Misinformation and Myths

Since we sent a demand letter to MCA and then posted it on this website (Legal Demand Letter Sent to MCA), we’ve started hearing a number of things that just aren’t true. So we are going to address them directly here to stay focused on the real issues articulated on this website and in the “Diaz Demand Letter”.

We are NOT working for/with developers

“We believe that having self-sustaining golf courses is important to The Meadows.” That quote is from our very first post on January 31. We don’t think that housing developments on the golf courses would be in the best interests of The Meadows. We’ve been clear and consistent on our support of the golf courses, but it is past time to move on from TMCC’s money losing management of the courses as a private club.

Always remember that the golf courses and TMCC are two separate things now. MCA Homeowners own the courses, tennis facilities and buildings, not TMCC. The facilities can operate without TMCC managing them.

The only group that has ever advocated for selling the courses to developers is TMCC. In the fall of 2017 the TMCC Board agreed to sell all of their assets to a developer who only committed to running the golf courses for one more year (2018) (Meadoword Oct 2017 page 16). In 2019 that the developer would have been free to develop the golf courses into housing. This deal only fell apart when the developer dropped the amount they were offering.

Last year’s MCA director candidates are NOT involved

Joe Moore and Ken Ludwig are not involved in our work in any way. We are a new group that is working hard to inform MCA Homeowners with facts and analysis, and gain their support to make better use of the MCA Homeowners’ assets.

TMCC is NOT going to “turn it around”

In 2018 the MCA Board told MCA Homeowners that TMCC had a plan to be profitable by 2020. In 2020 they lost $620,000 (excluding the Renaissance Access subsidy) even though they had use of the assets for $10.

Without the Renaissance Access fee/subsidy and free use of MCA Homeowner’s assets, TMCC continues to lose $1 million/year, just as they have every year for at least a decade. It is as regular as clockwork.

Demand for golf has been at an all time high since 2020, but TMCC has not been able to do any better.

There is no realistic reason to believe that TMCC will suddenly become sustainable.

The MCA Board has been serving the interests of TMCC Members not MCA Homeowners

We covered this in a lot of detail in these posts: HOA Board Legal Duties (Part 1) and HOA Board Legal Duties (Part 2)

Only 13% of MCA households are TMCC members, being subsidized by the other 87%. 40% of TMCC members that we are subsidizing don’t even live in The Meadows and don’t pay MCA assessments.

One email sent to the MCA said “I don’t support the Diaz Letter.  The Board has in my opinion done a great job.” Not surprisingly that person and their spouse are TMCC members. We’d have to agree that the MCA Board has done a great job for TMCC members. We’re speaking for the other 87% of MCA Homeowners that aren’t TMCC members.

How did we get here? When key decisions were being made by the MCA Board, most directors were TMCC members! We’re at another key decision point with the current lease coming to an end on June 30 and MCA Homeowners have to be represented by people who are NOT TMCC MEMBERS and will look out for the long-term interests of MCA Homeowners.

FINAL FACT: YOUR VOICE IS IMPORTANT AND THE MCA NEEDS TO HEAR IT

Let the board know that you support the “Diaz Demand Letter” by emailing the MCA GM at francesrippcondi@meadowsca.com, and copying us at ForTheMeadows@SarasotaMeadows.com.