Why hire an independent expert?

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?

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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).
  7. 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.
  8. 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?

  1. Costs some money (Please see #8 above). Even a $100,000 one-time cost would average $28 per household.
  2. 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.

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?


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

31 responses to “Why hire an independent expert?”

  1. buffnitty Avatar
    buffnitty

    The TMCC GM has had experience consulting with other clubs. He’s there, knows the ins and outs of the TMCC deep state. He spoke eloquently about re-capitalizing. This equates to right sizing. Right sizing? Yes, considering membership size and at least offering only breakeven amenities.

    The myth: “build it and they will come” cannot continue with “other people’s money”.

    Re-capitalize? Never with MCA money. Sell bonds to believers (or try).

    Like

    1. Website Admin Avatar

      The TMCC GM may well have the skills and knowledge. But he is employed by TMCC cannot be viewed as independent or focused on the best interests of the sports complex owners: MCA Homeowners.
      Totally agree on the “build it and they will come” myth (a line from movie about ghost baseball players is not a basis for a business plan)

      Like

      1. buffnitty Avatar
        buffnitty

        The TMCC GM is smart enough not to stay with a sinking ship. This guy is good and I’d guess he is probably exploring other options. Other options also will be trying to recruit him. Why would a talented guy like him stay with a failing business looking at ideas from committees like the MCA or other non business types?

        Like

    2. Harold E Haynes Avatar
      Harold E Haynes

      We need someone totally independent and unrelated. If the GM recommended any thing other than what he has been doing for an extended period of time. He would be saying he is part of the problem that needs changing. He is the leadership of operations that lead to breakeven or short fall. They have been in the shortfall position for numerous consecutive years. If he knew how fix the financial issues, I am sure It would have been fixed by now.

      Like

  2. mikeofall Avatar
    mikeofall

    Two options. Try to sell the entire facility. Kept as golf course. It is saleable. Get it off the backs of the residents. Move on Second option is keep charging the residents for a failing business. I don’t see how hiring a outside expert is going to recommend anything else except 20 million min to dump into the club. Sorry but I did business consulting my take.

    Like

    1. Website Admin Avatar

      All options are going to have pros and cons. A significant risk of selling the courses is that we lose control over the green space. If buyer went bankrupt (even potentially intentionally) any land restrictions on sale are void (as we understand it).
      Any expert should be directed to report on specific scenarios, all from the perspective of MCA Homeowners as the owner. One should be a mid-level facility without higher end club buildings. This is why it would be important to be directed by MCA Homeowners and not the MCA (or TMCC) Board.

      Like

      1. mikeofall Avatar
        mikeofall

        Lot of options but none will cure the basic problem, huge facility to maintain, aging population, not the best school district, older houses, now bad reputation because noise about residents carrying the club, we are no longer golfers but we’re for years, when on the club board we tried everything possible. Sometimes good intentions can’t cure a sport that has lost a good part of its draw as the baby boomers age out of golf. It’s gotten very expensive and moms don’t want dad spending 7 hours on the weekend, verses time with soccer kids. Per my son in law dropped there club membership In Long island. Also a contract can be drawn up with new owners addressing your valid concerns

        Like

      2. Website Admin Avatar

        Interestingly, since 2020 demand for golf has been booming. Which makes TMCC’s lack of success even MORE alarming.

        From this article: https://www.ngf.org/golf-industry-research/#rounds-played
        There were a record 531 million rounds played in 2023, surpassing the previous high of 529 million set in 2021.
        Rounds are trending more than 10% ahead of the five-year, pre-pandemic average from 2015-19.

        Ultimately I think we agree that we desperately need to look at alternatives beyond the current one: subsidizing a private club with a long long history of non-success.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. inspiringdfa1f87109 Avatar
      inspiringdfa1f87109

      Selling is the best way to derive the appropriate value of the asset: Many people think that MCA can’t (and shouldn’t have to) manage an asset this large.

      Besides, it can’t hurt to get an estimate of the value. Most estimates are free, aren’t they?

      Like

      1. wastelandloudly754f253984 Avatar
        wastelandloudly754f253984

        Unfortunately, we have three golf courses at the Meadows. Why, because the original developer could sell properties on the golf course for a premium.

        Meanwhile, golf industry evolved and at this moment it is almost impossible to run three adjacent golf courses and still break even.

        One golf course must go. I suggest to sell the golf course land on the east side of Honore. The remaining golf courses on the west side shall be reconfigured including a creation of a proper driving range.

        Getting a consultant may be more convincing to some, but the bottom line is: we cannot have three golf courses at the Meadows.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. inspiringdfa1f87109 Avatar
        inspiringdfa1f87109

        It is a good point about the inability to run three adjacent golf courses profitably.

        Here is my earlier idea, which does not involve development:

        I hope the MCA will explore the possibility of starting a tree nursery on some of the land from the golf courses.
        The two of the largest expenses are already covered by existing infrastructure:
        Land purchase.
        Watering expense.
        In addition, this solution does not involve residential development, something which is bound to be unpopular.
        A quick google search says that tree nurseries can generate up to $80,000 net profit, per acre!

        Like

  3. dmalgranbf2f820247 Avatar
    dmalgranbf2f820247

    I totally agree that we should hire an independent expert. Also, why are we not planning to charge the pickleball players to play on the new courts for the entire 2025 year? The tennis players pay! Are we so flush with cash that they don’t have to pay a cent?? Donna Malgran

    Like

    1. Website Admin Avatar

      Sounds like you are saying that everyone using the sporting facilities should pay their own way and not be subsidized. We would have to agree. Tennis members are likely in a profitable part of TMCC and would be paying their own way. Now lets do golf.
      One guess is that MCA has delayed the fee to encourage use of the new courts (would look bad to build them and then they aren’t well utilized)

      Like

  4. Harold E Haynes Avatar
    Harold E Haynes

    We have no choice but look outside The Meadows to an unbiased expert. That’s the only way we have a chance of saving the MCA finacially and we the owner, larger losses than we have incurred so far. The MCA Board and the TMCC should not be the reviewing group as you stated. Their findings and recommendations should be published for all owners by the independent experts and presented at Town Hall Meeting by them to avoid having this report misrepresented. This will provide the transparency we demand and deserve. The actions taken by the MCA should be the choice of the individual property owners only. 1 vote per property. A decision of this magnitude on our MULTIMILLION DOLLAR asset is too big to be decided by any MCA Board. Secondly the cost of an unrelated independent expert recommendation would possibly be less than the current subsidy’s, including $600,000 renasaunce fees, than it is currently costing each individual MCA property owner annually. We all win.

    Like

    1. Website Admin Avatar

      It won’t cost anywhere near that amount. This report only cost the city of Bradenton $24,000 https://sarasotameadows.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/river_run_golf_links_evaluation_report.pdf

      Like

      1. Harold E Haynes Avatar
        Harold E Haynes

        That is pennies compared to the dollars we as property owners spend, via the MCA, to prop-up and financially subsidise the TMCC annually.

        Like

  5. sandy Sandy Gilbert Avatar
    sandy Sandy Gilbert

    You already have a benchmark to go by. The city used two different golf consultants for the conversion of Bobby Jones Park and learned that the number of rounds they get a year would not sustain three golf courses. They are now down to two. Get their data and see what you can learn from it. Semi-Private is the way to go.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Gretchen Cochran Avatar
    Gretchen Cochran

    Marilyn Maleckas said at the last study session that the newly formed committee consists of 3 groups: MCA board members, MCC board members and community volunteers. You don’t mention the latter. Did I hear that wrong?

    >

    Like

    1. Website Admin Avatar

      Yes she did say that. But like many things she says it wasn’t true. As we noted in our Notes from the Nov 14 meeting, she consistently referred to the committee members merely as “residents”. Only when she was repeatedly pressed for names by another Board member, she listed 4 MCA directors (including herself as usual) and 4 TMCC directors. This is consistent with what was specified in the current MCA/TMCC lease.

      Like

      1. Gretchen Cochran Avatar
        Gretchen Cochran

        Thanks for your response. Like you, I will press for the names of the community members.

        >

        Like

    2. lhaynesh2 Avatar

      No to both questions. Our Board President’s comments were made to make every-one think they were trying to address the problems professionally. This action is to avoid a real experts opinion. You notice that the Committee is comprised of 4 MCA Board Members and 4 TMCC Board Members that will give them a 66% voting advantage for their pre-planed agenda when voted upon. Why are the TMCC Board even involve in any decision that has become a financial issue to for the MCA because of the TMCC.

      Like

      1. Website Admin Avatar

        Because the MCA tries to frame the issue as: “How can we help fix TMCC’s situation” rather than “How can we do what is best for MCA Homeowners”. The Board President consistently refers to TMCC as “we” when talking to MCA Homeowners so it is clear where their interests lie.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. mitchw12 Avatar
    mitchw12

    These members want to be a private club then it should not require money from mca residents..

    tmcc with generous lease subsidies has had years to learn to make it work ..failed yet still want privileged use..

    golf at Bobby Jones is generally packed and at higher fees

    attitude for co-operation it seems is bankrupt also..

    goodwill nonexistent:

    when the practice nets were wrecked asked if residents could use driving range..even pay nominal fee..NO..ITS PRIVATE

    Putting green has been used by children golf camp most afternoons from 4 to dark..asked if residents could use putting green sometimes so not to interfere with kids..NO ITS PRIVATE GO THERE SOME OTHER TIME

    these people throughout the years have professional careers of extraordinary success..would they have allowed amateurs to run their businesses and careers ? Yet..(I’ve been here 11 years.) It.seems this has been what’s been done..

    everyone here has worked sacrificed shared burdens it’s an insult to be taken advantage of..talk about seniors being scammed ..this is one of them

    Like

    1. Website Admin Avatar

      Some TMCC members point at Bobby Jones being subsidized by the City: True. Not OK, and Bobby Jones isn’t private. It is public and ALL City residents get a significant discount (which isn’t great for its profitability either)
      Some TMCC members point at University Park being subsidized by the residents: True, but UniPark isn’t private. It’s semi-private. Same with Rosedale. And both of those communities are “higher end” than The Meadows.

      Like

      1. lhaynesh2 Avatar

        Say it again. All semi-private with residents getting a deep pocket discount when they use any and all of the facilities, none of which are private. They still have a golf club. The difference is these communities are smartly and intelligently operated by QUALITY, EXPERIENCED, PROVEN, PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT. These management companies are accountable to the total community not a small, low percentage of the community’s population Club. We are not. If it takes OUR MONEY to balance the books, we deserve control of our own investments and property. Our board has proven to not be good business management people.

        Like

  8. mitchw12 Avatar
    mitchw12

    the consensus..no matter the comparisons tmcc has failed..the mca has failed..

    some suggest from selfish to segregating the haves with the have not so much to outright fraud in knowing members don’t have to pay full amount even with generous lease subsidies with knowing before hand requests for residents money bailout won’t be refused..

    a professional assessment..presented independently direct to residents and..and..suggesting how residents..not tmcc or mca can decide what solutions work best

    Hold open info meetings for residents .then.to hold a vote conducted by assessment company to choose which proposal and company to implement that plan

    People here worked diligently and for most of us..sadly to be at the end of our lives ..deserve to be treated with the respect we earned

    Like

  9. […] We recognize that taking responsibility for ownership of the assets is a REALLY REALLY BIG DEAL. It would likely need additional committees, perhaps similar to the structure of TMCC’s current committees. But that is the path MCA must take to get us to a viable entity that is best for MCA Homeowners. We recognize that the MCA Board does not have the skills to figure this out, and that is why MCA should get independent professional advice. […]

    Like

  10. […] Homeowners have to find a better way to use our sports and dining complex assets. Hiring an independent golf industry expert, who reports their findings to MCA Homeowners is the best first step to identify and understand our […]

    Like

  11. […] to build homes on the golf holes: We have consistently advocated for keeping the golf courses by investigating other options to operate them at a lower cost (or no cost) to MCA Homeowners. We, and everyone we know, opposes building houses […]

    Like

  12. […] expert for analysis and insight on the options MCA has for its sports and dining complex.  We agree and strongly advocate for the Board to move ahead on hiring an expert without delay. The Board is in the process of putting together a new committee on this issue, and providing a […]

    Like

  13. almost6b96f02c10 Avatar
    almost6b96f02c10

    Hi, Have not received any news from you folks in quite awhile. Always appreciate the straight talk you provide. Please update my email address and send the latest. Hearing rumors of Benderson coming in. Thank you for all of your efforts. Mike Garvey 3441 Highlands Bridge Road

    Like

Leave a reply to Green Space & Property Values – Home | Sarasota Meadows Blog Cancel reply