Quote:
Originally Posted by rubicon
This is a developer inspired project. clearly this business decision is made with the thought that construction costs, maintenance cost and other operations expenses will be transferred to others and if ownership remains with the developer the expectations of above average profits realized.
One poster said a draw to TV was an indoor pool. I do not believe very many residents moved here because of the idea of an indoor pool but rather golf.
Its interesting that the same people who push for everyone paying for more amenities complain about Comcast bundled package but then, a person's decision about keeping Comcast only affects them not others. So in my view all residents are entitled to cast a vote for any amenity that adds to their monthly fee
I find it interesting that people find it convenient to be spending other peoples money. so I wonder when will it stop. Socialism breeds entitlement. On the other hand if the developer has made a decision to build an indoor pool and offer private membership for a profit then by all means have at it, its the American way. it also a determinant as to how badly one really wants or needs such a facility.
Personal Best Regards:
|
I agree. I also realize that, as a swimmer who would love an indoor pool, I am a member of the minority. I don't expect others to fund an indoor pool just because I would like to be able to swim any time I'd like. I swim at sports pools in the early morning to avoid the sun and am grateful to have several pools to choose from. The absence of an indoor pool did not affect our decision to move here.
I'm also not a fan of how this project was "announced" without the benefit of details of how it would be funded and sustained.
The timing is interesting as well. Hmm, could this be a bone being thrown?