Off Course -

Click here to learn about the Exploratory Committee

Housing units surrounded by manicured green spaces and golf courses supported by enthusiastic neighbors.  What could go wrong?  Golf communities flourished for decades, but now their economic viability may depend on how they're re purposed.  

by David Tobenkin

    Most Residents of Crystal Lakes Golf Villas on the Tam O'Shanter Golf Course in Deerfield Beach, Fla., support a plan to turn part of the 98-acre property into a cemetery.
    You read that correctly.
     If their support seems surprising, it's because the cemetery beats other options that developers have floated for the neglected property that closed years ago.  Suggestions have ranged from construction of 600 new homes and condos to a multi-school campus to a high-rise, and even a water theme park.  However, with noise and traffic (to continue reading this article, click on the pictures)

Article submitted by Kim DeFilippis

Golf Fees - as proposed by Sean Mandeville

Property owners should care enough about their community to accept and pay their dues and assessments. I agree with that statement, I also feel the board of directors should make every effort to raise/earn every penny of revenue they can with in and out of our community. To be a legitimate request for dues or assessment increase, these two factors must be joined at the hip. You must be able to tell the community we have done everything we can to raise every penny of revenue and we are still short. I do not believe the board can make that statement at this time but I hope they take the action necessary that would allow them to make that statement. TRUE, Property owners should care enough about their community to pay their dues and assessments. Just as true, The golf community should care enough about their community and golf course to pay reasonable and fair golf fee's. I do not believe that is the case. It has been said that if the golf fee's get raised people will stop playing so we will lose golf memberships, so people lean to not raise fee's. If you raise dues or assessment on property owners who say it is unfair and won't pay, that is a negative on the property owner and should be forced to pay. So what is really said?, we must use the dues/funds from our property owners to subsidize golf course memberships in order to keep them members of the golf course? If we raise the golf fees we may lose some members. we may also gain others. It may just happen that after a golfer quits this course he or she may realize Diamondhead is still the cheapest and most convenient for them to play and rejoin their friends at our course. There are also other ways to make a membership more beneficial to entice and annual membership. I don't think the correct answer is to have the rest of the community subsidize golf memberships. This is why I have concern over and why I say the golf memberships are out of line. First I will say the basic membership price we can not compare to Hot sprigs Village (HSV)due to the number of courses they have verses our one course. All other factors surrounding golf is a legitimate comparison . 1. RENTAL CARTS = we only charge $300 annually for unlimited use of rental carts. That fee is for a single or family membership. HSV charges $799 for a single and $1438 for a family. 2. PRIVATE OWNED CARTS = we DO NOT CHARGE for members to use their privately owned carts. HSV charges $663 annually or $9.70 per round to allow the use of private owned carts. 3. FAMILY MEMBERSHIP = HSV gives about a 25% discount on the 2nd membership to make a family membership. We give about a 69% discount on the 2nd membership. To bring our fees more in line with these figures but still cheaper then HSV fees, the following increases are suggested. 1. Annual rental cart fee = Current Individual membership of $300 to $700 ($99 cheaper then HSV) Current Family annual cart fee of the same $300 to $1260 ($178 cheaper then HSV) 2. Private owned carts = Current fee is $0 to $564 ($99 cheaper then HSV) 3. Family Membership = Current family membership fee of $1480 to $1977.50 providing the 25% discount on the 2nd membership rather then a 69% discount. In my opinion these fees are fair and cheaper then HSV. People may not want to pay them but they are a fair price. It is time for the property owners to step up to the plate and save this community and your property values by paying your dues and assessments. It is also time for the golf community to step up to the plate and pay the fair market value of their sport to help save this community. One does not work without the other. It must be fair across the board for everyone.

Sean Mandeville

DPOA Property Owner

A Golf Course perspective

DPOA Treasurer John Porter submitted an article relating to the financial advantage(s) to Diamondhead for maintaining a golf course. Effect of Golf Course on Residential Property [see post Town Meeting 10-17-13]

 

The following articles are submitted by Kim DeFilippis with a contrary view:

The golf housing bust « on: July 21, 2012, 05:46:00 PM » Wall Street Journal describes an ugly environment: Luxury golf communities have hit a rough patch. After years of aggressive golf course expansion, interest in golf declined just as the market for luxury homes plunged. Now, once-pricey real estate is available at below-par prices. Selling a lot for $1." Seems they could have written this article 4+ years ago. If they didn't already. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303703004577474563368632088.html?mod=djemLifeStyle_h#articleTabs%3Darticle ..... Until two recent studies however, scant information had been available concerning the value of a golf course location. Do and Grudnitski (1995) estimate that building a house on a golf course adds 7.6 percent to the property's sale price. They suggest that property owners are willing to pay this premium in exchange for enhanced views, greater privacy, and the benefits associated with lower population density. Asabere and Huffman (1996) find that while golf course frontage yields a 7 to 8 percent premium, the value of homes nearby is negatively affected. The authors suggest that the increased traffic and noise from golfers may depress housing values. The Coastal Business Journal Page 1 Volume 1, Number 1

Town Meeting ~ 10-17-13

All Board members were present as noted in the Agenda Meeting post.

President Suzzi Combs welcomed the Town members to tonight’s meeting.

Committee Reports

Finance Committee ~ Frank Pohlkamp:  Thanked John Porter and accountant Neal Graves for the good work they are doing.  “Most of you don’t realize how bad the financials were.  There have been a lot of changes in the office, a good group, the bottom line looks good at this point.”

An asset analysis is being planned.  We have a problem with the financials ‘for about a year’. The bottom line is ‘relatively accurate, but there are some errors in individual departments’.  ‘…Nothing seriously wrong.’  We should have ‘improved finances in the near future’.  Frank thanked the Board for approving the Finance Committee’s recommendation of having the department managers explain ‘variances’.  This ‘will help the managers learn how to live within their budget’. 

Beautification Committee – Gail Porter:  explained projects currently going on and fund raisers noted.  A special thanks was given to DH members: Sarah Lee, Barbara Burk, Elaine Peterson, Sue Pelt, & Susan Fikes for a donation of $800.00 which went toward the improvement of the Front Gate median.  Chris Chaich, Bill Milligan, Bill Donnelly, Carl Payne, Eddie Gilbreath, & John Porter donated their time to help move the big rocks into place.  Thank you! 

The committee is requesting a Banner to be placed on the Front Gate area and a recognition plaque be placed in the Club House.

 Gail was asked to send her report to this editor.  Please note fund raiser dates as indicated on the Calendar of Events.

Beautification Committee
Report by Gail Porter

Read more »