New Construction as seen between Tivoli Court buildings, construction is along Lake Worth Rd
Entrance next to Lk Worth Rd gate to 70 townhouses between Tivoli and Lk Worth road
Developer website for 375 new rentals along Jog, with their floor plans
70 New Townhouses along Lk Worth Rd
Right turn entrance off Lake Worth Rd into “Lakewood Cove, a Lennar community”. Tivoli Court buildings can be seen on the right, Lennar buildings on the left
The first new building going up on Jog Rd, south of the post office and behind The Townhouses
It was recently reported by a reader of this website that Indian Springs has hired a complete management system for every aspect of their club. They now have five board members and five management company employees on their country club board. This club is healthy, with 685 members for two golf courses.
They have announced that equity members will receive a $500 per year for five years reduction in their dues, and their outside members will receive a $150 per year for five years increase. From this day forward all equity and outside members will be treated the same with the same privileges – there is to be no difference between memberships. In addition, their management company has stated they should not consider any initiation or equity fees as these are off-putting to potential members and until such time as they have too many members and a long waiting list, initiation and equity fees will not be part of joining the club.
Following is a comparison chart of Indian Springs (couple) charges to those of the FCC’s new Premier Membership and Equity membership costs.
The following interesting 13 minute video interview was submitted by a reader. Published on July 23, 2014, host Bryant Gumbel speaks with industry leaders, including Jack Nicklaus, the most accomplished golfer of all time, and executive Mark King about the state of the sport and what innovations should be embraced.
Please click the link below to view the video (and see the comments – very interesting!)
Also, look at Susan’s comment from yesterday (Aug 19) about Hotwire Communication, just to the right in Recent Comments.
——————————————————————————
August 1, 2014
Please see the following two postings: CHANGES IN PROPERTY VALUES AT THE FOUNTAINS, and immediately following it under Mandatory Membership Status, The cost of litigation.
We look forward to hearing from you.
——————————————————————-
CHANG
July 24, 2014
Fountains Condo vs FCC – Breaking News
Please be advised that the associations’ attorneys filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Friday July 18th. A hearing is scheduled on the motion for 1 hour on September 26th at 2:00 PM. There will be no testimony at the hearing as a motion for summary judgment has to allege that there are no material issues of fact and therefore the court can rule as a matter of law. Therefore the hearing will consist solely of argument by counsel for each side.
The motion states that the associations are entitled to a judgment as to counts III and IV of the complaint which are for equitable and promissory estoppel. The argument is that the courts relied upon representations of the country club that if they amended their Declarations to require mandatory membership that they could later repeal the amendment in the Declarations to eliminate mandatory membership and that as a result the FCC should now be equitably estopped from taking a contrary position.
Let me know if you have further questions.
David R Schwartz, President, Trevi Court
July 17, 2014
HOW DOES THE FOUNTAINS COUNTRY CLUB COMPARE TO OTHER CLUBS?
GREAT ARTICLE BY BOB FAGAN (who has likely played more golf courses than any living person)
CONCLUSION:
Private clubs now have 5* alternatives.
1. Generate non-member revenue.
2. Figure out how to operate on roughly half the member base.
3. Become more imaginative and skilled in provided a superior service to buck the tide for another decade.
4. Convert to semi-private or semi-public, however you want to call it.
5. Close down and liquidate.
What is your club doing to be around fifteen or twenty years from now?
Any less important discussions may be akin to arguing who gets which deck chairs on the Titanic. And the iceberg may be coming sooner!
As a result we received another article with a similar message that we thought you might want to read entitled, The Increasing Perils of Private Golf Memberships
May 27, 2014 FCC Minutes that we published on July 1 below, refers repeatedly to the Kemper Sports Report. A summary of that report follows.
MEMBER UPDATE
Membership Survey and Management Review by Outside Consultants
The actual report is available to view on the Club Information page of the member’s side of the website.
Member Survey:
Of the 495 people who responded to our survey, the results are as follows. According to our consultants, the percentage of respondents is slightly above industry standards.
Equity members account for 72% of the respondents
66% have been members for more than 5 years
406 are over 65 and only 89 are younger than 64
56% stay at the Fountains for more than 7 months
78% own a home at the Fountains
85% are retired
More than 70% of the respondents are satisfied with the overall experience at the Fountains
If capital investment/improvements were to be made, the first choice would be to improve outdoor dining, followed by golf course renovations, and then the installation of a resort style pool
63% use the Fitness Center, and 50% of those use the facility more than 3 times a month
80% are happy with the programs offered at the fitness facility
The golf course are rated #1 South, #2 North, #3 West accordingly.
72% eat in the restaurants more than once a week, with the Pub being the favorite
87% like the overall service in the card rooms
59% think our dining option are satisfactory and 29% would like to add additional dining options
76% think menu prices are right, and 18% feel the prices are too high
42% attend more than half of our social events and 30% rarely attend any social events
28% use the tennis facility and 72% rarely, if ever, use the tennis facility
98% of tennis members approve of the overall tennis program
88% rarely use the playground facility
If you would like to receive a detailed copy of the member survey results, please stop by the reception desk and ask for a copy.
Management Review:
Phase I was completed and presented to the Board of Directors on June 18 at a Special Board Meeting. There is a lot of confidential material included in this report and thus it cannot be distributed to our members at large. The following is a high level summary of the key findings:
While our current staff is very committed and dedicated, our consultants feel they could benefit from strong leadership and direction
Our staff would benefit from additional training programs on a regular basis.
Staffing levels need to be better structured to allow for normal working hours which will reduce both overtime and employee fatigue, especially during high season.
Focus on large scale catering events. They feel we are well positioned to attract these events given our location and our facilities.
We should improve the landscaping at our entrance gates and around our club to provide attractive locations where wedding and bar/bat-mitzvah pictures can be taken and where cocktail receptions can be held
Make improvements to our golf courses to attract new members
Welcome new outside members in an open and friendly manner
Offer new memberships for members under 40, 50 and 60 at different price levels
Market the club to outside members in the surrounding communities
Enhance our outside dining facilities
Enhance the lounge area
Install better purchasing controls throughout the club
These are some of the items that were discussed and reviewed with our consultants. The Board has asked our consultants to perform Phase II of the consulting assignment. This will include a financial review of our operations. Phase II will be completed in early September.
Once complete, we will formulate a comprehensive plan that will include potential cost savings and best business practices that will improve:
Member satisfaction
Employee retention
Purchasing savings in all areas, including food, liquor, equipment and fertilizer
Our ability to attract new members
Member morale
The litigation with the Seven Courts on the North Side of our community was beyond the scope of the report. This remains an open issue.
July 1, 2014
WHAT’S NEW?
This week we are posting the May 27, 2014 FCC Board of Directors Meeting Minutes.
.
We are doing so for two reasons: first, it will give non-FCC members some insight into the goings-on of the FCC; second, and perhaps more important, it may find some readers who can answer some questions which arise in the Minutes.
For example: in the President’s Report, Mr McGinn reports in reference to the 7 north courts, “A possible settlement has been mentioned,…”
• Does any one have any information about that “settlement”?
.
Further, under FCO Liaison the following was stated: “Mr. Dombrowsky reported the FCO Board has signed an eleven year contract with Hotwire which will provide the community with TV, phone and Wi-Fi services. The country club will get the services free of charge.”
.
• Can any one report how our monthly bills under Hotwire will compare to our current bills under Comcast?
.
——————————————————————————————————
——————————————————————————————————
——————————————————————————————————
Board of Directors Meeting Date: May 27, 2014
PRESENT:
Paul McGinn, Jeff Hamburger, Sydney Freifelder, Andy Solomon, Dr. Ben Geller, Edward Edelman, Richard Rombro, Joel Elin, Murray Danz, Sue Patalano, Stanley Strouch, Norman Dombrowsky
In attendance by phone: Paul Napieralski, John Heintz, Judy Braslow, Martin Zuckerman, FCO Liaison
Not in attendance: Staff guests: Joe Roux Guests: 39
Mr. McGinn called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. and asked everyone in attendance to please silence or turn off their cell phones. He asked for a motion to accept the minutes from the March 18, 2014 Board meeting. With a motion by Mr. Dombrowski and a second by Mr. Heintz, the minutes from the March 18, 2014 Board meeting were accepted.
Mr. McGinn went immediately into Communications.
Communications
Mrs. Freifelder reported receiving a letter addressed to Mr. Roux from the PGA Directors of southeast Florida complimenting him on the Honda Classic qualifier event held here.
Mrs. Sally Stribley wrote that she is the parent of an FAU golfer and said the event was a very special experience. She thanked the Fountains for making FAU look so good.
Mrs. Karin Zimni, a member of the club, wrote suggesting we give all new homeowners a brochure highlighting our three golf courses, dinner dances and special events when they move here.
Mrs. Deborah Rein, a second-generation club member, wrote that she returned to tennis this year and had the best season yet. She congratulated David Jasmin and his staff and complimented them for always being courteous and friendly.
Presidents Report
Mr. McGinn reported that the litigation and depositions are moving forward with seven presidents deposed last week. Mr. Kantrowitz will also be deposed. The FCC side has not been served yet as far as giving depositions. A possible settlement has been mentioned, but the opposing side needs to make the first attempt. Kemper Sports reported that 499 members submitted their survey responses. We will receive their draft by June 15 and will report on it at the June 17 Board Meeting. Committees are beginning to meet and get busy.
General Managers Report
Joe introduced Jamie Molesky as our Director of Membership and Social Activities. She will be working on member retention and community involvement. She will also work with the Social Committee on football outings and other activities. The club has slowed down and staff is keeping busy with summer projects. The railing in the Main Clubhouse will be replaced in August. A new awning will cover the ice machines near the bag room. We had a very successful Fireman’s Tournament with $21,000 in golf revenues. We will do the same with law enforcement in August. In November, Northwood University will be hosting a cross-country event at the Fountains with a 5k and 8k run. An awards luncheon will be held after the event. The Northwoods Ladies Golf Team will be hosting the Sunbelt Conference Tournament at the Fountains next year.
Treasurer’s Report
Mr. Hamburger reported the Operating Cash is less than last year. Member’s receivables are in good shape. The renovation pledge continues to go down with an outstanding balance of about $10 million. Accounts receivable are in good shape and we have $425 outstanding from the assessment.
Mr. Strouch asked about the dues income and dining room revenues. Mr. Hamburger said the Dining Room revenues are down $84,000 and there are plans to remediate this. Joe is addressing the revenues versus labor issue. Mr. Strouch asked for financials to be distributed each month a day before the Board Meeting. Mr. Hamburger concurred.
Committees
Admissions and Membership
Mr. Solomon reported that Mr. Arons will be reporting on a 30-day cycle detailing the sale of homes in the community. As of the 30th of April, there have been 23 sales. Of those who purchased, one took the Equity Step Up Program, eight did not take memberships, and fourteen took the Equity Social Incentive membership. Mr. Strouch added that 11 of the sales were in Luxemburg and 11 were in Versailles Court.
Mr. McGinn said “love letters” continue to be sent to those who purchase and do not take a membership.
Mr. Solomon reported that he and Mrs. Patalano will create a sheet to help Mr. Arons report home sales and memberships in a format that will help the board. They have also created a process for new member orientation. The day a new member signs up, they will not leave the grounds until they have been provided with face to face details on the proper procedures, given the new member handbook, escorted on a tour of the facilities, introduced to key staff and explained how to book reservations and tee times. Judy Braslow’s committee will assign mentors within 48 hours. Marlene Blum will chair an “on call committee.” They will take the new members on tours.
The Second Generation Committee, chaired by Lyn Silverman, is developing a plan of action that to reach out to the children or relatives of current members who are our potential second generation members. They will reach out to the membership to try and arrange dinner or golf for their children or relatives when they are at the Fountains with members in similar age groups and with similar interests. We are holding off on the Equity Social Incentive Membership until the Kemper Report. Mr. Solomon read a statement that we now have a reputation of being a low-end, semi-private club. He asked if the impact of weekly outside play is hurting the recruitment of outside members.
Mrs. Braslow said no new memberships were purchased in the non-mandatory courts. She suggested that we entice realtors to promote our membership. Mr. Elin suggested a monetary incentive to get realtors to sell memberships. Mr. Napieralski reminded the Board, that compensating realtors had been discussed previously. He suggested the Board send it back to Andy (Solomon) and let him do it. Mr. McGinn asked Mr. Solomon to get with Jamie and Mike Arons and come up with a plan to compensate the realtors. He also asked Sue and Andy to come up with a form for Mike Arons to complete for more accurate numbers.
Maintenance
Mr. Danz reported that Jerry Denmark, Leslie Good, Rhoda Morein, Harold Schenkel and himself met with Carl Gammon. Another committee meeting is scheduled for June.
FCO Liaison
Mr. Dombrowsky reported the FCO Board has signed an eleven year contract with Hotwire which will provide the community with TV, phone and Wi-Fi services. The country club will get the services free of charge. Three members from the FCC and three members from the FCO oversee the $50,000 Community Betterment Fund. The funds will go towards progressing with street lighting, road and gates and the hiring of an architect. He said the FCO/FCC agreement stated the south gate would be renovated first, however the club agreed to be flexible and would swap the Lake Worth Road gate for the south gate, if it made sense economically.
Mr. Zuckerman asked Joe to send Jamie Molesky’s contact information and he will plan for a meet and greet.
Golf
Mr. Heintz and Sue Patalano reported there will be a Memorial Day tournament with 100 people playing. On May 19, we had an organizational meeting. John made committee assignments. The Valencia numbers were given today and we are on hold until the Kemper Report.
Mr. Danz said he feels he’s been put in a defensive position. The full year’s numbers for outside Valencia play will be $87,000. It isn’t what he and Joel had hoped for. We hoped we could double that figure. It hurts when I hear that more people are concerned about the condition of our courses. Over two years’ time, our courses have experienced unbelievable deterioration. Our courses should be top priority at the club.
Grievance
Stanley Strouch reported that a grievance was filed over a confrontation between a member and an employee. The member’s behavior was not consistent with how a member should act and as a result will serve a two-day suspension upon return to the club next fall.
Mr. McGinn said we need to get our membership involved and we all must respect our employees. They are humans and members cannot talk down to them. If an employee is at fault, our members should take the high road.
House Food and Beverage
Mr. Edelman reported the committee met on May 15 and assigned subcommittees. They discussed the Pub menus and specials and special evening events. Our new 2 for $42 menu on Wednesday and Friday nights has started. We are trying to bring our membership back to dining at the club. We discussed more Theme Nights and less buffets. The Committee will look into a catering menu, cooking classes, more outdoor dining, more lite bite menus and gluten-free items.
Our PR committee will help to make membership more aware of what is going on at the club. He thanked Miguel and Joe for being more aggressive and booking more outside affairs.
On May 25th, there was a Graduation Brunch for 40 people. On June 1, there will be a brunch for 25 people and later, a Baptism for 55 people. There will be a wedding on June 7th with 250 people.
So far, the only negative is member use. The results of the 2014 Easter Brunch revealed 226 members compared with 328 last year. Our average price was $2.00 better compared to last year. The 2014 Mother’s Day Brunch produced 225 members compared to 244 last year. Again, the average price was up by $2.00. The 2014 Mother’s Day Dinner brought in 150 members, compared with 192 last year. The kick off for Memorial Day Weekend brought 90 members for a great International Dining experience. The food and variety was spectacular. The Memorial Day Barbeque brought in over 396 members, which was well over and above what we’ve had in the past.
Mr. Rombro asked when the gluten-free items will begin. Mr. Edelman said some items are already being offered and more will be on the menu by June 16. The Lite Bite and Healthy Menu start tonight.
Mrs. Braslow said the gluten-free items on the menu aren’t always available and asked that we be certain we have what is advertised.
Greens and Grounds
Mr. Solomon reported that Bissi attached the most recent Greens and Grounds Report. The status of the North greens – the course has been surface sprayed and the existing turf is gone. The size of the original greens was probed to capture the original size and shape of our greens. Our greens have lost 20-25% of square footage of our greens. The greens have been stripped and treated. The result is dramatic. A fumigant was worked into the soil on May 23rd. On June 11, we will sprig the course with Champion Bermuda grass. It will grow for 8 weeks. The grass on North 10th will be replaced with celebration grass. It was never replaced in the past and this is the newest strain. It’s more tolerant of less water. We are putting it in on the tees, fairways and collars. The West course will close on June 2. The South course will close on July 2. We will have one course fully open in June. The Valencias will play on West on Monday and Thursday. The impact will be significant. Jay will creatively work through this. Billy Fuller has met with us and he will meet with us again on June 16 at 3:00 pm. Billy will meet with the Board on June 17. Regarding the course conditions, we have a history of lack of attention to our courses. We have the same grass since the course was created. A decision is needed. The reality is that no previous Board ever voted to renovate the golf courses.
Mr. Strouch asked for the cost to seed/sprig all 18 holes on a course. Joe said the cost would run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Mr. McGinn said once the grass is up, you need to upgrade the irrigation system.
Audit
Mr. Dombrowsky – No report.
Legal
Mr. Rombro reported his committee had an organizational meeting. Mr. Strouch will still lead the By-laws, Rules and Regulations. Mr. Strouch said he will have the Rules and Regulations by the next Board Meeting.
Long Range Planning
Mr. Strouch reported his committee has met and the question is whether or not the club wants to continue as a first rate club or not. There are many issues to consider and they are in a holding pattern until Kemper issues its report. We also need to find out what our members want, which will be in the survey. The issues will be sent to the Board. The Long Range Plan is a big project and will not be completed until November 1.
Marketing
Mr. Hamburger reported his committee is waiting on the Kemper Report. Until they hear from Kemper, they are conducting minimal marketing. The Marketing and Membership committees met jointly. Subcommittees were formed and they are exploring the ramifications of changing the club address to Wellington and possibly removing the billboards. The Knot is helping us with outside weddings and other functions. We met with Janice at MDG for social networking and a joint meeting with the FCO.
New Member Advisory and Equity Appreciation
Mrs. Braslow reported interest in the June 18 New Member Breakfast is low. She asked Bissi to resend the announcement. If interest remains low, she may cancel the event and reschedule it for next fall. The Committee’s priority for the year is to ensure new members get invited to sit with members at social events and make them feel included.
House Social/Card Rooms
Mrs. Freifelder reported her committee has met once and they are busy planning for the next season. August will be a quiet month with the club closed for two weeks. We are looking at different options for getting the information out for next season. We have starting booking entertainment for next year. We will have smaller events and continue with the lecture series. We have put deposits down for several events including Street Talk for New Year’s Eve, Memory Lane, Savannah Jack, Nicholas King, Corey Kahini and Abracadabra, an ABBA cover band.
Tennis and Fitness
Dr. Geller reported he and Mr. Elin had a joint Tennis and Fitness meeting. Much of their plans pertain to the wish lists, which will come out in the budget process. Mr. Elin said the Tennis Committee met on May 15. Tennis had a terrific year and we have a wonderful venue. He cautioned the Board to not let tennis fall into the state of decay as golf has. He said we must continue to improve our facilities. People have offered to volunteer or donate towards landscaping. David Jasmin has a substantial wish list, which includes windscreens and lights. The schedule for next year will be jam-packed. He thanked Paul (McGinn) and Joe for brining bagels back to the South Complex. Dr. Geller said the wish lists for tennis and fitness next year will require one year of funding, not an ongoing cost.
Mr. McGinn said the South Complex was a large investment and we must maintain it. The history of the club is that it doesn’t take care of its investment. We remodeled 6 1⁄2 years ago and have not put money away to maintain our investment. We need to get into the habit of scheduling maintenance on the calendar and seeing it through. The cost of the landscaping is not the issue; it’s the amount of labor and resources to maintain it that is the issue.
Mr. Solomon asked if the fitness classes will alternate with golf and tennis or be in addition to golf and tennis. Dr. Geller said it would be in addition to and they would be based on utilization. Mr. Strouch asked if the landscaping will go through Andy and Shannon/Greens and Grounds. Mr. Solomon answered affirmatively. Mr. McGinn said the south maintenance barn can look better. It is getting sloppy. Mr. Elin said the foliage around the south complex signs had been overgrown and he was happy to see they have been trimmed.
Old Business
Mr. Edelman said the Food and Beverage Committee unanimously agreed to eliminate jeans on Wednesday and Friday nights as we are a country club. Mrs. Freifelder said the last Food and Beverage Committee made the recommendation to allow jeans, which is waiting on Board approval. So currently, they are not allowed. Mr. Napieralski suggested we wait until we hear what Kemper has to say in their report. Mr. Strouch said the Rules and Regulations did not go to the Board yet because they have not gone to the Legal Committee yet.
New Business
Mr. Hamburger said the Independent Roof Engineer issued a report with dangerous roof zones highlighted. Most of the roof is highlighted in dangerous condition. We have received bids from three companies and the engineer reviewed the bids and recommended the company that gave us the lowest bid. The bid came in at $800,000 with a 10% contingency. The schedule should go out to membership in the fall for assessment with plans to complete the work in March.
Dr. Geller asked if we can wait until March, how badly we really need to have it replaced. Mr. Rombro said the concerns are the roof caving in. Mr. Hamburger said it was not originally part of the renovation due to the cost and we were told it would last 6 or 7 more years. It has now been 7 years and we have no other options. Mr. McGinn said Carl has patched it as much as he can and we are spending more and more each year to patch it. Mr. Hamburger said the Accounting Building will also be reroofed.
Motions
No motions Q &A
Q: Mrs. Wilson said the signage near South Complex looks like a 3-year old painted it. A: Mr. McGinn said Joe is working with the FCO to have all signs match.
Q: Mrs. Wilson said South Fountains Drive has dead shrubs and broken sprinkler heads. She has called Maintenance three times.
A: Mr. Strouch said he will get it fixed.
Q: Arthur Ross asked for an estimate on the cost to redevelop two of our gates.
A: Mr. McGinn said an architect has not been hired yet, so we do not have any estimates. The gates are scheduled to be rebuilt in 2016 or 2017. The permitting process will be the time consuming part of it.
Q: Mr. Waltzer asked if we have money in reserves for all of the repairs that need to be completed. A: Mr. McGinn said reserves have not been maintained. We do not charge initiation fees which in other clubs are used to offset repair and updating costs.
Q: Mr. Ehrlich asked about the purpose of the $1 million reserve fund that we have.
A: Mr. McGinn said it was a catchall. We all have to vote on where to spend it, as it’s a capital fund. The master plan will have a cost factor and membership must vote on it.
Q: Mr. Nerzig asked if we could tap into those funds to pay for the roof instead of assessing members. He asked how much each member would be assessed.
A: Mr. McGinn said the assessment would be a one-time assessment of $1,100 per member.
Q: Mr. Nerzig asked if the funds to repair the gates will be collected before the gates are renovated and how much is estimated to replace them.
A: Mr. McGinn said estimates are based on what other clubs have spent to renovate their entrances. Mr. Strouch explained that the FCO will pay for the renovation of the gates per our agreement with them.
Q: Mr. George Seigal said people should understand that real limitation on the gates will come out of funding reserves.
Q: Mr. Freidland said this is a great place and he will take the step-up plan.
Q: Mrs. Rayna Katz said the most disturbing thing about today’s meeting is that we all agree that our golf courses are our greatest asset and we need to renovate a course. Why wouldn’t we do it? A: Mr. McGinn said we need a solid cost estimate and see how membership reacts to the cost. We can tie it into the roof repair and do a master plan. Many area clubs are renovating their courses and facilities. We need to upgrade and maintain our courses and facilities.
Q: Mr. Harris asked if the Board has approached any banks to loan the money to do these renovations.
A: Mr. McGinn said we have a relationship with Wells Fargo, who loaned us $10.5 million. Our appraisal value is not being maintained. We need to get out of the long-term debt before asking to borrow more money. We need to acquire more funding through memberships, assessments and reinstate the initiation fee.
Q: Mrs. Susan Kay said the sign for Marseilles Court is misspelled.
A: Mr. McGinn said they are aware of it and Mr. Zuckerman will assist us with the signs.
Q: Mrs. Vogel asked for more detailed statistics from Mr. Arons.
A: Mr. McGinn explained that Mr. Arons’ data only captures MLS information. It is delayed information and we also gather information on deeds. Mr. Strouch said the courts have the numbers and they can get that from Mr. Arons.
Q: Mrs. Pershan asked that the dress code be issued to all members.
A: Mr. McGinn said it is an issue that we need to police ourselves. It is uncomfortable for an employee to pull a member aside and tell them they or a member of their party is not dressed appropriately.
Q: Mrs. Goldstein suggested putting off the renovation of the gates with everything else that has to be done.
A: Mr. McGinn explained that the FCO and FCC are different and separate entities. HOA dues go towards the gates; FCC dues go toward the roof, so the burden is placed on the membership only, not all homeowners. The roof has to be replaced. We can no longer put it off. It was built, but never maintained.
Q: Mrs. Kaye asked why we spent money on the card system if we are not using the cards properly. The Golf Pro Shop is using them, but the card rooms and dining venues don’t collect until after you eat lunch. We spent a lot of money on this system.
A: Mr. McGinn said the cards were originally designed to designate services for different membership types. We are going back to having one type of membership so all members will have access to the same amenities.
Q: Mrs. Golden commented that we lost eight Fitness Members. She suggested it may be due to the hours the Fitness Center is open. She recently had visitors who wanted to use the Fitness Center but couldn’t because it closed at 2:00 p.m. She suggested keeping it open later.
A: Mr. McGinn said they have taken a hard look at use of the Fitness Center and to be cognizant of labor costs, the Golf Pro Shop also closes at 3:00 p.m. in the summer. It’s simply too costly to keep it open when use is significantly down after 1:00 p.m. We have looked at keeping it open 24 hours per day and allowing access with the scan card, but our insurance agent said it would be a great liability, given the age of our membership.
The meeting broke into Good and Welfare at 3:57 p.m.
Note to Reader – Past postings under Welcome, Mandatory Membership and the FCO/FCC Cost Sharing Agreement are found below.
There are a number of items that we are currently researching and will be posting in the near future.
Albert King wanted to post his response to some criticism we had received from an FCC member
Any one who feels that they have a lot to say and would like to make it a Post rather than a Comment, please submit your idea or full article to Contact Us.
We are trying some moves to make reading the blog easier.
Readers will be directed to What’s New first, where the highlights will be pointed out.
Postings from the past week will be placed in the Archives and can be found there as needed, by clicking on that title.
Recent Comments will not change.
HOW TO SPEND FIFTEEN MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR follows immediately below under Mandatory Membership.
On June 11, Ana Schwarz wrote in Recent Comments to the right, “Gene Lipscher has informed us that our case is in the docket sheet and the dates are: November 3 through December 12 for a non jury trial.”
A special welcome to over 30 Board Directors and Officersfrom the 7 Northern Courts in the Fountains. Our editorial board felt that it would a good idea to make you aware of our existence, in case we can be helpful in your efforts to get rid of Mandatory Membership.
Those of us who have sat similar boards know that your job is often unappreciated by the outside world, and so we wanted you to know that we do appreciate your efforts and are here to help. Feel free to call on us.
And, to all our readers…
We want to hear from you – your questions, your ideas, your comments, your kudos, your critiques. We want you to send us e-mail addresses of people in the 7 Northern Courts who don’t know about us.
We think that when more of us are engaged and start writing & talking more, we’ll get more answers, more quickly.
So now it’s your turn.
To contact us, go to the site, https://www.fountainsnetwork.com
At the top right you will see Contact Us. Click on it.
The form Contact Us will come up:
May 7
It’s been a busy time since we went live. Learning on the job. Many e-mails and phone calls. We plan to publish weekly as we get into a routine.
Do you have a question, or an idea you want to discuss? Click on Contact Us in the banner and let us know.
How to help? Let more owners know about us. Send them our link: https://www.fountainsnetwork.com
When 16 homeowners in the Fountains met for the first time on March 31, 2014, and formed the Fountains Concerned Residents Network, we didn’t know that less than a month later we would be launching this blog. Neither did we guess that over 80 owners would receive an invitation to join us.
We did know that we needed more answers regarding mandatory membership, primarily, as well as other developments in the Fountains. We also knew we were not experts, but that if we worked together as a community we would find among us others who had part or full answers that could help us all.
So, welcome! Let the sharing begin.
– 30 –
MANDATORY MEMBERSHIP
June 24
From Albert King
After re-reading the FCC member’s following comments, I was compelled to share my interpretations of these statements:
Member’s Comment: “The predicament we are in was caused years ago when the THEN board lied about our financial status. As with everything here the false rumors are destructive and tarnish our reputation. This is a wonderful club and your negativity only further deters new members from joining the club. We all knew that a PRIVATE country club should be mandatory membership when we moved here and voted for mandatory membership. Let’s point out the many positives and stop the club bashing.”
This is my interpretation of this member’s comment – The FCC Board Of Directors’ lies created a $17,000,000+ bank loan that today is being shouldered and repaid by us, the existing club members. This cost is a whopping burden to us, the existing members, because membership has declined due to attrition, and new membership has not developed, in part due to increased membership cost, and overall, the decline in private club membership in general.
However, we do know that comparable private country club membership in Palm Beach county is expensive and actually costs much, much more, but we do not want to pay such dreadful, buoyant rates. However, instead of tightening our collective belts, demanding less, reducing and controlling expenditures, we want non-member Fountains residents to share this FCC BOD imposed country club financial burden.
Although non-member residents have elected to not contribute to FCC financially, and decline to participate in FCC activities, nonetheless their involuntary contributions are wanted, as they will lighten the financial demand on us, the current FCC members, and their participation in club activities is not wanted anyway – they should just send money.
You see, those of us that purchased homes prior to 2003 had the guaranteed option to join or not join the FCC. That was B.T.F.L. – BEFORE THE FCC LIES.
The FCC BOD lies about Mandatory Membership enhancing housing values caused depressed sales and severe stress in the community leading to many units being rented.
Non-FCC member residents are now relying on the 2002 and 2003 FCC letters provided by the then FCC President stating, “Mandatory Membership Withdrawal Would BeHonored”. But today, we the existing FCC members are hoping to ignore his written word of honor because we do not want to continue to pay the attendant country club cost equivalent to and consistent with other private country clubs in the Palm Beach County area.
We want to maintain our exclusive, expensive club and need help, including renters – we don’t care – to shoulder some of the cost.
Albert King
Following are the two 1-page re-typed letters from the FCC club president Leo Wurtzel which authorizes all courts to vote out mandatory membership.
These were used to encourage courts to vote for mandatory membership in 2003 by promising that it could be reversed. They are now a key part of the lawsuit brought by the 7 North courts who voted out the mandatory membership requirement.
“MEMORANDUM
TO: All Interested Residents of the Fountains
FROM: Leo Wurtzel
President, F.C.C. Board of Directors
DATE: August 27, 2002
We have been advised by our attorney, Sachs, Sax & Klein, represented by Larry Glickman, Esq., that any court that voted in favor of mandatory membership can at any time in the future reverse their vote by the same procedure, a vote of the residents of that court that was used to adopt mandatory membership.
Signed by Leo Wurtzel, President F.C.C.
——————————————————————————————————————–
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 2, 2003
TO: The Fountains of Palm Beach Condominium, Inc. #1 (Gefion Court)
Samuel N. Grundfast, President
FROM: Leo Wurtzel, President
F.C.C. Board of Directors
Please be advised that if The Fountains of Palm Beach Condominium, Inc. #1, (Gefion Court) votes to approve the amendment to its Declaration creating mandatory membership with the Club, then the Court can at any time in the future reverse that vote and repeal the amendment by the same procedure and vote of the residents of the Court that was used to adopt the mandatory membership amendment.
Furthermore, in the event a lawsuit is commenced or claim made against the Court as a result of mandatory membership, then the Club will pay all insurance deductibles, legal fees, and damage awards in excess of the Court’s insurance and Umbrella Policy Coverage, provided the lawyers selected have been approved by their insurance company. In the event insurance coverage is denied the Court, then the Club shall indemnify the Court for all its legal fees and damage award.
This indemnification will only be binding on the Fountains Country Club, Inc. if, at the time a claim is made, the F.C.O. and your association maintain and have in force General Liability, Excess Liability and Errors and Omission insurance policies comparable to the policies in force at this time.
Leo Wurtzel, President”
Please click on the link below to read the 2 original copies:
Attached herewith the Auditors Footnotes to the Fountains Country Club, Inc 2013 financial statements
The FOUNTAINS COUNTRY CLUB annual expenditures for calendar year 2013 amounted to Fifteen Million Dollars. See below, the FCC April 29, 2014 certified 2013 Financial Report which is available to all members upon request. In fact, the FCC expenditures for the last five years were, $15.5, $11.02, $11.0, $13.0, and $12.3 million dollars for 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009 respectively. (NOTE # 8 – ASSESSMENTS, page 12)
This report confirms that in addition to 2013 membership dues payments of $5,042,895, FCC members were assessed and paid an additional $2.7 million dollars ( $1,700,535 and $974,400 ) in member special assessments during calendar 2013. WOW!
The report shows that In 2012 FCC members paid membership dues of $5,447,205 and special assessments totaling $1,801,977 ($1,391,387, $257,465 and $153,125 ).
And they want more money to spend. If you are a non-member owner, they want a portion of your income, retirement funds, savings, etc in the form of membership or quasi membership dues and assessments to add to their sovereignty and spending campaign. Yes, non-member northern court residents defeated MANDATORY MEMBERSHIP and the so called RECREATIONAL PACKAGE offer. But, the FCC establishment is expected to initiate other such attacks. SEENOTE # 10 –COMMITMENTS and CONTINGENCIES, (page 13, 2ND to last paragraph),
“THE PARTIES CONTINUE TO EXPLORE THE POTENTIAL FOR SETTLEMENT AND MIGHT REOPEN NEGOTIATIONS IN THE FUTURE”.
The FCC’s known and stated goal is to forcibly saddle the northern courts with FCC financial obligation support. Not only do they want your contract or commitment to pay fees, they really want the obligatory contractual liability that automatically attaches (your property) enabling them to obtain a judgment against you if necessary, guaranteeing that you and your heirs will make the compulsory continuous payments for years and years to come.
QUESTION. Can FCC obtain a judgment against you, or your heirs, or a buyer, once you sign up for FCC membership, or a FCC contractual package, due to non-payment of their fees because you want to terminate the services? SEE NOTE # 10 – LITIGATION.
The report confirms law suits were filed against various FCC members who are delinquent on dues and assessment payments. It is important to note that FCC membership and/or any other FCC contractual commitment package is really the equivalent of a SECOND MORTGAGE on your Fountains residence, other homes, bank accounts and personal property. ( THE ONLY EXCEPTION – A FLORIDA RESIDENTS PRIMARY HOME IN FLORIDA IS EXEMPT). FCC can and will obtain and execute judgments, which transfer to liens and levies against your resources to secure continuous payment of membership, fees and other assessed commitments.
NOTE # 1 – INCOME TAXES (page 8). The Fountains Country Club operation is a Federal/State approved 501 ( c ) ( 7 ) NOT-FOR-PROFIT organization required to adhere to certain specific disciplined rules and regulations to avoid income tax assessment. This explains the structure of the FCO Cost Sharing agreement, renewed March 1, 2014.
NOTE # 7 – RELATED PARTY AGREEMENTS, further explain how FCC transfers certain costs (reducing FCC expenses) directly to the FCO avoiding receipt of income subject to taxation.
It should be noted that while membership dues are no longer tax deductible, certain other qualified Country Club expenditures are in fact deductible for individual income tax purposes.
Overall the FCC financials remain unchanged from previous years and are in reasonably good health as long as membership levels are maintained, and the governing council is willing to issue and pay the special assessments needed to maintain current spending levels . The audit report confirms the Wells mortgage and Line of credit account balances are reduced at December 31, 2013 to $10,754,719 and $272,462 respectively, and the net 2013 operating result, after a $974,400 deficit assessment, shows an excess of revenue over expenses of $840,105 for the year.
The 2013 report discloses a Designated Capital and Debt Service fund with a $1,009,614 balance at Dec 31, 2013 and $1,037,912 Dec 31, 2012.
The President of Fountains Country Club (FCC ) indicated the club has LEGAL DEFENSE INSURANCE to deal with the Fountains Mandatory Membership Class Action type law suit. When questioned, Paul McGinn did not comment further about the particulars of the FCC legal Defense coverage and here is why.
The right to a defense under a general liability insurance policy is not a Solution or Remedy to all ills.
Insurance Defense Costs
A general liability policy, which is part of any typical business insurance policy or commercial insurance policy coverage, can be of various designs but has two distinct obligations: first, it is designed to protect against a legal obligation to pay others because of caused harm or damage; second, it defends against claims or lawsuits. In other words, besides paying for claims or suits, a liability policy also pays for their related legal costs and court fees. It can be provided as part of the business insurance policy’s liability limit or as a separate coverage
What Is Covered Under an Insurance Policy Defense Costs?
Defense costs generally include:
· Attorney fees (including cost of legal staff and expenses)
· Court costs of the applicable jurisdiction
· Costs of filing necessary legal papers
· If applicable, costs of expert witnesses
· Costs associated with investigation, etc.
How Are Defense Costs Handled?
A basic Legal Defense policy would provide indemnification for covered sustained legal cost related to the defense of an organization or its Directors or Officers. A general liability or Umbrella liability policy may, by design, provide legal defense Counsel and take control of settlement or other disposition of the legal issues.
General features of a legal Defense policy are:
1. The face amount of the policy ( maximum coverage amount )
2. Policy retention – Deductible
3. Annual premium derived from the above factors
4. Typical policy Exclusions ( just to list a few )
a. Illegal Acts
b. Dishonest Acts
c. Intentional Misconduct
d. Punitive Damages
e. Contract Claims
f. Bad Faith
To initiate a claim, the insurer has much more to do than just call the insurance company and send them the legal bills. Insurer must:
5. Timely notify carrier of the law suit particulars
6. Carrier review determines if and what coverage applies to insurers law suit
7. If subject to coverage or partial coverage, Carrier will issue a coverage determination letter
One of the most important components of commercial liability insurance is the coverage provided for the defense of claims (including lawsuits) against the insured. A key element of liability insurance policies (which cover liabilities owed to third parties), defense coverage typically provides either an actual defense (whether “supplemental” or eroding policy limits) or reimbursement for the cost of defense
The policy also contains a duty to defend that may or may not erode the limit of liability. Once the limit of liability has been paid out in settlements or judgments, however, the duty to defend comes to an end.
Insurance policies most often contain a duty to reimburse defense costs. Under those types of policies, defense costs typically erode the limit of liability. For example, if the defense of a covered claim costs $750,000 and the limits of liability are $1 million with 10% retention, $150,000 in limits remain ( $ 1 million less Insured retention of $100,000, less $750,000 ) to satisfy a settlement or judgment. Increasingly, however, general liability insurance policies also contain terms intended to limit or place qualifications on the scope of the duty to defend. Such defense-limiting terms (such as a duty to defend that applies against coverage limits) requires that Policyholders understand and review their coverage position.
The insurer faces significant potential exposure from the duty to defend, defense-related issues (e.g., the selection of counsel, the control of defense and the acceptance of settlement proposals) are among the most frequent sources of disagreement between insurers and policyholders. For any business that has found itself in a dispute with its insurance company over the control of a defense, that fight can be as frustrating as being sued in the first place. The types of disputes that arise between insurers and policyholders concerning the duty to defend are virtually limitless, and a comprehensive overview of the judicial rulings that have defined the outlines of these recurring disputes would be extensive.
The following scenarios, however, illustrate some of the common pressure points concerning the duty to defend:
Insured is entitled to a Defense: But Who Calls the Shots?
The Insurance Company ( Carrier ) could decide that defending the lawsuits—even though it agrees that Policyholder likely will not be found liable—will cost far more than it would to offer its policy limits in settlement and walks away free of any further duty to defend. Policyholder may object vociferously to Insurer’s intention. What rights does Policyholder have in this situation? Does it make a difference if defense costs are applied against the limits of liability? What if the tables are turned and Policyholder believes that the claims can be settled for the $1 million limit of the insurance policy, but Carrier would rather continue to litigate? Although the answers to these basic questions will have dramatic economic consequences for Policyholder, they will vary depending on the particular terms of the relevant insurance policy and the state law under which that insurance policy is interpreted.
Who Represents Whom?
Unfair trade practice claims were filed against the Insured. Insured promptly tenders the lawsuit to its general liability insurer carrier, and demands that it undertake the defense of the lawsuit. Carrier believes that the unfair trade practice claim is clearly subject to a number of exclusions. Nonetheless, Carrier decides to defend the insured subject to a reservation of rights. In its initial coverage determination letter Carrier informs that it is appointing ABC LAW FIRM to conduct the defense. Is this permissible? Would it make a difference if, instead of containing a duty to defend, the policy only provided for the reimbursement of defense costs? Given the reservation of rights, does the insured have a right to select its own counsel? Would it have made a difference if Carrier had reserved its rights because the insurer’s notice was untimely, rather than because of the possible applicability of a substantive exclusion? Can Carrier require that Insurer select so-called independent counsel from a list of pre-approved lawyers? What if Carrier objects to the counsel selected by Insurer?
Ultimately, the litigation does not settle and the jury returns a verdict for the plaintiffs, finding that Insured intentionally and knowingly conducted unfair trade pratices. The jury also awards punitive damages. Carrier informs Insured that, given the jury’s verdict, the litigation was not covered under policy provisions and requests that Insured repay the costs of defense. Under what circumstances is Carrier entitled to the repayment of defense costs? Once again, this scenario addresses a series of common areas of disagreement. But the answers to our questions, may have widely divergent consequences for Insurer’s rights depending on the particular policy terms and the applicable state law.
Who Said Anything About Being Reasonable?
Carrier informs Insured that he is entitled to select independent counsel. In the reservation of rights determination letter, Carrier states that it will pay for reasonable costs of defense provided in accord with its guidelines for retained-counsel litigation and subject to prevailing local billing rates. Five months after the first defense bill is forwarded to Carrier, Insured receives a letter informing him that the hourly billing rate of $550 an hour is inconsistent with the prevailing local standards of $175 an hour, that the retention of private investigators was unnecessary and that the litigation guidelines do not permit spending more than five hours preparing a motion to dismiss without obtaining the insurance company’s prior approval. Out of a total defense invoice of $ many dollars, Carrier approves less than $1/4 of the billing. Assuming that the insurance policy does not contain the same conditions set forth in the reservation of rights letter, can Carrier impose these conditions? Should Insured have objected to Carrier’s reservation of rights letter? Does it make a difference if the insurance policy states that independent counsel is expected to comply with Carrier’s litigation guidelines in a conflict situation? Does Carrier’s delay in reviewing the bills have any effect on its right to reduce the billings?
The fact patterns provided in these scenarios may seem to be exceedingly simple, and the questions raised in the scenarios occur quite frequently. But the answers to these common questions vary depending on the applicable state law and the terms of the relevant insurance policies—factors that are too often taken for granted by policyholders. It is a simple lesson, but one that cannot be over-emphasized:
“The right to a defense under a general liability insurance policy is not a solution or remedy for all ills”.
Albert King
—————————–
May 24
Some updates from our May 7 edition:
We understand that Gene Lipscher is the lead litigator for the 7 Northern Courts and he is being seconded by George Ord and Rod Tennyson;
Re bringing together new owners who have been sued by the FCC after Mandatory Membership was voted out, we have put 4 in touch with one another; we found 1 who doesn’t want to be connected; 1 who has re-sold and gone; 1 who has not responded, and 1 who was sued by the FCC but doesn’t exist. We also found that the FCC has many active lawsuits for other reasons like long-term members attempting to resign, non-payment of dues, etc.
New Information:
On May 15, the FCC started taking depositions from the 7 North Court Presidents. The depositions were taken in the FCO Board room and each lasted about two and a half hours. Bernard Ciancanelli, the President of D’Este Court and current FCO President, was first to be deposed in the morning, followed in the afternoon by Mort Horowitz, President of Esedra Court and immediate Past President of the FCO. There were only 4 people in the room during the depositions: the FCC lawyer asking the questions; the deponent; the 7 Northern Courts lawyer; & the stenographer recording the testimony. More information to come.
Contact Us if you have questions about these proceedings.
Re Depositions – the following explanation was posted on the Cornell University Law School website.
A deposition is witness’s sworn out-of-court testimony. It is used to gather information as part of the discovery process and, in limited circumstances, may be used at trial. The witness being deposed is called the “deponent.”
Depositions usually do not directly involve the court. The process is initiated and supervised by the parties. Usually, the only persons present at a deposition are the deponent, attorneys for all interested parties, and a person qualified to administer oaths. Sometimes depositions are recorded by a stenographer, although electronic recordings are increasingly common. At the deposition, all parties may question the witness. Lawyers may not coach their clients’ testimony, and their ability to object to deposition questions is usually limited.
Depositions are usually hearsay and are thus inadmissible at trial. There are, however, three exceptions to the hearsay rule that are particularly relevant to deposition testimony. The first is when a party admits something in a deposition that is against his or her interest. The second is when a witness’s testimony at trial contradicts their deposition. The third is when a witness is unavailable at trial. (http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/deposition)
Finally, for now, if you haven’t read what Susan wrote on May 20 in Recent Comments, we urge you to do so.
May 7
Make no mistake. Our major task is to GET RID OF MANDATORY MEMBERSHIP!
The purpose of this blog is to keep Fountains owners as up to date as possible regarding the mandatory membership issue which is now before the Florida Court.
Those owners, particularly in the 7 Northern Courts ( Esedra, D’Este, Gefion, Plaza,Tivoli, Trevi, Townhouses [Fountains Drive]), have not been kept at all current about what’s happening.
The 7 Northern Courts rejected mandatory membership in March of 2013, and rejected the mediation/recreation proposal in February, 2014. It is now May 2014 and it’s difficult to know what’s going on.
A relatively simple solution seems apparent to this writer. The 7 Northern Courts could quite easily produce a monthly progress report to owners that could be e-mailed, or sent by regular mail. We’d be happy to post it.
Why this has not happened to date is a mystery. The Boards of the 7 Northern Courts should be acting as a team in this matter. Is there possibly dissension among our leaders?
We encourage the 7 Northern Courts presidents to work together and start sending out a monthly progress report regarding mandatory membership developments. And we encourage the readers of this blog to contact their presidents and board members to get the ball rolling. We will be sending you the Board Member contact information for all 7 Northern Courts.
Another matter: It is interesting to note that increasing numbers of current FCC members, who are disaffected with the Club, are joining our readership. Many of them think the Club is headed for disaster with its current policies but feel helpless to do much to change things. We welcome them aboard and hope our blog will help.
Another matter: In talking with people and asking questions, we found out that the 10 new owners who have been sued by the FCC over mandatory membership, have never been brought together as a group. We are trying to connect with them and encourage that to happen, if they wish. Why someone in the 7 Northern Courts hasn’t suggested that, is a mystery.
And speaking of mysteries: Have you ever wondered why, when 10 new owners were sued by the FCC, that the 7 NORTHERN COURTS then turned around and sued the FCC? Why didn’t the 7NORTHERN COURTS just defend the owners? I’d like to know the answer.
Because, according to the FCC President, once the FCC was sued by the 7NORTHERN COURTS, the FCC insurance policy went into effect and is covering their legal fees. That’s right – no cost to the FCC!
Who engineered that?
Finally, for now: At the April Esedra Court Board meeting, President Mort Horowitz said there were two litigators on the case now. We know that Gene Lipscher is one. – http://www.lipscher.net -. Does anyone know who the other is?
—
April 22
It is pretty common knowledge that the recreation/mediation agreement offered by the Country Club this January-February, 2014, was voted down in all seven of the north courts. And, it is also known that In March 2013 the same seven north courts voted against the continuation of mandatory membership in the FCC as a condition of purchase. And everyone knows there is a court case.
However, to clearly understand what is going on is another matter. Among us reading these words now, there are likely a number of owners who can and will provide much more information as we proceed. Seeking that information can take many paths. We look forward to hearing of them. Here’s what the Esedra Court team has done recently.
Besides attending monthly Board meetings, it has asked formally to be on the Agenda. For example the following*:
To: Alan Diamond, Secretary, the Esedra Court Board
From: David Goldman
Re: Esedra Court Board of Directors Meeting, Monday, April 7, 2014
Dated: April 4, 2014
Dear Sir,
We look forward to the upcoming Esedra Court Board meeting on Monday April 7th.
A number of Esedra Court owners have asked that we present the following request under New Business on the upcoming Agenda.
We are hoping that you and the board members can address this matter and reach a timely decision.
“Since the majority of Esedra owners repealed Mandatory Membership last year, and have further underlined that decision by rejecting the mediation/recreation proposal along with the other 6 northern courts in February of this year, it is requested that the Esedra Board provide monthly progress reports to all residents relative to any developments in the Mandatory Membership Court case.
In order to speed communication and reduce costs, it is further suggested that these monthly progress reports be sent to owners by email, where possible, and by surface mailing to those without e-mail. Where people do not have e-mail a further cost saving method is available.
Furthermore it is suggested that the Esedra Court Board show leadership in this matter by recommending to the other 6 northern courts, that they do the same.
The net result of these proposals could be that all owners in the 7 seven northern courts would get the same message in a timely fashion, rumours would be diminished and costs of communication, reduced.”
*Board members were e-mailed this letter at the same time
——————————————————————————————————————
For Your Information
For anyone who is not familiar with the terms of the FCC offer and how much would have been required to pay for 25 years, the Esedra version of the offer is attached below this line. We’d be interested in seeing other versions for comparison.
The court will not set a date for trial until Sept 2014 at the earliest and we are under a Continuance. There is an attachment below called TRIAL CONTINUANCE. Click to open and see this information.
I’m sure people reading these comments will set me straight, but for now I want to share some things I’ve heard about the Fountains that I didn’t know before.
For example, I’ve heard that in years gone by, a builder in the Fountains went bankrupt and was bought up by what became the FCC. (Can anyone supply the details?)
In the deal, the FCC gained ownership of the ‘common elements’ including:
gates
roads and lighting
landscaping
fountains
golf cart paths
perimeter fencing and walls
Craft Hall, Fountains Hall and the FCO Office among other items.
In other words, the FCC became the landlord, and we owners are like renters of the ‘common elements’. (Please correct me if I’m wrong.) As a result all owners whether they belong to the FCC or not, pay an equalized appropriate rent called maintenance fees. And while this is a fair arrangement, it is unfortunate that the FCO doesn’t own the common elements.
Another matter:
It is my understanding that the Cost Sharing Agreement was passed at the FCO Board Meeting on February 12, 2014. The Minutes of that meeting indicate that only 5 of the 7 Northern Court Presidents opposed the agreement.
The Presidents of D’Este and Esedra supported it.
Why was that, since the majority of their constituents oppose mandatory membership?
It would be useful to get some clarifications.
—
April 18
The following link is the cost sharing agreement recently agreed to between the Fountains Condominium Operations, representing all homeowners, and the Fountains Country Club.
This agreement covers how expenses and rent are paid for in the community for
security and gates
roads and lighting
landscaping
fountains
golf cart paths
perimeter fencing and walls
tree root damage
Craft Hall, Fountains Hall and the FCO Office among other items.
Please read the link below to see what the community is paying for versus what the FCC is paying for.
The following link is the 2-page “Letter of Intent of Mutual Cooperation” between the Fountains Condominium Operations, representing all homeowners, and the Fountains Country Club signed on March 26, 2014.
The following link is the cost sharing agreement recently agreed to between the Fountains Condominium Operations, representing all homeowners, and the Fountains Country Club.
This agreement covers how expenses and rent are paid for in the community for
security and gates
roads and lighting
landscaping
fountains
golf cart paths
perimeter fencing and walls
tree root damage
Craft Hall, Fountains Hall and the FCO Office among other items.
Please read the link below to see what the community is paying for versus what the FCC is paying for.
The following link is the 2-page “Letter of Intent of Mutual Cooperation” between the Fountains Condominium Operations, representing all homeowners, and the Fountains Country Club signed on March 26, 2014.
