Ravines Residents Hear from Two Potential Buyers April 24th 2008

El Guappo,

Thank You for the info on the meeting, it was very interesting to read.  We didn't go, didn't see the point other then curiosity. The HOA nor the Board has any legal standing over the Resort other then collecting dues or fighting further development. It really doesn't matter what someone claims they will do when as we've already learned the hard way what someone says they will do and what they actually do are very likely to be two different things.

We would never be in favor of a mandatory membership of any sort. All that amounts to is the owners incurring a financial obligation so that the resort owner can make a profit.  It is our opinion that if it's done right that isn't needed.

The other reason is that for all we know BoA already has a buyer (an inside sale perhaps) that we're not privy to and anyone approaching the Board or the Homeowners may never even get the chance to try. It happens all the time.  With the property expected to be returned to the Bank sometime next month hopefully we won't have to wait much longer for the road to recovery, or the next battle, whichever it turns out to be.

http://24.23.126.8/  Petition for Choice in Nov  7 Commissioners or 5

El Guappo I could not agree with you more and I honestly cannot belive the comments by marsha, she is so outspoken and yet did not even take the time to attend.

I am going to put my two cents in now.

We have to start comparing ourselves to the golf communities closest to us.  Those being Fleming Island, Eagle Harbor and Oak Leaf Plantation.  Each one of these communities have outstanding pool and tennis facilities provided to their residents AT A COST.  All three facilities have large pools with splash zones and family areas with tables and shelter.  Currently the home owner’s association’s fees for the three communities is approximately 1700-1900 dollars a year which includes usage of these amenities.   

Now let’s look at the two proposals from last night.  First, the plan from Tampa was to bring our community facilities up to the standards of our rival communities, these included a new pool with splash zones and family areas and he was requesting an additional 98 dollars a month to do so.  The gentlemen from Jacksonville were proposing to fix the current pool and tennis courts which are extremely outdated and wishes to charge an additional 63 dollars a month to reopen what we basically have.  Doing the math 98 dollars over 12 months is 1176 dollars and 63 over the same 12 months is 756 additional a year.  When adding in the our current homeowners fees, which include ZERO amenities, of 744 a year for single family home the plan from Tampa total annual fees are 1176 + 744 = 1920 and the amenities proposed and proven by them would rival that of the three other golf communities.  Taking the gentlemen from Jacksonville and adding up the cost 756 + 744 = 1500 a year for nothing more than we currently have now.  What was astonishing to me was the fact people last night actually were willing to accept the 63 dollar increase because is was the least amount of the two proposed increases.  DO THE MATH PEOPLE…  One developer has proven his case by resurrecting one fallen golf community, I believe he can do truly do the same for ours.   

I do not know about you but 1920 dollars a year for amenities that rival our competitors and having a gated community and our golf course back sounds like a sound investment in our future.  Consider that this fee is directly inline with these other communities. 

I am sorry to say this but if this community still thinks it is the best place in Middleburg to live then people have not ventured to far from the gate.  Rolling Hills and other new communties being built in and around Middleburg,  are going to become the places to move to in Middleburg / Green Cove Springs.  They are building the same kind of amenities the gentlemen from Tampa is proposing for our community and they will rival the Fleming Island, Eagle Harbor and Oak Leaf.  We have to change our mindset, we have to modernize, we have to compete with other golf course communities and provide, at a minimum, the same level of services and amenities that they do. If we don’t change how we view our community we our just going to end up being another neighborhood that use to have a golf course and our just waiting for the NEXT BEST THING to come along and HOPEFULLY rebuild the course.  

Seriously folks if we don’t upgrade our amenities to compete we might as well just close the guard shack and become just another neighborhood.  So step and accept the cost of living in modern golf course community. 

EG/SC

First let me say that I don't live in the Ravines, I live in EH so I really don't have a dog in this fight. However, I'd like to make a couple of statements concerning your math and 'facts' about the three communities you mentioned.

Actually there are two fees paid. One is a CDD debt reduction fee that ranges from about $1200 to $1700. This is a 25 year bond that will eventually be retired. This fee depends on where you live in EH. This is a fixed fee and will not change.

The second fee is an O&M (Operation and Maintenance) fee of about $500. Everyone in EH pays this. It is the 'true' cost of amenity usage. It also covers all common areas including the golf course. This fee is adjustable on an annual basis.

I am no 'expert' so I'm winging it just a little because I don't feel like doing your homework for you. If I am not completely mistaken the golf course in EH and the others belongs to the CDD. Any monies it generates goes to expenses and for O&M of all areas.

It does not 'make a profit' for some outside entity. In addition, we are a semi-private course and readily available to the outside world without the hindrance of a gate guard. We sell memberships to the course to anyone that has the money. In addition, people who do not live in EH can buy an annual membership to use the tennis courts and pools for approximately $1800 + tax.

As I said, I am no expert on PUDs/CDDs but it sounds to me like you both may want to do some deep research and homework before you throw your money in either one of those pots. It is a distinct possibility that the deck they are playing with is marked and stacked in their favor.

Just a word of caution from someone that has nothing to gain.

Mike Heemer http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice (5 or 7) in Nov.

El Guappo & skycaddy - WELL SAID.  To be against membership being included in HOA Dues is not keeping with the trend of what is now happening everywhere.  To object to a proposal such as the Tampa group's is to remain status quo and we might as well turn the golf course into a reserve and just boast that we live in a 'gated community'...Next, why not save some more money and get rid of 24 hour security?

I don't see a raise in monthly HOA dues (only) as a way to make the club owner profit.  We are gaining amenities that rival the surrounding communities. This also adds to the value of all the homes in this neighborhood.  You would think that those who have been so outspoken about the loss of value of their homes due to the closing of the club facilities would see that and move towards this solution. It also gives us a stake (and probably a voice) in what goes on with the club.

Making the club part of ownership of a home in this community is not a bad idea. Do I really want to pay another $100 per month to live here?  Not particularly. But my desire to make this community one that is right 'up there' with the surrounding communities far outweighs my desire to save a few dollars on dues and watch my home value stay flat.  Especially if I get a nice, new facility, even though I have a pool now, it would be nice for other aspects of the facility that were proposed.

I read somewhere before that someone thought the only way for the club to be profitable without community participation would be to host major PGA events and be open to the public.  The article went on to state that there would certainly be more traffic up Ravines Rd and Creek Hollow Ln where the residents have already complained about speeders.

You're not going to please everyone no matter what happens.  I guess my official vote is for a NEW & IMPROVED RAVINES GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB.  That is what I reflected on my survey.  

Speaking of surveys, I understand that out of 477 that were sent out, only 285 were returned despite the many reminders.  To me, that means that 192 people could care less what happens.  Only 105 of the 285 voted NO to mandatory membership.  If I was provided correct info, that means 74% of those who care enough to respond feel that some sort of membership fee is necessary to improve the quality of this neighborhood.  

The presentation by the Tampa group was great.  they certainly have all their ducks in a row.  I would feel comfortable with them or a group like them joining our community.  The other group, well, I was one of those who walked out as they dribbled on.

Skycaddy I'm sorry you feel my concern is not up to par with your own and with so much at stake that your second thought of your first entry in these blogs, to be critical. 

You listened to some people talk and heard alot of ideas and notions came from that and what came of it other then something to chew on?

There is a difference between being able to compete and wanting to be one of the multitude. There are some really wonderful golf course Communities in Clay County but if you get alot "of really wonderful golf course communities" all offering the same exact thing then do you truly compete?  Ravines (the landscape) is unique and there is no other course like it.  In an ideal vision I would rather see a new standard set then be content to merely "compete". 

Those two figures used...$63 or $98. Any idea who is going to collect that money? Probably the HOA will get saddled with it.  What does the HOA do when someone doesn't pay their dues, have you looked at the Clerk of Courts records to see how many liens get placed on people in here from not paying dues? So what happens when people don't pay their dues?  Does the resort owner sit and wait for his money or will that come out of the Associations bank account?    I wonder how much more we'll have to pay our Property Mgmt Company for this service? Also was anything said about a cap for these fees?  This year it costs you $98 a year, what if two years after that they want to raise it to $150 and if you don't pay they lien your home.

Call me crazy but anything that potentially threatens my home concerns me.

Is there any recourse for the Community if the new owner doesn't hold up his end of the bargain?

There is a big difference between a community created as a CDD and trying to convert one, are you familar with that at all? Do you have any idea of the cost to the Association to do all this? In a few years we're going to be looking at repaving these roads and that will be quite an expense so I think some significant caution should be exercised in all this.

What about the people who have no interest in the tennis courts or pool, should they have to pay for something they will never use?  There have been a couple of lawsuits about such things recently and it didn't go well for those trying to force fees on other people for things they would not use.

Have you thought about ANY of the above mention items?

I didn't move out here thinking it was "the place to be", we moved out here believing it to be a quiet and peaceful place to live .

My Husband has an MBA in Business and has the educational equivalent of a PhD, he's both started, saved or bailed out a few businesses in his day two of them being Airlines so it's not like we're sitting here with no information refusing to participate.  Have you ever written a business plan?  Fred can write them in his sleep.

I think it was really great of these people to come talk to the Homeowners because Lord knows they have no obligation to. I also think it's great that so many showed up interested in what is going on. However, once the bank finally gets the property back the residents will have NO SAY in who buys it, we're out of the loop.  The only people we believe are worth listening to and asking questions of are the ones that actually buy the place.  It doesn't matter what you were told last night, the reality could be something quite different, so yes, we didn't want to bother with it but maybe, just maybe I have more information then what you think I do.  Not about those two companies represented last night, but about what is and what isn't possible in general.   

http://24.23.126.8/ Sign the Petition for Choice in Nov, 7 Commissioners or 5

I am the person that spoke up in the second presentation and talked with DeBusk after the meeting. It was a passionate conversation however he was trying to explain that these presentations were offering what he offered years ago and quite frankly I have to agree with that point. No golf course without development and that is exactly what is being offered and will be offered forever! No one can sustain a golf course on play alone anymore. If anyone disagrees with that I will gladly listen to the reason for rebuttal. It is interesting to see that we have residents that are passionate about our community however at times it is not expressed at the right time or in the right forum. Hopefully these bloggers were the same people that were standing in front of the County Commissioners with my neighbors an I trying to save our golf course, pool and tennis courts.

I have been saying this all along, and again. I support Mr Debusk as the owner of the golf course, he was trying to buoy up a failing business model and the only way to keep it afloat was to infuse cash via sales- we were presented by one very professional man that said the same thing- why then did we not just do this years ago and today we would have nice homes paying dues and a golf course. No, instead we need to find value in our daily lives by saying we do not want 70 more cars going down Ravines Road. If we are going to get what we already had, which was a course, a pool and the tennis courts, DeBusk was willing to step up and offer more than that and not levy the Community( I will agree him and his son did not go about this in the best manner possible however that should not have any bearing on BUSINESS). I recall offerings of walkways, parks, pools, etc however I think the mistake he made was not putting it in writing. If you listened carefully to the bumbling idiot that spoke second at the meeting- I wished he was videotaped to let this other moron possible purchaser hear his representation, this person was offering us what we had and was graciously allowing us to only pay $63 a month. Thanks for letting us pay for you to clean up your course.

This is my opinion of the whole thing:

DeBusk mad the wrong people upset and this became a personal crusade. A few people, and I think most of their houses are now for sale on main roads, did not want o have additional traffic. The gentleman below is 100% correct- who cares about the Ravines when you can live in Oakleaf Plantation,etc. Our one biggest asset we will ever own and the largest investment we will ever make and for $100 a month we are willing to say NO, I do not get it. Another concern we better get ahead of is the Lake Asbury project- go look at the Clay County website- 5000 planned homes with a town center. Magnolia Point and Fleming are just as close- we could capture all that business. I played Eagle Landing on Friday and what a class operation that was. the course was beautiful, GPS in the carts, the clubhouse was magnificent- who thinks that is not worth it for a $100 a month.

I also think other people took this opportunity to use this scenario/issue/debacle as a personal political platform. Who is heavily involved with the Republican party in Clay County- mmm, let me see- perhaps the same people that pass around a petition at a community meeting for a Republican County Representative. How dare they use our meeting as a forum for their personal politic agenda, that was not acceptable. I think this needs to be addressed.

The problem with our Community is a few people have taken advantage of the fact that the majority is not or did not get involved- it is time for the majority to step up. We need to review the demographic of the Ravines, it is not the community it used to be. There is a mixture of different demographic segments and we all want similar things- some want to play golf, others want to use the pool, others want to play tennis however we all want to have a nice community and realize gains on our one largest asset/purchase we will ever make and make a better life for our families. A portion of us are raising kids, going to soccer games and attending ballet. Other are relaxing and enjoying their golden years. This is the demographic of Fleming, Eagle and Oakleaf and it all works- why can we not work??

Diverbrian,

The first thing I would like to address about your entry was the statement made about a Republican meeting being used to pass around a petition.  I think I know who you're referring to but many may not.  There are two different PACs with petitions floating around, the CTLAC and the CPVR. It would have been nice if you'd been more specific about just who it was so you don't give everyone else a bad rap.  I agree that it's bad form to piggyback another forum for such things but it probably wasn't the first nor will it be the last.  I can only say I am supporting the CTLACs petition, but I was not there for the exact reason you stated.

The second thing in your blog that bothered me is your calling names. Is it so hard to express an opinion without calling people "moron" or " bumbling idiot"?  El Guappo was able to give a review on that meeting and express himself without calling other people names.

The only two issues my Husband and I got involved in was to protest the development of the Par 3 for reasons of health and safety.  Building on top of a landfill is a risky if not downright dangerous move.  The expense necessary to have made that place safe for a home to sit on didn't promise a huge payoff so that plan came to a stop.  We got involved the last time because the integrity of the course was at stake, moving holes and changing it from a championship course into a mere run of the mill course was something we were against and would continue to be against.  There would never be any hope for any championship golf tournaments to ever be held here if the course were altered in that way. Tournaments bring profit.

Why is it that people always come into the blogs and challenge the validity of other peoples efforts or lack thereof by their own personal standards when you have no clue as to the reality of their lives?  This mindset of "If you don't do what I do then your opinion isn't as important as mine" doesn't have any positive effect on anything.  I've been in the blogs for over a year talking about the Ravines, should I label your contribution as moot because you're just now coming in here to say something?  Did you research all the blogs on the Ravines before commenting? Yes, I was at the last BCC meeting and the meeting for the PC prior to that. 

Have you taken a look at the housing market lately?  Do you believe this will turn around over night or you're just willing to see the value of your home drop further by cheaper construction and spec homes that could very well sit on the market for three years before selling?  In this market the builders are going to go to cheaper construction, less amenities, standard construction grade with few upgrades to increase their profit margins.  There are so many people in Oak Leaf with negative equity in their homes right now that the future of that s/d is in a precarious position. Most builders where they have a choice will not continue to build when supply exceeds demand, that is simple economics.  Look at the foreclosure rate in Eagle Harbor, it's increasing daily. If you look at the absorbtion rates and realize the glut of homes on the market you would see it's not a pretty picture. 

The Bankruptcy Trustee made a veiled threat that if further residential development was ever allowed then the former owner just might sue.  Residents and any potential buyers ought to remember that threat, it could be a very costly setup to forget.

There is no point in going on with the debate about it's viability without further development.  I didn't come to that belief on a whim but based upon due dilligence that was performed by several people qualified to form that opinion.  I still say it's not a matter of can it make a profit but how much profit is enough?  There are alot of people not content to make a living or make a profit but go for the big cheese, the big payoff and they don't care who they have to walk on to get it.  That's a mentality I don't think we need here, and as long as that is the mindset the set up is easy to see. 

No doubt like you said a great many people did not get involved, isn't it like that everywhere even in county politics?  Get everyone involved and maybe there would be a different result, and then again maybe there wouldn't be.  I'm not that clairvoyant, are you?

We haven't seen the worst of the housing market yet, and mandatory fees provide nothing more then assistance to a new owners debt service.  It's alot easier to get a loan if you can tell the lender that the homeowners will be assisting in paying off the debt service. If that was such a great idea why wasn't it a great idea five years ago?  You may be right that for many it's become personal and petty and that is a shame.  Those who live here who've made it that way are likely to make it the same way for a new owner unfortunately.  I do know that I've never called another resident names because they had a different opinion then my own and I have never gasped in disbelief over it either.  The lack of tolerance in this community has created some really bad Karma that we'll all be dealing with for many years to come. 

Time will tell.

Marsha, firstly I do apologize if you feel I was referring to anyone other than the speaker who tried to sell us the empeoror's clothing.  I never consider the opinion of anyone trivial or mute.  The person that came to talk to us was a bumbling moron and I would gladly tell it to his face. 

Your response is refreshing and I would love to debate this situation because people that are passionate move mountains.  As far as the moving of the par 3 hole it appears that your fight was for your individaul piece of the pie and that is fine because  that is your perogative.

I would be extremely interested to hear a full blown solution for the scenario we have.  you obviously live on a hole and have seen your property value decrease. 

In reference to the foreclosure situation- People that bought in communities when they could not afford it in the first place and did not do their homework on adjustable rate mortgages need to live with the consequences of their actions.  We all could have bought more house and made it work with "specialty" type mortgages however we were prudent and did our homework and bought based on our own economic factors and what we could afford.  To me this bail out business is not a good idea and everyone needs to get out of the way and allow the market to correct and work itself out. 

I was directly solicited to vote for Rutledge- I do not know what that was and do not agree with it being done.

As far as tournaments, very few do them anymore except the large courses because they are expensive and create large issues- this was even addressed by the first speaker and I tend to agree with him.

 Af far as profits- if people do not play the course and do not eat at the restuarant you do not make money. It costs over $200,000 a year just to maintain a course- maybe even more.  Why has this course failed so many times with so many owners?  I am sorry to say, in my opinion, that this is no longer a Championship course, it is a meadow and a lot of us will be very happy to have a run of the mill golf course right now and years ago as well. It beats nothing.

Thank you for your response and I appreciate the dialogue

DB,

See I thought that you were speaking about a whole other type of petition, so lets forget about that for the moment.

A portion of our back property line does indeed border the old Par 3. However we cannot see it, cannot walk to it through our property as it is so densely overgrown. All the property except right where the footprint of our home and driveway was deeded over to conservation when we combined the five lots into one. So far as the value of backing up to the Par 3, there is none, not for us.  I'm sorry that it is so hard for you to accept that we objected strictly for reasons of health and safety, and that our motives were anything other then concern for those who might have invested there.  Yes, we have lost value to our home, collectively we've all lost millions, but we still can't change what's already happened.

I am not at liberty to divulge business plans, they're worth money and are protected by confidentiality clauses, non compete clauses etc.  Sometimes they are developed for ones own purpose and then there are times when it's part of a consulting package. There are so many variables that come into play, both with past owners and what is possible in the future that discussion here in the blogs seems a little out of place anyway unless you are speaking in very general theories.   What has happened in the past cannot be changed, it can only serve to be an example, good or bad.

While a good many foreclosures out there are people who just bit off more then they could chew there is also an enormous amount of foreclosures going on that are the result of investors getting in over their heads. They go into a new s/d buy lots and homes at pre construction prices and then in a good market flip them out at completion for a nice profit.  Regulations regarding loans based upon their being "owner occupied" were fudged.  Now those that are not outright losing their properties are selling them cheap to sell them quick which further drives down the market.

I can't prove that the resort can survive without more residential development, anymore then those who are determined to have it can prove to you that it will make the resort anymore viable.  As a community we cannot force an owner to put money back into the place, improve it, maintain it or expand it outside of what the covenants or restrictions already regulate. 

Just like no one can prove which is better, 7 Commissioners or 5, but what cannot be disputed is that hard economic times are ahead and the county doesn't need to increase it's obligations with two more Commissioners when school budgets and public programs are getting the axe.

You can't control what they do with their profits. Today 60 homes will do it, next year it will need to be 120, and then the course is slowly reduced over time until it's all developed and with mandatory fees the owners have facilitated it.   

All we can really do is hope for the best, and there will be those who will finally cave in fear and those who will stay the course on what they believe. Whoever ends up with it, if they open the Club we'll be there....ALOT if the food is good and the service is adequate.  If the course is open we will patronize it, we always have.  We always contributed sponsorship for the Charity events that were held here even before our home was finished.  I don't personally golf but I've spent a small fortune in gift certificates for my Husband and friends.

Thank you for the dialogue as well, civilized conversation and mutual respect is never a waste of time. 

M,

 I am in total agreement of someone standing up for their individual propoerty rights and defending their piece if the pie- to me that is what this Nation is based on and property ownership is the American Dream.  I am an firm believer in standing up for your individual rights and needs in a democratic society.  Not enough people do so and do not eralize what a gift it is to be able to voice your opinion and state your point without consequences.

 To the below comments: "I'm sorry that it is so hard for you to accept that we objected strictly for reasons of health and safety, and that our motives were anything other then concern for those who might have invested there.  Yes, we have lost value to our home, collectively we've all lost millions, but we still can't change what's already happened." 

I do accept this reasoning and do not find it hard to accept in the least.  This to me is a lot more valid than more trafficas a reason to lose millions of dollars. I think we can change what happened by getting this back on track- the bank does not want this land.  Gett the owners to agree to a settlement of the issues, build some nice houses on Black Creek, get them to commit to two years dues as part of the purchase, upgrade the current condos, get rid of the pool and build a nice playground, build a new pool, upgrade the clubhouse AND THIS WILL NOT BE A COST TO THE HOMEOWNERS, in my opinion and if done right.  It is hard to argue with this logic UNLESS we are upset and hate Debusk and do not want him to net 4-5 million in the process.  Who cares how much he gets, look what we get as well.  a beutiful course, walking path on Ravines road, a playground/pool and tennis courts and aplayable golf course and all for 70 more cars on our roads.  If I am wrong here again I will gladly accept feedback and comment. 

Was your health and safety risk discussed with the owners at any time, what was the response?  Was the owner willing to take this under advisement and make changes? Were the changes acceptable to you?  If they were would you have then supported the plan that was being offered and rallied behind the porposal? If not, why not?

My understanding is that the Owner put in writing exactly what he was willing to do and was willing to listen to all offers and feedback however needed to do construction to make this a viable business- am I totally off base or am I looking at this from too niave a position?

Thanks for engaging me in dialogue and education of some of these deeper issues.

Brian,

I am not sure if you understand this (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Marsha), but there can't be new homes built on Black Creek in the Ravines.

For one, the land is zoned so that homes can't be built.  Period.

In addition, the land would have to be re-zoned, and the county won't even entertain the issue for another year.

Also, the bankruptcy trustee warned the county that by rezoning the land to allow for residential development, there would be a likely lawsuit.  Why?  Because the bankruptcy trustee couldn't liquidate the land for its maximum value (i.e. what a developer would pay for it) to satisfy the creditors (and himself, since he gets a cut of whatever he can recover).  Do you honestly think the county is going to risk that?

This has nothing to do with whether or not we want Debusk to make any money.  But face it, my friend: there will be NO residential development in the Ravines.  Period, end of discussion.  I'm not being rude or sarcastic, either...just stating the facts as I understand them.

DB,

The issue with the Par 3, I would have to dig back in my memory banks to give you a solid attempt to recreate the situation and where we came into play on it. If memory serves it was about to go in front of the BCC before we even knew it was happening. It was discussed with a few homeowners but I don't remember how many or who all them were. My Husband spoke at the meeting of the BCC. I recall a man coming here to the house who was with some Goverment Agency appearing to be clueless as to the fact that it is an old construction landfill.  After that it just all seemed to stop. Our first priority was the health and safety of those would be residents. But make no mistake about it we are opposed to any further residential development..of any sort.  The traffic issues exist without the course being open.  The speeding I see on Creek Hollow Ln even with the speed humps is still an everyday occurance that involves mostly residents.

We bought into a built out PUD and a protected Golf Course. We have a right to want it to stay that way. Any owner past or future has the right and the freedom to try and change that. If they win, then I live with it and continue to support the resort by patronizing it because at that point it will be "whats done is done".  Fortunately for us, this time around, we won.

There is no way for me to know whether or not due dilligence was performed when the place was last purchased.  I cannot answer whether it was ignorance of the facts or the perception that it was something that could be changed with enough pressure, including running it into the ground to prove a point.  It would all be speculation on my part and it's history that's a waste of time to speculate on, it just doesn't matter anymore.

All I can say about the former is that the built out pud and protected course existed when it was purchased, and when risks are taken in business they don't always pay off. 

Further residential development and mandatory fees give hope but no guarrantees that the resort will be improved and expanded.  It seems to me that hope is better placed in the hands of an owner who truly wants to operate a resort rather then profit from further residential development. 

We're just going to have to agree to disagree and still make the effort to be civil.   One of us will no doubt be dissapointed with whatever happens in the future. I do what I can, and then I accept what I cannot change.

JoninClay,

My understanding is that the land back there could be by legal description seperated from the Ravines and homes could be built, just not very many, it's a density issue and although there would be a profit, it would be miniscule compared to what was wanted.  Access to that area the way things stand at the moment would still be through the Ravines. There are other parcels back there owned by other people that would be worth alot more if this had been pulled off and at least from the viewpoint of development is a very profitable scenario.

At least something should begin to happen soon as soon as the Bank gets possession of the property again.  Unless it's an entity with the capital to invest it will sit awhile longer because there are too many hoops to jump through over the fee situation for a bank to see this place as a good risk at the moment.  That however is just a personal opinion.

http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice in Nov  7 Commissioners or 5.

That's why I defer to you, my friend: you're much more "in the know" than I am.  For that, I am thankful, since it allows me to stay informed as to what's happening in/to our neighborhood.  :)

I agree to disagree however it is this mentaility that will cause us to become obsolete and lose property value and NEVER have a course and resort worth owning.

"But make no mistake about it we are opposed to any further residential development..of any sort.  The traffic issues exist without the course being open.  The speeding I see on Creek Hollow Ln even with the speed humps is still an everyday occurance that involves mostly residents."

This is so minimal compared to a 25-30% drop in property value and no course. 

You cannot operate a course today without subsidies from homeowners or levies- it does not workanymore.  Eagle Harbor, Fleming Island, Eagle Landing.  they aer all testament to this.  I ask again, if you have a method of making a course work with food and play I will bak you with my own funds.

Here is a rudementary breakdown and I knwo my mathc is off however I know it is off to the low side:

1)  Maintenance per year         $250,000

2) Salaries for emaployees      $500,000

3) Clubhouse costs                 $150,000

Total                                      $900,000 a year in cost and we all know this is low.  If the average round is $55 and this is high and the avergae plate of food is $15 and we know this is high too this is 70 dollars per round as long as everyone eats.

That would requier 12,857 rounds of golf to get your bills paid.  At 365 days in the year that would require 35 people played your course EVERY SINGLE day of the year for you to get your bills paid.  If I wanted to make $50,000 a year in income from this venture above I would need to get an additional 714 rounds of golf and a plate of food from each person which is 2 more rounds a day. 

 We all know my numbers are way low and it takes at least double or triple that to runa course.  tell me again how we aer going to get someone to buy this to just own a course. 

If I told you your house that was worth $450k a year ago could possibly be worth $650k in two years would you be in favor of it then versus a value of $285k today.....Think about this one really carefully before letting me know it is about health and welfare of future residents and cars in the road.

Anyone reading this blog ask yourself the exact same question- will you tolerate a few cars for improved proporty value and a beautiful neighborhood or would you rather your nest egg that you have been cultivating all these years continue to drop in value.

 I bought in the Ravines 4 years ago before all this craziness and all I have done is big back a little bit of equity however I am in no rush to leave and have time.  If we get a course, great.  If not, okay.  Thare are some of us that are relying on this investment for retirement or income some time in the next 5-10 years, you best get an appraisal done and see how your investment is doing and will do.  Even if you own your home free and clear can you handle a 25% drop in the equity and not get it back for quite sometime, maybe 5 years or more.  Our property values will go up over time, that is what propoerty ownership is however do we all have the same amoutn of time to wait for it to happen- I DO NOT THINK SO!  Is it attractive to buy in the Ravines or Oakleaf?  If you live in a big house in the Ravines you are targeting a decent income cusotmer and there is no incentive for them to live in our Community when their peers are in the other real RESORT Communities playing gold on their own course.  Why would I buy your $400k+ house when i can get the same in Oakleaf or better with a course and amenities.

I think you may want to do some checking on your numbers. You make it sound like 12,857 is a big number. It isn't.

That course should be doing at least 50K rounds a year (and probably was). Especially with a resort attached.  

Mike Heemer http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice (5 or 7) in Nov.

DB,

Since "agree to disagree" morphed to "agree to disagree but" it's just time for me to end my participation in this thread because there is nothing further to gain by just debating this into perpetuity.

The primary note holder and subordinate lenders would have reviewed the loan to value ratio, when the property was Appraised there should/would have been an Income Approach Considered. If the data did not show the income to be worth the risk they would not have loaned the money. Since the course is legally protected a Commercial Appraiser could not rely on a value of anything other then what it was because it is at it's "highest and best use". In order for the highest and best use to be development it has criteria to meet, one being that it is legally permissable which it isn't.

I am well aware of the decrease in value, we've probably lost more on ours then anyone else has, but that isn't going to change my mind, sometimes it's not all about the money. My income depends on a thriving market but I also have to live here so I have been vocal about mismanaged growth.  It's all about the money when it comes to what I pay for with my taxes. I believe in smaller goverment, not more, that is also against the grain of what many connected to my profession believe.

My opinion is not a "mentality" , it's just an opinion that you cannot truly disprove anymore then I can disprove yours. Numbers and statistics can always be created to support a viewpoint, I have offered some basic standard business practices that have merit regardless of estimated numbers for which you left out a few items that contributed to the income.

 The difference is that you are trying to change my mind and I am not trying to change yours.  There is also a limit to what I am willing to discuss in a public forum so for me the subject at the moment has gone as far as I am interested in going. No doubt there will be other things to discuss in the future. 

 http://24.23.126.8/

Marsha,

 Thank you for engaging in profesional and adult dialogue. I am not attempting to change anyones' mind, just offering a different perspective.  Thank you again and it is always appreciated to have adiscussion with someone that cares- no matter what the requested outcome is we ALL want the same thing for our Community, we just want to get there in a different manner.

I believe 5 commissioners is plenty, there is no reason in my opinion to have 7. 

Have a nice day and /i wish you all the best of luck and hopefully things will right themself.

Finder,

 Thank you for getting involved and thank you for your response.  Please know i am a simple guy asking simple questions- I do not understand as much as Marsha and do nto want to, there are things I just do not understand and it is frustrating.

50,000 rounds a year- that is 137 rounds a day- how many cars is that on the streets every single day and we did not want an additional 70 cars from residents that would pay dues, help to have the course upgraded and upgrade the property value.  Why is it okay for 50,000 rounds of golf a year and not okay to have 70 more cars in/out on a daily basis.  I still am baffled because noone can answer this and this was the number one reason at the County meetings for shutting this down.

If people were staying at the resort it was even more cars. 

Again, thank you for creating dialogue and discussion surrounding our homes and future.