A PLACE TO BE
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
With this influx of Rental Office conversation, one might want to chew on this.
Ten years ago April 2000 Minutes show the Board wanting a new Rental policy because renting owners were taking advantage of the Association with putting in/taking out their lots at any given time regardless of having signed a Rental Office contract agreement.
Sound familiar? It should because our Board passed a policy last October to correct this decade old problem.
We see that owners in 2000 were questioning the need of keeping the Rental office open and debated using the below talking points.
May 24 2000 minutes
RENTAL OFFICE DEBATE
Zylman-pro
A coordinated exposure to ORA (Outdoor Resort Association)
Future owners started as renters
New owners will upgrade when they buy and this will increase property values
Rental office rentals give more control
Less disruption in quality of our life
Year to date we are in the black and will not be a cost to us
In the future when no rental available, turn the building (Welcome Center) into a restaurant and make money
Aikman-con
It is the individual’s right to rent
Fights and headaches of handling the rentals would cease
Charge a registration fee for those entering the park and make money that way
It would decrease expenses in maintenance, office, staff, etc.
Mr. Zylman’s view was accepted because the Rental department was operating in the black and the assurance that if this ever changed the Rental Office would close..
When it was discovered the Rental Office had suffered back to back losses in 2004-05, owners pushed the 2006 Board to form a committee for an in depth Rental study. A Committee majority concluded the downward trend in participation in the rental pool by owners combined with the upward trend in costs, i.e. insurance rate and tax increases, equaled a poor long term economic prospect for the rental pool and this majority recommended that our Rental program be eliminated.
Committee members Ms. Burke and Mr. DeMalade disagreed and gained support from four Board members to keep the Rental Office open.
Ms. Burke later gave owners a report which asked the question, would you whether lose $29,671 each year having an open Rental office or a closed one that loses $70,926 each year from ongoing expenses. One might note that Directors Pelletier, Guerra, Martin, and Halbach were along side Ms. Burke on this 2006 Board.
These actions not only showed it was expected but downright acceptable for our Rental Office to lose between twenty to thirty thousand dollars each year and acknowledged that owners may now ignore Article VII of the Declaration of Covenants with impunity.
In the beginning our Rental Office was approved to be a self-fulfilling profit center and not a monetary burden upon our Membership.
WHY QUESTIONS
One must ask why a Director would close their eyes to those who disobey our Declaration of Covenants costing our Village thousands while chastising others who disobey a simple building code costing our Membership zilch.
Why don’t we have a rule like other Associations saying owner amenity rights are forfeited while renters use their privileges?
How is it we supposedly have $70,000+ worth of ongoing departmental expenses if the Rental Office is removed? Are these just penciled in expenses associated with other office expenditures?
Your comment
Read more...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)