Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ_Boston
I guess the question we would need to ask ourselves would be "Should everyone not buy into ANY retirement community that was run with CDDs"?
To answer that I guess you'd have to look at results. TV has been run in that manner since 199* (not sure exactly when CDD's were established). In that time have any of the districts, including those that have been turned over by the developer, been in financial trouble? I think the answer is no. So it seems that TV has survived at least the first few years of this economic turmoil. And it appears that perhaps we've done the CDD concept a little better than other developments? Perhaps!
|
But would anyone be safer in a non CDD community? Case in point: Kings Ridge in Clermont. The developer completed the community and then sold the rights to the amenities to a private party who then promptly raised the prices by almost 2x. Problem was that the covenants supposedly allowed for the homeowners to have the opportunity to take over control of the amenities before an outside concern could bid for them.
I agree that the CDD concept might work a little better here but in our visits to much smaller communities we were very concerned about what happened there after build-out then we were with TV.