Save Tyrolian Village Owner's Site

SWISS TIME PROPERTY MANAGEMENT UPdate

From Vojko Lapanja HOA/CIC Manager

August 28, 2023

Dear Tyrolian Village Association Homeowners:

I appreciate the support that so many of you have shown me during this unexpected and unsettling transition after being your HOA Management company for the past 23 years. Thank you very much for your trust, confidence, and goodwill that you’ve extended toward me and Swiss Time Management.

It has been brought to my attention by concerned homeowners that a certain individual—or individuals—in your community is engaged in mailing malicious postcards that are littered with lies and defamatory attacks against me, both personally and professionally against my community management company. As those who received them know, they also targeted some of the candidates who were running for the TVA-HOA Board.

The slanderous and libelous content of these actions obviously have one purpose: To damage my personal and professional reputation for under-handed, personal gain. We are actively investigating who is responsible for these hateful attacks and trust that the truth will prevail over these lies and that the source of these actions and false allegations against my character and business will be exposed.

There is one final important item that I want to clarify. It is unfortunate that the newly-hired management company has not been able to step forward and offer all homeowners a seamless transition and you have experienced problems. I honestly feel that the new management company was not ready to handle the unique HOA needs and affairs of Tyrolian Village, as they quickly formed an LLC entity for the management of your association only ten days before they took over the TVA-HOA account.

All the management transition issues that impacted the homeowners could have easily been avoided if several Board members, who made the decision not to renew Swiss Time Management’s contract, had made more prudent decisions, planned ahead, and communicated with me about what’s involved in executing a proficient HOA transition. Instead, Swiss Time was given a 7–day notice that our management contract would not be renewed and had no communications about the transition from the TVA-BOD before our contract ended on June 30, 2023.

I’m confident that most of you already know that my personal and business integrity exceeds the average expectations. I have always, as required by law, acted on an informed basis, in good faith, and in the honest belief that my intentions and actions were in the best interest of the TVA-HOA and its homeowners. Ultimately, any of my actions were subject to and resulting from the Board direction and instructions

I sincerely hope that as times, circumstances and membership evolves, we will have an opportunity to work together again. Please contact me directly if you have additional questions, information, or concerns. Thank you again for all your support.

Enjoy these beautiful days ahead – it’s always been my favorite time of year at Tahoe in the 32 years I have called it home.

Sincerely,

Vojko Lapanja

HOA/CIC Manager

Swiss Time Property Management

775-831-5345

vojko@swisstimellc.com

Below I offer you the FACTS:

1. All TVA-HOA accounts were always in the name of Tyrolian Village Association and any Board member and/or officer of the TVA-HOA as a Nevada corporation would—and absolutely did—have access to all HOA accounts.

2. In 2007, the current TVA Board at that time voted to approve, accept, and invest into Employers Insurance shares, which were given at no cost to the TVA-HOA, as part of the demutualization process in lieu of a small cash payout offered by the insurance company. The HOA Management company does not have the authority to make such decisions or investments—this relies solely on the action of the Board.

3. Over a 15-year investment period, those shares resulted in over $125,000 in quarterly dividends paid to the TVA-HOA—this appreciation was entirely deposited into the TVA-HOA operating account. It is important to emphasize that all quarterly dividend payments were accounted for on all TVA-HOA budget profit and loss statements in the financial reports, which over the period of 15 years were reviewed by 50+ Board members at all the TVA-HOA Board meetings and by three different independent CPAs doing the annual TVA-HOA audits.

4. Additionally, when the shares were liquidated and cashed in December of 2022, the TVA-HOA profited more than $365,000 on that TVA-HOA cost-free investment: that money was promptly transferred to the TVA-HOA account with Wells Fargo Advisors.

Please be aware, absolutely NO owner funds were used to purchase the shares in 2007—as previously noted, they were given to the association.

5. Regarding the garage projects and coverage remediation:

All Board members, during the 23+ years of Swiss Time managing the TVA-HOA, were informed about the status of garage projects and the coverage remediation—and the SWISS TIME PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC

TVA BOD alone approved all garage and new home projects. Again, HOA management does not have the authority to make such decisions. The different TVA-HOA Boards over the years were also informed about the TRPA long-standing verbal agreement that coverage would be remediated periodically, and everyone who ever served on the TVA-HOA Board knew that. This remediation work happened multiple times during my management of the TVA-HOA.

6. Out of 50+ detached garage projects, two (2) of the garage leases were not signed by those garage owners and we promptly followed up on that when this fact was discovered.

7. Regarding “Short Term Rentals”:

All letters prepared for STR owners and the Washoe County STR Enforcement were based on templates prepared and given to management by the Board and the TVA-HOA attorney; Swiss Time Management forwarded them as instructed by legal counsel and the Board. I have never received any compensation from any STR owner and/or vendor—or anyone else—for any management services.

The Compromise Dialog

Walter Sanders Email - No unit number

[Walter let me know if I cannot share your email here and I will remove - Kelly]

----- Forwarded Message -----

From: Walter Sanders <waltersanders1940@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 04:24:25 PM PDT

Subject: KC's compromise: two for him, one for you.

The Save TVA group wants to "compromise". They want a minimum of two parking spaces for STR owners:

"THE COMPROMISE
July 29, 2023

2. Converge On Potential Rule - DRAFT Two parking spaces minimum are allotted for STR parking for all owners..."

TVA has about 200 spaces total for non-garage owners. There are about 137 non-garage owners. There are also about 10 vacant buildable lots (TVA cannot legally confiscate parking from the lot owners). So, there are about 200 spaces for 147 non-garage units. The STR group wants "two parking spaces minimum are allotted for STR parking". The rest of us get one space and STRs get two spaces... In what non-delusional universe does that sound like a fair compromise? And get this, if this plan went through, and we all became STR owners, some of us would have NO PARKING AT ALL. Explain your math "Save" TVA.

Imagine if the author of this idea got on the TVA board and implemented this plan. Is there any doubt that the litigation it would provoke would cost TVA tens of thousands of dollars? Is there any doubt that "TVA" would lose in court and the "two space minimum" for STRs would go away anyway?

Since at least 1995 TVA rules have stated that each unit gets one space. Look around, not one unit has more than one designated numbered space: it's always been this way. Overflow parking is available on a first come first serve basis. Yes, there is often room for more than one car in some areas. And I'm happy to see second home owners bring family and friends up to enjoy their home. If you have a home in Tahoe you should be able to share it with family and friends. However:

"May 20, 2022 Revisions: (WDCA22-0001) BILL NO. 1876, ORDINANCE NO. 1686. An
ordinance amending Washoe County Code Chapter 110 (Development Code), Article 319, Short
Term Rentals (STRs) by amending various sections in order to: (2) exclude overflow
parking spaces in condominium or multi-family complexes in the calculation of required parking
spaces;"

https://www.washoecounty.gov/csd/planning_and_development/code_enforcement/files_forms_reports_manuals/dev_code/_Table%20of%20Contents%20and%20Amendment%20Summary.pdf

Click CTR/F and search for "overflow".

Clearly Washoe county implemented this rule. It is not a TVA rule. It was not implemented by the current board. The Save TVA group falsely claims the TVA board implemented this rule.

Do your own research and think for yourself. Don't put people on the board who are already lying to you and will almost certainly put the HOA in jeopardy.

Respectfully,
Walter Sanders

Also see Washoe County STR-FAQs:

https://www.washoecounty.gov/csd/planning_and_development/short_term_rentals/files-str/STR-FAQs.pdf

"39. Do I need to comply with the short-term rental regulations when I am using my home for personal
use?
Yes, if there is an active short-term rental permit issued for the property then the property owner and
any renters are required to comply with all STR regulations and standards, including occupancy and
parking limits, regardless of whether or not the property is under rental contract at any given time.
Per Washoe County Code section 110.319.15(4): (4) No events, parties, or weddings (regardless of
payment or familial association), are allowed or may be advertised. Failure to abide by regulations
could result fines and/or in revocation of the issued STR permit."

Kelly Coffey Response

Whoever you are please provide a unit number.

First The HOA has enough coverage when you consider the tennis courts for everyone to have two parking spaces. (I don't want to tear it up though.)

Since you omit item 1 of the compromise do you agree that rule A.3 is not useful and can be used against second homeowners to prevent their guests and tenants’ access to shared parking? A.3 is unfair and legally being challenge as a civil matter. It needs to be rescinded to save us this legal expense.

Overflow has never been used to describe our shared parking until the Board started making parking complaints to the Washoe County Complaint line in 2021. I have the evidence and have shared with the Board.

The HOA Board gets to decide how parking is used by owners. When a Board allots/assigns a temporary placard to any owner who asks for one then when they park with the placard that parking is no longer overflow parking. Assigned/Allotted/Allocated parking is not overflow parking by County definition.

The HOA board can then report to the County that an owner applying for a STR permit has 1 allotted parking space and 1 allocated parking space. 2 Parking spaces that are all legal.

Many other HOAs use parking placards so there is a precedent.

The County has stated and the County Commissioners demonstrated it is not going to interfere or contest what an HOA letter reports the parking for a home.

If someone sues the HOA because the board issues placards, then the board would be forced to allocate a second permanent space to owners that asks for an extra space and that will be legal too. The board has a lot of flexibility but must make sure everyone is treated EQUALLY.

My preference is we continue to share the parking and be tolerant of all owners, guest, and tenants use of the shared parking. I want to keep the tennis courts for as long as possible. Implementing the extreme option of tearing up the tennis courts and giving everyone two parking space is a waste of HOA resources and forces the HOA to remove the tennis courts when there is enough parking available today to share. In the future if more parking is needed due to greater HOA utilization, then the Board can tear of the tennis court for more parking then and not a day earlier.

If more parking remediation is coming and there is going to be the predicted problem then we should look at removing one tennis court to save all the remaining current parking today before it is too late.

The HOA needs to provide parking for all owners equally. The question is how do we accomplish that? I think the compromise gives us the best option for the time being. It does not do anything permanent and gives us the flexibility to deal with the future.

Kelly Coffey

1314 St. Gallen Ct.

???

Any other ideas from anyone?

IMPORTANT: Read The Blog

Read the latest about THE COMPROMISE, the election falsehood, everything you need to know about TVA HOA parking in the blog

Challenge: How many 8'x18' parking spaces can be gained by remediating the TVA tennis courts?

Go to THE COMPROMISE to find out.

Go to the blog

Critical Information - please read

Deceptive Postcard

There was a postcard that was sent that has been attributed to savetva.com. This postal mail did not come from savetva.com and is fraudulent. I nor any other savetva.com contributor engaged in any personal attacks on candidates or other owners. I am sorry for Kristina Hill and Swiss Time that someone would send this out to harm their reputations.

No one affiliated with me sent any postcard concerning Kristina Hill or Swiss Time. My email was changed fraudantly and sent widely to owners recently so I expect the same culprit is responsible for these postcards.

If you think about it just a little, savetva has been supportive of Swiss Time, given the facts we know, so why would savetva.com defame Swiss Time as in this postcard? This did not come from savetva.com.

-Kelly Coffey

An Olive Branch

No one wants a recall, the only reason we had a recall at all, was due to the fact, that the BOD ignored many, many requests from a multitude of homeowners to have a dialogue on STR and parking. The BOD could have added an STR owner to the parking committee to get some input, but they did not.

Left with no alternative and no voice, we called for a recall. The recall forced the BOD and the community at large to consider parking, as well as, a lack of board transparency, as topics that needed discussion.

Nearly 50% of those who participated in the recall voted YES on the recall. STR’s are only about 10% of the homeowners. If this was only about STR’s then the recall would have only received 25 to 30 yes votes, but instead approximately 74 families voted YES. We are not a fringe minority as some would have you believe. Nearly half the voting community was so upset with the BOD actions that they voted YES for a recall.

Considering, this clear demonstration of dissatisfaction, we are hoping the BOD revisits their decision-making process and seeks future input from the homeowners, before making significant changes to our community.

Speaking for ourselves, but we suspect we are echoing the sentiments of many in our community, we can avoid a second recall election if the BOD is willing to revisit the rules regarding parking, and, take for example, the draft proposal put forth by Mr. Coffey (see below) and implement this reasonable change to the Rules and Regulations.

We are optimistic reasonable people can come to reasonable compromises.

Two parking spaces minimum are allotted for STR parking for all owners on an annual renewable basis for a Washoe County STR permit. Owners can be allotted more parking spaces when additional parking spaces cannot be used by another owner for parking and the additional parking does not block another owner's access to their parking. All STR parking requires the use of parking placards including garage parking.

Sincerely,

Robert & Deborah Lipari

1366 Zurich Lane

An Owner's question..

Why does management allow for RV and watercraft parking and then want to enforce one parking space per home other to discourage STR?

Pets Banned

AM I BANNED IN TYROLIAN VILLAGE??

Our dog is asking … "why am I banned in Tyrolian Village??"

Our 2nd Home as been classified as a part time vacation rental or "STR", which now prohibits pets, courtesy of the Board of Directors May 2023 directives... Is an owner in his rental unit now considered a tenant?? If so our family pet who has been visiting Tyrolian for 13 years is now banished from her Tahoe home. Owners have already been warned of pending fines.

Pet ban is part of outrageous overreach by an activist board of directors apparently focused eliminating vacation rentals from Tyrolian Village.

We can fix this …

In response to the recent Tryolian Village Board email - June 16, 2023.

[Update - See the Blog concerning July 18th Washoe County Commissioner Meeting Info]

Dear Tyrolian Homeowner,

Our CC&Rs do not put any restrictions on rentals. The board has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure all owners are treated equally and equitability and thus has the power to report to the County that all owners’ tenants have rights to use our shared parking.

The argument to blame external forces is their modus operandi. [See 'TRPA Information' for more]

There is no outside force, and the board has the power to communicate clearly the CC&Rs to what has been in practice for decades for vacation rentals.

By requesting a letter from each HOA the County decided the HOA entity is the sole authority of the number of parking spaces for a unit in that HOA.

To reinforce that point here is a quote from Chad Giesinger, Planning Manager, Code Enforcement and Business License in Washoe County.
“Again, your argument about how you should be able to park in the street HOA common area is between you and the HOA. I hope this clarifies things,”

From an owner with a single car garage conversing with him on why the County outlawed common element parking for STR tenants as alleged by the Board.

County STR enforcement is not going to be issuing any violations, fines or orders to a HOA because that HOA reported a specific number of parking spaces. They have no legal authority to interpret our CC&Rs but the Board does.

The Board's argument is not valid and only serves to reinforce their unequal treatment of certain members in our community.

Find out more

Is "parking extremely limited" in TVA?

See the pictures

Where ALL owners should be treated equally and equitably,