What is a Maintenance assessment?

What is a Maintenance assessment?

Notices

» 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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Honest Question
  #11  
Old 05-11-2019, 05:24 AM
PennBF PennBF is offline
Platinum member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,566
Question Honest Question

Were, as I understand it PWAC Funds used to build the Park which I described?
Reply With Quote

  #12  
Old 05-11-2019, 06:46 AM
graciegirl's Avatar
graciegirl graciegirl is online now
Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: From Ohio, now happily live in Laurel Valley
Posts: 36,012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldwingnut View Post
The easy way to keep this straight is:
A) the bonds help build the villages - infrastructure
B) The maintenance assessments keeps it looking nice and operating properly
C) The amenities fees are what pay for the fun things here

Don't believe all the half-truths you read on that other site, they only print enough to get you to click on their site and pages (that's how they make money, it's called click-bait).

Here's the other half of the story on the 12% CDD-12 and 8% other CDD possible increase. These are only early budget estimates and the final numbers will not be calculated until late August or early September. A number has to be presented 90 days prior to final approval and once presented it can go no higher, only lower. The 12% increase that was reported is for the Project Wide Fund (PWF) portion of their budget. A significant part of that increase is due to the increased acreage and maintenance that comes with the property as it is developed, this part of the increase is covered by the additional maintenance assessments collect by the new homes that have been sold, so there is a net zero impact from that increase.

The second half of the increase and the increase the other CDDs are seeing is due to past years increased costs. Previously the PWAC has utilize "working capital" to fund some of the costs of operating the PWF. The working capital budget was over funded for the 3-4 months of reserves it was designed for. Basically we were using our savings account to fund some of our budget. Last year this was about $750K. Now the working capital is at just over the 3 months of reserves (about $4 million) so to keep it healthy we can't draw it down further. Now we have to live off our monthly paycheck so to speak.

Last year a 3% increase was projected for the PWF contribution but PWAC funded half of this with working capital and only passed a 1.5% increase on to the districts. Most districts then funded this out of their working capital budgets and few saw any maintenance assessment increase (south of CR466).

Our budgets and reserves are stable and healthy but the days of spending from our savings are coming to an end.

One last note, last year at this time the project PWF increase to be passed to the districts was about 17%, the final budget increase was 1.5% when approved in September. Will it be the same this year, I can't say for sure, but I am optimistic that it won't be and 8 or 12% increase.


Read this again, Pennbf.
__________________
I have to be myself, everyone else is taken.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
OK I Read it
  #13  
Old 05-11-2019, 07:57 AM
PennBF PennBF is offline
Platinum member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,566
Question OK I Read it

I did not see where my question was actually answered. This explains a lot about where Project wide gets some of it money,
(e.g. excess from prior years, working capital, etc.) however where does it identify if the park was paid for from cap'd amenity fees or from an uncaped PWAC. Some say "so what". The answer is simple. Once you open the door for using funds for one category which is under a different control and or no control you open the door to abuse. That is bad. The long response even says the maintenance fees are to keep things nice and Amenity for "fun things". The last I knew Parks are "Fun Things". If the people who wrote these rules wanted it to be discretionary they would have said so. Because the maintenance category had extra funds does not mean it is OK to charge the residents under that category as opposed to the Amenity Controlled funds. Hopefully I am wrong in the financial accountability of the Park. That would be great, however I have not seen anything that says I'm wrong even with a rereading of a prior note. The broader concern is if, and just if I am right how many other expenses are or were being charged in the Maintenance category? Another follow on question is what are the "Reserve Funds" level, how are they established, who monitors them what are the controls and are they fully funded? AAH, how problematic are finances?

Last edited by PennBF; 05-11-2019 at 08:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-11-2019, 09:29 AM
Bogie Shooter Bogie Shooter is online now
Sage
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 13,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PennBF View Post
I did not see where my question was actually answered. This explains a lot about where Project wide gets some of it money,
(e.g. excess from prior years, working capital, etc.) however where does it identify if the park was paid for from cap'd amenity fees or from an uncaped PWAC. Some say "so what". The answer is simple. Once you open the door for using funds for one category which is under a different control and or no control you open the door to abuse. That is bad. The long response even says the maintenance fees are to keep things nice and Amenity for "fun things". The last I knew Parks are "Fun Things". If the people who wrote these rules wanted it to be discretionary they would have said so. Because the maintenance category had extra funds does not mean it is OK to charge the residents under that category as opposed to the Amenity Controlled funds. Hopefully I am wrong in the financial accountability of the Park. That would be great, however I have not seen anything that says I'm wrong even with a rereading of a prior note. The broader concern is if, and just if I am right how many other expenses are or were being charged in the Maintenance category? Another follow on question is what are the "Reserve Funds" level, how are they established, who monitors them what are the controls and are they fully funded? AAH, how problematic are finances?
I think you should go to the next PWAC meeting and ask.
__________________
The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it. George Orwell.
“Only truth and transparency can guarantee freedom”, John McCain
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-11-2019, 10:33 AM
Goldwingnut's Avatar
Goldwingnut Goldwingnut is online now
Veteran member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Village of Hillsborough
Posts: 580
Default

I've been on the CDD-10 board and the PWAC for the last 5 years and I have yet to see anything either inappropriate or even questionable in the spending of the funds under the various budgets. It is very easy to make allegations, but without any proof or evidence you're just blowing hot air and trying to raise controversy where none exist. Please provide your proof.

The State of Florida requires a financial audit be conducted every year by an independent auditor. I read these reports in their entirety EVERY YEAR for the CDD10, PWF, and amenities budgets, nothing in the last 5 years has shown anything inappropriate occurring. I know the naysayers and developer haters here and on that other website will say the auditors are in the developers pocket or some other idiotic remark along those lines. Really? Do you think they're going to risk their company's reputation over a handful of contracts that barely make a blip on their balance sheet (a CDD# audit is about $10K)? Not hardly. You should get to know the people working for you in your government, they're not like the career politicians in Washington, they actually live here and care about what they do and what happens.

Reserve Funds are funded by the annual budget, just like may put some money away every payday into their savings accounts, the CDDs do the same in funding code 581911 "Transfer to General R&R". These reserves are being built up by annually to cover future expenses such as reroofing buildings, repairs to retention systems, etc. as all things have a limited useful lifespan and will have to be repaired or replaced. Unlike may municipalities our CDDs don't need to borrow money or issue bonds to fund their maintenance and replacement programs. This is a result of both conservative financial management and the fact that the CDDs do not continue to grow like other municipalities, our size is fixed.

The bottom line is that our local government (CDD, PWF, etc.) financials here in The Villages are both well maintained and in very good shape, few government bodies are in as good a shape. But don't believe me, take the time to learn about our budgets, the processes in place, and read the audits. Don't just believe the garbage that you read on some of the local websites with the rantings of the uneducated.

Concerning this "park" that PennBF seems to find issue with, I'm assuming it is the small park that is next to Hacienda At Mission Hills. This is land that is owned by the SLCDD, and was not a part of the property transfer that happened in 2016 when SLCDD purchased the amenities. From this one can assume that it is not considered an amenity and that the improvements were funded by and are maintained by SLCDD. There are many other properties throughout The Villages that are owned by the individual CDDs that have improvements for the benefit of the residents that are not considered amenities. These would also be maintained by the parent CDD or the PWF depending on the property, its location, and if included in the Project Wide agreement. None this is neither inappropriate or misrepresented anywhere.

This "park" has been in existence for a while and predates my tenure on the CDD and PWAC so I can't say with surety or confidence when, how, or why it came about. Not every single parcel of property is broken out in the budgets as there are many hundreds of them to maintain and unless there is a current issue there it would not be specifically identified and therefore not broken out in the budget. If you want to know for sure you can come to your CDD or the PWAC meeting and ask the questions and we can get the answers, or you can request the information from the District Clerk under the Florida Sunshine Act.

Much has been made in the last few years about the growth of the Project Wide Fund, unfortunately most of the reporting has been selective and deceptive journalism (I find that a difficult word to use to describe what some websites and newspapers put out). Last year the PWF saw a huge increase (about $1 million) that was negatively reported in that it neglected to inform the readers that the principal component of that growth was the increase in scope due to the addition of properties in CDD-12. What was not covered was that these increases were fully funded by CDD-12's PWF contributions. A net zero increase to the other CDDs. There was additional growth in the budgets due to increased costs for labor, material, and subcontracted work. These government budgets, just like our own personal budgets, are not immune to the realities of inflation, current events, and the economy. Bottom line is that the Maintenance budget is neither uncontrolled nor a shell for dumping other costs to. Since I started serving on the CDD-10 board in November 2014 the Maintenance assessment has decreased about 3% even though our cost have continued to rise.

The budgets and the administration of The Villages are both complicated and intertwined. Everyone should take the time to learn and understand how it all works.

PennBF, CDDs 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 have budget workshop meetings on Monday at the District Office Board Room at 984 Old Mill Run, can we expect to see you at one of these meetings?

Just for reference, on 6 May at 8:30 AM the PWAC held a budget workshop at the District Office and went over the budgets for the PWF, Amenities, and Fitness Centers. One would have thought with all the uproar over the Deferral Rate in the last few months there would have been substantial input from the public on these budgets. The total number of public comments and input for all three budges was, once again, ZERO!
__________________
GoldWingNut
(a motorcycle enthusiast not a gilded fastener)
Village of Hillsborough
My Drone Flying YouTube Page
Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-11-2019, 10:52 AM
Challenger's Avatar
Challenger Challenger is offline
Platinum member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Biscayne Villas
Posts: 1,940
Default

Posts like those in #6 demonstrate ignorance of the facts, and so misinform residents, that they are irresponsible. Creating doubt by misinformation seems to flourish on electronic social media. Those who state facts in their posts often cite references and attribute their comments. Skepticism can be a valuable attribute in this world.
__________________
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" Edmund Burke 1729-1797
Reply With Quote
Don't Understand
  #17  
Old 05-11-2019, 12:21 PM
PennBF PennBF is offline
Platinum member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,566
Question Don't Understand

I really don't understand !! Why is asking a question ignorant. I was raised and educated that no question is ignorant. Only answers. I am pretty old and have lived by this rule and will continue. I only hope that we never stop asking question and that as an intelligent society we never lose that attribute. I remember a Professor once teaching that nothing is a better complement than when someone is accused of being "childlike and being curious". What a great compliment to be compared to a child's curious mind. There ARE NO BAD QUESTIONS, ONLY ANSWERS. We should be ashamed to ever challenge somone asking a question. I asked if the Park was charged to an account other than Amenities. That is a valid question. Trying to intimidate for asking the question is unfortunate.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-11-2019, 12:56 PM
Challenger's Avatar
Challenger Challenger is offline
Platinum member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Biscayne Villas
Posts: 1,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PennBF View Post
I really don't understand !! Why is asking a question ignorant. I was raised and educated that no question is ignorant. Only answers. I am pretty old and have lived by this rule and will continue. I only hope that we never stop asking question and that as an intelligent society we never lose that attribute. I remember a Professor once teaching that nothing is a better complement than when someone is accused of being "childlike and being curious". What a great compliment to be compared to a child's curious mind. There ARE NO BAD QUESTIONS, ONLY ANSWERS. We should be ashamed to ever challenge somone asking a question. I asked if the Park was charged to an account other than Amenities. That is a valid question. Trying to intimidate for asking the question is unfortunate.
Your question was only the last sentence of a paragraph filled with pejorative remarks about the developer , that are not supported by any facts that you allude to. Ask your questions, get valid information , then offer your opinions with some modicum of factual support. Note: I have never met the developer ,nor "the Family", nor worked for any entity in the Villages.
__________________
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" Edmund Burke 1729-1797
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-11-2019, 01:23 PM
Bogie Shooter Bogie Shooter is online now
Sage
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 13,005
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PennBF View Post
I really don't understand !! Why is asking a question ignorant. I was raised and educated that no question is ignorant. Only answers. I am pretty old and have lived by this rule and will continue. I only hope that we never stop asking question and that as an intelligent society we never lose that attribute. I remember a Professor once teaching that nothing is a better complement than when someone is accused of being "childlike and being curious". What a great compliment to be compared to a child's curious mind. There ARE NO BAD QUESTIONS, ONLY ANSWERS. We should be ashamed to ever challenge somone asking a question. I asked if the Park was charged to an account other than Amenities. That is a valid question. Trying to intimidate for asking the question is unfortunate.
Could it be you are asking the wrong audience?
__________________
The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it. George Orwell.
“Only truth and transparency can guarantee freedom”, John McCain
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-11-2019, 01:42 PM
Goldwingnut's Avatar
Goldwingnut Goldwingnut is online now
Veteran member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Village of Hillsborough
Posts: 580
Default

Your question concerning the funding of the park area in question is valid and has been answered to the extent possible in this forum with the available information - it is and has been since 2003 property of the SLCDD and was not included in the 2016 amenities purchase therefore any improvements would have been funded by either the SLCDD or the PWF, either of which would have been appropriate as it is was not an amenity and would not have come out of the amenities budget. If you want additional information you would need to come to a CDD or PWAC meeting and ask the questions or contact the District Clerk for additional information.

This parcel of property is a minor asset and does not rise to the level of requiring additional attention in any budget item. Its genesis is of significance only for historical purposes and warrants little attention or notice. Is all of this information available, it absolutely is. Is it going to be engraved on a brass plaque and put on display at the entrance to ensure everyone knows its entire history, doubtful and unnecessary.

Your original and subsequent statements all suppose some level of malfeasance because you don't know how this was funded and therefor it must have been some sort of underhanded dealings. It is this supposition that you have put forth that I and others have issue with, not the park question.

I believe that I have been factual, civil, and non-derogatory in responding to you. If you want to discuss the budgets, expenditures, or any other governmental topics I will be more than happy to meet with you and discuss them, as for the park issue, I believe the question has been answered to the extent anyone can at this point.

Don Wiley
CDD-10 Supervisor/PWAC member
__________________
GoldWingNut
(a motorcycle enthusiast not a gilded fastener)
Village of Hillsborough
My Drone Flying YouTube Page
Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
assessment, maintenance, remember, dues, bonds

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:36 PM.