Do you think the amenities fees will go up....

[jayerose]

when the development is built out?

thank you!

[downeaster]

when the development is built out?

thank you!

Yes. However there is a cap.

[Chatbrat]

What is the cap ?

[Carl in Tampa]

What is the cap ?

It is tied to the Consumer Price Index. If you purchased a home in TV the information is in your paperwork.

[golfing eagles]

What is the cap ?

funnier yet---what is a build out???:a20:

[Bogie Shooter]

when the development is built out?

thank you!

Yes. However there is a cap.

How would build out trigger an increase?

[Barefoot]

when the development is built out?
Our amenities have increased every year since 2007. But there is a cap.

[Carla B]

Ours went down this year... by 4 cents.

[SouthOfTheBorder]

How would build out trigger an increase?

:agree:
Don

[Barefoot]

Ours went down this year... by 4 cents. Good news. Only a 4 cent decrease, but much better than an increase. :thumbup:

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

funnier yet---what is a build out???:a20:

Build out is a myth!

[outlaw]

How would build out trigger an increase?

The idea is that once the non-existent build out occurs, the developer will not have incentive to keep the fees as low as possible to not turn off buyers of new homes. This is a common strategy with many developments. The developer in many developments will eat a lot of maintenance and other costs that would normally be the shared responsibility of all owners, with the idea of keeping HOA fees down while new home sales are active.

[Bryan]

Amenity fees will go up as inflation goes up. Right now the annual increase in the fees is tied to the CPI and there is a cap at around $155.00/month on the total. I suspect the CPI part will remain as long as they calculate a CPI and I suspect, over time, our local government will have to increase the cap to some number above $155.00/month. Nothing (well, almost nothing) keeps getting cheaper.

[golfing eagles]

The idea is that once the non-existent build out occurs, the developer will not have incentive to keep the fees as low as possible to not turn off buyers of new homes. This is a common strategy with many developments. The developer in many developments will eat a lot of maintenance and other costs that would normally be the shared responsibility of all owners, with the idea of keeping HOA fees down while new home sales are active.

Theory is true, but I was wondering about actual numbers. Is the developer subsidizing maintenance?
Amenities fee = $145/mo from over 50,000 homes = 7.25 million/mo = 87 million/year
Costs?--would love to see the budget.
Here are some assumptions, they may be way off so feel free to pounce on this:
35 soon to be 38 executive courses:
The maintenance on a full 9 hole course in NY is about $140,000/year. This course is twice as long as an executive and does not have the economy of scale that 38 courses in proximity have regarding equipment, labor and chemical purchases, but because of climate is only open 7 mo/ year and gets far less play. So let's go real high and assume $120,000 year for each course = $380,000/ mo = 4.6 million/year
About 80 rec centers:
I am part owner in a 30,000 sq ft commercial office, cleaning and maintenance runs about $50,000 year. IF equivalent this would be about 4 million/year for the rec centers
About 80+ pools
My pool costs less than $1000/year, so let's assume $10,000/year for a public pool = $800,000/year
Plantings at RBs and intersections changed out 4x/year
Maybe $5,000/year each on about 100 = $500,000/ year
100 miles of MMP's---who knows, but it is Florida climate and not maintained by state workers, so throw a few million at that (unless getting striped)
Neighborhood watch and gates
Maybe a staff of 200 earning 25K /year max = 5 million/year
Any subsidy of nightly entertainment?
Say 1/2 of $800/night at each square = 4 million/year

So far, the above math only accounts for about 20 million/year of 87+ million. I'm sure I've forgotten some things, like the Sharon, the administrative staff, etc, but there seems to be plenty of room without major developer subsidy, so I'm not sure amenity fees are pre-destined to increase dramatically after the " build out"

[outlaw]

Theory is true, but I was wondering about actual numbers. Is the developer subsidizing maintenance?
Amenities fee = $145/mo from over 50,000 homes = 7.25 million/mo = 87 million/year
Costs?--would love to see the budget.
Here are some assumptions, they may be way off so feel free to pounce on this:
35 soon to be 38 executive courses:
The maintenance on a full 9 hole course in NY is about $140,000/year. This course is twice as long as an executive and does not have the economy of scale that 38 courses in proximity have regarding equipment, labor and chemical purchases, but because of climate is only open 7 mo/ year and gets far less play. So let's go real high and assume $120,000 year for each course = $380,000/ mo = 4.6 million/year
About 80 rec centers:
I am part owner in a 30,000 sq ft commercial office, cleaning and maintenance runs about $50,000 year. IF equivalent this would be about 4 million/year for the rec centers
About 80+ pools
My pool costs less than $1000/year, so let's assume $10,000/year for a public pool = $800,000/year
Plantings at RBs and intersections changed out 4x/year
Maybe $5,000/year each on about 100 = $500,000/ year
100 miles of MMP's---who knows, but it is Florida climate and not maintained by state workers, so throw a few million at that (unless getting striped)
Neighborhood watch and gates
Maybe a staff of 200 earning 25K /year max = 5 million/year
Any subsidy of nightly entertainment?
Say 1/2 of $800/night at each square = 4 million/year

So far, the above math only accounts for about 20 million/year of 87+ million. I'm sure I've forgotten some things, like the Sharon, the administrative staff, etc, but there seems to be plenty of room without major developer subsidy, so I'm not sure amenity fees are pre-destined to increase dramatically after the " build out"

You forgot the vig of 67M. Just kidding. The one thing I would point out regarding your analysis is either your estimates are waaaaay off, or some one is stashing a lot of moola, or both.

[golfing eagles]

You forgot the vig of 67M. Just kidding. The one thing I would point out regarding your analysis is either your estimates are waaaaay off, or some one is stashing a lot of moola, or both.

Exactly. But I'm probably way off, there may be a LOT of rec center salaries not accounted for. I know I'm pretty close on golf course and building maintenance from personal experience, but a lot of my post is supposition

[champion6]

This thread has quickly gone off track BECAUSE responders are mixing together expenses that are covered by amenities fees and other expenses that are covered by maintenance fees. The expenses must be kept separate because the regulations for raising amenities fees are different from those for raising maintenance fees. As we enjoy the beauty and all the offerings that TV has, it is difficult to notice "what pays for what."

[golfing eagles]

This thread has quickly gone off track BECAUSE responders are mixing together expenses that are covered by amenities fees and other expenses that are covered by maintenance fees. The expenses must be kept separate because the regulations for raising amenities fees are different from those for raising maintenance fees. As we enjoy the beauty and all the offerings that TV has, it is difficult to notice "what pays for what."

Do you happen to know which services are covered by which fees?

[llaran]

Of course they will go up, doesn't everything!!! The real question is how much?

[billethkid]

If and or when the developer becomes uninvolved in the operations of TV, the discipline of not responding to the multitudes of requests to do one thing or another that is not done today, to add something that does not exist today, to eliminate one and and another, do side striping, do center striping, build MMP chat lanes and on and on and etc.

Once that dsicipline is gone the problems will really begin to mount and the fees and temporary assessments will follow......just ask anybody who has gone theough the transition from developer to resident operating of a community.

Potentially an even bigger surprise comes to light....the real number of activities or facilities or amenities the developer was subsidizing to keep fees low and attractive. Not saying that could happen here but I would not rule it out.

We should all hope the developer stays involved with the operations of TV for a very long time.

[golfing eagles]

This thread has quickly gone off track BECAUSE responders are mixing together expenses that are covered by amenities fees and other expenses that are covered by maintenance fees. The expenses must be kept separate because the regulations for raising amenities fees are different from those for raising maintenance fees. As we enjoy the beauty and all the offerings that TV has, it is difficult to notice "what pays for what."

Looked at my invoices. My amenities fee is $145.66/month, so the 87 million/year figure is about right. The maintenance fee is on the tax bill with the bond, was about $700 for the year, which would add 35 million/year to the pot. I assume this type of maintenance goes for the public roads/sewers/water/electricity and not "amenities" like recreation

[Challenger]

If and or when the developer becomes uninvolved in the operations of TV, the discipline of not responding to the multitudes of requests to do one thing or another that is not done today, to add something that does not exist today, to eliminate one and and another, do side striping, do center striping, build MMP chat lanes and on and on and etc.

Once that dsicipline is gone the problems will really begin to mount and the fees and temporary assessments will follow......just ask anybody who has gone theough the transition from developer to resident operating of a community.

Potentially an even bigger surprise comes to light....the real number of activities or facilities or amenities the developer was subsidizing to keep fees low and attractive. Not saying that could happen here but I would not rule it out.

We should all hope the developer stays involved with the operations of TV for a very long time.

The history of so many HOA's and condo associations is filled with idiotic and self distructive activities. Usually those directors with real expertise and skill tire of running the organization and the conspirracy theorists and biggest loud mouths take over and create very toxic situations.

"The Developer" in TOTV has a incredibly large financial interest in seeing to the well oiled , efficient and high quality of life in the "bubble". It is my understanding that they own around 4million Sq ft of commercial property here , and as long as that is the case they have an enourmous incentive to protect what becomes our joint interest. The death of Gary Morse gves me great pause. Ofter the imperial families begin to fracture after the Monarch dies. That would not bode well for us. A sign that the family was selling the commercial package also would not bode well. Just the musings of one who has been through this stuff before, but on a much smaller scale.

[Barefoot]

If and or when the developer becomes uninvolved in the operations of TV, the discipline of not responding to the multitudes of requests to do one thing or another that is not done today, to add something that does not exist today, to eliminate one and and another, do side striping, do center striping, build MMP chat lanes and on and on and etc.

Once that dsicipline is gone the problems will really begin to mount and the fees and temporary assessments will follow......just ask anybody who has gone theough the transition from developer to resident operating of a community.

Potentially an even bigger surprise comes to light....the real number of activities or facilities or amenities the developer was subsidizing to keep fees low and attractive. Not saying that could happen here but I would not rule it out.

We should all hope the developer stays involved with the operations of TV for a very long time.

Absolutely true. :agree:

[bagboy]

The history of so many HOA's and condo associations is filled with idiotic and self distructive activities. Usually those directors with real expertise and skill tire of running the organization and the conspirracy theorists and biggest loud mouths take over and create very toxic situations.

"The Developer" in TOTV has a incredibly large financial interest in seeing to the well oiled , efficient and high quality of life in the "bubble". It is my understanding that they own around 4million Sq ft of commercial property here , and as long as that is the case they have an enourmous incentive to protect what becomes our joint interest. The death of Gary Morse gves me great pause. Ofter the imperial families begin to fracture after the Monarch dies. That would not bode well for us. A sign that the family was selling the commercial package also would not bode well. Just the musings of one who has been through this stuff before, but on a much smaller scale.

I mentioned this very thing a few months ago when the striping issue in District 4 arose, and the potential covering of the Hacienda pool. In my opinion, when and if the time comes that district boards have total control of our funds and decision making, the Villages lifestyle will drastically change for the worse. It makes no difference if those new decision makers are total idiots or intelligent PHd types. They'll be impowered to run our Villages the way "they" see fit.
I have seen the turmoil and destruction caused by HOAs and POAs first hand in two other states. And should that governing model whether by design or misfortune come to be in the Villages, I will consider my time as a Villager an absolutely wonderful experience, and move on.

[Bogie Shooter]

The idea is that once the non-existent build out occurs, the developer will not have incentive to keep the fees as low as possible to not turn off buyers of new homes. This is a common strategy with many developments. The developer in many developments will eat a lot of maintenance and other costs that would normally be the shared responsibility of all owners, with the idea of keeping HOA fees down while new home sales are active.

Just an idea...........not a fact!

[Bogie Shooter]

Do you happen to know which services are covered by which fees?


The following come's from the resident academy presentation.

♦Payment of the Amenity Fee is required through the Contract you signed when you bought your home. The contract requires you to adhere to the Declaration of Restrictions (Restrictions) for your unit/lot.
♦Amenity Fee is paid for in exchange for Amenity Services- it is a FEE FOR SERVICES
♦Depending on your Restrictions, your Amenity Fee increases every year or every three years.
♦Depending on your Restrictions, your Amenity Fee increase is based on when you purchased your property or signed your contract.
♦The Amenity Fee increase is based on the CPI and CAN NOT be increased greater than that amount each year (or every three years depending on your Restrictions).
♦The current rate for all new homebuyers is $145.00/month.
♦There is currently a deferral at $155.00 which means no resident pays more than $155.00 per month.

------------
VILLAGE CENTER
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (VCCDD)
♦Recreation Amenities Division (RAD)
♦Funded through Contractual Amenity Fees Purchased from Developer.
♦Common Area Maintenance
♦Community Watch
♦Recreation Centers and Activities
♦Water Retention Areas
♦Gate and Postal Facility Maintenance
♦Executive Golf Courses

♦Water and Wastewater Services
♦Funded through User Fees.
♦LSSA and VCSA Utilities

♦Villages Public Safety
♦Funded through VCCDD Amenities Revenue, SLCDD Amenities Revenue, Developer Amenities Revenue, Lady Lake Assessments, Lake County Assessments, Sumter County Assessments and General Fund.
♦Provided to all residents in Lady Lake/Lake County and 11 Residential Numbered Districts.

----------------

♦Sumter Landing Amenities Division- (SLAD)
♦Funded through Contractual Amenity Fees which have been purchased from the Developer and Developer funding of amenity services for those amenity facilities owned by the Developer.
♦Common Area Maintenance
♦Community Watch
♦Recreation Centers and Activities
♦Water Retention Areas
♦Gate and Postal Facility Maintenance
♦Executive Golf Courses
♦Project Wide Maintenance

♦Villages Public Safety
♦Funded through Amenity Fees.
♦SLCDD provides funding to VCCDD for Villages Public Safety.

♦Lake Sumter Landing Assessment Program
♦Funded through assessments on properties in the SLCDD geographic area.
♦Provides the operation and maintenance costs for Lake Sumter Landing � sidewalks, landscaping, parking lots, d�cor, janitorial and Christmas decorations.

[JoMar]

The idea is that once the non-existent build out occurs, the developer will not have incentive to keep the fees as low as possible to not turn off buyers of new homes. This is a common strategy with many developments. The developer in many developments will eat a lot of maintenance and other costs that would normally be the shared responsibility of all owners, with the idea of keeping HOA fees down while new home sales are active.

We don't have an HOA so no HOA fees here.

[biker1]

Is that really necessary? You know what he meant.

We don't have an HOA so no HOA fees here.

[justjim]

when the development is built out?

thank you!

OP ask if the amenities fee would raise following build out. Answer: no more than the CPI (consumer price index) which is the cap.

As a side bar, OP the maintenance fee could be raised as needed by the District. Overall, I don't think the change in fees will be significant following build out.

[JoMar]

Is that really necessary? You know what he meant.

I think so because there are people on here that believe the POA and VHA are traditional Homeowners Associations and that they have some input into the fees paid.

[billethkid]

OP ask if the amenities fee would raise following build out. Answer: no more than the CPI (consumer price index) which is the cap.

As a side bar, OP the maintenance fee could be raised as needed by the District. Overall, I don't think the change in fees will be significant following build out.

The answer assumes the replacement governing body (of the developer.....most likely residents) may well change those rules to allow increases beyond the CPI.

The maintenance fees will be a function of whether the structure of TV current amenities remains the same.

Experience has shown that when residents do in fact take over managing the developement, cost do increase as they allow for more non budgeted "wants" of residents. The developer kept that in check while under his jurisdiction.

As the wants increase, and they will, the costs increase and as a result there will be rate and fee increases or even special assessments.

Under resident rule the game changes from meeting the devlopers objectives to one that is more political and special interest driven.

[bagboy]

So therefor, the increase(s) won't be to fund the wants of the people, but the wants and whims of the district supervisors. They are already dipping their toes into the amenities fund pool, testing the waters to see just how far they can go.

[Bogie Shooter]

We don't have an HOA so no HOA fees here.

Is that really necessary? You know what he meant.

Yes, necessary. There are people reading TOTV that have no idea. It was a misleading statement that was corrected.

[Bogie Shooter]

So therefor, the increase(s) won't be to fund the wants of the people, but the wants and whims of the district supervisors. They are already dipping their toes into the amenities fund pool, testing the waters to see just how far they can go.

So, vote them out!

[rubicon]

Residents are also taxpayers and all one has to do is reflect on what the history of federal and state government programs and then brace yourself for the ride. I get very nervous when a resident(s) demand indoor pools, stripping of multi-modal paths etc.

I am sure there are some folks here that are well healed and spending is not an issue. While others live the philosophy of my last dime gone on my last breath. But I believe for the majority living on saved income that does little or nothing to replenish itself requires discipline and sound money management. I mean I didn't sacrifice my entire working life to foolishly throw my money away on nonsense or based on "I want"rather than "I need"

Some may think me foolish but my financial goal is to leave my kids much of my estate and for what I view as good reason.

So I would hope that those in charge also embrace this concept.

And to add to this unsettling equation is the possibility of some economic disaster that could wipe out retirees savings .

Personal Best Regards:

[Shadow8IA]

Looked at my invoices. My amenities fee is $145.66/month, so the 87 million/year figure is about right. The maintenance fee is on the tax bill with the bond, was about $700 for the year, which would add 35 million/year to the pot. I assume this type of maintenance goes for the public roads/sewers/water/electricity and not "amenities" like recreation

I'm looking at my tax bill and I don't see anything for maintenance. I live in Lake County/historic side. Is it possible we don't pay for it? We don't have the bond either.

[golfing eagles]

I'm looking at my tax bill and I don't see anything for maintenance. I live in Lake County/historic side. Is it possible we don't pay for it? We don't have the bond either.

I don't know. Maybe Lake Co is different than Sumter. Maybe the maintenance goes with the bond and goes away once bond paid off. Good question, I'm sure someone will weigh in with the answer

[biker1]

If they really wanted to correct it they would have explained that it is called an "amenities fee" and not an HOA fee. Also, that there is an annual "maintenance" fee paid with the Nov tax bill. Instead we got a terse answer.

Yes, necessary. There are people reading TOTV that have no idea. It was a misleading statement that was corrected.

[rustyp]

I'm looking at my tax bill and I don't see anything for maintenance. I live in Lake County/historic side. Is it possible we don't pay for it? We don't have the bond either.

Correct - no maintenance fee or bond.

[outlaw]

Just an idea...........not a fact!

Don't know what you mean. This happens regularly with developments. If you are saying it won't happen in TV, you may be right. But to say it isn't true of any developments is wrong. I believe, as in any captive market, the business entity will charge what the "customers" will bear. The business will tend to maximize profit. I have no problem with this scenario, because I think I am willing to bear more expense than most in TV, if it means fewer people using the amenities. As an example, if the developer decided, after the imaginary build out, to charge a green fee for playing on the executive courses, I would be ok with it, up to a point, if it meant there would be more tee time availability and the speed of play would pick up. If the developer started charging a participation fee for, let's say, water volleyball, I would be ok with that if it meant I didn't have to get there 45 minutes early and wait in line just to get a spot. The developer is already doing this with the tennis clubs, championship golf courses, country club pools, trail fee on executive courses, and fitness centers. No one really knows what will happen, and some just rely on this developer benevolence concept that may have existed when the original developer was alive. But now we have the children running things, and we will have to wait and see. I have heard from more than one business owner regarding their dealings with the developer, and "benevolent" is not used in their description.

[outlaw]

Correct - no maintenance fee or bond.

I don't think it's called a maintenance fee. Do you have a charge that says non-ad valorem?

[OCsun]

If they really wanted to correct it they would have explained that it is called an "amenities fee" and not an HOA fee. Also, that there is an annual "maintenance" fee paid with the Nov tax bill. Instead we got a terse answer.

biker1, you are right with this response. More and more responses on this blog come across as short, curt and down right nasty. Straighten up people or face getting detention.

[outlaw]

Reading some of the comments, it appears many think the districts have a say in the amenities fee. After being schooled yesterday regarding the powers of the districts, I came away with the understanding that the amenities and fees are owned and controlled by the developer, until the developer sells off a majority of its commercial property, which I doubt will ever happen. So why the discussion regarding the resident elected district representatives catering to special interests, etc., and driving up the amenities fees?

[outlaw]

biker1, you are right with this response. More and more responses on this blog come across as short, curt and down right nasty. Straighten up people or face getting detention.

That's what happens to old unhappy people. Ergo the term "grumpy old farts".:)

[rustyp]

I don't think it's called a maintenance fee. Do you have a charge that says non-ad valorem?

Yes - two of them. Waste collection fee and The Villages Fire District.

[dbussone]

That's what happens to old unhappy people. Ergo the term "grumpy old farts".:)

Or as I prefer, Grump Buckets.

[golfing eagles]

I don't think it's called a maintenance fee. Do you have a charge that says non-ad valorem?

Mine is listed under the "Non ad valorem assessments" section on 2 lines---one for bond and one for maintenance. Since this is on the county tax bill, is this for public infrastructure maintenance and nothing to do with amenities? I also found the previously posted list of what is covered by the fee in each area quite confusing. Knowing who is paying for what and how much it costs might shed light on possible fee outcomes after the mythical build out. And by that I mean status quo amenities, not the hypothetical wish list that some feel is inevitable.

[outlaw]

Yes - two of them. Waste collection fee and The Villages Fire District.

Sounds like you don't pay the maintenance fee in the typical TV way. Could be your common grounds maintenance is wrapped up in your city taxes, etc.

[billethkid]

Don't know what you mean. This happens regularly with developments. If you are saying it won't happen in TV, you may be right. But to say it isn't true of any developments is wrong. I believe, as in any captive market, the business entity will charge what the "customers" will bear. The business will tend to maximize profit. I have no problem with this scenario, because I think I am willing to bear more expense than most in TV, if it means fewer people using the amenities. As an example, if the developer decided, after the imaginary build out, to charge a green fee for playing on the executive courses, I would be ok with it, up to a point, if it meant there would be more tee time availability and the speed of play would pick up. If the developer started charging a participation fee for, let's say, water volleyball, I would be ok with that if it meant I didn't have to get there 45 minutes early and wait in line just to get a spot. The developer is already doing this with the tennis clubs, championship golf courses, country club pools, trail fee on executive courses, and fitness centers. No one really knows what will happen, and some just rely on this developer benevolence concept that may have existed when the original developer was alive. But now we have the children running things, and we will have to wait and see. I have heard from more than one business owner regarding their dealings with the developer, and "benevolent" is not used in their description.

I high light the above example ONLY to facilitate adding to the points I have already made about the kinds of "things" that can/will happen whenever/if the developer is no longer in the picture.

The developer had a strategy of building a lifestyle for everybody, regardless of income, stature, affordability, etc. That lifestyle include free golf for life (executive courses) and reasonabley priced Championship green fees.

Under resident ownership a real possibility of doing things differently is the high lighted example above (again only using the high light as an example....no counterpoint intended whatso ever by me).
And if for some reason something like that was approved......remember it is the active voters who make things happen....not the opinions on TOTV....there would be very many unhappy folks who may not want to pay green fees as that is not what they bought into, some may not afford the new rules, etc.

While using the above example to make a point, and it is currently hypothetical, it is in fact a real possibility.

Having lived in a real gated community with only 3 18 hole golf courses that went through the transition from developer to resident control, I can cite first hand some examples. The golf courses were for the exclusive use of residents only. Our monthly fees included playing the 3 courses. After the transition there was a movement started by some golfers to add a greens fee to be more of a filter to reduce the number of players to make t times easier for them to get and a side benefit they expected reduced pace of play.

It did get approved. It did all the things the participating golfers wanted to have happen. It also increased dramatically the number of homes that went up for sale.

For many reasons already listed in this thread, it seems unlikely the developer would divest from the operations of TV. However, keep in mind that it is always a possibility. And let there be no mistake, there will be a change in the lifestyle most residents bought into.

[lefty]

Why would there be a raise? Because the number of units paying the fees remain steady, how ever the costs will rise as materials, and labor both increase as time goes on.

[morriewayne]

Yes