Mike Dixon Responds to Ron Johnson, or Does He?

Bob Frank;

Your idea of painting the Villas and all the other painting year round (as needed) makes too much sense to ever be considered by the other board members.
You would think that the property and grounds committee would give it some consideration though. Is there any one on the P&G committee that could muster enough business sense to consider the changes that might save this community a lot of money?

Oh crap – now I remember. That was a stupid question.

I hope Ron Johnson doesn’t think that when Mike Dixon went “nose to nose” with him and shouted, that it was an isolated incident. Mike did the same thing to me one day in front of witnesses. To my misfortune the witnesses were Terry DaSilva, and some other employee’s of RMI. If I’m not mistaken Mike has done this to several other residents as well.

Maybe Mike isn’t feeling too well these days, with all the complaints and stuff. Maybe Mike (like David Berman related before he forged a signature), is suffering from depression, and he just doesn’t know it. I hope Mike doesn’t do what David did in HIS past.

Gee, maybe we should start checking all the signatures on the bank withdrawals and stuff. If it could happen to David, it could happen to Mr. What’s his name.

Good point, bbaker2879! Thank you for posting!

As most people know, all of the villas, and our community facilities, were not constructed in the same quarter of the same years, and so by forcing the villas to be painted at the same time it forces the costs of labor and materials to be higher than necessary. Also, paint weathers in part due to direct exposure to the Sun and whether it is wood, metal or stucco, etc. So, by painting everything in one year using the big project approach, you are always wasting money.

There is also a potential tax problem by putting large painting projects into our reserves accounts. I am advised that the Internal Revenue Service rejects allowing that approach. IRS considers painting to be a non-capital expense that should be routinely handled in operating funds and should not be put tax-free into reserve accounts.

If true, that could mean that the hundreds of thousands of dollars we have in our reserves for painting projects could wind up being declared taxable at the 30% corporate rate. That would be very bad news indeed. We need to avoid any chance of that happening in a future IRS audit. For more details on this issue, see this link:
http://www.porterandcompany.com/Articles/ItCouldHappentoYou.pdf

Most importantly, many companies, government agencies, and property managers have learned what Disneyland and other well-managed companies have practiced for decades--that inspecting and painting as needed is far more cost-effective, as well as providing a better appearance, in both the short- and long-runs. SCA needs to pay attention to the lessons learned from others.

I believe that the SCA Board needs to direct RMI to employ a small crew of part-time painters that are available on-call, year-round, to maintain our villas and community property (inside and outside) with such an efficient approach. Quality will be much higher as we have full control over the paint quality, the surface preparation work, and the quality assurance via a RMI staff member. Costs will be lower by not paying contractor overhead, G&A and profit costs--while paying for labor at the lower, part time rates. I suspect that we could also benefit from RMI hiring some of our seniors living in the Henderson area who often welcome such part-time employment opportunities and who may provide superior workmanship.

This year-round painting approach was jointly proposed by Bruno and myself last Summer, but Mr. Dixon unilaterally dismissed it, and a few other board members just went along. The results are costing members a great deal of money and inconvenience. I will press again under the new board to seriously investigate the cost-trade-offs for this painting approach.

How many people paint their houses every 7 years? My guess would be none. Why do we not extend the time frame for the painting? Makes too much sense!!
If Mike Dixon spent less time at GVR he would have more time for board matters.