[Mikeod]

Originally Posted by Mr.Kris

How do you know that? Are you involved in any way?

I would like to see your figures and know your timelines.

With what I have there is a bump in the setting and use of amenity fees because the build out (final setting of amenity fees, i.e. the stream) will occur well in advance of purchase of all rec facilities (establishment of the debt). And my understanding is the establishment of debt is based on the full amenity stream, and not a combination of debt and maintenance.

Granted my analysis is ROM (rough order of magnitude). But I can refine it with more detail from you.

Please share your facts and figures and I will incorporate in the analysis.

Regardless, it looks like my $51,000 per home is a reasonable figure given the information I have. Would you agree?

I am in no way involved in the process of setting fees. Part of this discussion is apparently semantics. You call the $51K figure debt where I would term it a financial obligation that involves both debt and service fees for use of the facilities.

While the original homeowners had relatively low amenities fees, as these properties changed hands the fees were automatically raised to the same level as new home purchasers. Thus the amenity stream was enhanced. While the amount the fee can be raised each year is capped, there is no such cap on the fee paid by the purchaser of a new or resale home. Thus, the amenity stream can be increased without violating the cap. I believe the fee will be calculated to ensure sufficient funds to cover both debt and maintenance/refurbishment.

[perrjojo]

Originally Posted by travelguy

I understand that the original buyers into The Villages paid something like $30.00 per month as an amenity fee, and that to make the offer more enticing there was a clause that would make it so that their payment would never go up and that it would reamin the same until they sold the property. This is now almost 50 years later, so I would assume that all of these purchasers are deceased.

We have a friend who is an original Villager and they pay $67 per month.

[Mr.Kris]

Originally Posted by mikeod

I am in no way involved in the process of setting fees. Part of this discussion is apparently semantics. You call the $51K figure debt where I would term it a financial obligation that involves both debt and service fees for use of the facilities.

While the original homeowners had relatively low amenities fees, as these properties changed hands the fees were automatically raised to the same level as new home purchasers. Thus the amenity stream was enhanced. While the amount the fee can be raised each year is capped, there is no such cap on the fee paid by the purchaser of a new or resale home. Thus, the amenity stream can be increased without violating the cap. I believe the fee will be calculated to ensure sufficient funds to cover both debt and maintenance/refurbishment.

Ok. Thanks.

I obtained the bulk of my information from here. Village Community Development Districts There is a wealth of information. Not only the IRS but also TV representatives and the group that did the initial estimates for TV.

It is my understanding that the bonds for the facilities are an obligation, above and beyond the cost to maintain the facilities.

I used the amenity fee as an approximation to calculate the obligation per home after all facilities purchases were made, bonds issued. It’s a method of projection/extrapolation.

Initially, it appears and it is logical, that the bulk of the amenity fee will be used for facility maintenance, operation, developer's expenses, etc. But as more facilities are purchased it appears that more of the amenity fee will go for debt maintenance.

The amenity fee, for home sales, may be raised, but as I see it, that ability to compensate will diminish as sales slow (e.g. build-out, etc.) and rec facilities purchases/bond issue accelerate.

Therefore, at some point in the future a general increase in the amenity fee may be needed. If the IRS prevails that point may accelerate in time. If you have any question concerning the cap you might want to read the amendment clause in your Declaration of Restrictions. It seems from the language that any clause in the declaration can be changed unilaterally.

I did this exercise to determine my course of action, and shared it with others to determine if there was any logic in my thinking. In no way am I saying that this analysis can be relied upon (read disclaimer here). It is only as good as the information I have and my ability to perform analysis on that information.

I do quite a bit of analysis before I reach a personal decision. And I still make mistakes.

For me, I’m looking at buying a $350,000 designer with a $51,000 rec facility bond requirement, and if new, with a $30,000 infrastructure bond. Therefore I will be obligated for $431,000 plus fees (amenity), taxes, etc.

My 7 month stay in TV starting in April will help me make the determination on whether this is something I want to do.

Thanks for the interaction.

[Peachie]

Originally Posted by Mr.Kris

Ok. Thanks.

I obtained the bulk of my information from here. Village Community Development Districts There is a wealth of information. Not only the IRS but also TV representatives and the group that did the initial estimates for TV.

It is my understanding that the bonds for the facilities are an obligation, above and beyond the cost to maintain the facilities.

I used the amenity fee as an approximation to calculate the obligation per home after all facilities purchases were made, bonds issued. It’s a method of projection/extrapolation.

Initially, it appears and it is logical, that the bulk of the amenity fee will be used for facility maintenance, operation, developer's expenses, etc. But as more facilities are purchased it appears that more of the amenity fee will go for debt maintenance.

The amenity fee, for home sales, may be raised, but as I see it, that ability to compensate will diminish as sales slow (e.g. build-out, etc.) and rec facilities purchases/bond issue accelerate.

Therefore, at some point in the future a general increase in the amenity fee may be needed. If the IRS prevails that point may accelerate in time. If you have any question concerning the cap you might want to read the amendment clause in your Declaration of Restrictions. It seems from the language that any clause in the declaration can be changed unilaterally.

I did this exercise to determine my course of action, and shared it with others to determine if there was any logic in my thinking. In no way am I saying that this analysis can be relied upon (read disclaimer here). It is only as good as the information I have and my ability to perform analysis on that information.

I do quite a bit of analysis before I reach a personal decision. And I still make mistakes.

For me, I’m looking at buying a $350,000 designer with a $51,000 rec facility bond requirement, and if new, with a $30,000 infrastructure bond. Therefore I will be obligated for $431,000 plus fees (amenity), taxes, etc.

My 7 month stay in TV starting in April will help me make the determination on whether this is something I want to do.

Thanks for the interaction.

If you're unable to manage those costs, Kris, you may want to consider a patio villa. You can still have a ton of fun for a fraction of the cost.

[Mikeod]

Originally Posted by Mr.Kris

For me, I’m looking at buying a $350,000 designer with a $51,000 rec facility bond requirement, and if new, with a $30,000 infrastructure bond. Therefore I will be obligated for $431,000 plus fees (amenity), taxes, etc.

.

The last sentence confuses me. It seems you are charging yourself the amenities fee twice. You list a $51K rec facility bond requirement and later mention amenities fee, taxes, etc. as an additional expense. The bonds for purchase of the facilities are issued by the central district (LSCDD) and the principle and interest payments are from our amenities fee, not a separate amenity fee. So the $51K is your only obligation as far as the purchase AND use of the facilities.

I understand that when you look at the total like that it may not be attractive, but it's not different from looking at the total paid for a financed car or the total paid on a 30-year mortgage. You have to do what works for you financially and psychologically. My interest is that others read these threads and I want to be sure that we are clear in what we say.

Best to you.

[mrfixit]

...to keep The Villages running and looking like The Villages.......
.............the cost is.....................................$ 697,742.38 Per DAY.

Yes.....
The Villages "budget" is nearly Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars per DAY.

This information came straight from Janet Tutt.

The Districts' Budgets total is................... $ 254,675,968.01
This is for 01-Oct 2013 through 30 Sept 2014.

[dgammon6]

What I think is great about TV is that all the facilities, rec centers, pools, executive courses, etc are all constructed before you move in. You don't buy your property on the promise that the developer will provide these items later.

[Mr.Kris]

Originally Posted by mikeod

The last sentence confuses me. It seems you are charging yourself the amenities fee twice. You list a $51K rec facility bond requirement and later mention amenities fee, taxes, etc. as an additional expense. The bonds for purchase of the facilities are issued by the central district (LSCDD) and the principle and interest payments are from our amenities fee, not a separate amenity fee. So the $51K is your only obligation as far as the purchase AND use of the facilities.

I understand that when you look at the total like that it may not be attractive, but it's not different from looking at the total paid for a financed car or the total paid on a 30-year mortgage. You have to do what works for you financially and psychologically. My interest is that others read these threads and I want to be sure that we are clear in what we say.

Best to you.

Since the original amenity fee did not cover the bonds to purchase the facilities, here I am splitting the amenity fee into two factors. So what I am looking at is the cost for the (1) infrastructure bond, (2) rec facilities bonds, and (3) maintenance and operation of the rec facilities.

Living with you guys is an attractive thought. I just need to determine what I'm signing up for. Where is the value. Some people buy on their first trip. I don't. I crunch numbers. I read contracts. I ask people like you questions.

Thanks for all your help. I owe you a drink. You'll probably recognize me in April. I'll be the one wearing the "pocket protector."

[Mr.Kris]

Originally Posted by mrfixit

...to keep The Villages running and looking like The Villages.......
.............the cost is.....................................$ 697,742.38 Per DAY.

Yes.....
The Villages "budget" is nearly Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars per DAY.

This information came straight from Janet Tutt.

The Districts' Budgets total is................... $ 254,675,968.01
This is for 01-Oct 2013 through 30 Sept 2014.

The devil is in the detail. There's some (hefty) profit buried in there somewhere. I don't know what else Janet told you, but the next time you see her ask here to send me the books and I'll get back to you on this.

[Mr.Kris]

Originally Posted by dgammon6

What I think is great about TV is that all the facilities, rec centers, pools, executive courses, etc are all constructed before you move in. You don't buy your property on the promise that the developer will provide these items later.

That's very true. The failure of other Florida contractor's is why they call CDD bonds "dirt bonds." You're essentially buying dirt.

[Mr.Kris]

Originally Posted by Peachie

If you're unable to manage those costs, Kris, you may want to consider a patio villa. You can still have a ton of fun for a fraction of the cost.

Thanks, but managing cost is not an issue. I need to decide whether it is a good investment for me. The issue would be the same if I was considering a villa.

[Parker]

Well, I'm not so much interested in the numbers of living here. But I am amazed and amused at the intelligent, learned, and diligent numbers crunchers posting here. Thumbs up to all you bright people!

[kittygilchrist]

Dear Mr. Kris, I'm the dancer who pm'ed from singles forum, HI!
Your approach is totally logical. Mine is nearly the opposite. Just wanted to encourage you to keep up the work of crunching...somebody has to do it.
Having posted here a LOT since moving, wanted to share that if you say black, it's probable that white will respond first and eventually: gray, and an axe grinder, a sweetie pie, a wild card, and a nut or two, as well as brilliant antler bumpers. I could wear any of those colors.

The singles community will enfold you in opportunities to develop relationships and that has been the most surprising and wonderful and priceless element about living in TV.
Kitty

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Mr.Kris

The devil is in the detail. There's some (hefty) profit buried in there somewhere. I don't know what else Janet told you, but the next time you see her ask here to send me the books and I'll get back to you on this.

You know Kris, you sound like a lot of us at the beginning of checking out this place. Very skeptical and very...much thinking, "What's the catch?"

For sure there is a profit margin or it wouldn't be what it is. It very well may not be the right choice for you but people who have run huge businesses, many CEO's and people who have had successful careers of every kind have decided to live here.

I have watched and read this forum, and you are not at all unlike what I was,, looking for the fly in the butter, I have watched people who over time have become villagers.

The chip in the neck and being conservative financially helps a lot.

We will watch and see what you ultimately decide.

[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by Mr.Kris

Thanks, but managing cost is not an issue. I need to decide whether it is a good investment for me. The issue would be the same if I was considering a villa.

I think the villages is a horible investment, but so was our new car and eating out all the time. Being my age, investment is of no interest to me. I am interested in enjoying the remainder of my life to the fullest.