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.

Skyline Has Changed. Our Governance Should Too.

Skyline has never remained static. As circumstances changed, owners adapted. As new challenges emerged, new solutions were implemented. Throughout Skyline's history, significant changes have required thoughtful consideration, open discussion, and decisions designed to address the evolving needs of the community.

One of the most significant examples occurred during a difficult period in Skyline's history when the Legacy properties were separated from the resort as part of a broader effort to address serious financial challenges.

The Skyline Mountain Resort of today is very different from the community that was originally envisioned when the resort was created. What began as a seasonal recreational destination has gradually evolved into a community that now includes a growing population of year-round owners.

The proposed separation between seasonal and full-time owners follows the same principle. It recognizes that Skyline has evolved into two distinct communities with different priorities, responsibilities, and long-term needs.

The goal is to create a governance structure that more accurately reflects the community that exists today while allowing each group to address its own priorities, responsibilities, and long-term objectives.

Why Separation Benefits Seasonal Owners

For seasonal owners, separation offers significant long-term advantages.

Many seasonal owners purchased property at Skyline because they wanted a mountain retreat, a recreational escape, and an affordable way to enjoy Utah's beautiful outdoors. Most seasonal owners do not rely on Skyline's roads, utilities, facilities, and services in the same way that year-round owner do. Yet under the current structure, seasonal owners remain financially tied to the costs, liabilities, and future obligations associated with maintaining these assets.

As infrastructure ages, maintenance and replacement costs inevitably increase. Roads require reconstruction. Water systems require upgrades. Insurance costs continue to rise. Recreational facilities require ongoing repairs and capital improvements. These obligations create financial exposure for all members, including owners who may only visit Skyline periodically throughout the year.

Separation would allow seasonal owners to reduce their long-term exposure to these liabilities, create the potential of lower fees, while preserving access to the recreational opportunities that attracted them to Skyline in the first place.

A Matter of Fair Representation

One of the most important reasons to consider separation is fairness.

Today, the seasonal owners possess a permanent voting majority over the full-time lot owners. While this arrangement may have made sense when Skyline was primarily a seasonal community, it creates increasing challenges as the number of permanent owners continues to grow.

Many decisions affecting full-time lots are ultimately determined by owners who do not live in the community year-round. At the same time, seasonal owners are often asked to vote on matters that primarily affect the daily lives of full-time lots.

Separation would allow seasonal owners to govern seasonal priorities and full-time owners to govern full-time priorities. Each group would retain control over its own future while maintaining cooperative agreements where shared interests exist.

Important Points Every Member Should Consider

1. Skyline has outgrown its original "one size fits all" governance model.
Skyline Mountain Resort was originally designed as a seasonal recreational community. Today, it includes a large and growing population of full-time owners. As the community has evolved, managing two distinct groups under a single HOA has become increasingly complex.

2. Seasonal and full-time owners have different priorities.
Seasonal owners may understandably resist funding infrastructure and services—such as roads, snow removal, water systems, utilities, and other year-round needs—that they rarely use.

3. The full-time community continues to grow.
A significant number of owners now live at Skyline year-round, and that number continues to grow over time.

4. Seasonal owners could continue enjoying resort amenities.
A separation structure could allow seasonal owners to maintain access to Skyline's recreational amenities while reducing responsibility for services that primarily benefit full-time owners, similar to the relationship Legacy owners have with the resort today.

5. The current voting structure creates a permanent imbalance.
Seasonal owners hold a voting majority and can consistently determine outcomes, even on issues that primarily affect full-time owners. A sustainable governance structure should allow each community meaningful control over matters that directly affect it.

6. Fairness concerns apply to both groups.
If full-time owners held the majority, seasonal owners would likely seek greater independence as well. The issue is not which group has more votes, but whether one group should permanently govern another group with different needs and priorities.

7. Interest in separation continues to grow.
More than 100 members have already expressed support for exploring separation, and interest continues to increase as members recognize the differing needs of Skyline's seasonal and full-time communities.

This approach holds several key benefits

-- Each group would retain control over the financial decisions most relevant to its members and lifestyles, ensuring that decisions are made by the owners most directly impacted by the outcomes and creating stronger alignment between costs, priorities, property values, and long-term community planning.

-- Separating governance along natural lines of residency and use would significantly reduce conflict over dues, assessments, infrastructure priorities, and long-term development decisions.

Conclusion --

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.

**All contracts, covenants, and governing documents should be interpreted with due consideration for future growth, changing conditions, and circumstances that may not have been reasonably anticipated at the time of their adoption. The absence of an express provision authorizing separation, reorganization, or restructuring should not be construed as a prohibition against such action. Rather, it reflects the practical reality that no governing document can foresee every future contingency. Accordingly, communities must retain the ability to amend, adapt, and restructure their governance arrangements.