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

—