To Better Serve SMR: Separate Seasonal and Full-Time Owners

The Evolution of Skyline Mountain Resort

The Origins of SMR

Skyline Mountain Resort was established in August of 1965 originally under the name Sports Haven International as a private, recreational mountain community for hunting and leisure. Members purchased non-deeded lands where they could build cabins or camp and enjoy the rugged beauty of the Manti-La Sal Mountains. Over time, the community added amenities designed to enhance the resort experience — including a clubhouse, rental cabins, RV sites with hookups, a pool with slide, and tennis courts. Eventually, a 9-hole golf course was developed, growing piece by piece until completion in 2005. In 2015, individual deeds for lots were issued to members, formalizing ownership.

Over decades, this structure proved appealing for a community rooted in recreation and part-time use. Seasonal owners flocked to their lots for summer stays, family gatherings, and quiet retreats. Amenities were central to that vision — shared resources in a single association that managed both the infrastructure and recreational facilities.

A Single HOA for a Mixed Community

For many years, a single governing body made sense: an HOA that included roughly 600 Seasonal owners, hundreds of lots that were often unoccupied most of the year, and an emerging group of Full-Time residents who began building homes and living year-round in what had originally been a recreational community. Your HOA also managed and maintained communal amenities — a 9-hole golf course, swimming pool, tennis courts, cabins, RV sites, and more — even as the nature of the community changed.

This combined structure worked best when most lots were used seasonally. Amenities and shared roads were funded collectively, with the assumption that the majority of owners were part-time participants. But what once worked well is now creating increasing conflict.

Conflicting Priorities in a Growing Community

Different Needs, Different Lifestyles

Over time, almost 150 full-time residents have built homes in the lower section of SMR, choosing to live year-round in what has become a de-facto residential area. These homeowners face ongoing challenges that differ starkly from those of Seasonal owners:

Full-Time Owners Seek:

-- Improved infrastructure — paved primary access roads, year-round grading and maintenance, snow removal, and street safety.

-- Essential services — postal delivery, garbage pickup, emergency response access, and long-term water infrastructure that meets regulatory standards.

-- Representation focused on residential, year-round needs rather than recreational priorities that dominate much of the existing HOA agenda.

Seasonal Owners Tend To Prefer:

-- Minimal infrastructure changes that would increase assessments or dues.

-- Gravel roads and limited development to preserve the rustic, recreational character of their properties.

-- Access to amenities without taking on ongoing responsibility for infrastructure or costs associated with year-round living.

These diverging needs have placed growing strain on a shared governance model. Monthly meetings, voting conflicts, and budget decisions routinely reflect the tension between maintaining a recreational resort environment and funding long-term infrastructure improvements needed in the full-time area.

Conflicts of Interest Have Emerged

Under the current unified HOA structure, disputes often arise over financial responsibility and decision-making:

-- Maintenance Costs vs. Usage: Seasonal owners may understandably resist increased dues if they believe the funds would primarily benefit full-time residents’ infrastructure — like roads or year-round utilities — that they seldom use.

-- Voting Power Imbalance: When Seasonal members make up a significant share of the association, decisions impacting full-time living standards can be blocked, delayed, or deprioritized.

-- Liability and Asset Management: Shared ownership of amenities like golf course facilities, cabins, and recreational assets complicates budgeting, oversight, and future plans. What works for seasonal leisure does not always translate into sustainable residential community funding.

These conflicts are not simply personality or preference differences — they stem from fundamentally incompatible structural priorities when one association governs both recreational and residential communities together.

Why Separation Makes Sense

The reality is that two distinct communities have grown out of one legacy association — and a single HOA can no longer serve both fairly and effectively.

A Better Path Forward

Through restructuring, the community can establish:

-- A Full-Time owners’ HOA that governs recreational amenities, residential infrastructure, utilities, roads, and services that support year-round living.

-- A Seasonal owners’ HOA that governs and preserves the character and leisure focus that drew most seasonal owners to SMR originally.

-- Reciprocal agreements between the two associations providing ongoing shared access to amenities, trails, golf course use, and other shared interests.

This approach holds several key benefits:

-- Each group retains control over financial and governance decisions most relevant to its members.

-- Asset ownership can be equitably split — with Full-Time owners assuming stewardship of the golf course, cabins, pool, tennis courts and other facilities appraised collectively at approximately $5 million, and Seasonal owners retaining ownership of 100++ unsold lots valued around $60,000 each (your appraisal estimates).

-- Financial decisions will be determined by owners invested in the outcomes directly affecting their lifestyles and property values.

Conflict over dues, assessments, and infrastructure priorities will be drastically reduced by separating the decision-making process along natural lines of use and residency.

Fairness, Stability, and Sustainability

Separation does not mean division or exclusion. Instead, it means recognizing the reality of how this community functions today. It means honoring the legacy of Skyline Mountain Resort while allowing both groups to thrive under governance systems that reflect their distinct needs.

This is not about who pays more or who wins — it is about establishing a structure that protects property values, formalizes responsibilities, clarifies financial priorities, and fosters cooperation through well-crafted reciprocal use agreements.

A Conclusion for the Future

The combined HOA served its purpose when SMR was primarily a recreational property with occasional use. But the landscape has changed — full-time homes, year-round residents, and the needs of a real residential neighborhood have reshaped expectations.

A one-size-fits-all association can no longer fairly accommodate both Seasonal and Full-Time owners. The most equitable and responsible course is to create two autonomous, focused HOAs — each with reciprocal agreements to preserve shared enjoyment of amenities — and governance that reflects the actual needs of the people it serves.

This separation is not a breakup; it is a strategic realignment for a community that has matured and diversified. It is a step toward fairness, clarity, and long-term success for everyone who calls Skyline Mountain Resort home — whether seasonally or year-round.