Category: Keeping SAEPOA

If I were to pick the most important item for the future of our airpark, beyond use of the runway, it is access to the runway. Thus, the status of our roads is paramount. That includes the condition of the roads and our right to taxi airplanes along them. Since Sandia Airpark Estates is an airpark, preserving the character of the neighborhood matters for the value of our properties, even for those who don’t have airplanes or don’t yet live here.

Jerry and the board (the board is clearly run by Jerry) are now trying again to get SAEPOA dissolved. Their last attempt was a meeting in which we were deprived of a proper means of interacting in order to scare us into dissolving the association in the belief that the IRS was going to come after us as individual lot owners. It appears that they have now given up on that tactic and they are now trying to present another tactic, a lawsuit that they have likely encouraged to try to force our dissolution.

Through all of this, we never really get a clear idea of what’s going to happen to the roads!

• Jerry indicates that he wants the city to take over the roads and pay for their maintenance. At present, however, the city has not done so, and it doesn’t appear likely that it will.
• If we transfer the roads to public ownership (assuming they are accepted), we are not guaranteed our right to taxi.
• If the city doesn’t take ownership (very likely), who will maintain the roads?
• Right now, you own a 1% share in the roads for each lot you own, through SAEPOA. If SAEPOA is dissolved, what happens? Probate? Court dissolves/decides to grant the roads to “someone”?
• Jerry has a clear business interest in the properties to the North side. Does this have anything to do with it?

Deborah and I have been very grateful for Sandia Airpark and our neighbors. We’re going through a tough time right now, but this is not always the case, and even now, we greatly enjoy living here. We jointly wrote this post to give us a look ahead.

What could be more enjoyable than a friendly neighborhood with pilots who love to fly? Furthermore, we get the pleasure of families who are charitable to spread goodwill to the community inside and outside the Airpark, including the communities of Edgewood, the East Mountains in general, and even the entire Albuquerque area.

Good things about SAEPOA (Why Keep SAEPOA?)

• We allow public use of our private roads/taxiways, by anyone for:
  • Taxiing aircraft
  • Strolling, jogging
  • Walking dogs, horses
  • Biking, driving, etc.
• Our partnerned airport owner provides runway/fuel access for anyone. Pilots fly, use, the runway, roads, and have access whether they are SAEPOA residents or not.
• We sponsor holiday events for families:
  • Annual Santa Fly-In (Dec.),
  • Trick-or-Treats (Oct. 31),
  • July 4^th Barbeque, etc.
• We have many EAA members who do activities like Young Eagles (EAA), in fact the local chapter board is largely SAEPOA members.

Good things we would like to promote at the Airpark:

As we think ahead, we’re thinking of other things we can do, and we’d very much like your ideas on what we can do.

• Fly-In (sponsored by SAEPOA)
• Air Show for kids (with model airplanes, even helicopters, or other manned aircraft) for community
• Do simple fundraising that we coulduse to support better community service:
  • Chili cook-off (e.g., volunteers cook chili to be given freely by the cup; voting costs $1 or more as a donation. Chili with highest $ donation, wins!)
  • Bake Sales
  • Sell hot dogs, chips, drinks (perhaps at an Air Show)

It is our sincere hope that we will be able to do these kinds of things more than we have in the past. It’s largely for this reason that members are invited to come to our house for cookouts to have fun and to plan great things we can do together.

We are also hoping that our Board will gain an interest in these activities, and will drop their plans to dissolve the Association. Hey Board: Join in building the Association and the neighborhood up so that we can better serve each other and the community at large!

Done right, an Airpark like ours should be the envy of all neighborhoods! Please help us build this community. As a bonus, property values will increase with improved community relations.

Please share your thoughts with us in our ongoing discussion, Begining this Thursday, Feb. 13 at 6pm! Thereafter on Fridays, starting February 21. See you then!

Yesterday, you probably received an email from “SAEPOA Correspondence”. Although the email is signed by Richard Baker as President, recent history has shown that the likely authorship is Jerry Powers, our Vice President.

The email appears intended to create a panic in order get the members supportive of disbanding the Association in order to avoid problems with the IRS.

I believe that there are many flaws in the argument given, and I urge the members to avoid panicking and hasty action.

Let’s look at what is said and how it should be looked at soberly:

The email states that “the SAEPOA attorney has informed us” – in other words, we still only have the words of an attorney who only consults with Jerry (per his own words and the obvious statements from SAEPOA legal invoices). This is an attorney, not a court, nor the IRS. Futhermore, all information is filtered through Jerry, who has sought the dissolution of SAEPOA for years.

According to the lawyer hired by Jerry using the Association’s money, we are “at risk of fines, back taxes, interest and penalties that could well amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars.” What is very important to realize here is who is “we”. Is it us as individual property owners? No! Rather, it is we, as the not-for-profit incorporated SAEPOA. In other words, SAEPOA is running the risk, not us personally. Could SAEPOA be bankrupted? Yes, primarily if this board mismanages things! How does that affect us individually? Well, we would be no worse off than if we disband it and give the money away as Jerry wants. There is a chance that officers of SAEPOA could be held accountable if the IRS or a court finds some kind of malfeasance. However, this is the case whether SAEPOA is dissolved or not. To reiterate, this is what the alternatives look like:

1. Dissolve – SAEPOA account is certainly and completely zeroed one way or another. Officers could still be held liable for their actions if the IRS decided we were in some kind of violation.
2. Keep – SAEPOA continues operation — and only in the worst case, or by board decision — the accounts are zeroed or substantially diminished. Officers could also be held liable for their actions if the IRS decides there is a violation.

In the board email, the earlier statements are clarified, but in a way likely intended to alarm by stating that it “could result in the filing of liens against property and garnishment of funds from the Association’s bank accounts”. Please note that the action mentioned is against the Association, not individual lot owners. In other words, worst case, how is this any worse than dissolving the HOA and giving the assets away preemptively?

Perhaps one of the most egregious statements was how this “was discussed at our last member Zoom meeting on January 31.” The meeting was, frankly, designed to prevent any discussion of an open variety. Zoom was used as a tool to control dissent as many of us suspected. The link is included in the board email, and I suggest that you review it. In it you will see that:

• Richard, our president, only speaks for about two sentences, reading a prepared statement, and turning the meeting over to Jerry.
• From this point forward, Jerry does all presentation.
• The entire agenda and flow is oriented to move the membership towards panic, driven by the idea that the funds will be lost (by Jerry’s and the Board’s actions, which are likely not legal) and that there is a looming, if unclarified IRS problem.
• Dissolving SAEPOA is presented as the solution to the problem, although it is not made clear how it would really improve our situation.
• The only interaction allowed from the membership is through Zoom “hand raising”, and questions can be only be asked of Jerry.
• When Jerry responds, the members are muted, so that they can’t question or reply to Jerry’s responses.
• Chat was disabled to ensure no challenges there, either.
• At one point, Jerry even goes so far as to answer for the Attorney!

The authors of the email state that the board wanted to “reform the Association and get it back to legal operation and do some good things for the community.” This is just not credible. Any attempts to get back to legal operation were certainly not discussed with the membership (not surprising there). Regarding doing “good things for the community,” the statement is not in good faith. This board and the Working Group have shown a studious disinterest in community-oriented activities, whether that is starting a Young Eagles activity, or doing community events like the Santa Fly-In where not one board member or Working Group participant was even present.

The email goes on to very forcefully push for the dissolution of SAEPOA, claiming that we “risk the IRS fines, penalties and back taxes that all members will be responsible for.” This is intended to create panic–inappropriately. Again, worst case, the fines and penalties would only belong to the Association. Back taxes could potentially (and unlikely) be owed by individuals under the improbable scenario that the IRS decides to retroactively pursue individuals for claiming deductions for their dues as charitable donations. Such individuals would only owe tax on the adjusted amount. Since the dues is small, the deductions are small, and the backtaxes would be even smaller. Furthermore, it’s unclear if dissolving SAEPOA would remove that unlikely(and probably tiny) tax liability.

The board then goes to make the pitch that we are illegal, again, with the underlined statement that a “501(c)3 corporation can only spend money on the public at-large and must not benefit the members.” The IRS, however, can (and often does) interpret this fairly openly. Historically, the IRS has certainly not meant that doing action for public good must exclude the members. For example, the EAA is a 501(c)3, but it still does good for its members, all 250,000 of them! Jerry’s main objection is that the primary expense of SAEPOA was roads. Keep in mind, however, that even though we are a private airport, we are public use. Any aircraft can (and does) use the roads/taxiways, especially the aircraft residents of the commercial hangars. Harrison Ford nearly took off into me as he taxied out from one of roads/taxiways, and I don’t believe he is a SAEPOA member! We keep the roads open to the general public who regularly walk or drive through the neigborhood.

Consider that SAEPOA has operated for well over 30 years without problems from the IRS. Jerry questions whether we are in conformity with IRS requirements and is saying that we need to dissolve quickly. I am simply asking “why the panic now?” What is it that drives us to act with great haste and little discussion.

SAEPOA had a long-running argument about the fairness and legality of the automatic counting of “yes” votes to achieve the 2/3 majority requirement for some written votes. Many have felt that this is unfair. In fact, several years ago, the association voted to end the practice (although ironically it used automatic “yes” votes to do so).

Even though the practice has ended, the subject of “yes votes” and their effect on past association votes was the rallying cry for the “Working Group” as Jerry Powers was forming it. The Working Group would insist that proper representation had to be restored and that all prior votes under the rule needed to be reversed, and future votes had to be “fair” (even though the rule had already changed). This was also a rallying cry for elections and probably had an influence on the election of Jerry, Richard and others to the board.

Now, however, we are living with an alternate reality. While Jerry has argued that we needed to restore representation, he is running the airpark as a single leader. Jerry is the only one presiding or substantially speaking in meetings. With Zoom as his venue, he makes liberal use of the “mute” button and ensures that only his point of view is heard. He has a unanimous rubber-stamp approval from the board, and so he dictates changes. In fact, major votes (such as reversing governance for 30 years, or refunding monies from dues increases) are being made by Jerry alone and then rubber-stamped by the board. These should properly be done using the very 2/3 written vote requirement that Jerry raised as his hue and cry!

Even “lesser” items, such as contracts, require membership approval, which would normally require a majority vote of a quorum present in a membership meeting. This includes the contracts for attorneys who claim to represent the entire association, but who were chosen by Jerry and who only interface with Jerry. By all appearances, we are paying for Jerry to hire three lawyers who claim to work for us, but are perhaps working against us, and we are denied the right to say or do anything about it in violation of our rules.

Now, Jerry is pushing the idea of doing away with SAEPOA, essentially killing our ability to organize at all and leaving us to whatever he has planned next. I suspect that he intends to achieve his goals (whether shared or hidden) through control of information (and thus an improperly informed vote by us), or by once again acting via board action to somehow declare the association “illegal” in the same manner that he reversed the last 30 years of governance.

Our entire system is being run through Jerry, even though our governance is set up in the covenants and bylaws to be much more open. If Jerry really believed in the right to vote as he stated to justify his actions, then he would have at least three votes that he appears uninterested in:

• A written, 2/3 required vote to roll back governance 30 years.
• A written, 2/3 required vote to refund dues.
• A quorum/meeting vote to approve hiring the attorneys.

Alas, there seems to be little interest in really allowing the members to vote. In fact, with Jerry’s plans, it is possible that we will never vote again, or perhaps one time in a rigged situation just to kill SAEPOA.

Beware of those who kill democracy to “save” democracy. At the moment it looks like we have a democracy more like the “Democratic” People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea).

This must get fixed. I challenge Jerry to honor our governance and the membership he claims to protect. I also challenge any board member to reach out to me to discuss their independent reasoning and thought.

Over the last several years, we have seen a portion of SAEPOA members, known as the “Working Group”, formed and led by Jerry Powers, that proposes substantial changes to how we operate in Sandia Airpark. Gradually, this group has gained election of the board of directors for SAEPOA, and it now has a clean sweep with complete control. Recent meetings have shown that Jerry is running the entire process, even though he is the Vice-President and not the President. (As seen in the board meeting of 29 Jan and membership meeting of 31 Jan.) At this point, the association President, Secretary and Treasurer vote unanimously with whatever Jerry dictates. Indeed, other than Richard’s ceremonial two-sentence opening, Jerry was the only speaker.

Jerry/the Board/Working Group now have started extreme and unilateral actions that should require a written vote with a 2/3 majority (interestingly one of the main items on which this group has campaigned). These actions include a unilateral decision by the Board to reverse 30 years of governance of the association, and the decision to refund money from all dues increases over that time. Considering the length of time, increases for various purposes, and inflation, this may mean that the association will bankrupt itself. Jerry has presented this as a necessary action, and says that he doesn’t need a membership vote because prior actions were (in Jerry’s words alone) “illegal”. For backup he includes various opinions of lawyers who report to him personally, even though they are paid for by the membership. All information, contact with attorneys, etc., is filtered through Jerry. No court judgment or other final action is cited.

Jerry’s Plans (as well as we know them)

Jerry doesn’t make everything clear, particularly what his financial or other interests or conflicts that might influence board actions. However, he says that he has a set of remedies. Jerry has layed out a motivation of both fear (of adverse action against the airpark), and reward (Sandia Airpark having its needs met for “free”). However, the presentation is one-sided in that no one is able to debate the issues with Jerry on an even ground. Jerry runs the meetings and they are essentially a one-way communication. Even during comment periods, Jerry is quick with the mute button to ensure that he holds a one-sided advantage. Thus, key issues are left out. We must discuss:

• The risks associated with taking Jerry’s approach, which could be very substantial and leave all property owners seriously damaged.
• A realistic assessment of the downsides of keeping the Airpark – away from the haste and fear stoked by Jerry/the board/working group.

In the coming weeks, I suggest that we make a sober assessment. I will do my part to understand better how to make this decision wisely and I encourage all lot owners to do the same.

Let’s start, however, with an outline of the risks behind Jerry’s plan that he has not acknowledged, but are nevertheless likely. His plan proposes the following:

1. Jerry says that acrimonious SAEPOA meetings will end: Jerry mentions a benefit of no longer having contention. I have lived in this airpark for 18 years and have gone through two periods of acromony. One was about 15 years ago, and the issue then was about horses and personal disagreements and legal actions among a handful of airpark residents. The acrimony lasted about two years and we got past it. The second phase began with Jerry’s arrival and the creation of the Working Group. While Jerry is pushing for the idea that abolishing SAEPOA would allow us to then live in a harmonious neighborhood with a spirit of volunteerism, I have my doubts. Normally, the person creating the acrimony does not end it when they get their way, rather they double down as they move toward their next objective. I don’t expect volunteerism to increase as well. One point of evidence is that Working Group members did not come and did not assist for the Santa Fly-In, our major annual event.
2. Jerry says the roads would be paved for “free” using city money: By ending the association and handing over the roads to the city, we could, in theory, have them paved at city expense. However, this is one of our greatest risks. From what we see, the “GO bond” of 2014, upon which Jerry was counting, has been cancelled for paving the north end of Rainbow Road, and there are no further plans to pave the other roads in the airpark. Given that Edgewood still has many residents living on dirt or gravel roads, I would expect the city to be reluctant to raise new money on our behalf. This plan of Jerry’s could lead to disastrous consequences. These include:
   • The roads never getting paved and we no would no longer have money or an association to pave them.
   • After ceding our rights to the city, the city changes its mind and forbids aircraft from using the roads — total loss of use for the airpark. This would very adversely affect property values whether you live here or not.
   • (In case you don’t believe that leaders don’t change their mind, consider that our association president assured us, only a year ago, that he would not cooperate with Jerry in the event that Jerry moved toward ending SAEPOA. He has obviously changed his position. The city or state present even greater risk as they are governments with some level of sovereignty. Should they change their mind and forbid aircraft, we would be fighting a government in court–a very difficult task.)
3. He says there will be no dues: While we would not pay SAEPOA dues, please keep in mind that the dues are very low. You may not want to pay the dues, but you may also be walking into a trap in that you will no longer have a fund to resolve problems (such as if the city does not pave the roads).
4. He says that abolishing SAEPOA will end any problems with the IRS and 501c3 status: Merely ending SAEPOA does not shield officers from liability in the unlikely event that the IRS pursues the Association for some form enforcement.

In a subsequent post, I will address the topic of the downsides to keeping SAEPOA. It is my contention that the risks are not nearly as dire as Jerry presents them, and that we should avoid panic. But, that is for another day.