[zcaveman]

Before you decide to dump the online Tee Time System, I suggest you try using the telephone system as your sole means of getting requests and reservations for your groups for the next month. After two weeks, I think you will be willing to pay the $8 a month.

I am not happy with the $8 a month but anything will beat the telephone system - especially if you have several groups that you make requests and reservations for.

Also, I will repeat some info from my first note. When I moved here in 2001, ClearLink was the plan for a total Villages cable company. Anyone on ClearLink hi-speed got the villages.net free. When the Villages decided to dump ClearLink and go with Comcast, Comcast sent us a letter that the villages.net would be free until June, 2009. I still have the letter. Comcast gave all Villagers using the high speed internet the free villages.net. Maybe they did not specify the 6/2009 date but all introductory prices come with a catch. The date was 6/2009.

And for those that wonder why you get two email addresses, it is so that the online Tee Time System can deliver the tee time reservations from the requests directly to your PC if you use a PC client email product since they only recognize the village.net as a valid domain.

I agree with all of the other posts about the amount of money the villages.net and the developer are going to "glean" from us but the alternative is not worth the time and the pain.

Z

[OutsiderWithInterest]

I hesitate to get wet again, but what the heck? The water is very warm.

The most intelligent observation offered in this whole thread is this:
"Villages.net is a private for profit company."

This fact sums up and ends the conversation does it not? Like every such business, it boils down to one question for the customer: Is the service received worth the price?

If the answer is no, then the solution is very easy: Cancel your subscription. Then use the phone system. You can make a reservation in two minutes or less. It is VERY EASY. If the answer is yes, then shut up already and go play golf.

Oh I suppose, if enough people complained about their property taxes and bugged their representatives to death then something might change...OH I'M SORRY. I forgot. We were talking about an $8/month voluntary payment, not a mandatory $500/month for taxes (I tend to focus on things that really cost money, not 3 or 4 beers a month. Again I apologize).

Maybe you all should make this the issue of 2009 and force the district to ante up and pay an annual fee to the villages.net so that all residents can access the tee time system, "for free", as some say. Wouldn't that solve your problem? Money you can't see is money you wouldn't be spending right? Those poor kids at the villages. net would probably love that. Then they wouldn't have to hear you complainers go on about EIGHT DOLLARS day after day after day after day after day.

To the issue of all the computations offered, know that every one is 100% off the mark. You all are just guessing. Do you even know how many subscribers there are? I certainly do not. Without that, you can't even write the first number down on paper. It's a jolly waste of time. Plus it costs you an extra blood pressure pill. Why would you do that to yourselves?

Even villages07, who, with his experience as IT development manager KNOWS THE COST of "an" online system, saying that "this is no $2M/year system" [is there a tee time system on your resume by chance? Would you happen to know anything about the complexities involved? That isn't meant to be a rhetorical question...I really would like you to explain some aspects of its to us], let me say this:

It must be isn't it? After all, it IS generating $2M of greed to the developer (according to your calculations).

This is way over the top I know. But gee whiz people, it gets so old. Take your 8 bucks and drive to a course outside of the Villages for gosh sakes. Sure it cost money to get there, but "BY GOD, I was able to call them up and reserve a tee time, FOR FREE."

[cabo35]

I thank God every morning when I wake up in the Villages....a place where passionate controversy and healthy, spirited debate focus on whether its worth spending $8.00 a month for the OPTIONAL convenience of booking your tee times on line. Thank you TOTV. Ain't life grand. Be of good cheer! Celebrate!!!

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by cabo35

I thank God every morning when I wake up in the Villages....a place where passionate controversy and healthy, spirited debate focus on whether its worth spending $8.00 a month for the OPTIONAL convenience of booking your tee times on line. Thank you TOTV. Ain't life grand. Be of good cheer! Celebrate!!!

Cabo,

You say it all!

[EdV]

I gave my thoughts on this issue in another thread on the subject but I think it is worth repeating here:

The real question that should be answered is whether or not the Developer has the right to charge individual Villagers for specific services that are an integral part of the Amenities, rather than making them part of the Monthly Amenities Fee that everyone shares.

Recently I uploaded a transposed copy of the Declaration of Restrictions for the Lake Sumter district which I had converted into a searchable PDF. It is posted in the Nuts and Bolts forum for reference purposes when discussing covenants and restrictions here in TOTV.

Section 4.1 – C of that contractual document states that:

“Each Owner agrees that as additional facilities are requested by the Owner, and the erection of such additional facilities is agreed to by the Developer, that upon a Vote of ½ of the Owners approving such additional facilities and commensurate charges therefore, the monthly Contractual Amenities Fee provided for herein shall be increased accordingly.”

Now the question is, what is the definition of a facility. Dictionary.com defines it as:

a. Something designed, built, installed, etc., to serve a specific function affording a convenience or service.
b. Something that permits the easier performance of an action, course of conduct, etc.

Now if that doesn’t describe the on-line reservation system, I don’t know what does. I’m not a lawyer but I think that a reasonable argument could be made for the idea that charging a separate fee for the use of this new facility is a breach of the contract that the developer signed with each Villager.

The representatives of the developer are always quick to point out that the amenity fee is not a tax, but is instead a contractual obligation and is subject to the terms as stipulated in the Declaration of Restrictions. OK, fine, but it's a two way street.

When it comes to anything having to do with the identified amenities (exec courses and rec centers), you really owe it to yourselves to make sure that the developer colors inside the lines.

[Russ_Boston]

But the argument could be made that the courses have a free reservation system (by phone). I would think that the on-line system could be considered a 'value added' function beyond the required free access.

Also, like you, not a lawyer.

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by Russ_Boston

But the argument could be made that the courses have a free reservation system (by phone). I would think that the on-line system could be considered a 'value added' function beyond the required free access.

Also, like you, not a lawyer.

Russ,

I'm not a lawyer either - but my opinion mirrors yours.

To me it is like the high speed ferries to Block Isl. or Martha's Vineyard or the Canadian Maritimes. You can get there for less other ways - but time is worth something. Only you can decide how much on-line vs phone is worth to you.

[EdV]

Originally Posted by Russ_Boston

But the argument could be made that the courses have a free reservation system (by phone). I would think that the on-line system could be considered a 'value added' function beyond the required free access.

Also, like you, not a lawyer.

I think you’re missing my point. There’s no question that the online system adds value, some wouldn’t dream of going back to the old phone based system that lacks features they use all the time. That’s clear from some of the posts in this thread.

The point I’m trying to make is that the developer has added value to a basic amenity that is supposed to be governed by the contract every villager signed when they bought their home. And according to my interpretation of that contract, anything done to those facilities is supposed to be funded by the amenity fee that is shared by all villagers.

For example, how would you feel if the next time you go to your local recreation center for a swim and find that there is now a new section of the pool area. In that area are fancy lounge chairs with plush cushions and canopies , an ice dispenser, and even air conditioning to keep the area cool in the heat of summer. But there’s a sign that says “this area reserved for Pool Club members only”. And when you inquire, you are told that the developer has set up these areas at each of the recreation centers and membership is $50/month or $500/yr and you can use these value-added areas at any of the recreation centers.

So it’s not about whether the $8/mo for the online system is worth it, nor about how much it costs to implement it. It’s about whether or not the developer should be allowed to add value to the basic amenities and charge individually for it. And my take is that the contract calls for anything done to the amenity facilities must be funded by the amenity fees.

I think the POA and newly elected AAC members should make it clear to the developer that he can add value and charge for anything he wants, just don’t mess with the amenities.

And Katezbox, regarding the high speed ferry, you may have given the developer a new idea. Granted, the golf cart bridge is not an amenity, but don’t be surprised to find a 50 cent toll both there the next time you go to cross it. No big deal, you can always get in your car and cross 441 that way.

[Alex]

Thanks for a good post EdVinMass!

[Russ_Boston]

Remember - certain things ARE left off the use of the amenities. For example if you want to walk the exec courses that is free but if you want to ride then you need to pay an additional trail fee even though the cart paths are already in place. Why couldn't this be challenged per your argument?

If you want to use the phone it's free if you want to use the on-line system it is 26 cents per day additional.

[Talk Host]

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

I think you’re missing my point. There’s no question that the online system adds value, some wouldn’t dream of going back to the old phone based system that lacks features they use all the time. That’s clear from some of the posts in this thread.

The point I’m trying to make is that the developer has added value to a basic amenity that is supposed to be governed by the contract every villager signed when they bought their home. And according to my interpretation of that contract, anything done to those facilities is supposed to be funded by the amenity fee that is shared by all villagers.

For example, how would you feel if the next time you go to your local recreation center for a swim and find that there is now a new section of the pool area. In that area are fancy lounge chairs with plush cushions and canopies , an ice dispenser, and even air conditioning to keep the area cool in the heat of summer. But there’s a sign that says “this area reserved for Pool Club members only”. And when you inquire, you are told that the developer has set up these areas at each of the recreation centers and membership is $50/month or $500/yr and you can use these value-added areas at any of the recreation centers.

So it’s not about whether the $8/mo for the online system is worth it, nor about how much it costs to implement it. It’s about whether or not the developer should be allowed to add value to the basic amenities and charge individually for it. And my take is that the contract calls for anything done to the amenity facilities must be funded by the amenity fees.

I think the POA and newly elected AAC members should make it clear to the developer that he can add value and charge for anything he wants, just don’t mess with the amenities.

And Katezbox, regarding the high speed ferry, you may have given the developer a new idea. Granted, the golf cart bridge is not an amenity, but don’t be surprised to find a 50 cent toll both there the next time you go to cross it. No big deal, you can always get in your car and cross 441 that way.

Although I'm not completely sure of all the details, I was led to believe that certain amenities at some of the golf courses are reserved for those who pay the extra priority golfing fee. Is it true that some of those pools are only for those who pay the priority fee. I do know that at one time, Cattle Baron was only for priory golf members, but that bit the big one.

[Russ_Boston]

The pools at the CC's are additional but that doesn't follow the amenities argument since the CC's are not supported by the amenity fee anyway.

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

And Katezbox, regarding the high speed ferry, you may have given the developer a new idea. Granted, the golf cart bridge is not an amenity, but don’t be surprised to find a 50 cent toll both there the next time you go to cross it. No big deal, you can always get in your car and cross 441 that way.

Ed,

LOL

I hear you - but I don't think the language in the documents prohibits the developer from finding additional sources of revenue. I'm not trying to take a stand on whether this is greed, fair or somewhere in between.

k

PS - hope the golf cart bridge doesn't become like the the NH tolls on 95!

[Talk Host]

Originally Posted by Russ_Boston

The pools at the CC's are additional but that doesn't follow the amenities argument since the CC's are not supported by the amenity fee anyway.

I think it does address the argument that was made by EdVinMass in his post.

[EdV]

Lets not confuse the issue by using the trail fee argument as a justification for allowing the developer to add fees at his whim to the basic amenities and pocketing the revenue.

The trail fees are revenues that go into the operating funds of the amenites and offsets the cost of maintaining the executive course golf cart paths. That revenue I believe is listed on the Village Center Community Development District's (VCCDD) Recreational Amenities Division (RAD) annual budget as "Parks & Recreation Fees & Charges" to the tune of 1.6 million dollars. Here's a link to that http://www.districtgov.org/vccdd/you...bas_090131.pdf

As far as I know, not one cent of the 8 dollars per month charged for the online tee time system ends up in the revenues of the VCCDD's RAD.

Now if I'm wrong about that and those fees are in fact revenue to the VCCDD, then I would withdraw my objection to it and any discussion of the issue can focus on whether or not one feels it's worth the value added and use it or not based on personal choice.