This recall will be decided by a very small number of votes.

If 98 people vote NO, the recall fails, even if hundreds of homeowners never vote.

Do not assume someone else will take care of this.

The Facts

• Ballots mailed: January 10
• Ballots due: February 10
• Quorum required: 196 homeowners
• Replacement candidate deadline: January 16
• Next open HOA meeting: January 20

Why This Recall Is Happening

Too many decisions are being made without transparency, without homeowner input, and not in the best interest of the full community.

This recall is about ending personal agendas and restoring a Board that:

• Communicates clearly
• Acts responsibly with our money
• Represents all Morgan Creek homeowners

What You Need To Do

• Vote YES
• Return your ballot immediately
• Talk to your neighbors
• Put up a yard sign

Doing nothing helps block the recall.

If you want change, vote YES.

Comments welcome. On the web post click “comments” on the top.

A QUESTIO0NABLE INCREASE IN YOUR DUES IS COMING JAN 1-WHY SHOULD YOU CARE? WHAT CAN YOU DO?

Of the 586 owners in Morgan Creek, 377 will see an increase of over $18/month. Some will see little change. However, some “lucky” few in the Lake community will see a decrease of over $56/month! Two of the HOA Board members will significantly benefit from this change. In our view, this is a self serving breach of the Board’s fiduciary responsibility to the HOA. It is one significant basis of many for the recall election coming up February 10.

Most members were emailed a summary budget on November 13. Make no mistake, this budget was the work of Steven Lalliss, the Board’s Treasurer, and his alone. We have confirmation in writing that, contrary to misleading statements he made at public meetings that the budget was reviewed by the Community manager’s controller or the associations’ CPA, It was not. This final budget was given to the full board only one day before a hastily called special board meeting and railroaded through to meet a 45 days notice time limit on increasing dues.

So, other than most of us paying more while the select few pay less, what’s the big deal. The changes were made to skew the allocation of money the Association is required to set aside as reserves for future replacements and repairs of infrastructure. These reserves are broken don down by areas, e. g. Lakes, Villas, general. While the new budget does not change the overall amount of money required by the audit of Browning, an independent firm, It does dramatically skew the reserve amount away from Lake properties and toward the other members, leaving the Lake area underfunded, less than 20% of the amount needed. Read the report in the budget documents. It’s all there. Who does this benefit, Board members Steven Lalliss and Stephanie Bernal.

So, if any of the above offends you and your pocketbook as it does us, in addition to supporting the recall by voting YES, we suggest you write to the Community managers, the Board, and our Association’s attorney demanding the budget be revised to correct this financially irresponsible wrong and leave the existing dues structure intact. In addition, we suggest that you request the HOA attorney review the budget process and go on record as to whether any rules were violated. You can reach Action Property Management at the below address, and ask them to forward your correspondence to the Board. In addition, the HOA’s attorney, John Hansen can be reached at the address shown below.

rleng@actionlife.com

jhansen@bayjaclaw.com

If you wish to comment click the “comments” word at the top of this post.

Support the recall. VOTE VOTE VOTE We need a quorum. YOUR VOTE MATTERS

First the good.  We had a near record turnout on Tuesday night.  There were about 80 people who attended in person and another 54 who tried to attend by Zoom, 134 total.  Unfortunately, the Zoom connection failed, limiting the meeting to those on hand.  More about that later. 

Another positive was the Introduction of Action Properties, our newly appointed community managers.  They introduced their Company and some of their preliminary plans.  They seemed competent and professional.  Their approach seems to be tech intensive and light on hands on management.  They will be starting December 1 with only one on-site manager one day a week while they recruit a full-time professional.  They rolled out their snaphoa app for their portal and have sent out signup instructions to the owners.  We’re clearly in the honeymoon phase.  We’ll see how it goes.

Now on to the bad and the ugly.  Stephanie started the meeting with the rules of decorum the Board intended to follow.  From there she lost control entirely and the meeting often became chaotic.  Viewing from afar we got the impression that Director Steve was running the show.  That said, what follows is the meat of the meeting:

• From the beginning the offered Zoom connection failed.  Zoom attendees couldn’t hear and finally around 7 pm were kicked out entirely.  Davis Stirling rules require that since Zoom was an offered option, the meeting be paused for a best effort attempt to fix the problem.  That failed.  Therefore, the meeting must be stopped and rescheduled.  Steven and Stephanie were informed of the rules and chose to proceed anyway, claiming Zoom was optional.  A formal protest is being filed.
• Steven, as Treasurer, then attempted to explain the new budget.  There were numerous questions from the floor asking him to respond to why Lake dues (where he and Stephanie live) were being reduced by $57.86 while 377 homes in the general area were being raised $18.20  Also, questions were raised about the reserve study update which shifted reserves out of the Lake Community causing them to fall to a dangerously low level of under 20% of the study’s recommended values.  This should trigger a special assessment of the Lake Community.  Steve’s responses were evasive and never answered the questions. 
• A major discrepancy was exposed when Steve insisted the final budget was delivered to the board in August.  Director Harris said they did not receive it until the night before the Board meeting to approve it, a breach of HOA rules.  Per HOA rules a minimum of 4 days is required.  In addition, Steve, when asked if anyone but him reviewed the budget he prepared said that both the FirstService Controller and our lawyer had.  There is no evidence that this is true.  FirstService has been formally asked to verify this in the full budget package to be mailed to us shortly.
• Again, Steven raised the charge that the recall election has caused significant delays and unnecessary costs, moving the voting out to February.  None of this is true.  Both the annual and recall elections could have been held at this meeting.  Extending the date to the maximum allowed was solely at the Board’s discretion.  See our November 16 post for details.
• Among the committee reports, the only highly controversial one was the Social Committee.  Due to potential conflicts of interest, the committee voted to eliminate event sponsorships (a bad move in our estimation since they can significantly reduce costs).  The only clear conflict would be if a sponsor held a management position with the HOA.  That would be Stephanie Bernal.  The committee also objected to Steve, the Treasurer, arbitrarily reducing their budget from $2,800 to $600 without full board review and approval.  Another issue involved the revision of the committee charter by the board.  The committee chair and one member present stated they were never consulted concerning the change.  Steve and Stephanie insisted they had.  We wonder who is correct?
• As a result of the Zoom fiasco and other interruptions, the owner forum was limited to about 10 minutes when President Stephanie abruptly adjourned the meeting.

In summary, here are some outstanding issues yet to be resolved:

• Will the Board reconvene the open meeting with working Zoom intact as required by law?
• Will FirstService fulfill their fiduciary duty and explain whether or not the final budget was reviewed by their Controller and HOA counsel?
• Will the major change in reserves allocation made single handedly by the Treasurer and ensuing change in dues structure be allowed to stand?
• Will the proposed Social Committee charter change actually include input from committee members who are closest to the issues?

As always, comments are welcome.  To see comments click the  word “comments “ at the top of the post.

There will be an HOA open meeting next Tuesday, November 18 at Creek View Ranch School at 6 pm and also by zoom.  We strongly encourage you to attend in person to find out why a recall election has been called and challenge the board to provide fact based honest answers to the issues raised.

The board members being recalled, Steven Lalliss and Stephanie Bernal, have created several brochures and flyers and opened a website to tell you about the great job they’re doing.  They contain a lot of misinformation without any supporting documentation.  The meeting is your chance to understand what’s really happening.  The following are some verifiable facts and questions you need to ask:

• The recall and annual election timing.  They allege the recall has caused a delay in the annual meeting and caused unnecessary election expense.  The Facts:  Davis Stirling (The legislation governing HOA’s in California) regarding recall elections specifically provides that the board has up to 20 days after petition receipt to set an election date.  They took the full 20 days.  It requires the election be held at least 30 and no more than 150 days from that date.  The petition was submitted in mid-September.  Thus, the recall election could have easily been held at this upcoming meeting along with the annual meeting and election.  The board chose the maximum of 150 days to put it in February.  Google Davis Stirling recall rules to verify if you wish. YOU NEED TO ASK WHY?
• The annual meeting and election of directors has been held in November for as long as we can remember (20+ years).  The board chose to delay that until 30 days after the recall election.  It could have been held on schedule at this November meeting. YOU NEED TO ASK WHY?
• 2026 Budget: The package emailed to owners contains no detail, no comparison with current year actuals and projections. It raises dues for 377 homeowners by $18.20/month while lowering Directors Stephanie and Steven’s dues by $57.86/month and raises major concerns over reserve funding levels.  The lake reserves were reduced to about 10% of required.  It’s in your budget packet.  ASK STEVEN ABOUT THIS APPARENT CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
• The board must receive the final budget for approval at least 4 days before the meeting called to approve it. Our information is that Steven. the treasurer, prepared it on his own without review and presented it to the board the night before the meeting. Steven has claimed in public that his budget was reviewed by the FirstService controller. Contact with the controller revealed no such review took place. ASK WHO CAN VERIFY WHAT, IF ANY, REVIEW TOOK PLACE AND TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF SUCH?
• Honey, I bought this dress on sale and saved us $200!  Logic sound familiar?  The new gate access system claimed $18,985 “savings” but the incumbent system, Door King, had no ongoing costs:  Actual new costs for ButterflyMX per the board are $16,460 for equipment and installation and $6,000 annual subscription.  That’s $22,460 for an unbudgeted capital expenditure made without any community involvement. It’s your money.  ASK ROD, THE ARCHITECT, WHY WE WEREN’T CONSULTED?
• Management company change: The board says FirstService raised their costs by, initially 50% later walked back to 32%, over their tenure. The board claims massive savings of $65,000 with a switch on management companies  Initially, FirstService had one full time manager.  Due to the size of our community and workload a part-time assistant was added.  We will now have Action Properties as manager.  We expect at least the same level of service.  ASK THE BOARD AND ACTION PROPERTIES, WHO WILL BE ATTENDING, IF THEIR BID INCLUDES THESE TWO MANAGERS?
• Director Steven Lalliss claimed someone singled him out for punishment by disabling his community access, without supporting evidence.  He brought suit against the HOA  and, without admitting fault, he was awarded several thousand dollars in small claims court.  We understand he now has a new claim for $2,500 in attorney’s fees.  The HOA has also spent on attorney fees to defend these actions.  In addition, Lalliss withheld dues for several months during this process.   ASK STEVEN FOR AN HONEST PRECISE ANSWER TO WHY HE HAS COST THE ASSOCIATION SO MUCH?
• Removal of volunteer: A Social committee member and business competitor of Director Bernal was removed after most of the social committee filed a complaint against Director Bernal; the board ignored the complaint and conducted no investigation. ASK STEPHANIE TO EXPLAIN?
• Use of HOA-funded events for business promotion: Director Stephanie Bernal’s public social media posts describe community events as “value-driven events,” a way to “turn neighbors into clients,” and “getting visible without feeling salesy” for her real estate business.  ASK STEPHANIE TO EXPLAIN?

Our community deserves transparency and due diligence in financial and management decisions. The upcoming open meeting is an opportunity to ask the hard questions and demand accountability from those in charge.  This recall is not about personal disputes or politics. It’s about safeguarding our community and ensuring that decisions are made with integrity and transparency. Join us in voting yes on the recall to protect Morgan Creek and demand the due diligence our community deserves.

The following is a copy of the agenda. Note, the agenda has an entry that suggests the board will limit open forum comments to 20 minutes. That’s about 6 commenters. We’ve never had this restriction before. The room is usually available until 9 pm. ASK THE BOARD WHY THEY WANT TO THROTTLE THE COMMUNITY’S RIGHT TO TRANSPARENCY?

As always, comments are encouraged/

On Wednesday, the Morgan Creek HOA Board held an emergency meeting and approved the 2026 budget by a 3–1 vote, with one abstention. Whether you attended or not, there’s significant confusion about what was actually said, what’s backed up by documentation, and what questions still need answers.

If you were there, you saw a board member try to ask questions and get shut down repeatedly. You saw homeowners muted. You saw the meeting ended abruptly because it was “time bound.”

In addition, we were told that Action Property Management was selected by the Board but apparently has not signed a contract. With the abrupt firing of First Service whose last day is November 30 there is likely to be a significant gap in services. This will profoundly affect all of us. The extent is yet to be seen.

This post lays out what we know, what we can verify, and what we still need answers on, and why it is critical that every homeowner attend the November 18 meeting.

---

What the Board Said vs. What the Facts Show

“The budget was reviewed by the controller.”

FirstService has confirmed that Steven prepared the budget on his own. The final budget was not reviewed by the management company’s controller.

If a controller review exists, that documentation should be shared with the community.

---

“We are fully funding the reserves per the reserve study.”

The August 2025 Browning Reserve Study tells a different story. It shows the Lake Community funded at only 10.2 percent, far below the 70 percent threshold considered financially healthy.

The study specifically recommended a $120,000 reserve contribution (approximately $1,176 per home) for the 145 Lake Community homes, including Lake Lots, to address this critical underfunding.

That reserve contribution was significantly reduced in the 2026 budget, leaving the Lake Community even further behind on its funding trajectory.

Under California Civil Code §5550, the reserve study must be updated every three years, reviewed annually, and the association’s funding plan must be consistent with that study.

---

“In previous years, the budget was delivered late too.”

Yes, budgets have occasionally been delivered late. But there is a major difference between a late budget that maintains the existing structure and one delivered at 11 PM the night before a vote that changes how costs are allocated across the community.

Last year, the board received the final budget draft on the Friday prior to Tuesday’s open meeting, giving directors several days to review. That was not the case this time.

Under Civil Code §4920, agenda materials must be provided at least four days before a board meeting. That did not happen here.

---

The Real Issue

These are not minor line-item adjustments. This budget shifts significant assets between cost centers, changing who pays for what.

---

What Actually Happened During the Meeting

Here is what we know:

• The budget was delivered to board members at 11 PM Tuesday night for a Wednesday vote.
• A board member tried multiple times to ask legitimate questions and was shut down.
• Homeowners were muted, questions went unanswered, and the meeting was ended abruptly because it was “time bound.”
• Discussion was cut short, the vote was called, and Rod left immediately after voting yes alongside Stephanie and Steven.

Both Steven and Stephanie each own three-share lake lots. Under this new budget structure, their dues will decrease by $57.86 per month, while 377 homes will see their dues increase by $18.23 per month, an extra $218.76 per year for most homeowners in our community.

---

Why Any of This Matters to You

This is not about politics or personalities. It is about money, property values, and responsible management.

The 2025 Browning Reserve Study warns that if we continue on this path, reserves in underfunded areas will be nearly depleted by 2027 or 2028. Major projects like road repairs, fencing, and lake maintenance will exceed available funds.

When that happens:

• The HOA will face large special assessments or steep dues increases to catch up.
• Under Civil Code §4525, HOAs must disclose reserve underfunding in all resale packets. That affects property values.
• Mortgage lenders often flag financially unstable HOAs as high-risk.
• Deferred maintenance costs more in the long run and increases liability for the association.

Moving budget lines around does not solve the problem. Morgan Creek’s reserves in key areas remain critically low. Without immediate action, we are headed toward emergency assessments that will impact every homeowner.

With the impending gap in property management services there will be no one to guide the Board in fulfilling their fiscal responsibility.

---

What Needs to Happen

The board must reconcile the 2026 budget with the  2026 Reserve Study, as required by Civil Code §§5550–5560.

Any changes that affect how reserve assets are allocated by cost center should be supported by an official reserve study conducted by an independent expert.

A third-party financial review/audit should also be conducted by an independent CPA to verify the claims made during Wednesday’s meeting and ensure the budget is accurate, transparent, and fair.

---

Why November 18 Matters

The November 18 meeting is your chance to demand answers.

Here are the questions homeowners deserve clear, written responses to:

1. Where is the reserve study or documentation supporting these cost-center changes?
2. Where is the controller’s review of the final budget?
3. Why was the $120,000 reserve contribution recommended in the2025 Reserve Study for the Lake Community reduced in the 2026 budget?
4. How does the Board propose to fill the gap in services resulting from the firing of our current property managers?

Homeowners deserve transparency, documentation, and financial accountability, not last-minute decisions that leave our community exposed to future financial risk.

---

What’s Next

A recall election for Stephanie and Steven is scheduled for February 2026. While that process moves forward, our immediate priority is correcting the 2026 budget before then.

We cannot afford to wait. The longer we go without aligning the budget to the reserve study, the deeper the financial risk becomes.

---

The Bottom Line

We all care about Morgan Creek. It is our home, and we want it to remain the beautiful, safe, and well-managed community that drew us here in the first place.

Your presence at the November 18 meeting matters. Your questions matter. And your voice matters.

Together, we can ensure Morgan Creek’s finances are handled with the care, integrity, and transparency every homeowner deserves.

As always, comments are encouraged.

Are you happy with your dues, value for the money? Happy with HOA responsiveness to your needs? How about transparency? Here’s your chance to understand what is happening secretly behind the scenes. It does affect you! Attend the HOA Board sponsored Zoom meeting 6 pm Wednesday November 5. This “emergency” meeting has been called with little notice to discuss the 2026 budget. It will also provide an open forum for owners to present issues and ask questions. The meeting agenda and links are at the end of this post.

In preparation, here’s some food for thought:

• The Board has fired our Community manager FirstService for no clear reason. They leave November 30 (their last knowledgeable representative left last Friday). No replacement has been identified. Need an RFID vehicle tag? Need ARC review and approval of a project? Landscaping issue? Good luck.
• We have a new gate system, implemented without any community input. Love it or hate it, what did it cost to install? What are the annual costs we’ve been obligated for? Nobody knows, but you can ask at the meeting.
• Transparency? Here’s a comment that a home owner recently posted. It could be you. “Dear HOA Board, I would like to request some clarification regarding the recent removal of six trees and several bushes along the pathway to the golf course between Parkstone Circle and Pinehurst Drive. We did not receive any written notification or explanation about this decision. The removal has significantly reduced privacy for the four homes adjacent to the pathway, as the bushes next to the iron fences previously provided natural screening. Could you please share: The reason for removing these trees and bushes; Whether there are plans to replace them with similar new landscaping? If there are broader plans to remove additional trees or bushes along other pathways throughout the Pinehurst community? Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. We value the community’s natural beauty and would like to understand the future landscaping plans. Thank you for your time and assistance. Best regards,JD”
• The list goes on.

Join Zoom Meeting:  https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89201191632?pwd=YLNLmLOpkfOk8me1lJsqmBhTbcaU7t.1

Meeting ID: 892 0119 1632 Passcode: 496862

—

Just when we thought we might have some control, the rules for the recall election have been sent out. It’s set for February 10! Yes, you read it right. the statutory rules state a recall election must be held no less than 35 days or more than 150 days from the date of submission of the recall petition. Surprise, he Board selected 150 days. So here’s some facts, what to expect:

• The recall is for two members, Stephanie Bernal and Steve Lalliss.
• The election is handled by an independent company. It will be held February 10 in person and by zoom. Ballot will be sent before. The Board has not indicated whether or not an electronic option will be used.
• A quorum will be 33% of our 586 owners. Removal will require a simple majority of this. In numbers, at least 196 ballots need be cast, and more than 98 of those must vote yes. That is an extremely high hurdle considering voter apathy in the community in past elections. Unlike a regular election where, if a quorum is not reached, there can be a redo with a 20% threshold, in a recall this not an option.
• It looks like the Board has decided that, win or lose, the regular election will be 30 days after the recall. If the recall is successful they will likely not appoint replacements, but wait for the regular election.
• The regular election this time will be to fill positions held by Steve Lalliss and Pam Porter.

Our best current information is that the firing of FirstService will still occur. There last date will be November 30. The Board has an ad hoc committee in place to find and select a replacement. No replacement has yet been identified. With little or no planning for overlap be prepared for chaos!

Over significant objections the Board has implemented the The ButterflyMX gate access system. The access keypads are in and appear to be working, at least until discovered by vandals(think gas pumps). Privacy concerns have been ignored.

Some Board members and some residents continue to use the “Nextdoor Morgan Creek” forum to air this dirty linen very publicly. If you read the variety of posts, you’ll quickly realize the forum is way broader than our enclave. We urge you to stop using it and use this more targeted forum instead.

So what to do. If there is any hope of changing the balance of our Board, the Community must mobilize. To do this, we need better communications. For now, this BLOG is the only thing we’ve got. We urge current followers to alert all your neighbors to its existence and ask them to sign up. When the time is closer, we will need a grass roots effort to inform all residents of what’s happening, then get out the vote. Everyone possible will need to be a part of that.

As always, bring on the comments. But most of all, get your neighbors on board.

On short notice, the Board hosted an orientation on Saturday for the new ButterflyMX gate access system. The meeting was held at the Kingsbarns playground.

We were unable to attend. We’d appreciate comments from any attendees willing to share about how the meeting went and anything learned.

Please respond with comments or thoughts. Thank you.

Stephanie, our HOA Board President, has chosen to respond in a very public unrelated forum, Nextdoor Morgan Creek, to owners concerns over firing FirstService and the new ButterflyMX gate access system. Definitely not the place to air our dirty linen. Why not through the official email system or here on this forum? Below is her post:

“Dear Morgan Creek Members, As President of the HOA Board, I would like to clarify some misinformation circulating to members. First, an email went out yesterday that stated Machelle was removed from her role as General Manager by the board. That is not true, the board ended our contractual agreement with FirstService Residential. The board never dismissed Machelle, that was a FirstService Residential decision, and as a result, they brought on Jim Pryor to take over for Machelle. The only action the board took on September 14th was to terminate the contract with FirstService Residential. It was the board’s understanding that Machelle would continue in her current capacity, until a new Management Company was identified, hired, and the transition process was completed. Please be assured that all community operations and services, including landscaping and maintenance, will continue uninterrupted under FirstService Residential thru November 30th, 2025. Residents should continue to follow all established community rules and procedures, including the timely payment of dues per current processes. Be assured the board is working tirelessly to find a new management company that will be more responsive than FirstService, decrease assessment dues, and ensure a smooth transition. While the board always truly appreciates all the suggestions, ideas and comments shared by members of this community, only the five board members are held to a higher standard of fiduciary trust by the association. Any member can suggest ideas and campaign for change that benefits themselves more than the community. The board members cannot. Directors are voted to serve on the HOA board by all voting members of the community. Therefore, they have the authority to make decisions on behalf of the association. They also must act primarily in the interest of the association above our own interest. For these reasons, the majority of the board acted to remove FirstService Residential as our managing company, for the following imperative concerns: The cost for FirstService Residential has gone up over 50% in less than 3 years since they started managing the association. The board anticipates a reduction in management costs to the association to a level below that at which FirstService Residential started as our management company in November 2022. The board will work to ensure that the new management company serves our community better than the former. FirstService Residential has failed to correctly apply the mandates in our Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for our budget. Multiple errors in our budget have been found that required correction which cost members, including two board members, increased assessments. These errors should have been noted by the management company, but were instead uncovered by our current treasurer. Consistently poor communication and response to issues in the community, specifically, how FirstService Residential mismanaged very concerning back to back break-ins to our mail boxes. The lack of attention to the severity of the concern of residents was unacceptable, and many residents were extremely concerned with the lack of priority to help mitigate or follow up with solutions. The majority of the board perceived a bias by the management company in addressing its concerns. Several of the board members’ valid concerns were not prioritized appropriately. Less than three years ago, the management company was changed from Associa to FirstService Residential, and there was no request by the board at that time for a vote from the entire community. And yet, our management company was changed from Associa to FirstService Residential. Since that change, our fees to FirstService Residential have gone up over 50%. On January 29, 2025 , the President of the board at the time, sent out a survey on Nextdoor to rate the Morgan Creek HOA management company, FirstService Residential. Obviously, there were concerns even back then of the performance of FirstService Residential. In fact, the survey revealed approximately ~51% disapproval rating of this company. Since that survey, the board also noticed significant deficiencies in the performance including the above mentioned finance discrepancies, bias in responding to board members, and potentially legally liable failures to provide documents. Additionally, the board has noted a determent in the performance of FirstService Residential to the point that the board gave notice of its dissatisfaction with both the community manager and FirstService Residential. The board requested a performance improvement plan in March of this year, since that request, the performance deteriorated rather than improved. To address the costs of the new ButterflyMX gate system, the cost analysis the board conducted was $7.85 per owner as a one time fee for the equipment. With an additional $10.24 per owner (less than $1.00 per month ), for annual subscription. Installation costs for the system will be a one time cost of $20.25 per owner. Because the board acted before July 1st, the board saved the association $6,600 in annual subscription fees and $13,385 in equipment costs. I understand the frustration and confusion this situation has caused our community. As your President through the end of the year, I want to assure you that I am committed to full transparency and open communication, so we can work together to bridge this gap and move forward positively. Thank you for your time and patience during this transition. Sincerely, Stephanie Bernal President, Morgan Creek”

Just a few simple observations:

• She claims the firing is because of a price increase. Does anyone know what competitors charge for the same service? Do your homework first.
• She claims Machelle was dismissed by FirstService. Amy effort to keep her for smooth transition? The alternative will be chaotic.
• The claimed survey results was not on an internal site, but the very public and broader site, Nextdoor. We don’t know about you, but we never saw a survey.
• Still no reason why we need the new ButterflyMX System. We’d like to hear.
• She says a big deal was made about minor and historic bookeeping precedents relative to assessments for the Lake community. We believe one or more board members has a lake front home. The recent discovery and assessment change lower their dues? Higher standard?

We could go on.

The HOA recently shared their ButterflyMX Privacy Statement with us. You can download it from their email. We’re not lawyers, but reading through it, we have serious concerns. I hope we have a lawyer on this blog or in our community who can shed light on what we’re risking. If so, please come forward and share. Our quick reading exposes a few immediate concerns.

The app tracks our movements and those who visit us. They have the expressed right to turn information over to law enforcement.

since the app is web based, our information can be exposed to social media, e. g. Meta. It is suggested we have to opt out if we don’t want this exposure.

if the company is acquired or bankrupt, they can turn over our personal data.

we have no choice if we want access to our community other than through our RFID tags. I don’t know about you, but it appears we are being backed into a corner with no say and without being given a valid reason this is happening.

If anyone with more knowledge than us can shed some light on our rights and options, please come forward.