Home | Sarasota Meadows Blog

A Summary of where we are now

As with all our blog posts if there are any inaccuracies, please let us know at ForTheMeadows@SarasotaMeadows.com and we will fix it.

TMCC and its members

TMCC members are in a MUCH MUCH better position than they were before 2018. I understand why they don’t want anything to change from the current situation (which has more-or-less been the same money-losing private club experience they have had prior to 2018).

Through the $10/year lease they have unfettered use of $10+ million of recreational assets (golf course, tennis facilities, restaurants and clubhouse). It even includes assets they didn’t have before: the new fitness facility and pickleball courts.

They have been relieved of all debt and associated interest costs. We recall members boasting in 2018 that the MCA is now their piggy bank to pay for everything in the future. Sadly that has been pretty accurate (so far).

They receive $600,000/year payment from MCA for providing very limited access to the facilities with almost no incremental cost to allow MCA Homeowner use of the facilities.

MCA Homeowners

MCA Homeowners are WAY WAY worse off and continue to pay and pay

In 2018 when TMCC was on the verge of bankruptcy, the MCA Board had to choose between two undesirable options that were thrust upon them:

  1. MCA acquiring TMCC’s assets for $6 million, or
  2. Allowing any outside party to acquire the assets (possibly through bankruptcy), to do with as they pleased.

The MCA Board made the better choice for The Meadows. It was the lesser of two evils. It prevented a serious change to the character of The Meadows.

Unfortunately, this and subsequent actions, means:

  1. We have to pay off that $6 million + $2 million that has been spent on capital improvements + interest over 15(?) years.
  2. We have to pay off $4 million + interest over 15(?) years for the new fitness and wellness center.

There is no getting around that. Not great, but again it was the better choice when TMCC’s perpetual losses forced the situation on MCA Homeowners.

But we DO have an ongoing choice on whether to subsidize TMCC’s members’ private club lifestyle. With the subsidies described above, TMCC is now reporting a “profit”, but don’t be fooled. They aren’t doing any better than they were before 2018. It is the same operation with too few members to be profitable (without subsidies).

What was presented as saving The Meadows from a bad outcome for MCA homeowners, has turned out to be saving and maintaining TMCC’s member experience at any cost to MCA homeowners.

Continuing to save The Meadows’ green space can be done
without saving TMCC’s private club experience.

SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE

Contact us at ForTheMeadows@SarasotaMeadows.com

Posted

in

by

Website Admin

Tags:

Comments

24 responses to “A Summary of where we are now”

  1. littleplatte2 Avatar
    littleplatte2

    So what do you want to do?

    Like

    Reply
    1. Website Admin Avatar
      Website Admin

      Another blog post is on its way!

      Like

      Reply
      1. John Nitterauer Avatar
        John Nitterauer

        I’ve been told the golf courses are the problem. Golf is simply not a breakeven endeavor. Not only the MCC but other private clubs around the country have the same problem. Agreed The Meadows must have this green space but not utilized as a golf course. Green space maintained like the green space on Longmeadow is fine and much less costly. MCC’s golf courses are manicured daily – Longmeadow’s as needed.

        Our property values are based on operating costs. Higher MCA fees affect those values. No new development. Close all golf courses that don’t break even. Maintain green space at more reasonable costs.

        Like

  2. Jack Avatar
    Jack

    It’s easy to complain. What constructive ideas do you have? Why are you anonymous? I don’t take anonymous complainers very seriously.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Website Admin Avatar
      Website Admin

      Another blog post is on its way!

      Like

      Reply
  3. Jeff Holmes Avatar
    Jeff Holmes

    In addition to TMCC, there are two other courses – The Groves, executive size, and The Highlands, full yardage, Can you tell us the profit/loss for those two courses? Are those courses also subsidizing MCC?

    Like

    Reply
    1. Website Admin Avatar
      Website Admin

      All 3 courses are owned by MCA and leased to TMCC for $10/yr. So all references to TMCC are for the whole club which operates all 3 courses, tennis facilities, fitness center and restaurants. It can be a bit confusing as the private course used to be called the Meadows course but is now referred to as the Members course.
      All operating costs are merged so there is no way to tell their individual profitability. Note that some of the costs don’t increase with 3 courses vs 1 (eg you don’t need 3 times as much equipment, or 3 times as much staff).
      You can see the non-member revenues from the Form 990 data but that will include Member course green fees as well: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jzpKj5kW0Bar_rPe6K09CvA_2pgJWzOAarsaoZEiMiM/edit?usp=sharing

      Like

      Reply
  4. mitchw12 Avatar
    mitchw12

    what company runs the TMCC ?..if private club model is not profitable why continue? All residents should have unlimited access ..each of us are already paying for very limited access l 1 day a month at Meadows course!)and then for golf still pay and onlyv18 holes offered ? ..can use tennis courts.restaurant( take out only??!!) and bar.. Seems MCA employees and office ..meadowword..online news letter to market TMCC EVENTS..having the facilities available certainly is nice but to have a wealthier group able to afford membership and have the rest of us helping them to be excluded..nit right and obviously business wise is failing

    Like

    Reply
    1. Website Admin Avatar
      Website Admin

      TMCC Board is at the head and is responsible for running the recreational facilities. They report only to the full year members of TMCC.

      They have hired ICON to manage and administer the club (they are the hands on management and staff).

      Like

      Reply
      1. mitchw12 Avatar
        mitchw12

        ICON. what where who runs it.. do they run other properties.. put a casino hospitality group in charge..limited membership and room capacity reservations only ..make top floor and rooms for casino..multi outlet marjeting with local and global companies to boost visibility of sarasota.county should also be behind marketing of area..plenty of successful peopleakready here ..lower level restaurant and bar open to public.residents discount on golf tennis restaurant ..especially if continuing subsidy..any way doesn’t seem ICON has been able to operate to anyone advantage.but having these facilities in good shape does add to property values..wild open space..got plenty in florida..if that’s the case..just lease courses and grow orange farmer

        Like

    2. Louise Avatar
      Louise

      I agree…if we truly are the owners, why do we only get to play one Saturday out of the month and only after 12 noon? Why can’t we use the restaurants 24 seven or whenever they’re open? You would think they would want the business? I feel like my nose is pressed against the window, looking at all the Meadows country club members laughing at us. 🤬

      Like

      Reply
  5. Steve Avatar
    Steve

    People love to live on other people’s money. The Meadows course (which we all own) and the others should pay their own way or be returned to the owners (homeowners). The “private” (can’t be private if we pay for it for them) privileges that TMCC members enjoy should be at their own cost. Their membership rates should cover the deficits without subsidies from the rest of us.

    As to our homeowners-paid facilities like the community center and gym, pickle ball, etc, including tennis, this should be free to the owners without restriction (the golf members don’t pay the freight and should not push those who do out).

    if the club had decent food service and reasonable rates, there are thousands of potential social members—the current failure to provide decent food and service and for overcharging runs exclusively to ineffective management.

    I say: if they won’t reform then let them go broke and the homeowners will do better without the takers dominating TMCC now!

    Like

    Reply
    1. Website Admin Avatar
      Website Admin

      “Free to owners” would likely require higher MCA assessments for all and only benefit homeowners who use the facilities. Which just substitutes MCA homeowners who use the facilities as the one’s supported by all MCA Homeowners. Might be better than subsidizing private club members but still not great.

      TMCC is never far from “broke”. The only thing keeping them afloat is MCA Homeowner subsidies. Before that happens they’ll let the course going in to terrible disrepair (that’s what always happens when a course is struggling financially) and MCA Homeowners will have to pay up to repair the courses (millions of $).

      Like

      Reply
  6. Ken Ludwig Avatar
    Ken Ludwig

    During the Candidate Forum in which Joe & I participated, we had only a few minutes to present some of our candidacy views. I brought up the fact that expenses for all three golf courses are all lumped into one bucket. Why? That is contrary to good cost accounting in any business venture. I think we know why. My suggestion was to separate costs for each golf course. If a golf course continued to be in the red, then consideration could be made to turn that course into green space usable to all Meadows residents at lower maintenance costs. Perhaps, this was not so important to voters or at the very least to large voting blocks influenced and controlled by TMCC Board members, many MCA Board members and/or former MCA Board members.

    Also, about a year ago I did an analysis to consider making TMCC Members’ golf course semi-private – something TMCC “powers” do not want to do! I never gave the document to the MCA Board President, MCA or TMCC Boards and didn’t share it with anyone thinking it would probably go on deaf ears. Perhaps, I should have. Slightly dated now a year later, I’ll try to figure out how this audience may see the 2 page analysis as it was/is quite interesting. I hope the website administrator will contact me independently.

    Like

    Reply
    1. E. Dougherty Avatar
      E. Dougherty

      Think about some of the other semi-private models in our area (University GC, Rosedale, etc.) and it is easy to see that this model can be very effective. The TMCC members are living in a fantasy world that is subsidized by others but anyone can see that they are sitting on deck chairs on the Titanic and being kept afloat only by the good graces of the MCA residents. And the management company has no incentive to present a complete operational and financial proposal while they are drawing money from the current courses. Perhaps the MCA should get Heritage involved as they are now reportedly buying LRCC and Legacy for attractive prices??? As a former resident and a current user of Groves/Highlands I am saddened by this prolonged dance in which the public courses decay while the private course shines. Good luck MCA residents.

      Like

      Reply
      1. Website Admin Avatar
        Website Admin

        Great examples of successful transitions to semi-private in higher end developments than The Meadows (not being negative about our area just talking about average property values).
        We expect there would be a lot of resistance to selling the golf courses as the MCA would lose control over what happens to the space in the future. We would be part of that! However leasing the assets to a company for more than $10/yr (and not have to pay them $600,000 per year) would certainly merit consideration.

        Like

  7. Jan Avatar
    Jan

    I cannot attend the MCA annual meeting on March 4 in person or via zoom. Do you know whether the meeting will be recorded and accessible later for viewing?

    Like

    Reply
    1. Website Admin Avatar
      Website Admin

      Don’t know. Would you mind asking the MCA and getting back to everyone?

      Like

      Reply
      1. Jan Avatar
        Jan

        Sure. Will call them and report back.

        Like

  8. BScrimshaw Avatar
    BScrimshaw

    I understand the frustration and agree that transparency needs to be much greater. To be clear, I am not a golfer, but I would not be interested in a solution that saw the golf courses simply transferred to green space. It is, I think, a naive solution borne out of anger over how the file has been managed. As green space it would not be long before the same people pushing the plan would want to cut back on maintenance. It is unrealistic to believe that golf courses do not drive property values and the prestige of The Meadows. That said, the current private club model does not work. Let’s start there and consider what options may be available.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Website Admin Avatar
      Website Admin

      We agree that making the golf courses successful is the best approach. And we’ll keep reminding everyone that “making the golf courses successful” is not at all the same as making TMCC successful. TMCC’s private club model is a barrier to that goal.

      Like

      Reply
  9. Jan Avatar
    Jan

    This is to follow-up on my post yesterday. I was told by the MCA office that the March 4 meeting is going to be recorded and will be available on the website about 10 days after the meeting.

    Like

    Reply
  10. HOA Board legal duties (Part 1) – Home | Sarasota Meadows Blog

    […] lease to a 1-year term until the MCA Board fully understands its options. We’ve documented that the current relationship is significantly skewed in favor of TMCC and the MCA Board has to do a much better job acting in the best interests of MCA Homeowners. To […]

    Like

    Reply
  11. HOA Board legal duties (Part 2) – Home | Sarasota Meadows Blog

    […] we described in our post A Summary of where we are now, what the MCA refers to as a “strategic partnership” is no partnership at all. It is […]

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Ken Ludwig Cancel reply