Don’t understand why we have to justify and defend the fact we live in the villages to somebody that lives down the road.:shrug:

That makes sense, I started way less than poor and chump change would have been very welcome. After a lot of hard work and luck I fall toward the other end of the scale, so I understand both completely.

And I'm still thrifty (a huge tight wad...).

I kinda shocked myself with that one.

We don't, everyone should do their thing and be as happy as they can with it. Some old farts like to fuss at one another for no good reason. Other old farts get entertainment out of stirring the pot and watching the fallout.

Amenity fee
 

That ocean view will get you every time!

Next to none. There will be some that have to travel from neighboring areas in legal carts for 30 mph street (or illegally), but insignificant quantity.

Excellent explanation of HOW new rates are calculated. That process is clear.

So please explain the justification for WHY it's okay that everybody pays a different amount for the exact same amenities. Everybody should pay the same amount for the same amenities. Not $179 for them, $195 for them, $210 for them.

What if you and I are in line at the grocery store with identical items in our carts. The bill should be identical. If mine is more, is my jug of milk more valuable than yours? Why was I charged a different amount for identical things?

What if our houses (next door to each other) are assessed at $500k, and all exemptions are equal. Why would it be okay for my tax bill to be less than your tax bill?

That is a good example and explains why things are the way they are - the exemptions on the three homes are NOT equal so the tax bills are NOT the same.

You and your two neighbors have identical homes assessed at $500K. One of your neighbors purchased three years ago, you purchased two years ago, and your other neighbor purchased last year. Your tax bills are all different!

The neighbor from three years ago filed for the Homestead Exemption and is benefiting from two years of the Save Our Homes limitation on taxable assessment increases. He pays less than you.

You purchased two years ago and filed for the Homestead Exemption so you are benefiting from that and but only one year of Save Our Homes if that. You will pay a little more.

The assessed value of your other neighbor's home was just adjusted to *his* exemptions rather than those of the previous owner so his tax bill just increased quite a bit. His exemptions will kick in next year. His tax bill is higher than both of yours.

The same with amenity fees. Those that have been here longer started at a lower initial rate. While everyone's amenity fee increases annually by the CPI over the last 12 months (written into the deed restrictions), the initial rate which is set by the Developer each year typically increases more than the CPI. Therefore, the more years you have been in your home, the larger the difference between your amenity rate and that of a new home buyer.

There is one interesting difference between the amenity rate and the Save Our Homes reduction: the amenity rate resets when you purchase a new home but the reduction does not. When I purchase a home my amenity fee is set to the current initial rate regardless of what it was in my previous home. However, my Save Our Homes reduction is portable and can be carried over to the new home. Me and my neighbor are very likely NOT paying the same in property tax because we have a different history with the Save Our Home reduction.

Sorry, but when we are talking about $3,5,7/ month, that IS chump change and regardless of one's prior occupation nobody here is that marginal that it makes a difference. But if you must know, I was relatively poor for a physician. Many of my colleagues thought I was the "chump", I didn't pack my schedule, saw 2-4 patients/hour, gave away probably $2-3 million in free care to those that WERE that marginal. I wouldn't be insensitive enough to call , say, hundreds of dollars/month "chump change", but c'mon----$3 or 5 or even 10. Lets be real.
And BTW fdpaq----I respect you as well---if I didn't, I wouldn't bother debating you. Plus, every now and then we DO agree on SOMETHING :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

The example was two houses (of any age or style) are exactly equal in assessed value (and exemptions) are both taxed at the same rate per $1000
Exactly same property taxes. All the other words about ages, size, etc are irrelevant when assessed values are identical.

In the amenity fee thinking, one house would be taxed at a different amount.
But that would be unfair.

What is unclear about this?

You are ignoring the details that result in the amenity fee being different.

To compare apples to apples you would have two homes purchased at exactly the same time. In that case, the amenity fee for the two homes would be exactly the same just as the exemptions and property tax.

If the amenity fee was different then the reason was the homes were purchased in different years. If the homes were purchased in different years then the exemptions would NOT be exactly the same and the property tax would NOT be the same.

Can you explain an amenity fee difference of over $20 for two homes next door to each other. One is $179 the other is $201. Most in the neighborhood are in the $185-$195 range.
I’m not complaining, just trying to understand how it works. Must be a reason.

We're by no means rich. But I understood what you were saying. If the 3,5 or 7 dollars is going to be their breaking point, then TV may not be for them.
And yes, it's chump change to us as well. You can spend $7 on 1 drink at Starbucks.

Prices are going up everywhere, our amenity fee is no exception. Just a fact of life. Not everywhere is affordable for everyone. Just like we can't afford to live in Naples.

Now I'm confused. I see that number (189) frequently. But, earlier in this thread, I thought I saw people saying their amenity fees varied widely, from under 189 to over 200. So, does everyone really pay 189, or does the fee vary from house to house, even next door neighbors?

Read some of the previous posts. More than a few explain it very well.
My advice is to just pay it, move on and enjoy everything TV has to offer.
Life is good here.

EVERYBODY should pay the SAME amount of money for IDENTICAL amenities.

I do not care about the method they invented to calculate amenity fees. I do not care when the "anniversary date" is. I do not care when the house was sold. I do not care about any long winded reasoning to justify charging DIFFERENT AMOUNTS.

If you pay more than me, please explain exactly what you are getting for that extra money? What does your extra $25 a month get for you that I do not also get? Maybe preferred seating at cards? Better tee times? Pool temperatures controlled to the temperature you prefer?

‘fact, the golf courses and their maintenance is a small portion of the overall amenity fee.’

Do you have figures to back that fact up? Golf courses I bet are half of amenities fees cost?

It’s system we agreed to when we moved in. Amenities is not hidden cost like end of year maintenance fees that bounce all over place depending on what district you live in.

It’s what we all agreed to when we brought.

So unless you recently moved and want yours raised to $195 per month, since that's the current start rate, call up TV and tell them you want to pay more. Blow their minds.

I'll take that bet! Here are the figures:

23-24 SLAD Budget:
Amenity fees in: $85M
Golf course O&M out: $3.3M (4%)

23-24 RAD Budget:
Amenity fees in: $48M
Golf Mgmt Svcs out: $1.7M (4%)

Here are the FACTS from the proposed budgets for RAD and SLAD

Executive golf is about 3% of the total amenity budget

End of BS statements on wild percentage guesses.
Case closed!:wave:

Thank you for the FACTS, I know you posted something similar last year, nice of you to repost it. So, 3% of $190 is $5.70/month for exec golf. I stand by my previous posts

Hey Don, just curious, what is SLAD and RAD? My understanding was that the amenities were controlled by the PWAC and the AAC? Are they subcommittees that report to PWAC and AAC?

I am surprised at how low a percentage Executive golf is of the total budgets, but then again, that might help explain the deteriorating conditions over the years? I can only imagine what it costs to maintain and heat (in the winter) the approximately 112 swimming pools.

What I was surprised about is how "cheap" all the flowers are to replace.

;)

:)https://www.districtgov.org/images/A...pdf?v=20230721

You'd lose that bet... The actual amount (from those who actually know how much money is spent $$$) has been posted, multiple times...

IIRC it's less than 10%... Closer to 5%...

And my property tax rate should be the same as the full timers who receive the "Sunshine Discount"...

But it's not... Should I get benefits because I pay more?

Is your mortgage rated the same for your neighbor, who has the exact same mortgage amount? No? Why not?

It's 3% (per Don Wiley)... I stand corrected...

More posters should respond in this manner!⭐️

I don't mind doing it because it happens so rarely... :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Oh my

SLAD is the Sumter Landing Amenities Division and RAD is the Recreation Amenities Division- these are divisions of the SLCDD and VCCDD that are the actual owners/controllers of the amenities north of 44 and north of 466 respectively.

PWAC and the AAC are resident advisory bodies that provide guidance to the SLAD/RAD. Neither has the actual authority to make a final decision or spend a dime of the amenity fees that are collected north of 44, any decision made has to be approved by the owners of the respective properties - SLAD & RAD

I’ll post the AAC and PWAC charter documents later this morning when I’m on my PC and not my iPad for all to read and understand that the AAC is only an advisory body for the amenities, regardless of they think the outcome of the lawsuit was.

Just a quick reality check here on the AAC and PWAC - the district office and the developer won’t like the following paragraphs too much, they’re much too blunt.

VCCDD and SLCDD are the owners of the amenities north of 466 and between 466 and 44, as such they have the sole authority and responsibility as a government body (a CDD under FS190) to manage, operate, and make all financial decisions related to the amenities they own. The AAC and PWAC are buffers between the VCCDD and SLCDD (the amenity owners) and the residents. Why? Because the VCCDD and SLCDD are land owner elected boards and the only significant landowner in these CDD is the developer, you can call it a “landowner election” but the reality is it is a developer appointed board. These boards as the owners do not need the input from the AAC and PWAC to make any decision, but they do want the input from the residents, they just don’t want to have to deal with the residents directly.

Acting as buffers, the AAC and PWAC get to sit through the sometimes hours of complaints, uninformed opinions, and whipped up hysteria (thank you POA barf ) that frequently accompanies difficult and controversial issues in the community. Having been a member of the PWAC for nearly 8 years, I make the previous statement form a first hand and informed position. The VCCDD and SLCDD boards are spared these joyous times. After receiving the residents inputs the AAC and PWAC make their recommendations to the parent boards for final actions.

It’s been said many times over by staff that the parent boards have never overridden or gone against the recommendation of the AAC and PWAC. This is a true statement. Why it is so is important more to the VCCDD and SLAD than to the residents. The first time they override the AAC or PWAC they effectively neuter these committees and invalidate their existence; this translates to that they get to deal with the residents directly, something they really don’t want to do. The other reason this is important is finger pointing - if the committees make a poor decision, the boards can point back to the committees and say they were doing what was requested by the residents. These committees are the board’s poop shield and scapegoat. The first time they override a PWAC or AAC decision, PWAC and the AAC need no longer exist.

Concerning decision making: when a CDD board, Committee, or even the BOCC convene a meeting most the the decisions to be made by the boards are already determined in the minds of the board members before they walk into the room. This isn’t because they are given direction by anyone on how to vote, it is because they have spent the time researching and understanding the issues beforehand. They have been doing their due diligence to understand the facts, the laws associated, ramifications, impacts, and community inputs of the issues. They are making the decisions based on an educated and informed position that many times does not agree with the passion of the resident that come to speak at the meetings. Be glad for this, because otherwise it becomes mob rule and decisions would be made based on who can gather the biggest crowds and can yell the loudest.

If you want to understand why board members make the decisions they do, ask them. Most all I know will take the time to help you understand why they have come to their decision. They are willing to have a calm and reasonable conversation with most any constituent. Does this mean that you can argue with them, get in their face, or threaten them? Not hardly, if you try these tactics the response you’ll likely get is they allow you to vent and then thank you for your input, they ignore you and walk away, or maybe even get law enforcement involved and have you removed. Your right to freedom of speech does not give you the right to disrupt a public meeting or verbally or physically abuse or accost another person or an elected official.

Thanks Don, very informative and sheds a lot of light on the reasoning behind that branch of the alphabet soup tree. To the casual observer, all the different boards and acronyms cloud transparency and make it very difficult to understand the inner workings of the whole CDD structure. It must be very difficult being a PWAC/AAC board member. Kind of like being the meat in a sandwich, where one slice of bread is the developer and the other is the Ammenity fee paying residents. Not an enviable position when controversial issues arise.

The POA (I am not a member) has been in existence since 1975. They represent hundreds if not (arguably) thousands of Villagers in their membership....and for that alone....should be respected. What I like about the organization is it is autonomous and independent. Most politicians don’t like this because.....ding ding ding, they can’t control it nor stifle their opinions and content. Although I did notice the ones that complain about them....still showed up at their Candidates Night on 7/18. It’s kind of like if someone has a YouTube channel and controls the narrative/content on there as well. I’m sure most understand the correlation.

The second to last paragraph......don’t look now but those words appear to be an endorsement of the BOCC as currently constituted. No argument there!

///