Candidates discuss effectiveness of committees

The five-member Canyon Lake POA Board of Directors are collectively responsible for the management and operation of the POA’s business affairs. The board members are elected for staggered two-year terms.

Three of the five seats are up for election in May when the terms of Mike Harris, Phil Hawgood and Tom Nathan end. The three directors are eligible to run for another term.

The five candidates vying for a seat on the board are Jeanne O’Dell, Tom Nathan, Chris Poland, Phil Hawgood and Mike Harris.

In the weeks leading up to the election, The Friday Flyer will feature a series of questions to the candidates. During this period, residents will have a chance to hear directly from the candidates and learn what they hope to accomplish if elected to serve on the board.

Last week, The Friday Flyer asked the candidates if they feel the POA should be involved in the clubs’ fundraising activities and determine how the funds raised are spent?

In this fourth installment of questions, The Friday Flyer invited the candidates to answer the following question in 300 or fewer words. The candidates are listed in the order they will appear on the ballot.

Question: Serving on the POA Board is a big commitment of time. In order to ease the burden of time and provide an opportunity for the members of the community to participate in the governance of the POA, there is a POA committee system.

Committees play an essential role in assisting the POA with a variety of functions and duties. Committees are led by member volunteers and have a specific purpose within the community. Committee members are appointed by the Board of Directors, who individually serve as a liaison to various committees.

There are standing committees for Appeals, Architectural Control, the Estates (mobile and manufactured homes), Facility Review, Finance, Green (Golf Course) and Recreation and ad-hoc committees for the Dredge project, Fiesta Day, Rules & Regulations Review and Security Advisory.

How do you view the effectiveness of the current committees? Are they properly utilized or could they be better utilized? What changes to the committee structure would you consider making if elected?

Jeanne O’Dell

Jeanne O’Dell. Photo by Donna Ritchie

The committees are another chance for Canyon Lakers to volunteer their time and become involved in our community. The value the committees bring to our community is immense, as they are made up of either experts in their field, such as the Finance Committee, or a wide range of members who bring a different perspective to the task at hand, such as the Recreation Committee.

I do not understand the decision to make some of the committees ad-hoc and other committees to go dark four months out of the year. If the reason was that the affected committees do not bring value to the community, restructure the committees or change the function of the committees so that they do.

I believe that the effectiveness of the Facilities Review, Security Advisory and the Rules & Regulations committees have been compromised by the board due to the changes. These committees should and do act as the voice of the members.

The Finance, Facilities Review, Security and the Rules & Regulations committees, if structured correctly, can provide a citizen’s oversight function for the members of the community. The board of directors cannot be experts in every field. The committees can act as advisors and experts if the board is willing.

The Finance Committee does a fantastic job in reviewing the operating budget but their recommendations regarding funding for the Repair & Replacement, Road Reserve and the Capital Improvement accounts are mostly ignored.

In accordance with the committee charter, the Facilities Review Committee is to assist the board with determining the priorities for improvements to our assets, as well as assist with long-range planning. This is no longer happening.

The Security Advisory and the Rules & Regulations committees are viable committees and should be returned to standing committee status.

Tom Nathan

Tom Nathan. Photo by Donna Ritchie

The committee function is to advise and assist the board of directors with matters pertaining to the specific area of responsibility for which the committee was created.

Committees are commonly asked by the board to review and analyze items and provide feedback.  The committee does the research necessary to provide a response and the board reviews their summary and recommendation (when applicable).

Committees typically arise from a need. For example, the Dredge Committee was just recently formed after concerns about the dredging of the East Bay have become a current issue. While important, there isn’t a current need for this committee to meet on a regularly scheduled basis, so it is an ad-hoc committee – meaning it meets on an as-needed basis.

The Appeals Committee is a standing committee because it has regularly scheduled meetings each month to address member citation appeals in a timely fashion.

I believe our current committee members provide valuable input for the board of directors, so they are effective in my opinion. When the board receives committee feedback, it then receives and discusses the information and may take an action (or not) based on the committee response.

Committees are evaluated each year with the POA staff. Committee charters are revised and updated from time-to-time to improve their function for the board and for the Association.

The current committee structure is designed appropriately in my opinion. Each year there is a new board of directors with ever-changing goals and priorities. Committees provide the support needed to meet these objectives.  It’s up to the board of directors to design and maintain a committee structure that will best serve the board of directors toward their achievements during their term.

I believe a great deal has been accomplished in the past two years, and I will always consider making committee changes to benefit the Association.

Chris Poland

Chris Poland. Photo by Donna Ritchie

I remain steadfast in the belief that Canyon Lake is a community where people live and work together to create a special place that all can enjoy – each with their own favorite part.  Much of that effort occurs within the POA’s six standing committees, five ad-hoc committees and two work groups. I am a member of the Dredge Committee and Facilities Review Committee and know the intensity of our work and the value it can bring to decision making.

The candidates recently received the current committee policy and the charters for all the committees and work groups. I found this revised organizational structure to be comprehensive and complete with charters that provide clear direction, opportunities and responsibilities.

I see no immediate need to change the policy nor the committee structure. I am concerned, however, with how they are being implemented and how much say the community has through these committees in what is being done.

From what I have experienced, the committees are not used to their full potential, their recommendations not fully considered and their effectiveness limited due to incomplete communication channels related both to what they are asked to do and how their recommendations are received.

While the charter to each committee is unique, they all follow a similar pattern. Each one works with, is directed by and reports to the general manager. Through that channel, they advise and make recommendations to the board. While each committee is assigned a board member liaison to serve as a communication link, their work appears to be ad-hoc and informal.

Committees should be used to their full potential. They should be formally asked to consider and advise in all matters within their charter on a set schedule. The board’s response to their recommendations should be clearly articulated.

Phil Hawgood

Phil Hawgood. Photo by Donna Ritchie

The POA Board of Directors utilizes sub groups of committees to ensure that the board has sufficient expertise and help. Each member of the sub-committees is approved by the current board before service. We currently have some of the following committees: Standing, Appeals, Architectural Control, Estates, Facility Review, Finance, Green and Recreational.

The board also created the position of general manager, who is currently a general contractor with years of experience. He meets with sub-committees or respective chairs as is needed.

Beyond the sub-committees, there is an abundance of intelligent people in our community that we value and rely on.

I am a retired general contractor. I have built custom homes worth millions of dollars. From that experience, there are always going to be issues. Paradoxically, some are small but take a lot of time to correct, while some are big and take less time to correct. It’s all about the willingness to resolve and move on.

The Appeals Committee meets monthly and oversees our members in our community who have received a citation of some type. They have the most thankless job of any sub-committee. They listen to each member for up to 10 minutes about the issued citation, then, in private, discuss and vote to affirm or modify the citation. They see 20 to 30 reviews each month. All rely heavily on this committee.

The Finance Committee works to create the annual budget, the most important thing in Canyon Lake.  They work with our Controller Susan Dawood and her staff. Between these two entities, it is brought to the board of directors to decide the final outcome.

There is no more difficult part of a director’s job than the review and approval of the annual budget. This current board has just completed next year’s budget with help from the Finance committee and Susan Dawood.

Mike Harris

Mike Harris. Photo by Donna Ritchie

All committee members are appointed by the board of directors. They report directly to the board and work with the general manager. The committees are comprised of business owners, engineers, accountants and tradesman. They do not interface with designers, contractors or engineers.

The Architectural Control Committee is the only committee required by the Davis-Sterling Act. They work tirelessly to review permits and plans for improvements, structures and modifications to member’s lots in accordance with the CLPOA governing documents, CC&R’s and Rules & Regulations.

They visit homeowners on a weekly basis when permits do not have sufficient detail to make an informed decision. They inform the homeowner of the governing documents in order for the permit to be in compliance. This is the hardest working committee.

The Finance Committee is the second hardest working committee. They spend countless hours reviewing the monthly financials in order to prepare for the yearly budgets.

The Facilities Review Committee is responsible for looking at the overall common areas and developing an ongoing program to life, limb and property of the CLPOA, to preserve and enhance certain assets, including roads, bridges, the drainage system, the perimeter fencing, the street lighting and signage. The committee conducted a survey of residents and we are rapidly working to complete the highest priority items.

The other standing committees are Recreation, Appeals, Green and Estates. They are invaluable in the service they provide.

The only change I would make is more accountability to avoid committees redesigning of a working engineered plan, e.g. the main gate. The buildings were originally designed with wrap around windows for visibility.

We have now ordered windows to install on the vehicle side so members can see in and attendants see out. Every year we host a wonderful dinner event to show our appreciation to the committees.