We, and many MCA Homeowners, are advocating for the MCA to hire an independent golf industry expert to help the MCA understand its options for its sports complex assets (golf courses, tennis, fitness, and dining facilities). An example of one would be National Golf Foundation.
What are the upsides to taking this approach?
- MCA Homeowners don’t believe their sports complex assets are being used in the way that is best for them as the owners of the assets. Hiring an independent expert would give everyone information on the alternatives, their merits and their risks.
- The “Strategic Planning Committee” of 4 MCA Board members, 4 TMCC Board members and MCA management is not going to come up with any solutions that don’t involve TMCC, which doesn’t address #1 above. An independent expert would investigate all opportunities.
- The MCA Board has said they don’t know anything about operating such a facility. Understandably true. But it is a legal duty of HOA Boards to make INFORMED decisions. Hiring an independent expert would provide expertise they don’t have and meet their legal requirement to be informed.
- Due to absence of transparency and ongoing obfuscation by some MCA Board members (for many years), as well as conflicts of interest on TMCC related decisions (as many as 8 of 9 MCA Board members have been TMCC members), there is a very low trust level in the MCA Board. Absence of information from/on TMCC is also an issue. Some of this may be improving but not enough to fix this problem. Hiring an INDEPENDENT expert would address this and add credibility to decisions related to our sports complex.
- Running the sports complex exactly as it is currently being run MIGHT BE THE OPTIMAL SOLUTION. It may be that the independent expert says that this is as good as it gets for our sports complex. If so, MCA Homeowners (including us) would have to accept it and deal with it.
- If the independent expert says that operating the courses semi-private is the way to go, TMCC members may accept significant changes to their operation if the alternative is for TMCC to cease to be involved in the facilities. (Some changes to TMCC would likely require members’ approval either through Board decisions or by-law changes).
- If the independent expert recommends significant capital investment, it provides supports for the MCA Board in doing so. If the expert recommends against it (or indicate there is a viable path as a mid-level golf operation without significant investment), then it saves the MCA from making multi-million dollar mistakes.
- The cost for hiring an expert to produce such a report is in tens of THOUSANDS of dollars to make sure MCA is making well informed
MULTI-MILLION dollar (possibly tens of million dollar) decisions.
What are the downsides to hiring an independent golf expert?
- Costs some money (Please see #8 above). Even a $100,000 one-time cost would average $28 per household.
- They might recommend something different than the current arrangement. This only would be a downside for TMCC and advocates for no change. It would be upside for all current and future MCA Homeowners that aren’t TMCC members). This is undoubtedly the fear of many MCA Board members.
THERE IS NO REASONABLE REASON NOT TO HIRE INDEPENDENT EXPERTS
IF THE MCA BOARD WANTS TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS, AND
DO WHAT IS BEST FOR MCA HOMEOWNERS.
A few important caveats:
Would be paid for by MCA and the report would be posted on the MCA website (no Records Inspection request required). The report would also be shared with all TMCC members but they cannot be drivers of the process.
ICON cannot be viewed as independent, even though they have industry expertise, because they are under TMCC contract and control.
Would require the cooperation of TMCC for data on the operation. Not providing it would be completely damming that TMCC knows that the expert will likely draw the conclusion that the current use of MCA’s sports complex is not optimal for MCA Homeowners.
Needs to be directed by an independent committee of MCA Homeowners with relevant experience (only one Board member on the committee, chosen by the committee). Include a proportional # of TMCC Members (about 12%) but not more (=1 of 8-10 committee members). Given the clear recent history of MCA Board subsidizing TMCC and resisting considering any change in how our sports complex assets are used, this is critically important to the success and credibility of this work. Whether the Board takes this approach or not will be a true test of their commitment to transparency and they recently failed such a test. In August an MCA Board Member made the following motion and no other Board member would even second the motion so the Board would vote on the matter:
“Due to Tropical Storm Debby’s damage to The Meadows Country Club facility, I make a motion to establish a strategic planning committee consisting of a representative group of Meadows Community stakeholders to investigate various options regarding this property. This strategic planning committee will report its findings to the entire Meadows Community Association Board of Directors for review and discussion.”
At the October 30 special board meeting a Board member stated that “we’ve got some big decisions that need to be made in the next couple of months that will determine the fate of the community”. Even ignoring the Board’s legal duty to be informed, why wouldn’t the Board demand a report from an independent expert?
Home | Sarasota Meadows Blog 
Leave a reply to mikeofall Cancel reply