READ THE WHOLE STORY

Tldr

READ THE WHOLE STORY: The Real Cost of Protecting Eastridge Hills

October 22, 2026 | Eastridge Hills Community Commentary

The Reality: Leadership Requires More Than Reading a Budget

Recent discussions about Eastridge Hills’ finances have raised concerns about assessment increases, legal expenses, transparency, and the responsibilities of our Board of Directors.

These are legitimate subjects for homeowner scrutiny. But numbers without context can create a misleading picture of how an Association operates.

A budget tells us what is spent. It does not always tell us why.

And when it comes to protecting our property, enforcing our rights, and maintaining our community, the cheapest decision today can become the most expensive mistake tomorrow.

Let’s examine the facts.

1. Legal Fees: The Cost of Defending Our Community

Much has been made of the Association’s approximately $50,000+ in legal expenditures during 2026, compared with the $4,000 originally budgeted.

That’s a substantial difference. Homeowners deserve an explanation.

But here’s the question: Should the Board refuse to protect the Association’s interests simply because doing so requires legal counsel?

Legal services are a normal and sometimes essential part of responsible HOA governance.

Consider what happens when:

  • A contractor damages our entrance gates. Should homeowners absorb the repair costs, or should the Association pursue reimbursement from the responsible party?
  • Property owners fail to pay assessments or other lawfully imposed charges. Should their neighbors shoulder the financial burden indefinitely?
  • Another association disputes obligations under a recorded easement agreement. Should our Board simply surrender rights that protect Eastridge Hills?
  • A management company accidentally discloses confidential homeowner information. Should the Board ignore the resulting legal exposure?

Each situation may require professional legal assistance.

During 2026, two unexpected matters contributed significantly to the Association’s legal expenses.

First, the management company’s accidental disclosure of confidential homeowner financial information. That incident raised legitimate legal concerns requiring careful attention.

Second, the Association’s efforts to evaluate and enforce its rights under the 1992 recorded Reciprocal Easement Agreement with the neighboring Eastridge Property Owners Association (EPOA).

The county-recorded agreement establishes rights and obligations affecting both communities, including security guards at the back gate. Protecting those rights may require legal advice, negotiation, and, when justified, litigation.

Neither situation could reasonably have been included as a predictable expense in the original legal budget.

Legal fees should always be reviewed, justified, and controlled. But the amount spent alone does not establish waste.

An Interesting Historical Parallel

There is also an irony worth remembering.

During the previous Board’s tenure, homeowners criticized legal expenditures associated with efforts to challenge the recall election process and the $123 assessment designed to chill participation in elections.

Now, legal expenses have again become a subject of criticism by a previous board member.

The appropriate standard should remain the same regardless of who occupies the Board seats:

Were the expenditures authorized, necessary, proportionate, and reasonably intended to protect the Association’s legitimate interests?

That is a more useful question than simply asking how much the attorneys billed.

2. Assessment Increases: Inflation Doesn’t Stop at Our Gates

The Association’s monthly assessments increased from $205 in 2025 to $216.69 in 2026. The 2027 budget identifies a monthly assessment of $260.03.

A roughly 20% increase for 2027 deserves careful explanation.

But Eastridge Hills does not operate in an economy separate from the rest of California.

Service providers face rising labor, insurance, equipment, transportation, utilities, and operating costs. Those pressures appear in the contracts and suppliers that support our community.

When those contracts renew at higher rates, the Association must decide how to maintain necessary services while meeting its financial obligations.

Homeowners can reasonably disagree about spending priorities. They can question contract terms, request competitive proposals, and recommend alternatives. Minutes of open board meetings consistently show the leadership has requested a minimum of three bids for every major contract.

But simply labeling higher assessments as mismanagement does not identify a practical solution.

Which services should leadership eliminate? Which maintenance should The Board postpone? Which contractual obligations should the association abandon?

And what would those decisions cost the membership later?

Responsible budgeting requires more than promising lower dues. It requires explaining how the Association can meet its obligations with the money available.

3. Bank Interest: The Money Didn’t Disappear

One financial comparison deserves particular clarification.

The 2025 budget listed $12,636 in bank interest, while the 2026 operating budget listed only $360.

At first glance, that looks like a dramatic loss of investment income.

But the figures apparently reflect different accounting treatments.

Under the previous Board, the annually published budget attributed reserve investment interest earned to operating revenue.

The current Board budget instead reflects reserve investment earnings in the reserve accounts.

California Civil Code §§4177, 5510, 5550, 5565, and 5570 establish important requirements concerning reserve funds, their permitted uses, financial planning, and disclosure.

Based on the information publicly available, there is no indication that the previous Board actually transferred or spent the reserve interest. The discrepancy appears to involve how the earnings were presented in the annual budgets.

That is an important distinction.

The 2025 figure represented approximately $13 per homeowner per month. Including reserve earnings in an operating-income comparison can make the earlier operating budget appear more favorable than a properly classified comparison would show.

An accounting correction is not a loss of income. Money doesn’t disappear because it moves to the proper column.

As homeowners, we should compare actual investment earnings across both operating and reserve accounts before drawing conclusions.

4. Executive Sessions: Confidentiality Is Not Secrecy

California law generally requires HOA Board meetings to be open to members, subject to specified exceptions.

Civil Code §4935 permits executive sessions for certain matters, including litigation, personnel matters, contract formation, member discipline, and qualifying assessment-payment issues.

Why?

Because some Association business involves confidential legal advice, sensitive homeowner information, or negotiations that should not occur in public.

A Board discussing litigation strategy with its attorney is not necessarily concealing misconduct. It may be protecting the Association’s legal position.

Of course, executive sessions must remain within the boundaries established by law. Routine Association business does not become confidential simply because a Board prefers privacy.

Transparency requires lawful openness. Responsible governance also requires protecting information that should remain confidential.

Both obligations matter.

5. The Independent Website: A Forum Is Not an Administration

EastridgeHills.com is an independently operated homeowner website and was established March 23, 2018 – years before the current board took office.

It is not the Association’s official website, is not funded by Association assessments, and does not exercise Board authority.

Its purpose is to provide community information, commentary, and opportunities for discussion.

The Association’s official notices and records remain the responsibility of its authorized communication channels: the Silvercreek management company.

Homeowners may agree or disagree with opinions published here. That is the nature of an independent forum.

But publishing commentary about Association affairs does not transform a private website into an official arm of the HOA.

Nor does a family relationship with a director, by itself, confer Association authority on a website publisher.

Independent commentary should be judged by its accuracy and transparency – not by an assumption that it speaks for the Board.

6. Eastridge Hills Has a Board, Not a Presidential Administration

One final point deserves attention.

Eastridge Hills does not operate under a presidential administration.

It is governed by a Board of Directors.

The President chairs meetings and performs duties assigned by the governing documents and delegated by the Board. The President does not possess unlimited authority to impose assessments, approve expenditures, direct litigation, or establish policy independently of the Board’s required decision-making processes.

Board members share responsibility for collective decisions. Individual directors remain accountable for their own conduct and votes.

If homeowners want to understand why a decision was made, they should examine the applicable authority, meeting records, votes, contracts, and financial documents.

Our President has a gavel, not a crown.

7. The Consequences: What Happens When We Stop Enforcing Our Rights?

Imagine an Association that refuses to spend money on legal counsel.

A contractor destroys a gate, and homeowners pay for the repairs.

A delinquent owner refuses to meet financial obligations, and responsible neighbors make up the difference.

A neighboring association disregards a recorded agreement, and our community absorbs expenses it may not legally owe.

A privacy incident occurs, and the Board fails to obtain appropriate legal advice.

Would that really be responsible financial management?

Certainly not every dispute belongs in court. Negotiation, insurance recovery, mediation, and reasonable settlements can often provide better solutions.

But the Association must preserve the ability to enforce its rights when those alternatives fail.

The purpose of legal counsel is not to generate legal fees. It is to protect the Association’s interests while managing its legal and financial risks.

Every dollar spent should serve a legitimate purpose. Every decision should withstand scrutiny.

And every decision not to act deserves scrutiny as well.

8. A Call to Action: Demand Complete Facts and Practical Solutions

Eastridge Hills homeowners deserve financial transparency, careful management, and accountability from every director.

We should ask:

  • What caused an expense, and what alternatives were considered?
  • What rights or assets were the Board seeking to protect?
  • What would have happened if the Association had taken no action?
  • Are financial comparisons based on consistent accounting practices?
  • What measurable savings would a proposed alternative actually produce?

These questions are not attacks. They are the foundation of informed homeowner oversight.

Our community has only 81 homes. Every dollar matters. So does every contractual obligation, every recorded property right, and every investment the board makes in maintaining our neighborhood.

There is room for vigorous disagreement about priorities and spending. But those disagreements should rest on complete facts rather than selective financial comparisons or assumptions about individual motives.

The Bottom Line

Fiscal responsibility is not simply spending less. It is spending wisely, protecting what homeowners collectively own, and refusing to shift avoidable costs onto the people who follow the rules.

The real cost of HOA governance cannot be measured by attorney invoices or assessment percentages alone.

It must also be measured by the property, rights, security, and financial stability that responsible governance protects.

James Goodall

Independent homeowner commentary | EastridgeHills.com

This website is independently operated and is not an official publication of the Eastridge Hills Homeowners Association. The views expressed are those of the author and do not represent an official Board position.

HOME

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *