[TomOB67]

NJBlue,
So if I understand this correctly... The Villages has found a way to make its residents of a non-private, non gated community to pay for building everything, right down to the public roads, common areas, and possibly even the town squares through the bonds sold. And then you pay to keep maintaining some of these public access places thru your amenities fees. Is this true?? Wow! Boy they're good.
I understand the problem some people are feeling now...but it sounds the anger is being aimed in the wrong direction.

[otherbruddaDarrell]

I know that we are not a full "gated" community and people can come shop, visit etc.
BUT.....as residents we are the people paying for the golf courses, pools, clubhouses, landscaping and the things that attract people here.
Guests should not have access for more then 30 days to our amentities. I have family in Florida and so does my wife (apx. 20 people), but they understand the rules and so do we. I have been at the pools and seen people jump in the water when the recreation people come to check passes because they know they do not check the passes of those in the water.
I agree that the resident should be with the guest when using things that require a guest pass.
Most of the people I have had conversations with agree.
Again...I am for a 30 day limit on guest passes.

[jeffy]

Originally Posted by musicman

Barefoot,

I am going to have to disagree with you there. My wife and I both work in TV and provide services to the community. When we first moved here, we didn't know the area, where to buy a home, so we leased a home in TV. We lived there for three years. We are quiet folk, no kids, no wild parties, rarely home because we work our tales off. We are both in our 40's. We were NEVER made to feel welcome in our home. In fact, we were made to feel most UN-welcome. We quit going to the rec facilities and pools (the fees were paid by the homeowner we leased from) because we were constantly harassed by residents accusing us of taking advantage of THEIR facilities and we shouldn't be there. We got tired of answering to these blow hards that we WERE entitled to be there.

As for the use of public facilities, we rarely go to the town squares anymore. We have been nearly run down by people driving carts on sidewalks, and upon pointing out that it is a SIDEWALK not a cart path, we have been verbally abused. We have not been able to drive on the street because of carts parked in the road. Some of these "friendliest hometown" residents have even told us that we should get out of their way because this is their town and they can drive and park where they want.

I don't get it. We work to support the retired community and provide services they need, but aren't made to feel welcome when we want to use the facilities we have (or had) a right to use. Many residents need to consider that if the under 55 crowd stayed out of "their" town, they would not have anyone to serve them at the restaurant, mix them a drink, provide their healthcare, bag their groceries, cut their hair, trim their bushes, etc.

I understand the frustration of wanting the "private" facilities restricted to those that pay for them. It makes sense to me. Unfortunately I encounter many that have that feeling about the entire Villages area.

I often joke that the town motto should be "Florida's Friendliest Hometown as long as you're 55 or older". Just my opinion, I guess. Sorry for the rant.

I am sorry you and your wife have felt so out of place in TV. I was 50 when we bought here and my child bride was a mere 46. We bought almost 5 years ago and from day one could not have felt more accepted and loved by our neighbors. No where at any time have we felt dissed. I have never lived in such a friendly area. Sure there are some grumudgends out there as there is everywhere. But for us they have been few and far between.

TomOB67 , you talk about villagers being angry, bored people. To me, your posts sound the angriest .

jeffy

[NJblue]

Originally Posted by Bob S

NJBlue,
You mentioned that entertainment at the Squares is not paid for from the amenity fees. I am curious. How is it paid for?

Per Janet Tutt, it is paid for by the entertainment organization which is not controlled by the VCDD but rather the developer. I assume that the developer gets his funding for this from rents and/or special assesments from the merchants. Likewise, The VCDD does not govern Katie Bells, entertainment at the Savannah Center or the Lifelong Learning Center.

[NJblue]

Originally Posted by TomOB67

NJBlue,
So if I understand this correctly... The Villages has found a way to make its residents of a non-private, non gated community to pay for building everything, right down to the public roads, common areas, and possibly even the town squares through the bonds sold. And then you pay to keep maintaining some of these public access places thru your amenities fees. Is this true?? Wow! Boy they're good.
I understand the problem some people are feeling now...but it sounds the anger is being aimed in the wrong direction.

No, you don't have it completely correct. The residents did not pay for the Town Squares - the developer continues to own them. As far as the supplemental maintenance of the roads in the numbered districts, this comes from the maintenance addition to our taxes (which is in addition to our amenity fee), which also pays for the landscaping, transportation paths, street lighting, water retention areas, etc.

Whether we are overpaying for what we get or paying the price that is justified for the environment that we want is irrelevant to this discussion. Your logic is akin to a family who spent a lot of money to live in a nice house only to have a freeloading relative come and stay with them long after the period of normal graciousness. Then, when the family starts to complain about it the relative tries to shift the blame to the family having overpaid for the house that they live in. Doesn't work that way.

[RichieLion]

I propose that in order to obtain the 365 pass, which is what I as a amenity paying resident have, that the resident applying for the pass for a relative should have to pay an additional amenities fee. Otherwise that relative and his family should be relegated to the 30 day pass. Has this ever been considered? What could be fairer? That would be a benefit instead of the current inequity.

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by SABRMnLgs

Someone wrote the comment that, "I pay for the amenities such as golf and such why should they get it for free?"
I have the opposite feeling without agreeing or disagreeing. I have lived here for 5 years and have never set foot on a golf course. Why should I have to pay for an activity I have never used and probably never will? Same difference!!

Not at all - HUGE difference. You knew what you were buying into (or should have). Non-residents bought into nothing and are getting some amenities free of charge.

I propose that in order to obtain the 365 pass, which is what I as a amenity paying resident have, that the resident applying for the pass for a relative should have to pay an additional amenities fee. Otherwise that relative and his family should be relegated to the 30 day pass. Has this ever been considered? What could be fairer? That would be a benefit instead of the current inequity.


Richie, I really would not like to see this. I want to welcome all - but to open up TV as a pay as you go facility would increase overcrowding - esp on the golf courses.

[TomOB67]

Whether we are overpaying for what we get or paying the price that is justified for the environment that we want is irrelevant to this discussion. Your logic is akin to a family who spent a lot of money to live in a nice house only to have a freeloading relative come and stay with them long after the period of normal graciousness. Then, when the family starts to complain about it the relative tries to shift the blame to the family having overpaid for the house that they live in. Doesn't work that way

Good analogy..I did get off track with the golf carts and fees...sorry

not being an outsider on the inside...you wouldnt know or believe the nasty misinformed attitude that is cast upon us quite often). It is im sure from a small few in respect to the number of very happy and pleasant people we come across...but over time it does get wear ya down. I guess this thread got my attention at the wrong time...sorry for the venting..I do enjoy The Villages, thats why we moved to the area...and if the shoe were on the other foot...I would probably, no, I would feel the same way I am sure.

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by TomOB67

Good analogy..I did get off track with the golf carts and fees...sorry

not being an outsider on the inside...you wouldnt know or believe the nasty misinformed attitude that is cast upon us quite often). It is im sure from a small few in respect to the number of very happy and pleasant people we come across...but over time it does get wear ya down. I guess this thread got my attention at the wrong time...sorry for the venting..I do enjoy The Villages, thats why we moved to the area...and if the shoe were on the other foot...I would probably, no, I would feel the same way I am sure.

Tom,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

Kate

[NJblue]

Richie, I really would not like to see this. I want to welcome all - but to open up TV as a pay as you go facility would increase overcrowding - esp on the golf courses.

I don't think that it would increase overcrowding. In fact, it would most likely cut it down. As it stands right now, guests from the tri-county area can get a free pass for 365 days per year. By imposing a fee on them, at worst it will keep the number the same (but increase our amenity budget). In all likelihood, it would cut back on the number of guest days in TV since anytime something that used to be free is charged for, consumption will go down. It's basic economics.

Your point may be that people from outside the tri-county area may want to buy a 365 day pass. However, I don't think that this necessarily has to be allowed.

[bargee]

Well I must say this took longer than I thought it would.We were thrilled when we found out we could elect the people who would handle our amenitys and fees on our behalf.It did not take long for the Villages to break them down to a toothless tiger.Now they will do what they are told and take all the blame for what ever happens.What a deal.

[BaylorBear]

I agree with you, Tom. We are TVr's and we extend our besh wishes and welcome. Let's not be sour and fight with one another. Snideness just isn't necessary. This is a lovely place to live; be happy and enjoy it!

[Barefoot]

Originally Posted by musicman

Barefoot,

I am going to have to disagree with you there. My wife and I both work in TV and provide services to the community. When we first moved here, we didn't know the area, where to buy a home, so we leased a home in TV. We lived there for three years. We are quiet folk, no kids, no wild parties, rarely home because we work our tales off. We are both in our 40's. We were NEVER made to feel welcome in our home. In fact, we were made to feel most UN-welcome. We quit going to the rec facilities and pools (the fees were paid by the homeowner we leased from) because we were constantly harassed by residents accusing us of taking advantage of THEIR facilities and we shouldn't be there. We got tired of answering to these blow hards that we WERE entitled to be there.

As for the use of public facilities, we rarely go to the town squares anymore. We have been nearly run down by people driving carts on sidewalks, and upon pointing out that it is a SIDEWALK not a cart path, we have been verbally abused. We have not been able to drive on the street because of carts parked in the road. Some of these "friendliest hometown" residents have even told us that we should get out of their way because this is their town and they can drive and park where they want.

I don't get it. We work to support the retired community and provide services they need, but aren't made to feel welcome when we want to use the facilities we have (or had) a right to use. Many residents need to consider that if the under 55 crowd stayed out of "their" town, they would not have anyone to serve them at the restaurant, mix them a drink, provide their healthcare, bag their groceries, cut their hair, trim their bushes, etc.

I understand the frustration of wanting the "private" facilities restricted to those that pay for them. It makes sense to me. Unfortunately I encounter many that have that feeling about the entire Villages area.

I often joke that the town motto should be "Florida's Friendliest Hometown as long as you're 55 or older". Just my opinion, I guess. Sorry for the rant.

Actually, Musicman, we aren't disagreeing at all. If you rented a home in The Villages, you had every right to use the amenities that were paid for by the homeowner. Regardless of your age. I think the rudeness you encountered was totally unacceptable. I feel badly that you had such a negative experience.

But I do feel that use of amenities that are paid for by residents should be limited to residents, renters, and those on 30 day guest passes.

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by NJblue

I don't think that it would increase overcrowding. In fact, it would most likely cut it down. As it stands right now, guests from the tri-county area can get a free pass for 365 days per year. By imposing a fee on them, at worst it will keep the number the same (but increase our amenity budget). In all likelihood, it would cut back on the number of guest days in TV since anytime something that used to be free is charged for, consumption will go down. It's basic economics.

Your point may be that people from outside the tri-county area may want to buy a 365 day pass. However, I don't think that this necessarily has to be allowed.

I don't think 365 day passes should be allowed - do we really want to turn into an organization collecting monies for amenity use? That anyone can buy a one day pass? Do you think that private country clubs built around a community would want to let non-residents buy a membership and create more demand on limited facilities? What about the insurance? What about children they would bring in with them?

We could have snowbirds renting on the cheap and paying an amenity fee for a few months a year to get access to our facilities.

[dillywho]

I served on the committee that made the proposals to the ACC, which in turn made them to TV. There was considerable discussion on guest passes, primarily the in-area ones. Those passes are only issued to residents whose relatives fall within the parameters outlined (children, grand-children, etc.). It does not include brothers, sisters, etc within the tri-county area. They still are not allowed to use the ammenity-supported facilities, but can come to the movies, etc. Those on in-area guest passes must be accompanied at all times by the sponsoring resident, regardless of the guests' ages. The 365-day pass enables them to have the guests in on a last-minute basis, say Sunday dinner and then the pool or whatever. However, many of them stated in the meetings that they see less of their kids and grandkids now than they did when they lived farther away. Everyone, it seems, lead such busy lives that they don't really have time to come visit "since they can see them anytime now". The grandkids are not allowed to bring in their little friends...thus the ID's at the young ages.

With so many new communities springing up all around us, that is why the rec centers, etc. have really clamped down on ID checks. Please don't be offended when you have to produce your card (even if they do know you), because this is one way to protect our ammenity-paid recreation.

To my knowledge, there was never a proposal afloat to sell ammenity passes and I only missed one meeting, I think.

What did prompt some of the discussion concerning all guest passes and time limits had to do with those few who had figured out a way to "beat the system". One scenario:

Joe Schmo comes in for the usual winter season (3 - 6 months) but doesn't want to rent or maintain a home here. After all, he has to pay the ammenity fee whether he's here or not. He goes outside TV, purchases his winter home, and then using his other out-of-area DL or whatever, gets his Villages buddy to obtain a guest pass, and then has him renew it every 30 days for the duration. Not being a son, daughter, etc. he wouldn't qualify for the in-area guest pass at all. By not having limits on usage (i.e. 30 days), he's here on "your dime" the whole time. That is abuse. We all pay...he plays, be it golf, pickleball, billiards, etc. Renters at least are paying the fees through the rent they pay the homeowner, assuming that homeowner is not generous enough or dumb enough not to include that cost in the rental fee.

Fortunately, the abusers are not that many. Unfortunately, some will always be among us.

Hope this gives a little insight to it all. On a personal note, I don't think we're grouches for wanting to protect our investments; and, our ammenities are our investments as are our homes. Most all of us want the privilege of guests and to be able to share our lifestyle with them on occasion. As such, there is nothing wrong with limits on that sharing. All of life is give and take.