The Villages

» Site Navigation
Home Page The Villages Maps The Villages Activities The Villages Clubs The Villages Book Healthcare Rentals Real Estate Section Classified Section The Villages Directory Home Improvement Site Guidelines Advertising Info Register Now Video Tutorials Frequently Asked Questions
» Newsletter Signup
» Premium Tower
» Advertisements
» Trending News
» Tower Sponsors




















» Premium Sponsors
» Banner Sponsors
» Advertisements
Closed Thread
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 02-17-2011, 04:13 PM
billethkid's Avatar
billethkid billethkid is offline
Sage
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,108
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2,361 Times in 681 Posts
Default A more meaningful number to look in addition to full time emplyees would be

full time employees +
part time employees +
ALL subcontracted employees/work expense =

total cost of people doing work to maintain TV.

The headcount GAME is just that...a number that by itself reveals....MEETING THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF HEADCOUNT. IN THIS CASE....FULL TIME EMPLOYEES.

Just a single point of data not representative of the real "people" expenses actually incurred.

btk
__________________
"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it"...Mark Twain
  #17  
Old 02-17-2011, 05:11 PM
katezbox's Avatar
katezbox katezbox is offline
Golden Sunrise Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: The Village of Bonita
Posts: 1,524
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

BTK - thank you.... this is what I pointed out in my original post on this subject.

I used to ask my students if a 5% growth rate year over year was good? Of course the right answer is that you don't have enough information to answer the question.

192 VCDD employees does not tell us that the government is fat, skinny or anywhere in between. Without a whole lot more info, it is just a meaningless statistic...
__________________
Holyoke, Mass; East Granby, Monroe, Madison and Branford, Conn; Port Clyde, Maine; North Myrtle Beach, SC; The Village of Bonita (April 2009 - )
  #18  
Old 02-17-2011, 07:05 PM
redwitch's Avatar
redwitch redwitch is offline
Sage
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,098
Thanks: 1
Thanked 65 Times in 27 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to redwitch
Default

And don't forget the volunteers, which frequently are doing something that could create employment for others.

TH, your list really isn't fair --

How many people work for Community Watch? usually part-timers
How many are there at the gates? all part-time
How many in the sales office? assistants part-time/contractors; not sure what the agent/sales staff called -- might be independent since they have real estate license
How many in the relocation office? no info on this one
How many in the administrative office? about even mixture of full/part-time
How many at the Charter School? not TV staff
How many at the Fire Department? not TV staff, county
How many in the legal office? most legal outsourced
How many in the construction office? unknown
How many work at the newspaper not TV staff
How many work at the radio station? not TV staff
How about the television station? not TV staff
Are the transportation drivers not employees? part-timers
The recreation department has many employees. majority part-timers
Isn't there a property management department? supposedly not, but seems to have been phased in again, not sure of the # of employees or other info
I've met some of the beautiful ladies who work in human resources? unkown
The amenity authority surely has employees uunknown
How about the architectural review committee (are they volunteer) believe they are volunteers, but won't swear to it
Utilities, Budget, Finance, acquisition, district management, yet more. utilities not TV staff; unknown as to rest

While we are comparing TV to a municipality, it isn't. We don't have our own police/fire/rescue departments -- they are manned by the appropriate counties. We don't have many of the departments a city our size would have, nor do we have any say in how these non-existent departments would be run. I doubt a city would be allowed to hire so many part-timers. People would be in an uproar that they weren't getting the benefits, etc.

So, 192 full-time employees to run TV sounds pretty reasonable, albeit an absolutely worthless number. Without knowing how many positions are staffed by part-time employees or volunteers, we have no clue how well-run TV actually is. Also, we don't know how many entities that would be true departments in a municipality are actually subbed out here. However, looking at TV, looking at all that is offered here, looking at all there is, I'd say TV is doing a very good job and has a very well-oiled machine. And, since it has absolutely no relevance to us (we don't pay for it regardless unless amenity fees would go up because of more full-time employees), who in heck cares?
__________________
Army/embassy brat - traveled too much to mention
Moved here from SF Bay Area (East Bay)

"There are only two ways to live your life: One is as though nothing is a miracle; the other is as though everything is a miracle." Albert Einstein
  #19  
Old 02-17-2011, 07:14 PM
billethkid's Avatar
billethkid billethkid is offline
Sage
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 17,108
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2,361 Times in 681 Posts
Default One day we residents will have to know the "real expense" of manpower,

(any label you wanna put on it).....let's around build out time when there will have to be a transition of responsibility from the developer to the residents.

There have been many development transitions that have gotten unpleasant when the real costs of operations were exposed.....minus the subsidizing of the developer to make sure everything stays in place during their "marketing tenure".

Most do a good job of providing sufficient funding to bridge the transition as well as a few years into operating by the residents. Hopefully that will be the case here in TV.

btk
__________________
"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it"...Mark Twain
  #20  
Old 02-17-2011, 09:52 PM
iaudit iaudit is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 338
Thanks: 0
Thanked 9 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billethkid View Post
(any label you wanna put on it).....let's around build out time when there will have to be a transition of responsibility from the developer to the residents.

There have been many development transitions that have gotten unpleasant when the real costs of operations were exposed.....minus the subsidizing of the developer to make sure everything stays in place during their "marketing tenure".

Most do a good job of providing sufficient funding to bridge the transition as well as a few years into operating by the residents. Hopefully that will be the case here in TV.

btk
BTK, we will never know that number. The VCCDD and the SLCDD, the two CDD's that run the amenities in the Villages, will NEVER be run or controlled by the residents. They are composed of commercial properties owned by the developer who elects/appoints the board of supervisors for these districts. The good news is the amenity fee can only go up by the yearly rate of inflation, the bad news is there may not be enough money to maintain the currently level of service and maintenance of the amenities since there MIGHT be some subsidization by the developer. The developer has not yet "sold" most of the facilities south of 466 to the SLCDD, probably waiting for the final outcome of IRS bond issue.
  #21  
Old 02-18-2011, 05:58 AM
Bryan's Avatar
Bryan Bryan is offline
Veteran member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Village of Alhambra
Posts: 838
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Send a message via MSN to Bryan
Default

The "192" number, while impressive, is very misleading. That is more like 192 supervisors and managers to oversee all the volunteers, part-timers, and contracted-out services and no real workers (well - maybe a few real workers like in public safety). The meaningful number would be how many workers it takes to provide all TV services and support - contractors, volunteers, part-timers, and full-timers. I suspect that number would make us look quite inefficient (based on numbers only) because, frankly, others wouldn't have the rec center employees to the extent we do, golf course employees, community watch personnel, on and on and on. Apples to apples comparisons probably are not possible when considering TV - we do things so much differently with so many fun-oriented or "optional" expenses (i.e. flowers in every traffic circle). Budget-wise, per capita, I'll bet TV spends as much or probably more than most cities to service and support their residents but no one provides those kinds of numbers, do they? This may sound negative but it is not. I am very happy with TV and the way it runs - not perfect but if you find something better, leave TV and go there. I don't see any mass exodus coming up. The old saying "Figures don't lie but liars can figure" probably applies in this situation.
  #22  
Old 02-18-2011, 07:01 AM
Taj44 Taj44 is offline
Veteran member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 862
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan View Post
The "192" number, while impressive, is very misleading. That is more like 192 supervisors and managers to oversee all the volunteers, part-timers, and contracted-out services and no real workers (well - maybe a few real workers like in public safety). The meaningful number would be how many workers it takes to provide all TV services and support - contractors, volunteers, part-timers, and full-timers. I suspect that number would make us look quite inefficient (based on numbers only) because, frankly, others wouldn't have the rec center employees to the extent we do, golf course employees, community watch personnel, on and on and on. Apples to apples comparisons probably are not possible when considering TV - we do things so much differently with so many fun-oriented or "optional" expenses (i.e. flowers in every traffic circle). Budget-wise, per capita, I'll bet TV spends as much or probably more than most cities to service and support their residents but no one provides those kinds of numbers, do they? This may sound negative but it is not. I am very happy with TV and the way it runs - not perfect but if you find something better, leave TV and go there. I don't see any mass exodus coming up. The old saying "Figures don't lie but liars can figure" probably applies in this situation.
I'm with you. Things seem to be going along smoothly, and other than the upkeep of the golf courses at times, we have few complaints. And, they've hired probably most of the people part time, so they don't have to pay them benefits, just a nearly minimum wage salary, which makes things pretty cost efficient.
  #23  
Old 02-18-2011, 10:24 AM
spk7951's Avatar
spk7951 spk7951 is offline
Gold member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Village of Hadley
Posts: 1,236
Thanks: 4
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redwitch View Post
How many at the Fire Department? not TV staff, county

Not so sure that this is correct. The Villages Public Safety Dept had 67 full time employees as of the end of 2010. The chief of the dept reports to Janet Tutt and on the Sumter County yearly tax bills there is a fee for "Villages Fire District", which as I understood it that goes to The Villages Fire Dept operating expenses.
  #24  
Old 02-18-2011, 11:09 AM
Castle guy Castle guy is offline
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 7
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default 192 employees.

That sounds good. If we are comparing TV with municipalities, should we not also have to count county employees who supply services, and who are paid from our tax base, as opposed to ameneties fees ?

I agree with all previous posters who think that this type of number is utterly useless unless situated in some type of context.
  #25  
Old 02-18-2011, 09:18 PM
Bogie Shooter Bogie Shooter is offline
Sage
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 14,379
Thanks: 2
Thanked 1,004 Times in 504 Posts
Default

No cause for worry at this point wether the number is 192 or 192000. If TV is over staffed we could call a certain governor who could reduce the number rather quickly.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

You are viewing a new design of the TOTV site. Click here to revert to the old version.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:02 AM.