1
STEP 1: Assess the Community’s Current Financial Position
While the “shelter in place” order may be frustrating, let’s not sugar coat it, so were your 2020 budget planning meetings. What took blood, sweat, and tears to put in place months ago may now be a snapshot of what could have been, pre-Covid. Te reality is many members have been impacted financially by the economic downturn. Te first step is to assess current payments and ensure operating cashflow for the association is in-line with projected budgets. For those in need, there is government and privately supported financial aid. It’s important to be proactive in sharing this information with members who may be falling behind on their dues as it will ultimately serve to protect the association’s common interests.
STEP 2: Explore Cost Savings Options
Once the Community’s current financial position has been verified, and if found to be below projections, considerations need to be made for how to best “weather the storm”. Unfortunately, we Californians are all too familiar with this mindset given recent droughts. Te common reaction for most during these times was to simply cut costs wherever possible. Tis led to irrigation being completely turned off, plants and grass dying, and accumulations of deferred maintenance that was later paid for exponentially. Tis should provide a lesson in what NOT to do. Tere are reasonable accommodations that can be made to cut costs, save money, and not disrupt the infrastructure of your landscape maintenance. For example, we’d suggest discussing the following cost-saving initiatives with your landscape contractor…
Retrofit irrigation from spray heads to drip, wherever possible within planter beds. It’s been reported that 70% of urban wa- ter use is attributed to irrigation and that 50% of that water is wasted. Drip irrigation ensures the water goes directly to the intended source and is opti- mized. For upfront installation costs, the project could poten- tially be supported by reserve funds. Ultimately your associa- tion will capture savings by way of improved water usage.
Convert sections of turf that provide little recreational ben- efit within the association to planters. Turf requires 40%- 50% more water than trees, shrubs, and/or groundcovers. If the turf is strictly there for aes- thetics, low water use planting can provide similar if not more impactful curb appeal, when designed correctly. As an added benefit, rebate money can be utilized (based on your water provider) or the project could also potentially be supported by reserve funds. Depending on the total square footage of turf converted, your association can realize big time savings through lowered water usage.
8
Consider eliminating “busy work” sections of your maintenance service. Tis requires an open conversa- tion with your landscape contractor to identify sec- tions of the property that demand constant atten- tion, by way of frequent trimming, that ultimately provides little benefit to the plant’s actual health & appearance. Most com- monly, the wrong plant was installed in the wrong loca- tion, meaning it didn’t have the proper space to flourish. With an upfront investment in extra labor, these “time sucker” plants can be selec- tively removed. Depending on the volume of plants taken out, there could be a consideration to lower the monthly maintenance fee until times are better and the area can be replanted. Furthermore, select sprin- klers near the removed plants can be capped, if not needed to support the health of other plants nearby, helping to save on overall water use.
2
Bring the topic to membership and discuss tapering service expectations in the short-term. Be candid in sharing the cur- rent financial position of the association and poll the willing- ness to tolerate minor adjust- ments to current service. For example, instead of a 6-week pruning cycle, it will now be an 8-week cycle. All grass will not be edged weekly, rather it will rotate with ½ being com- pleted each week. Leaf debris will be allowed to accumulate in non-focal areas. Small weeds will be tolerated in non-focal areas. Again, this needs to be an open conversation supported by the many and not the few, otherwise it can quickly turn into a frustrating process for all involved. Te goal would be to offer a short-term reduction in maintenance fees, with an agreement to revisit at a spe- cific date as to not allow this to become the “new norm” or ser- vice standard moving forward. Down the road, it should be ex- pected to incur some clean-up fees for the non-focal areas that have had their service scope re- duced once the association is in better financial standing.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32
