River Oaks Trace Property Owners Association

In Part 1 we gained a little historical perspective of our condo fees. Most importantly, we learned that our fees have always been calculated by a pro rata method per requirement of the Master Deed. This method necessitates that our expenses be multiplied by an apportioning operative (Ownership Factor), the product being the fee to be charged to each condo. We are going to walk through some of the calculations to see how our fees have been evaluated up until a few years ago. We will then look at how our fees have been corrupted with a methodology that is contrary to the pro rata process.

We will begin by assembling data needed to compute the Ownership Factors. Ownership Factors are simply the fractions representing the percentage ownership of each condo in River Oaks Trace. You may remember the following formula from Part 1:

Our job is to gather up the square footage areas of all the condos in ROT. We will do this by way of a spreadsheet the same way Bill Pryor did back in 2005. I will present you with a single spreadsheet one or two columns at a time. Click on Exhibit 1 below. In Column A you will see the condo numbers ordered from #1 to #52. In Column B are the square foot areas of the corresponding condos (on the same row) in Column A. These are the same areas used by Bill Pryor (and approved by the Board of Directors) in 2005, except for condo #52 which was added years later. In all likelihood Pryor used data obtained from the Tax Assessor’s office–possibly from the website www.arcountydata.com which the Assessor uses to publish such information to the public. This site went online around 2003.

Using the formula for the Ownership Factor given above we can calculate the OF for each condo. You will notice the figure 68,296 at the bottom of Column B; this is the total area of all the condos in the Trace given in square feet. We will calculate the OF for Condo #1 to illustrate:

Don’t be alarmed at the long stream of decimal places; three or four decimal places are enough. It is just that the spreadsheet defaults to such extreme precision. If you click on Exhibit 2, you will see all the other Ownership Factors have been computed in like manner and displayed in Column D. Added in Column E are the equivalent percentages for a more familiar look. Keep in mind that OF’s can change only if the square foot area changes in the Trace.

Turning now to how fees are actually computed, all that needs done is to multiply the amount of Association’s expenses for a given period by the Ownership Factor. The expenses could be the total for a day, a month, or a year–any period, actually. Using Condo #1 as an example, if the Association’s expenses are estimated to be $120,000 for next year, the total fee for Condo #1 would be $120,000 x 0.0164577720510718 = $1,974.93. Dividing the result by 12 gives a monthly fee of $164.58, or $165.00 when rounded.

Our current fees are a result of the original calculations of Bill Pryor back in 2005 along with a couple of modifications–a 28% increase in 2008 and a recalculation of OF’s in 2011 when Condo #52 was added. It is with the most recent modifications of our Board of Directors that we encounter a problem. Over the last couple of fee increases and Special Assessments the Board has not applied the pro rata method per the Master Deed; instead, they have simply increased the fees of all condos by equal amounts.

In one case the Board increased all fees by $50 for a total increase of
$50 x 47 (units) =$2,350.00. As we have already discussed, the way this should have been done is to take the total and multiply it by each OF to find the fee increase for each condo. Click on Exhibit 3 and examine Column E to see the increase that individual condos should have paid. The values shown would be rounded to the nearest dollar. Condos which have areas close to the average of 1453 square feet will also have fee increases close to the average of $50; the variation will be only a few dollars. The difference in fees grows as the condos get smaller or larger. There is a very identifiable bias favorable to larger condos and detrimental toward smaller condos when fees increase. This bias reverses and favors smaller condos when there is a reduction in fees; but, how often are fees ever reduced?

Let’s make a distinction here between the pro rata method stipulated by the Master Deed and the method used by the Board in the most recent fee actions. Hereafter, I will refer to the method of applying equal charges to fees and Special Assessments as “The Levelized Method”, or simply “Levelization”. Be mindful that these two methods are not compatible; in fact, they are mutually destructive. Look at the formula below:

If we divide both sides of this equation by “Total Expense”, we get:

This is exactly what we would expect–the value of the OF (Ownership Factor) remains the same. If we now increase our expense by $50 with a corresponding increase of $50 in the Condo Fee (Levelization) to offset the new expense, we get the following:

If you remember your work with fractions from early school years, you will note that this last expression no longer equals the OF. That, of course, is because when you add the same number to both the numerator and denominator of a fraction, you change the value of the fraction. Remember, we stated earlier that the only way the Ownership Factor could change is for the Area (square footage) of the infrastructure to change as square footage is the metric used to compute the OF’s in the first place. Thus, the Levelized Method corrupts the OF by changing its value.

We have seen how a $50 increase in fees would look by the pro rata method; a $50 Special Assessment would look the same for its duration. Let us now look a case where the Special Assessment is much larger. Last year we repaid two loans in the amount of $83,472.00. The Board simply divided this amount by the number of units in ROT (47) to arrive at a charge of $1,776.00 to be paid by each unit. The way this should have been done, of course, was to multiply the total amount by each Ownership Factor to secure the proportionate amount each condo should have paid. Click on Exhibit 4 and examine Column F to see what the payments should have been.

Condos with areas close to the average (1,453 square feet) paid an amount close to the average of $1,776.00. Payment amounts would vary significantly as the condos get smaller or larger. For perspective, the smallest condo (#34A) paid $649.00 more than it should have paid; the largest condo (#6) paid $1,865.00 less than it should have paid.

In Exhibit 5 the variance between what each condo should have paid and the average of $1,776.00 is shown in Column H. Amounts that were underpaid are shown in red; overpaid amounts are in black. In Column G are our current fees which are now an illegitimate hybrid of the pro rata Method and Levelization.

A few weeks ago I sent an email to the Board of Directors asking why they ignored the Master Deed in assigning the most recent fee increases and Special Assessments (prorating increases). They refused to answer my question. Their silence prompts another question–“Does the Board intend to continue ignoring the Master Deed in the future’? And, of course, the cliche‘ query comes to mind–“If the Board is not going to follow the rules, how can they expect us (members) to follow the rules”?

In Part 3 I will show a simple way to correct the aforementioned irregularities such that the Association has the money it needs to operate and members never overpay nor underpay their fees…mm

Congrats to Myles F who recently completed basketball camp at Harding University. Myles is son of Carrie and Paul F (#12). Now where is that LeBron guy?

Back in 2005 a man by the name of Bill Pryor was tasked by our Board of Directors with recalculating the condo fees of River Oaks Trace. Bill was the accountant for the Association at the time. He was a sober, competent professional who enjoyed a reputation for dedication and accuracy.

The Association’s Master Deed sets out the guidelines for computing condo fees in clear fashion after stating its philosophy about how they should be created. That philosophy is that since larger condos require more resources for the services they receive, they should pay proportionately higher fees; collaterally, smaller condos require fewer resources for the services they receive and should pay proportionately smaller fees. The fees, therefore, should be distributed in a manner that reflects the size of the condos to which the fees are applied; thus, a pro rata method of distribution should be used in fee calculation. Below is the excerpt from Section V of the Master Deed laying out the pro rata method of fee calculation.

Following the above instruction is an explicit example of the above outlining the method used in computing the percentage ownership of the original condos comprising River Oaks Trace–condos 1 through 5.

Additionally, Section VII of the Master Deed assigns the payment of the common expenses as being proportionate to the Ownership Factors, or Percentage, as calculated in the above example.

The concept of proportionate share in the payment of common expenses is further reinforced in Section IX, Article 9.2, of the By-Laws:

Let me explain that “size of the condos” means the square foot area of not only the living area but also virtually all appurtenant structures associated with the condos–garages, decks, patios, walkways, etc. Bill Pryor assembled the square footage for each condo in the Trace, likely from such data maintained by the county tax assessor. He could then calculate the fractional share of ownership of each condo by dividing the area of each condo by the total square footage of all condos. Such mathematical division would produce a decimal fraction representing each condo’s share of ownership. This fraction is what I will hereafter call the condo’s “Ownership Factor”. In Part 2 of this series, I will show you the calculations used to determine the Ownership Factors for us currently and then how those factors are used in computing our fees.

Over the years since Bill’s work there have been a handful of modifications to our condo fees. Just two years after Bill’s efforts the Board at the time determined that we were not bringing in enough revenue and in 2008 a 28% increase was imposed. About 2011 the last condo built in River Oaks Trace (#52) was figured in to the Ownership Factors. Fees were stable for several years after that until we underwent some fee increases and Special Assessments necessitated by natural cost additions and bank loans.

In Part 2 I will take you through the calculations to determine the Ownership Factors; then, we will look at the computations for condo fees. I will show you some anomalies present in our current fees, how our fees have been corrupted, and I will reveal to you the consequential decision made by Bill Pryor back in 2005 that has troubled the collection of condo fees for the past 21 years…mm

I met an energetic young man yesterday by the name of Jacob Doyle who is working in the neighborhood power washing our houses. He was contracted by President Sivia to clean all the units in River Oaks Trace. I am sure this is good news to all.

Jacob is very accommodating and is careful of details like flowerbeds; be sure to offer your cooperation and instruction when he makes it to your home, probably within the next two weeks or so. Also, give a shout of thanks to President Sivia when you see him.

If you have personal power washing needs, you can call Jacob at 573-239-7205. Click on the image below to go to his website…mm

It was not that surprising to learn at our general meeting that we are compensating our President. Our legacy documents do not allow compensation for the President, other staff, or Board members for performing their regular duties; however, compensation is allowed for work performed above and beyond those duties–typically, work that we would have to pay for anyway like professional services. Traditionally, over the last 40 years or so, any work offered by the President outside their duties was considered voluntary. The job can be demanding and any work outside the job duties is certainly worth compensating.

Out of curiosity I sent a text to the Board of Directors asking about the reportable nature of the compensation. The exchange is given below.

QUESTION: Hon. Board, Now that we are paying our President, I have a question.  Are we paying him under a W-4 (employee), 1099 (contractor), or nothing at all?

BOARD’S RESPONSE: Thank you for your question . The board has made sure that all necessary documentation for Bills stipend has filed. 

My question was simple, pointed and object-oriented and I expected a specific answer. The Board’s response, however, was non-specific and deflective. Curious that they did not just tell me which document applied…mm

Welcome to the latest iteration of my site dedicated to River Oaks Trace. As I did in my previous site, I intend to give relevant information that you may find useful and even impactful. More than that, I want you, the members of River Oaks Trace, to participate in this venue by sharing things important to you and which you think may be of interest to others. Those things may include opinions, observations, compliments, complaints, photos, birthday wishes, holiday recipes, etc.

As webmaster, author, and monitor I must make a few rules. If you submit items to be posted here, please focus on family and community. Let’s stay away from politics and controversial matters outside our immediate neighborhood; there are plenty of other sites for that. If you have something to share, send it to me by text, email, regular mail, or other form of communication and I will transcribe it into a post for you. It’s even better if you can send photos as well; visuals make an article more interesting. If you need help with photos, I have 60 years experience in photography along with skills in Photoshop and graphic design.

Occasionally, there may be posts that contain sensitive information not suitable for outsiders to see. In such cases I will protect those posts with a passcode and I will give the passcode out only to ROT members. Passcodes will expire within 12 to 24 hours, after which a new passcode will be required. I will distribute passcodes with a text alert.

Attribution: Also on the subject of security, I need to know your identity for any articles that you submit for publication. I will normally know this through your method of submission–email, text, phone, etc. There are, however, hackers who like to create mischief by spoofing legitimate contributors; therefore, I will need your full name (first and last) along with your submissions.

Referring to the previous paragraph, for security reasons I will not include your full name in posts that I publish for you. At most, I will include only your first name and the initial of your last name; however, I suggest you provide me an alias under which to publish your articles. Examples of aliases would be “Happy Frog” and “Over the Hill”. You can make up your own, of course. You can be anonymous…mm

On Saturday, 9 May 2026, Brady Owens graduated Harding University after years of hard work. Brady is the son of Carrie (Owens) Friar (#12). Congratulations to Brady for earning his BBA degree and best wishes for a bright future whether he enters the workforce or pursues his Master’s. God bless you bro’.

I need to make a plea for the organization pictured above–Sweet Paws Rescue. It is an operation run by husband and wife Sam and Sabrina Henson who manage it out of their home north of Judsonia. Their primary aim is to rescue dogs who have been abandoned, tortured, or discarded by their owners. Some of the details of these rescues are horrifying; the brutality found just in White County is shocking especially when scaled against the problem nationwide.

If you think I’m joking, watch this (Facebook video)

Martha and I first encountered Sweet Paws about three years ago. Since then we regularly donate supplies, food, equipment and money; but, what we give is far short of the need. Sam and Sabrina have formed a non-profit for their rescue efforts and do get some help from other sources; however, they are faced with a never-ending supply of dogs needing help.

Sabrina is a powerhouse activist when it comes to saving her puppies (and adults too). She will drive to almost anywhere to fetch and rehome them–even hundreds of miles. Police departments, humane societies, puppy mills, and individuals across the state know about her mission and routinely contact her about dogs which are no longer wanted. She has an incredibly energetic and charismatic personality when it comes to collecting her canine charges. Collecting is just the first step. When she brings them home she bathes and grooms them. She gets rid of parasites like fleas and ticks, then she deworms them. She gives them plenty of food and water and whatever else needed to bring them back to good health. For more serious matters like external, or suspected internal, injuries, she takes them to a veterinarian. She does all the above while showing her dogs lots of love along the way.

The veterinarian whom Sabrina uses is sympathetic to her mission; he discounts his service for her, but must charge something. Her visits, understandably, are frequent and so the charges mount up. Her bill right now is over $4,600.00 and she needs help. Please visit her Facebook page by clicking on the image above; and, if you are moved, please consider a donation. Thanks…mm