it in the bud.

Hey Karl, Apparently, since you continue your daily demands placed on the organization, you have decided not to honor our gentleman's agreement that you would cease the constant harassment of staff of the organization. You are free to break your promises, but whatever respect I had for you when we made that agreement is gone. When you present the organization with a formal legal demand, and threaten official complaint under NRS, it needs a proper response. This organization is forced to treat such threats seriously and that requires legal representation. But then you already knew that. It is you that wastes homeowner resources, with a purposeful harassment campaign. You've already filed dozens of demands upon staff under threat of NRS reprisal. I'd ask you to stop, but by now I know better. At this juncture, I will not continue to engage with you. I have more positive things to get to.

What happened to the original post …. With all the comments from homeowners in The Cliffs?

Why? Why are issues being discussed on Next Door? Is there a”private” group limited to Somersett, Sierra Canyon, Vue, and Village residents?