Hi All,
Andre has posed some interesting questions in a Comment Stream on the BLOG. Below we will explore them; no doubt there will be some valuable comments and responses. As always, do not shoot the messenger:
My responses will be in red.
Acronym of the day: QFR = Questions for Record!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave, I am trying to understand the process here.
-1) UCO is fully responsible for all operational cost required by WPRF to maintain the recreational activities of which the lakes and lagoons are part and parcel;
-
Yes, per the Millennium Amendment to the Long Term Lease, UCO/CV Unit Owners are responsible for all Operational costs of the Recreational Facility.
-
2) These operational costs are approved by the UCO Operations Committee which is chaired by the President of UCO;
-
Yes, essentially correct.
-
3) Once this approval is given to WPRF, Anita Cruz as the Manager, proceeds to spend that money and reports back to UCO as to the status of the account on a periodic basis;
-
Yes.
-
4) UCO would certainly not be allowed to go into the Hasting Clubhouse and do any type of physical changes to the building without the approval of the owner represented by WPRF;
-
Actually, if UCO wished to effect reasonable changes in the Hastings Clubhouse, and if appropriate approval process was followed and was obtained from the Delegate Assemble to provide required funding, then indeed we could make changes in the Hastings Clubhouse or, for that matter, the main Clubhouse. The maxim is simple; “you can have anything you want, as long as you pay for it”
-
Question
1: Under what authority is UCO authorized to restore the lakeshore without any approval from WPRF as stated by Mark Levy in his correspondence to me?
-
Again, It’s not a matter of approval; rather one of tacit concurrence. Why would WPRF refuse, if the Unit Owners must pay for the work? WPRF states that they have not approved the plan, but It is clear that they are permitting the project to proceed.
-
Question 2: What tender process is being followed by UCO to spend that kind of money which is held in a separate account by WPRF?
-
This sort of project is scoped by the Operations Committee and funded through the Operations Budget. This process is clearly described in the Millennium Amendment to the long term lease. Please, everyone reading this diatribe must read the document.
-
REF: http://oris.co.palm-beach.fl.us/or_web1/or_sch_1.asp
Select the Book/Page tab:
BOOK: 11660 PAGE: 1550. Enter as follows: 11660/1550
-
Consider attending the Operations Committee meetings, they are very interesting drama and they spend lots of our money.
-
Question 3: When does the Delegate Meeting (the Board) happens to approve these kind(s) of spending?
-
Don’t confuse the UCO budget process, approved yearly by the Delegate Assembly, with the WPRF/Operations Budget. Your monthly payment to WPRF consists of two main parts; one part is RENT the other part is MAINTENANCE. Do the arithmetic;
an average $100.00 per month across 7854 Units = $9,424,800.00.
Are we beginning to see the light? Again read the Millennium Amendment.
-
Question 4: If WPRF is only holding the money bag and the work is to be executed under UCO sole discretion and authority, why didn’t UCO collected the money directly from the owners through the UCO fees?
-
As noted throughout above, because it is an expense for Maintenance of the Recreational Facility per the Millennium Amendment.
-
Question 5; Is there more here to this issue than meets the eyes? Thank you Andre
-
Please be a bit more specific; and please do not shoot the messenger!
Dave Israel
