Priority golf memberships will no longer cover trail fees at executive courses

[Rainger99]

I just saw that if you have a priority golf membership, it will not cover trail fees at executive golf courses.

[Papa_lecki]

Thats not what the application says - “includes country club pool and executive trail fee”

https://www.golfthevillages.com/images/priority-application.pdf

[Bilyclub]

Thats not what the application says - “includes country club pool and executive trail fee”

https://www.golfthevillages.com/images/priority-application.pdf

It's part of the new agreement. Both sides have not signed off on it, yet. It's on the online rag.

[Two Bills]

I can see the argument to remove the Executive Course concession, as the Developer bins all the the money from Priority Golf sales.
Amenity Fee collection stands to gain $$$$ by refusing the trail fee concession.
Bit like Walmart giving out vouchers with special offer, for 10% off at Publix, and not sharing bonus on sales.

[Goldwingnut]

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.

[Laker14]

Thank you, Goldwingnut for bringing that information. I was under the mistaken impression that some of the Priority dollars went to the districts, with the assumption that since a Priority Member plays enough golf on Championship courses that they won't play a lot on executive courses, so a small fraction of that money might be better than no money at all collected from a Priority member who doesn't play any executive golf.

Given your explanation, I see no reason why the trail fee should be waived for the Priority member. As a Priority Member, I see no reason for that fee to be reduced since none of that money was going to pay for trail fees anyway.

[tophcfa]

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.

Thanks, that explains things clearly. I support the proposed changes as they appear to put all residents on a level playing field and modestly increase revenue for the ongoing maintenance of the Executives.

[Mortal1]

to goldwingnut...."Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy"...it is NOT free. part of your amenity fees goes towards exec golf.

[tophcfa]

to goldwingnut...."Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy"...it is NOT free. part of your amenity fees goes towards exec golf.

I guess it’s all how you choose to look at the amenity fee. The way I look at it, you pay the fee regardless of weather you opt to play the Executives or not. If you decide to play the Executives, regardless of how often, your amenity fee remains the same (in the business world that’s referred to as a sunk cost). Based on that logic, it’s easy to argue the Executives are free. Put another way, if my wife and I walk an Executive course today, we will be out of pocket zero additional dollars. If we decide to play 18 at a typical Championship course today, walk or ride, we will be out of pocket about $135 including tax.

[alwann]

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.

Appreciate the explanation, but remain confused about who the trail fee covers. I read the trail fee under the current policy covers up to 4 people per household. Asking another way, I am a priority member who plays executives once or twice a month at most with spouse. Currently she pays the $4 fee each time. (She doesn't play often enough to break even on paying the trail fee at the annual rate, nor would I.) So, if I also want to pay at the course going forward instead an annual fee, is it $4 or $8 for us? This isn't about the money. I'm merely confused about what "covers to 4" really means.

[Bilyclub]

In the past I have seen many posts stating that the trail fee was instituted so that TV could keep their advertised promise of "free golf for life".

The Villages TV Commercial for Golf Free For Life - iSpot.tv (https://www.ispot.tv/ad/7LyK/the-villages-golf-free-for-life)

[collie1228]

"The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy." Wait a minute. All executive courses have permanent concrete cart paths on which golfers must drive (unless you are handicapped). Just how much wear and tear is there on a concrete pathway? I submit there is none. Trail fees are a money making tax historically imposed by golf courses to enhance profit margins. For executive courses with concrete golf cart paths they are even more profitable.

[dewilson58]

"The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy." Wait a minute. All executive courses have permanent concrete cart paths on which golfers must drive (unless you are handicapped). Just how much wear and tear is there on a concrete pathway? I submit there is none. Trail fees are a money making tax historically imposed by golf courses to enhance profit margins. For executive courses with concrete golf cart paths they are even more profitable.
:blahblahblah::blahblahblah::blahblahblah:

Don't forget the original cost of the path......walkers should not pay for that.

Don't forget about the par fours out there.

:cryin2::cryin2:

[mike234]

I am elderly and have trouble walking. this is discriminatory against elders who aren't handicapped but have trouble walking.....this is terrible and everybody should pay zero.

[rustyp]

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.



The article in the online news states a $38000 boost in revenue is the estimate this change will benefit the executive courses. I find that hard to believe since $38000/141= 269.5. Call it 270. 270 is the number of priority memberships that have been given complementary trail fees. Even at half assuming non spousal membership that equals 540 memberships. In a community of nearly 140000 that says .2% have priority membership.

Lets say the number is more like only 2% priority membership. That would equal approx $395000 in increased revenue for the executive courses.

1. What are the real numbers?
2. If the windfall is significant enough should not the auto increase trail fee CPI formula be reviewed and possibly offset?

[Goldwingnut]

"The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy." Wait a minute. All executive courses have permanent concrete cart paths on which golfers must drive (unless you are handicapped). Just how much wear and tear is there on a concrete pathway? I submit there is none. Trail fees are a money making tax historically imposed by golf courses to enhance profit margins. For executive courses with concrete golf cart paths they are even more profitable.

In the ideal world I would agree, there would be little ongoing costs if everyone stayed perfectly on the cart paths, but they don't and there are some holes that don't have cart paths their full length (some of the par 4s). People drive on the courses all the time. When the courses are wet even rolling off to one side of the path can and does cause significant damages to the courses. The RA policy causes significant wear and damage to the courses that would not exist without the carts being on the course. The concrete on the paths is not indestructible, as it ages it starts to degrade, plates shift, plant rooting breaks it down, all of these have to be repaired and with the miles of cart paths we are talking about, the cost again adds up quickly.

[Goldwingnut]

The article in the online news states a $38000 boost in revenue is the estimate this change will benefit the executive courses. I find that hard to believe since $38000/141= 269.5. Call it 270. 270 is the number of priority memberships that have been given complementary trail fees. Even at half assuming non spousal membership that equals 540 memberships. In a community of nearly 140000 that says .2% have priority membership.

Lets say the number is more like only 2% priority membership. That would equal approx $395000 in increased revenue for the executive courses.

1. What are the real numbers?
2. If the windfall is significant enough should not the auto increase trail fee CPI formula be reviewed and possibly offset?

Real numbers and estimated values are attached.

The CPI is the measure that is used, unfortunately it is flawed and is manipulated frequently by Washington politicians to suit their needs and agendas, it therefore never comes close to the actual cost increases that are seen. Just go to the gas pump and see how that matches the CPI adjustment in your Social Security check. The CPI adjustments will help, but we'll continue to lose against inflation every year.

[dewilson58]

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[rustyp]

Real numbers and estimated values are attached.

The CPI is the measure that is used, unfortunately it is flawed and is manipulated frequently by Washington politicians to suit their needs and agendas, it therefore never comes close to the actual cost increases that are seen. Just go to the gas pump and see how that matches the CPI adjustment in your Social Security check. The CPI adjustments will help, but we'll continue to lose against inflation every year.

My WAG and your spreadsheet are amazing close. The numbers account for a 12.5% in trail fee revenue. FYI that number is year over year not a one time increase. I believe there is some wiggle room for further conversation at the meeting for exactly what will be done with this increase. An example can any of this revenue be used for any other amenities other than executive golf ?

[rustyp]

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

92544

[TSO/ISPF]

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.

HOLDOVER?
The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

So why does not "THE DEVELOPER" contribute that portion of the priority membership to maintaining the executive courses or reduce the cost of priority membership accordingly? Did priority membership fees go down when the ownership of the executive courses went to the SLCDD and the VCCDD ? Did Amenity fees go up?

[rustyp]

HOLDOVER?
The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

So why does not "THE DEVELOPER" contribute that portion of the priority membership to maintaining the executive courses or reduce the cost of priority membership accordingly? Did priority membership fees go down when the ownership of the executive courses went to the SLCDD and the VCCDD ? Did Amenity fees go up?

Answer - the trail fee as part of the priority membership is a complementary gift made by the developer to entice membership without any cost to the developer. In fact this move may decrease the desire for priority membership and possibly create the need for an increase in membership fees.Thus any giving money to the executive courses or reducing the price of priority golf is a loss in revenue to the developer. There is no extra money of a trail fee baked into the revenue stream on a championship course. Any give away = a loss. One can argue that the developer had no right in giving away what was not theirs to give away.

[Rainger99]

The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

If carts create significant wear and tear on the executive courses, then we should try to reduce the wear and tear. The executive courses should provide some incentive for people to walk the courses. In order to encourage walkers, there should be a program that for every 10 rounds that you walk, you get a free play at a Championship course. This would also reduce pollution from carts.

[Papa_lecki]

What did VCCDD and SLCDD pay the developer a fee for use of the tee time system?

[alwann]

If carts create significant wear and tear on the executive courses, then we should try to reduce the wear and tear. The executive courses should provide some incentive for people to walk the courses. In order to encourage walkers, there should be a program that for every 10 rounds that you walk, you get a free play at a Championship course. This would also reduce pollution from carts.

With a few exceptions, the executive courses are not laid out with aging players in mind. And surely none of the championship tracks are. The wear and tear is mostly on the greens. Please use the increased revenue, if any, to keep the playing surfaces in good shape. The paths are in pretty good shape already.

[golfing eagles]

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.

Thank you for the facts. As a priority member, I see no reason for all residents to subsidize my trail fees either. My only concern is the reference to wear and tear on the course. It is possibly a slippery slope since obviously those with RA tags that drive off the paths cause considerably more wear and tear, and some that are, well let's say careless, cause even more. The obvious conclusion would be a two tiered trail fee, which of course I'm sure would violate the ADA. Perhaps a fee for the RA tags???? Call it handling and processing? Naturally, the wear and tear on the paths would be the same.

This will no doubt be a post attacked by the usual culprits, but I'm just playing devil's advocate----If it is unfair for everyone to subsidize trail fees for priority members, then isn't it is unfair for everyone to subsidize additional wear and tear by RA tag holders? Same would be true on the champ courses vis a vis the greens fees.

[tophcfa]

I have a related question for Goldwingnut. Just like most of the Executives, most of the sports pools are also owned and operated by the SLCDD and VCCDD. For the sake of consistency, why is the developer allowed to give out resident passes to the Lifestyle visitors that are accepted at the sports pools? The only benefit of giving out the passes is to the developer, who is trying to sell new homes, while the passes to already overcrowded pools are detrimental to amenity fee paying residents! Do the developers pay a fee for this privilege that is used to help maintain the pools? If not, the SLCDD and VCCDD need to put a stop to this practice.

[Papa_lecki]

I have a related question for Goldwingnut. Just like most of the Executives, most of the sports pools are also owned and operated by the SLCDD and VCCDD. For the sake of consistency, why is the developer allowed to give out resident passes to the Lifestyle visitors that are accepted at the sports pools? The only benefit of giving out the passes is to the developer, who is trying to sell new homes, while the passes to already overcrowded pools are detrimental to amenity fee paying residents! Do the developers pay a fee for this privilege that is used to help maintain the pools? If not, the SLCDD and VCCDD need to put a stop to this practice.

But selling the houses converts the visitor into an owner and into an amenity fee payer - so the developer is paying marketing to increase gross amenity fees too.

[Stu from NYC]

But selling the houses converts the visitor into an owner and into an amenity fee payer - so the developer is paying marketing to increase gross amenity fees too.

But does not the increased amenity fee go toward a new district that just benefits the developer and district?

So please correct me if I am wrong but what do homeowners who have been here for awhile get out of it? Just asking.

[elevatorman]

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.

Will there be any attempt to recover lost revenue from the developer? The developer has been giving away property (trail fees) that was not his to give.

[Tomptomp]

Gee, I thought I signed a contract when I became a priority member. I’m no lawyer but the contract should be enforceable until it expires.
Secondly, The villages can easily determine number of rounds played on the executive courses, by priority members, and take that money from the $791 paid for yearly membership.

[DrBrutyle109]

Easy way stop the wear and tear from the golf carts on the executive courses
KEEP THE CARTS ON THE CART PATH. If you can’t get from the path to the tee or green....play dominos

[HoosierPa]

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.

Thanks Don. As usual, very good explanation. I hope Residents realize how fortunate they are to have you as their volunteer representative

[banjobob]

Just good business , an old friend and successful businessman once told me , “It’s no sin to make a profit” The Villages has all the angles covered , look into how many different corporations are owned by them .

[Goldwingnut]

Will there be any attempt to recover lost revenue from the developer? The developer has been giving away property (trail fees) that was not his to give.

Interesting question and one that I've given thought to also.
The inclusion of the Trail Fee in the Priority membership was a part of one of the services agreements when the executive courses were acquired by the SLCDD and VCCDD with the amenity's purchases. So, in this case there is likely no legal grounds for any recovery.

Post-amenities purchase significant responsibilities for oversight were given to both the AAC and the PWAC, including budgets. Why this was not noticed by the AAC in the previous budgeting cycles is beyond me. As for the PWAC, I and the rest of the committee members are taking a critical look at everything that comes before us to ensure what is approved is fair, reasonable, and in the best interest of the residents that we represent.

Some on both committees seem to go about their day with the mantra of "lets screw the developer over". An unhealthy attitude that serves no one well. The developer has no say in the decisions that are made by the PWAC and has one vote in the AAC. The developer is, however, a part of what happens with the growth of the community and their input must be considered in decisions for the long-term sustainability of the community. While the developer does appoint (the correct term is landowner elected, but with only one landowner appoint is a fitting word here) the members of the SLCDD and VCCDD board and these boards are the ones that actually own the amenities, they are smart enough recognize that the residents say in what happens with the amenities is absolutely critical, hence the existence of the AAC and the PWAC. (yes, I known the AAC came about because of the lawsuit, only part of their responsibilities were a result of this legal case - management of the lawsuit funds, these funds are nearly exhausted and the responsibilities that remain are nearly identical to the PWAC's). A win-win outcome is always a better solution than what is sought by the "let's screw the developer" crowd.

Did the PWAC catch the developer with the proverbial "hand in the cookie jar"? Perhaps. This is more akin to when Dad finds out and says No, and Mom knowing what was going on and by not saying No was giving a passive yes. Is punishment or restitution due? Perhaps not.

[Knogger]

If I've paid my Priority Membership fee which was stated to include pool access and executive golf trail fees, how is that considered a free pass on the trail fee.

[Goldwingnut]

If I've paid my Priority Membership fee which was stated to include pool access and executive golf trail fees, how is that considered a free pass on the trail fee.

I'd suggest that you read the entire thread, the bottom line is that the priority membership are giving the executive trail access which is not theirs to give and was paying the true owners nothing for it.

[dewilson58]

Easy way stop the wear and tear from the golf carts on the executive courses
KEEP THE CARTS ON THE CART PATH. If you can’t get from the path to the tee or green....play dominos

Lovely

[dewilson58]

With a few exceptions, the executive courses are not laid out with aging players in mind. And surely none of the championship tracks are.

Those are called putt-putts.

[mpcolonel]

I just got my priority and it covers trail fees. Don’t know where you got that from

[crash]

"The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy." Wait a minute. All executive courses have permanent concrete cart paths on which golfers must drive (unless you are handicapped). Just how much wear and tear is there on a concrete pathway? I submit there is none. Trail fees are a money making tax historically imposed by golf courses to enhance profit margins. For executive courses with concrete golf cart paths they are even more profitable.

You obviously don’t live on a golf course if you think people stay on the golf path. Most do but everyday I see people driving off the path more so if it is raining. Yes they play in the rain and at night after dark and for free after the starter shack is closed.

[golfing eagles]

I'd suggest that you read the entire thread, the bottom line is that the priority membership are giving the executive trail access which is not theirs to give and was paying the true owners nothing for it.

Per previous post: "The inclusion of the Trail Fee in the Priority membership was a part of one of the services agreements when the executive courses were acquired by the SLCDD and VCCDD with the amenity's purchases."

Did that apply only retroactively from the date they were acquired or ongoing, and if so, for what time period?

[rustyp]

I'd suggest that you read the entire thread, the bottom line is that the priority membership are giving the executive trail access which is not theirs to give and was paying the true owners nothing for it.

Interesting question and one that I've given thought to also.
The inclusion of the Trail Fee in the Priority membership was a part of one of the services agreements when the executive courses were acquired by the SLCDD and VCCDD with the amenity's purchases. So, in this case there is likely no legal grounds for any recovery.

Post-amenities purchase significant responsibilities for oversight were given to both the AAC and the PWAC, including budgets. Why this was not noticed by the AAC in the previous budgeting cycles is beyond me. As for the PWAC, I and the rest of the committee members are taking a critical look at everything that comes before us to ensure what is approved is fair, reasonable, and in the best interest of the residents that we represent.

Some on both committees seem to go about their day with the mantra of "lets screw the developer over". An unhealthy attitude that serves no one well. The developer has no say in the decisions that are made by the PWAC and has one vote in the AAC. The developer is, however, a part of what happens with the growth of the community and their input must be considered in decisions for the long-term sustainability of the community. While the developer does appoint (the correct term is landowner elected, but with only one landowner appoint is a fitting word here) the members of the SLCDD and VCCDD board and these boards are the ones that actually own the amenities, they are smart enough recognize that the residents say in what happens with the amenities is absolutely critical, hence the existence of the AAC and the PWAC. (yes, I known the AAC came about because of the lawsuit, only part of their responsibilities were a result of this legal case - management of the lawsuit funds, these funds are nearly exhausted and the responsibilities that remain are nearly identical to the PWAC's). A win-win outcome is always a better solution than what is sought by the "let's screw the developer" crowd.

Did the PWAC catch the developer with the proverbial "hand in the cookie jar"? Perhaps. This is more akin to when Dad finds out and says No, and Mom knowing what was going on and by not saying No was giving a passive yes. Is punishment or restitution due? Perhaps not.

While I do see the logic the developer is giving away something not theirs to give I sincerely hope this decision is well thought out. I am not sure how you will measure a win / win. The developer carries a big stick as compared to the AAC and PWAC. The developer has many resources at their finger tips to show us who the boss is without hurting sales or their bottom line. Be careful. As they say some battles aren't worth fighting. I'm neutral on this one and trust you representatives will do the right thing for us owners in the long run. This seems to be going awful fast.

[JMintzer]

Gee, I thought I signed a contract when I became a priority member. I’m no lawyer but the contract should be enforceable until it expires.
Secondly, The villages can easily determine number of rounds played on the executive courses, by priority members, and take that money from the $791 paid for yearly membership.

Seems to me, your contract expires yearly...

[dewilson58]

The VCCDD charges $100 for Priority Spouses for annual trail fee.......going to be difficult to charge the Priority more than $100.

[Flyers999]

Easy way stop the wear and tear from the golf carts on the executive courses
KEEP THE CARTS ON THE CART PATH. If you can’t get from the path to the tee or green....play dominos

I'd be all for that as long as there was an exception for the handicapped.

I try to do that anyway. The only problem I have with it is carrying the sand bottle to fix the divots. Awkward.

How about this: Everyone except the handicapped must keep their carts on the cart paths. In addition, all divots will be fixed by the
ambassadors as well as ambassadors will.be required to rake all sand traps and line up all putts?

[OhioBuckeye]

Huh, sorry but what is Executive Trail Fees then?

[Bilyclub]

I just got my priority and it covers trail fees. Don’t know where you got that from

Have you not read the posts in this thread? When the agreement gets signed priority will no longer be a free pass on the Executive courses.

[Bilyclub]

Huh, sorry but what is Executive Trail Fees then?

Trail Fees: https://www.golfthevillages.com/executive-golf/images/trailfeeapp.pdf

[OhioBuckeye]

I kinda see what you’re talking about. In your attachment it says in fine print. (Includes Country Club pools AND Executive Trail Fee) So in your defense it doesn’t have a price. But in the comment about price increases it does say Includes Executive Trail Fee, but then again it doesn’t actually say anything about price increase. So it wouldn’t surprise me that TV would start a separate trail fee. TV is getting older & maintenance would be more frequent. But I would think starting a trail fee would hurt tee times. So your attachment isn’t very informative!

[dennisgavin]

If carts create significant wear and tear on the executive courses, then we should try to reduce the wear and tear. The executive courses should provide some incentive for people to walk the courses. In order to encourage walkers, there should be a program that for every 10 rounds that you walk, you get a free play at a Championship course. This would also reduce pollution from carts.

many exec courses have no place to park a car, Are we to carry our clubs for miles to play/walk a course?

[NY2TV]

Something I have never understood is why the fee is $4 per person and not per cart. If the rationale of the fee is due to wear and tear of the cart paths, a 2nd person in a cart is not going to double the effect the cart has on the cart path.

[Bilyclub]

I kinda see what you’re talking about. In your attachment it says in fine print. (Includes Country Club pools AND Executive Trail Fee) So in your defense it doesn’t have a price. But in the comment about price increases it does say Includes Executive Trail Fee, but then again it doesn’t actually say anything about price increase. So it wouldn’t surprise me that TV would start a separate trail fee. TV is getting older & maintenance would be more frequent. But I would think starting a trail fee would hurt tee times. So your attachment isn’t very informative!

The attachment is the current system and prices. Once the agreement is finalized and signed some things will change.

Over the last few months there has been more clarity brought to this situation and the inclusion of the trail fee in the priority membership.

First, the inclusion of the executive course trail fee was for the priority membership holder only, if the rest of the household wanted the executive course trail fee it was sold at 75% of the normal rate.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership was a holdover from the days when the developer owned all the courses - championship and executive, the majority of executive courses are now owned by the SLCDD and the VCCDD.

The inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership derived no benefit to the budgets that maintain the executive courses. No revenue was received from the developer for these included trail fees. For lack of a better term, they were a gift from the VCCDD and the SLCDD to the developer and the residents who purchased the priority membership. The only time there is revenue received related to the priority membership is when the reduced trail fee is paid for the remainder of the household.

The only people who are benefiting from the current agreement are the minority that are receiving the "free" trail fee, the remainder, the rest of the residents, are having to (unjustly?) carry their costs associated with executive course play.

Since the developer is not paying for the inclusion of the executive course trail fee with the priority membership, there will not be a change in the priority membership rate, they have made that perfectly clear. They are not profiting from either the current or proposed Trail Fee policy.

The SLCDD and VCCDD are governmental bodies, there is no justification or requirement to provide preferential treatment to any one resident, group of residents, or business entity.

If the AAC wants to have additional public discussion on this topic, all of the information should be made crystal clear before the few who are benefiting from the current agreement start to vent their rage. If the AAC decides not to change the current policy as proposed, they should then be ready to justify and explain to the rest of the non-priority membership residents that are paying a trail fee 1) why they should continue to give this service away 2) why the non-priory residents should continue to cover the costs and 3) why non-priority resident should not also receive either free or a discounted trail fee. There is no reasonable justification for any of these.

Executive golf is still free, if you walk the course, with or without your own hand cart, you pay nothing to play. The trail fee is a convenience fee to allow you to use your own cart on the course and cover the additional wear and tear on the course these carts bring. The costs associated with cart wear are significant and were part of the justification of the change a year ago in the Reasonable Accommodations policy.

With respect to the rest of the proposed agreement, these are needed changes. Revenue sharing of trail fees is now clearly defined. The cost of providing the on-line service will now be shared based on a benefit received based calculation method - the developer will pay a higher percentage of the actual costs. The ability to pay your trail fee and/or priority membership fees on-line will finally be available. An avenue will now be available to make changes to the on-line reservation system - perhaps we can now move into the 21 centry and have a phone app to make reservations instead of having to rely on a web page. Trail fees will include a CPI adjustment to help cover the continued increasing costs of the additional course maintenance.

[collie1228]

You obviously don’t live on a golf course if you think people stay on the golf path. Most do but everyday I see people driving off the path more so if it is raining. Yes they play in the rain and at night after dark and for free after the starter shack is closed.

So what you are saying is that we have to pay trail fees to cover costs incurred by people who don't follow the rules? Sounds illogical to me.

[Papa_lecki]

Are the Marshalls employed (paid) by the “developer” or the districts? Will the districts need to hire Marshall’s for the executive courses?

[dewilson58]

Are the Marshalls employed (paid) by the “developer” or the districts? Will the districts need to hire Marshall’s for the executive courses?

:ohdear::ohdear:

[2BoyDogs]

If the trail fee is " free, " why do I have to write a check out each year to get it?

[DaleDivine]

So what you are saying is that we have to pay trail fees to cover costs incurred by people who don't follow the rules? Sounds illogical to me.

Yep, it's true. You have to pay rising costs in stores that have lots of thefts. If people followed the rules and didn't steal, costs would be less in the stores.

:bigbow::bigbow:

[dewilson58]

If the trail fee is " free, " why do I have to write a check out each year to get it?

Please read & learn.

[DaleDivine]

If the trail fee is " free, " why do I have to write a check out each year to get it?

Trail fee is NOT FREE. Golfing is FREE IF you walk the course.

:ho::ho:

[Rainger99]

Something I have never understood is why the fee is $4 per person and not per cart. If the rationale of the fee is due to wear and tear of the cart paths, a 2nd person in a cart is not going to double the effect the cart has on the cart path.

I would assume that it is because they make $8 when they charge per person instead of only $4 when they charge per cart.

[dewilson58]

Something I have never understood is why the fee is $4 per person and not per cart. If the rationale of the fee is due to wear and tear of the cart paths, a 2nd person in a cart is not going to double the effect the cart has on the cart path.

Would it help you if they charged $8 per cart?? :ohdear:

Or $2 per tire??

[EviesGP]

I don't care about the math. Per Don's explanation, it's more of the principle. Everyone riding the Exec courses should pay for the wear and tear. If the District(s) are not getting any revenue from the Developer's Trail Fees, this should be corrected. For those doing the math, just realize how this gets compounded as we keep expanding in an exponential manner?

As for the CAP(formerly RA), I agree with the doc. They should pay for those passes. Of course, I have a very strong opinion about those individuals/privileges, as well. As a former Ambassador, I witnessed so many extreme violations, that I welcomed the new CAP process. Unfortunately, I now witness that this changed very little. I continue to see individuals driving ALL OVER the courses! Then, watch the individual get out of the cart, with very little effort. THAT, is what tears up these courses! NOT the damage to the greens! If that was the case, the walkers would be paying a fee, as well?! The upkeep of these courses will always be a no-win situation until they strictly enforce the policy(s)!

[mulligan]

If the trail fee is " free, " why do I have to write a check out each year to get it?

It is included with the priority membership fee.

[Jnukey]

In my case, it will not make sense to pay for the Priority membership unless the price is adjusted.
I only play the championship courses once a week if that so paying that much without the trail fee included doesn’t make sense for me even with all the other benefits

[Phpb2]

“Reasonable Accommodation” tags are now called Villages Course Access Pass ( CAP).
To qualify, one must have issued to them a valid Disabled Person parking placard.
I’m certain that the authorities deciding the Executive Course issue are fully aware of ADA implications should the disabled be charged a fee vs those walking with a pull cart!

[drcar]

“Reasonable Accommodation” tags are now called Villages Course Access Pass ( CAP).
To qualify, one must have issued to them a valid Disabled Person parking placard.
I’m certain that the authorities deciding the Executive Course issue are fully aware of ADA implications should the disabled be charged a fee vs those walking with a pull cart!

You are comparing apples and oranges, having a cap card does NOT preclude charging a trail fee. If it did 30% of the golfers would not be paying trail fees.

[drcar]

If the trail fee is " free, " why do I have to write a check out each year to get it?

The trail fees are not free, one way or another you pay for them.

[Cardinal64]

In a meeting a couple years ago, we were told that the old agreement let The Developer keep the trail fee portion of the Priority fee as partial payment for all Villagers who use the tee time reservation system for the Executive Courses. We wanted a discounted Priority fee because we did not want a trail fee, but we're refused, and we're told it was mandatory for all Priority members, not optional. The Trail Fee includes payment to the Developer. It would be of interest to know how much ! The Priority fee should be reduced since it no longer includes the mandatory
Trail fee, but The Developer probably has outsmarted the CDD's again to pocket some more $$$. Also, can paid Priority members still have Trail access until their membership expires?

[Papa_lecki]

In a meeting a couple years ago, we were told that the old agreement let The Developer keep the trail fee portion of the Priority fee as partial payment for all Villagers who use the tee time reservation system for the Executive Courses. We wanted a discounted Priority fee because we did not want a trail fee, but we're refused, and we're told it was mandatory for all Priority members, not optional. The Trail Fee includes payment to the Developer. It would be of interest to know how much ! The Priority fee should be reduced since it no longer includes the mandatory
Trail fee, but The Developer probably has outsmarted the CDD's again to pocket some more $$$. Also, can paid Priority members still have Trail access until their membership expires?

As I asked previously, under the current system; do the development districts…..

Pay to use the tee time system?
Pay the marshals?
Pay for the carts that are at some of the executive courses?
Pay for the staff to work in the starters shacks?
Pay for the divot repair mixture?

I assume, the DD pay the developer for course maintenance?

[rustyp]

In a meeting a couple years ago, we were told that the old agreement let The Developer keep the trail fee portion of the Priority fee as partial payment for all Villagers who use the tee time reservation system for the Executive Courses. We wanted a discounted Priority fee because we did not want a trail fee, but we're refused, and we're told it was mandatory for all Priority members, not optional. The Trail Fee includes payment to the Developer. It would be of interest to know how much ! The Priority fee should be reduced since it no longer includes the mandatory
Trail fee, but The Developer probably has outsmarted the CDD's again to pocket some more $$$. Also, can paid Priority members still have Trail access until their membership expires?

This is an interesting post however raises many questions in my mind.
1. What meeting and for what purpose ?
2. Who is we in "we were told"
3. What is the old agreement Vs new agreement (or are you referring to the new proposal).
4. Why would a trail fee be mandatory for priority members and not regular members
5. The telephone part of the tee time system is free, $8/mo for computer access. Everyone is at liberty to use the free part. Does any of the amenities fees from the AAC and PWAC support the system. If not why not ?

Maybe the developer is not such a bad monarch as being portrayed. Maybe we already had the aforementioned win / win. Developer offered a stipend for priority membership estimated to be 2% of Villagers and in return maintained (which is probably a sizable expense) the tee time system that benefits the overwhelming majority of Villagers. The increased revenue by the new proposal is estimated at $380K/year. If the AAC and PWAC are not paying into the tee time system how much would it cost us (AAC and PWAC) to develop and maintain a separate system if the developer says take a hike ?

[Topspinmo]

Trail fee is NOT FREE. Golfing is FREE IF you walk the course.

:ho::ho:
Any amenities in villages is not free. We all pay monthly amenities fee. Maintaining golf courses big part of the fee. Trail fees way to generate extra money. And yes, for what we get it good deal. I agree the developer should be paying districts part of his priority membership fee, he sold his interest in districts when they paid full price for the district amenities.

[Stu from NYC]

Any amenities in villages is not free. We all pay monthly amenities fee. Maintaining golf courses big part of the fee. Trail fees way to generate extra money. And yes, for what we get it good deal. I agree the developer should be paying districts part of his priority membership fee, he sold his interest in districts when they paid full price for the district amenities.

Agreed but good luck getting that to happen.

[Topspinmo]

Agreed but good luck getting that to happen.

Not going to get anything to happen. Just see it for what it is. We peon’s going to pay regardless.

[Stu from NYC]

Not going to get anything to happen. Just see it for what it is. We peon’s going to pay regardless.

True but this is still a great place to live

[guitarguy]

Ambassadors work both championship and executive courses.
How are those costs handled and who pays?
Do championship course superintendents handle executive courses as well?
It would be interesting to know how this is handled.

[Papa_lecki]

Am I reading this right? There appears to be 375,000 in trail fees from priority golf. VCCDD FY2020 revenue was $115 million.
SLCDD revenue was $90 million

How much time was spent on an item that is almost a rounding error?

[OhioBuckeye]

Sorry, I see your attachment but where’s it say, Executive Trail Fees will or won’t go up? That’s my question. I’m not saying your not right but where does it say anything about Trail Fees?

[OhioBuckeye]

Bilyclub, you said that’s not what the article said. I just didn’t see the article where it said Executive Trail Fees won’t go up or you explain what it said about trail fees, that’s what you said. I’m not going to make a big deal about this, just trying to see your proof!

[Bogie Shooter]

Am I reading this right? There appears to be 375,000 in trail fees from priority golf. VCCDD FY2020 revenue was $115 million.
SLCDD revenue was $90 million

How much time was spent on an item that is almost a rounding error?

79 posts so far……:1rotfl:

[Stu from NYC]

79 posts so far……:1rotfl:

Will give odds it gets to at least 100.

[rustyp]

79 posts so far……:1rotfl:

Will give odds it gets to at least 100.

By posting the little guy eating popcorn you can increase your number of posts with little or no effort and at the same time annoyingly keep the thread alive. Of course that doesn't do jack for furthering anyone's education on said subject. Oh look I'm approaching Sage. When does one get to rosemary and thyme ?

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[drcar]

Ambassadors work both championship and executive courses.
How are those costs handled and who pays?
Do championship course superintendents handle executive courses as well?
It would be interesting to know how this is handled.

Executive staff is paid by the developer, and then reimbursed by the districts, championship maintenance is separate from executive. not the same superintendents.

[drcar]

As I asked previously, under the current system; do the development districts…..

Pay to use the tee time system?
Pay the marshals?
Pay for the carts that are at some of the executive courses?
Pay for the staff to work in the starters shacks?
Pay for the divot repair mixture?

I assume, the DD pay the developer for course maintenance?

LOL, there has been and will be a agreement between both parties to cover all this.

[rustyp]

This is an interesting post however raises many questions in my mind.
1. What meeting and for what purpose ?
2. Who is we in "we were told"
3. What is the old agreement Vs new agreement (or are you referring to the new proposal).
4. Why would a trail fee be mandatory for priority members and not regular members
5. The telephone part of the tee time system is free, $8/mo for computer access. Everyone is at liberty to use the free part. Does any of the amenities fees from the AAC and PWAC support the system. If not why not ?

Maybe the developer is not such a bad monarch as being portrayed. Maybe we already had the aforementioned win / win. Developer offered a stipend for priority membership estimated to be 2% of Villagers and in return maintained (which is probably a sizable expense) the tee time system that benefits the overwhelming majority of Villagers. The increased revenue by the new proposal is estimated at $380K/year. If the AAC and PWAC are not paying into the tee time system how much would it cost us (AAC and PWAC) to develop and maintain a separate system if the developer says take a hike ?

As it turns out the AAC met Friday and into the room waltz an 11 page document from the developer in essence says OK we will remove the stipend of free executive trail fee with a priority membership but the AAC and PWAC now need to pay part of the tee time system at the tune of > $200K per year. The AAC vote was taken and 3 to 2 voted to table the agreement. The next step is meet with PWAC on Monday. Ref today's online news.

To my AAC reps can you publish what ever document agreement you bought to the table?

[Goldwingnut]

As it turns out the AAC met Friday and into the room waltz an 11 page document from the developer in essence says OK we will remove the stipend of free executive trail fee with a priority membership but the AAC and PWAC now need to pay part of the tee time system at the tune of > $200K per year. The AAC vote was taken and 3 to 2 voted to table the agreement. The next step is meet with PWAC on Monday. Ref today's online news.

To my AAC reps can you publish what ever document agreement you bought to the table?

Here's the agreement. There's a lot more to understand about the entire process and agreement than what is put out on the other site. Please feel free to attend the PWAC meeting tomorrow morning.

[Papa_lecki]

///

[Bilyclub]

From the online rag:

Deputy District Manager Carrie Duckett revealed Friday that Villagers who purchase priority memberships now will receive the benefit of having their trail fees covered for the next 12 months at executive courses in The Villages.

[rustyp]

Here's the agreement. There's a lot more to understand about the entire process and agreement than what is put out on the other site. Please feel free to attend the PWAC meeting tomorrow morning.

That is the exact agreement publish on the "other"site. I read it. Lot's of definitions and summaries of what's mine what's yours. My take away still is you can take the trail fee stipend away from the developer then the AAC and PWAC need to pay their fair share for other items like tee time system. One item I was not clear on - it specifies in great detail the developer owns all the courses south of 44 Is it trying to spell out you need give them the developer that proportion IE number of courses south of 44 divided by total PWAC courses ratio of trail fees collected by the PWAC ? How is that money being split up today ? As I posted before

1 Is this battle worth having
2 Developer carries a big stick - they came to the table, ducks in a row, full of legalize
3 How will a win/win be measured ?

I am not being trying to be a wise guy - I don't want to win this battle if it disrupts whatever harmonious relationship exist today between residents and developer in the future. This is a piddly $375K issue as opposed to years ago when there was a 40 million dollar issue when the community was 1/3 the size it is today (which is why the AAC exist today). As far as attending meetings I learned the pen is mightier than the sword. Plus I have a touch of germaphobia in me.

[Dana1963]

I just saw that if you have a priority golf membership, it will not cover trail fees at executive golf courses.
“Those purchasing priority golf memberships in The Villages can lock in their executive golf trail fees for a year if they buy now before a final decision on a revised tee time and trail pass services agreement.“
But, let's keep this thread open forever.

[Papa_lecki]

This is a piddly $375K issue as opposed to years ago when there was a 40 million dollar issue when the community was 1/3 the size it is today (which is why the AAC exist today). As far as attending meetings I learned the pen is mightier than the sword. Plus I have a touch of germaphobia in me.

If Dev Districts need to pay $200k for the tee time system, its going to battle over a net $100,000.
I guess I am missing something, there must be more to it.

I would wager the tee time system would be replaced in the next few years. As software ages, it becomes less expensive to replace with new than maintain the old.