Owners Informational Update

(Not an Association Communication)

This update continues our series of owner-funded project reviews intended to help owners understand how major Association expenditures were structured, funded, and recorded.

This edition focuses on the Concrete Restoration / ProMax project, which resulted in substantial special assessments paid directly by owners, as well as a lien on the Building due to non-payment.

What Owners Were Told

Based on Association communications at the time:

• Owners were informed that concrete restoration was required for building safety and compliance
• Owners were given a choice between paying a Special Assessment or participating in a loan
• Many owners elected to pay the Special Assessment in full

Owners reasonably understood that choosing the Special Assessment would reduce or eliminate the need for borrowing.

What Owners Paid

• Owners paid approximately $45,000 per unit in special assessments for concrete restoration
• These payments were collected directly from owners, outside of monthly dues

What the Records Show

Based on records available to owners:

• A loan related to the concrete restoration project appears in Association financial records
• The presence of the loan raises questions given that owners paid the Special Assessment
• Publicly available financial records do not clearly explain:
  
  • Why a loan was required in such a high amount, after owners paid
  • How loan proceeds were applied
  • Whether Special Assessment funds and loan funds were both used for the same scope

Why This Matters

Concrete restoration represents one of the largest owner-funded projects in the Association’s history. Understanding:

• how funds were collected,
• how obligations were incurred, and
• how payments were ultimately recorded

is essential for evaluating:

• long-term debt exposure
• future assessment risk
• financial oversight practices

What Owners Still Don’t Have Clear Answers To

• Why a loan appears to exist when owners paid the Special Assessment
• How much of the project was paid from owner funds versus borrowed funds
• Whether all payments align with the project scope and timeline
• How similar funding decisions may affect future projects

This is a factual overview based on owner-accessible records.

Paid by Owners vs. Recorded Obligations

What Owners Paid	What Records Show
~$45,000 per unit in Special Assessments	A loan associated with the same project
Payments made directly by owners	Loan obligation remains on financials
Owners told assessment could avoid borrowing	No clear explanation of loan necessity
Expectation: project paid by owners	Open questions on funding overlap

Why this matters:

When owners pay large special assessments, any remaining or additional debt affects:

• future assessments
• borrowing capacity
• resale and refinancing risk

Owners deserve clarity on how their payments were applied.

What Comes Next

Future updates will include:

• Side-by-side timelines
• Payment vs. obligation summaries
• Documentation excerpts
• Additional project case studies

Sources note: This summary is based on Association financial statements, audits, meeting minutes, and records made available to owners. Where records are incomplete or conflicting, this summary reflects what is shown in those records and identifies open questions for clarification. No conclusions are asserted beyond the documents referenced.

Disclosure:

This publication is issued by Concerned Owners and is not affiliated with the Golden Surf Towers Condominium Association, its Board, management, or vendors. It is based on Association records available to owners and information observable by owners. Corrections supported by documentation are welcomed.