It’s time for the PWAC and AAC to measure amenity cost.
 

As an example, the Brownwood wood shop has made the news multiple times for cost overruns, additional equipment cost, etc. I don’t know if these expenses are excessive or warranted but I expect the PWAC in this case to provide quantifiable measures that justify the funds expended. We spend million$ in amenities fees each year and should have a system to track the actual cost per user or unit for every amenity funded in order to manage these funds appropriately. You can’t manage it unless you can measure it!

Please let us know what responses you get when you attend the next meetings of the PWAC and AAC and raise you concerns at the podium.

Haha! I suspect that approach would get one nod and several stares with little else. But there may be another way…

I think you'll find you are mistaken in your expectations. There is a very good accounting of what is spent on what activities and facilities. You'll not get any data on how much is spent per resident per activity if that's what you're looking for, such data would be extremely time and resource consuming and expensive to collect, but there is good accounting for the manned facility usage.

Most of the supervisors that serve on the AAC and PWAC have a pretty good understanding of where the money goes and don't expend a lot of time and energy rehashing what they already know at the meetings and workshops (they're doing their job to know in advance), they try to stay focused on problems and issues at hand, resident concerns and interests, and the bottom line necessary to maintain a balanced budget while planning for the future. However, if you have specific questions and/or concerns you should contact your representatives at your respective governing committee, they'll let the district staff know of the item (so exact data can be ready to present) and they can be prepared to answer the specifics of the questions at the meetings/workshop.

I look forward to seeing you at the upcoming meetings and workshops.

So, not even going to try. Just dismiss it based on bad assumption.

While in theory, this might have merit, but there is no way the data will help make everyone happy.
I don’t play tennis, but I golf - so spend more money on golf and turn the tennis courts into putting greens.
Why is there water volleyball at the sports pool when I want to swim laps?

The last time I did woodworking was in 7th grade shop class - I have no interest in the wood shop, but there are a lot of villagers who do - to me, it’s a give and take.

Nicely put.

IMO anytime amenities money used for activity all villagers paying amenities should be able to use that facility. AND not have to joint membership and wait to get on controlled list. We are ALREADY Paying members. I agree with addition fee to use the facility but to ban villagers who paid amenities by having wait list is wrong. Few spend 8 hours plus day using facility.

But we all have access to those facilities, not limiting number of golfers or tennis players ect… Which means have equal opportunity to use all amenities except wood shop.

Somebody who presumably knows more than us has decided on the capacity of the wood shop.

Never said measuring cost by unit or person should be used to measure one amenity against another. Measuring cost by unit is a very practical and effective management approach, providing a measurement of expenses vs use and a tool for future capital planning and maintenance. I don’t buy the “ it’s too time consuming” excuse because that’s all it is, an excuse for lazy management practices and avoiding accountability. Once you spend the time to establish a baseline for each amenity then annual updates will maintain the database. I’m sure the current PWAC and AAC members are very conscientious about their responsibilities but they could be better stewards with better information.

Do you propose polling each unit to see what percentage of the time the owners spend using each amenity or will you take attendance and log the time used by each user at each amenity?

Otherwise, knowing that x% of the amenity fee goes towards the golf courses and y% towards the pools seems to be a pretty good metric.

Didn’t say that. I said there may be a better approach. As you can see on this thread some people have already become defensive, trying to protect their turf, defend the Amenity Committee’s or make excuses. I expect a good number of Committee members would react the same way because we are all resistant to change if we’re honest about it. The difficulty lies not with a new idea, but escaping the old ones.

Share with us your plan, and how it would benefit us.

We already have a lot of information based on the current reservation systems (tee times, court reservations, club membership,etc). Additional information could be gathered by recreation staff as they visit each rec center during normal duties and record the number of people using the amenity. Over time the data collected will show a median or average to establish a baseline.