Quote:
Originally Posted by EdV
At the risk of repeating myself, you signed a contract that binds you to pay that amenity fee in perpetuity but the fee can never be raised more than the annual CPI. In return, the special CDD is contractually obligated in perpetuity to maintain those amenities properly no matter how much or how little it actually costs them to do so. And you agreed to it.
So that’s the way it was when you signed the contract, and nothing has changed..
|
Excuse me, I haven't waded into this matter to date and may be repeating some stuff ad nausium, but I still have a few of questions:
1) Amenity fee receipts and expenditures are now public information in Districts 1-4. Is that the case in the newer districts?
2) Is the Developer in fact using amenity fee funds to pay for the legal fees in the IRS case?
3) If so, are these amenity fees presently coming from all districts, including Districts 1-4, or just the two districts whose bonding procedures are being challenged?
4) Yes our contract says the amenities will be maintained "properly" regardless of cost. But "properly" may be a term subject to broad interpretation. If the Developer decided his legal expenses were too high, could he decide to reduce amenity services to some degree and still be able to argue that he was meeting the contract terms?