|
|
The
POA has repeated its Survey of residents’ attitudes that it conducted
previously in February, 2003, May, 2004, and most recently in December, 2005.
The
objective of these POA Surveys was to quantify and assess Village residents’
opinions about a variety of questions and issues of importance in our
community. The
POA Survey grew out of our disappointment with the annual Villages survey
conducted by the Central Districts and the developer.
The POA views this Villages survey as much too general, incomplete, and
lacking in essential details that can be measured on an annual basis.
This annual Villages survey ducks the hard issues that should be in the
evaluation. And, the resultant
stories in the Daily Sun seem like a general whitewash of often frivolous
issues. In
the POA Survey a total of 991 respondents in the three-month period from
October thru December, 2007, rated fifty (50) different questions or issues on
a numerical scale between 1 and 10. A
score of 10 represented the highest, best, most satisfying, or positive
rating; and a score of 1 represented the lowest, worst, least satisfying, or
negative rating. The
scores for all 50 questions were tabulate and averaged individually for only
the responses for that particular question.
Respondents were asked to only rate
subjects with which they were familiar and to put “NR” (No Response)
whenever they were unsure or had no familiarity with the subject. New
questions were added this year to get the total of 50, compared to 46 in the
previous POA Survey. The “–”
shown in the ratings below indicates that the question was not included in the
Survey for that year. Generally,
scores over 9.0 could be considered “excellent,” although no factors in
any of the four Surveys rated at 9.0 or above.
Scores can be judged in the following terms:
10.0 - 9.0
Excellent
8.9 - 6.0
Good
5.9 - 4.0
Poor 3.9
and Below
Disastrous The
991 Surveys returned this time compared to a total of 983 returned last time
In each year, the questionnaires were distributed to Villages residents
through home delivery to resident driveways in issues of the POA Bulletin.
The Bulletin is now distributed to most occupied homes in The Villages These
Survey responses are considered representative of the views of Villagers since
the questionnaires were distributed to Villagers without consideration as to
whether they were POA members, VHA members, or non-members of either
organization. This
year’s Survey may still be too small a sample to be statistically accurate.
However, it is large enough to be representative and informative about
the views of all Villagers. (See
the accompanying article in this Bulletin about the Survey sampling
rationale.) The
ratings are listed below for this year’s (12/07) and last year’s (12/05)
Surveys. The POA summary and
comments are shown immediately after each grouping.
Ratings
12/07
12/05 General
Questions
Common Landscaping
8.6
8.7
Villages Cleanliness
8.5
8.6
Entertainment on Squares
7.9
7.8
The
Overall Villages Safety
6.5
6.1
Traffic in The Villages
5.2
4.9
Traffic Round-About Circles
4.4
-
The Learning Center
7.7
7.3 Residents
rated common landscaping, Villages cleanliness, and entertainment on the
Squares in the high end of the “Good” range.
All three were roughly comparable to the results of the previous
Survey. The Villages
administrators should take pride in these favorable ratings.
Overall
safety in The Villages and the The
ratings for traffic in general and on the round-about circles remains in the
“Poor” category, but traffic in general showed minor improvement.
Villagers
are unhappy with the traffic situation, and the recent rapid growth of our
community is no excuse for this undesirable situation. With
our population now over 67,000, traffic improvements are needed soon –
otherwise, we face traffic gridlock when the population approaches 110,000 in
4-6 years. The
round-about circle situation is serious and dangerous and rated just above the
cutoff for the lower “Disastrous” category.
This is a serious and dangerous issue that needs to be addressed. The
Ratings
12/07
12/05 Fees
in The Villages
Monthly Amenity Fee
5.7 5.0
Annual CDD Assessments
-
4.5
Original Construction Bond
-
4.2 None
of these bread-and-butter money items are popular with residents and rate in
the “Poor” category. Perhaps
that should have been expected. But,
this points out that the developer and the Central District administrators do
a poor job of explaining the rationale for these charges.
It does take money to run this place.
But, residents don’t seem to understand the details or feel good
about the charges. The developer
and the administration should make an effort to better explain these details.
Ratings
12/07
12/05 Resident
Services
Emergency Fire Serv.
8.7 7.6
Emergency Health Serv.
8.8 8.1
Trash/Garbage Services
-
8.7
Water Utility Service
-
8.2
Neighborhood Watch
6.0 5.9 Emergency
Fire and Health services rated at the high end of the “Good” category and
showed nice improvements from the earlier Survey.
These were the highest ratings in the Survey this year.
Villagers should be proud of these results. Neighborhood
Watch services showed a slight improvement barely into the “Good”
category. This continuing low mark
may be a reaction to the administration’s decision to start charging for the
service, a very unpopular move with residents. The
Trash and Water Utility Service questions were not asked in this year’s
Survey but generally rated quite well last time.
Ratings
12/07
12/05 Property
Owners’ Associations
The POA in General
7.7 8.2
The POA Newsletter
7.7 8.3
The VHA in General
5.5 5.4
The VHA Newsletter
5.4 5.4 The
POA scored in the middle of the “Good” range with scores of 7.7.
These ratings are down slightly from the previous Survey.
Perhaps these high ratings reflect the POA’s efforts to speak up for
Residents’ Rights, such as the sinkhole repair on the Nancy Lopez golf
course, the vinyl siding workmanship situation, the aborted Activities Policy
that tried to restrict our Constitutional Rights of Freedom of Speech and
Assembly, support of the Straw Vote, opposition to the Sumter County Hospital
Tax, etc. The
VHA continued to rate in the “Poor” category with scores of 5.5 and 5.4. It
appears that many Villagers recognize that the VHA has a strong relationship
with the developer and often speaks for and supports his positions.
The VHA didn’t score lower because Villagers apparently acknowledge
that the organization has many worthwhile activities and services that are
beneficial to our community. Now,
if it just supported the POA concept of Residents’ Rights....
Ratings
12/07
12/05 TV,
Radio, Newspapers
Villages Radio Station
7.1 6.9
Villages TV Station
5.9 5.7
Daily Sun Newspaper
6.5 5.8
Daily Sun Objectivity
4.6 3.9
Reporter Newspaper
6.8
- The
ratings for the Villages Media group are generally not outstanding.
The
radio station scored in the middle of the “Good” category; the TV station
saw its rating continue in the “Poor” category.
Both the TV and the radio station need to better understand their
customers so as to be more responsive. The
TV station, especially, ought to investigate its low score to see what
remedies might be needed. The
Daily Sun newspaper in general improved to a “Good” rating of 6.5, up from
a “Poor” rating of 5.8 last year. For
objectivity of reporting, the Sun scored a “Poor” rating of 4.6, up from a
“Disastrous” rating of 3.9 last year.
This is still an embarrassing showing for the Daily Sun.
The Sun just doesn’t get it – that Villagers want better and more
objective reporting from their community newspaper.
This objectivity issue has been a black mark on the Sun’s credibility
record for many past Surveys. The
Daily Sun has an obligation to this community to do a fair and balanced job of
reporting the news. Fortunately,
Villagers see the biased and slanted stories for what they are. The
Reporter newspaper scored in the “Good” category.
Too bad the Reporter suspended publication recently. Ratings
12/07
12/05 Villages
Golf Program
Exec. Course Conditions
7.4 7.1
Champ. Course Conditions
7.7 7.7
Championship Greens Fees
5.6 4.8
Priority Golf Program
5.3 4.7
The Tee Time System
6.8
-
Ambassadors Exec Courses
7.8
-
Ambassadors Cham Courses
7.6
- Golf
scores generally showed minor improvements since the last Survey. Residents
seem basically happy with the Executive Golf program and give a rating this
year of 7.4 in the “Good” range and slightly improved from the previous
Survey. Championship
golf course conditions showed a rating in the middle of the “Good”
category. The ratings for greens
fees and the Priority program show improvements this year, but still only into
the “Poor” range. The
Tee-Time system and the Ambassadors show ratings solidly in the “Good”
category. The
golf program should be a shining star in the recreational programs of The
Villages. The “Poor” ratings
for the Priority program and the championship golf fees are troublesome and
should be carefully reviewed. The
developer should investigate these further to identify specific complaints and
what might be done to further improve the ratings for the next Survey.
Ratings
12/07
12/05 Local
Governments
Janet Tutt
6.0
-
Pete Wahl
4.7 4.0
Monica Andersen
5.1 4.0
Nick Xenos
5.3
-
John Rohan
5.7 4.6
Courtesy of Rec Dept Staff
8.0
-
The VCCDD
5.7 4.0
The SLCDD
5.8 4.2
Residential CDDs
6.0 4.8
City of This
category shows some improvements from the previous Survey, yet most ratings
are still in the disappointing “Poor” category.
It is sad to see our local governments and administrative officials
held in such low regard. Most of
these ratings are in the “Poor” category.
This is unacceptable. The
several better-scoring elements here include the new administrator of The
Villages, Ms. Janet Tutt, and the courtesy and helpfulness of the recreation
department staff. Both rated in
the “Good” category. Also
showing improvement into the “Good” category were the residential CDDs and
the governments in All
of these local governments and officials should attempt to improve their
images and raise these ratings. This
would be good public relations as well as good government.
This should be viewed as a mandatory requirement
and not something that “might” be worked on.
Ratings
12/07
12/05 Miscellaneous
Developer - Morse
5.2 4.0
Original Disclosure
5.1 3.9
Covenants/Restrictions
6.2
-
Home Warranty Performnce
6.2
-
Sales Dept Gets Tee Times
3.4
-
Resident Control Decisions
4.1
-
Contribute to Perf. Arts Ctr.
5.3
-
Radar to Catch Golf Spedrs
6.5
- This
is a miscellaneous category that we included to get comments and reactions
from residents on various topics. The
developer, Messrs. Gary and Mark Morse, faired about as well as the Central
Districts and the senior staff in the “Poor” category, although
improvements were shown. It is disappointing to see the developer held in such
low regard. The developer needs to
recognize that he has a public relations problem, in spite of the wonderful
community that he has created here in The Villages.
Perhaps this is due to the ever increasing and higher prices for
everything in The Villages. It
might also be due to the developer’s habit of doing various things in The
Villages without telling us about these actions beforehand.
The developer needs public relations help to overcome a poor image. People
rated the original disclosure information given to them at the closing of
their homes as “Poor,” which was a significant improvement from the
“Disastrous” categorization given previously, but still disappointing. The
developer and the Central District administrator need to take this to heart
and do a better job of providing information to residents, most notably at
closing. The
Covenants and Restrictions also scored at the bottom of the “Good”
category. Residents apparently
understand the value of the Covenants and Restrictions, but they do not
especially like them. The
performance of the Home Warranty department also scored at the bottom of the
“Good” category. We originally
thought the department would score lower after the controversy over the vinyl
siding issue. But, this mark still
leaves room for improvement, and this department should score much higher.
After all, the Home Warranty department should emphasize Customer
Service. Residents
gave the lowest score of the Survey to the developer’s practice of taking
available tee times on the executive golf courses for the use of his sales
department for sales prospects. The
3.4 rating here was clearly in the “Disastrous” category.
This appears to be a serious public relations problem for the developer.
Residents feel that our amenities are for residents. Also
scoring low in the “Poor” category was the Charter’s School’s use of
Villages’ facilities, like golf courses, swimming pools, tennis courts, etc.
Again, residents seem to feel that our amenities are for residents who
pay to maintain the facilities. On
these matters of the tee times and the Residents
had “Poor” ratings for the idea of having decision-making power in the hands
of residents and also for the idea of personal contributions to an independent
Performing Arts Center. However, the
POA feels that these two questions were poorly phrased and ambiguous as read.
Thus, we tended to discount these responses. Using
radar to catch speeding golf carts only got a low rating in the “Good”
category. Some responders thought it
would be good for safety reasons; others apparently thought the police had
better things to do. Summary
- The POA feels the Survey is a valuable tool used to gauge the thoughts and
opinions of Villagers. It will be a
periodic feature of the POA Bulletin. Hopefully,
it will identify issues that need to be addressed.
Ultimately, the hope is that the insights and suggestions provided here
will be used to make The Villages an even better place in which to live. In
addition to these rated factors, we provided room in the Survey form for
open-ended comments from respondents. We
were almost overwhelmed by the volume of written responses from this section.
We plan to reprint many of these comments verbatim in the Bulletin in the
coming months, probably over several issues. Overall, the POA is pleased with the results of this Survey. We are especially hopeful that when District Administration and the developer read these comments, they will try to address some of the issues and concerns identified here. Perhaps questions like these should be included in the annual survey conducted by District Administration. The POA would be happy to assist the District in preparing the questions.
This
article addresses the details and rationale for the sampling size and
procedure used in the Annual POA Resident Survey.
Specifically, this addresses the suitability of the 991-person sample
size. Surveys
like the Annual POA Resident Survey are often done with a very low
percentage sampling of the population. The
U. S. Census Bureau, for example, routinely does national surveys with
sample percentages in a range of 0.005% to 0.04%.
Based on an estimated Villages population of 67,000, this would
indicate a sample of no more than 27 people compared to the 991 used in the
Annual POA Resident Survey. In
another example, the Nielsen Media Research Company routinely studies
households in major metropolitan markets for TV viewing. Sample sizes are
usually about 800 homes in major city markets such as The
Annual POA Resident Survey this year used a sample of 991 out of a population
of about 67,000 for a sampling rate of 1.5%. That is a sufficient size when
compared to these other studies just mentioned. The
POA does not claim statistical accuracy – but, these results are
representative for the subject matter surveyed based on adequate size and
acceptable sampling techniques. Any suggestion that a larger sampling rate was
needed would not be accurate. Furthermore,
the population in The Villages is rather homogeneous in terms of age, income,
lifestyle, family situation, and other demographic factors.
This substantially reduces the need for a larger sample size.
And, everybody had an equal opportunity to vote. Also,
the questions in the Annual POA Resident Survey were not complex and required
a simple rating response to the questions. The survey would have been much
more complex if we had asked, for example, about TV viewing in the 8 p.m.
hour. Individual answers here
could easily have numbered more than 50 for each question and would have
required a much larger sample to be accurate. The Annual POA Resident Survey
was fairly simple, which indicated the suitability of a smaller sample size. In
summary, the Annual POA Resident Survey was not perfect and was not designed
to be statistically accurate. But,
it was representative of the thinking of Village residents. Whether
you liked the results or not, we hope that reporting this study will be
helpful for everybody in the dialogue about good points and bad points in our
community. Finally, the Bulletin article devoted space to a discussion of solutions to the problems. Rather than dwell on some of the really embarrassing results, the POA proposed some common sense solutions that might help to address the issues and make changes for the better. We hope that these suggestions are implemented by our Central Districts. If they are, we could make worthwhile progress on solving many of the issues noted.
The
POA has commented in many of the Bulletin issues over the past year that there
seems to be a lack of good quality control in the developer’s building
operations. We have commented
extensively about the Vinyl siding problem.
Now, we are seeing similar comments about sloppy workmanship in other
aspects of building construction here. Notice
the following comments about the plight of ten homeowners in the The
homeowner who wrote this commented that there were many more residents with
similar complaints and that their comments may also be documented in the
future. -
Four out of the ten homeowners had to have air conditioner coils replaced in
their units. -
Two had to have wall-to-wall carpeting replaced in all the rooms of their
homes. -
One had bathroom cabinets installed in their kitchen instead of kitchen
cabinets. -
Three replaced inferior GE washer and dryers due to loud sound and
dissatisfaction with performance. -
One found that 1/4" wallboard had been installed.
They had hot water coming out of the cold water faucet.
The garbage disposal unit was installed incorrectly. -
One had to have the posts in the dinning room replaced.
The exterior wall was not finished outside close to the roof and an
opening was left. The toilet in
the guest room had to be replaced. The
toilet backed up because construction debris was found in the main line and
the toilet backed up into the house (this happened to two homes).
When the warranty office was notified and a plumber was sent, he billed
the resident for his service, was very rude, and it took many phone calls to
have this taken care of. The
counter top in kitchen had to be replaced along with the ceiling in the master
bedroom. Tiles were chipped in the
bathroom. In the kitchen 52
chipped tiles were reported to the warranty office but the builder refused to
replace them and patched them instead. -
Another home had their bathroom shower re-tiled twice due to sloppy
workmanship. Their kitchen floor
had tiles installed and some were high and others were low, grout was painted
instead of being grouted properly, and it is now pealing.
When the repair people painted the tiles they left a mess and damaged a
kitchen cabinet and the door had to be replaced.
The lanai door has defects in it and has been looked at but the
warranty department refused to replace it. -
Another resident had large holes in their attic plugged due to workers
bringing lumber through this area for construction.
There was an opening in the peak of the garage roof that ran the full
length of garage. Painters were
very sloppy. -
A list was provided from another resident, as follows: REPLACED:
Rugs throughout home, front door, bathroom exhaust fan, two walls that were
crooked, fire hydrant, the outside electric transformer four times due to loud
humming, switch for garbage disposal was on the opposite wall. REPAIRED:
Bathroom caulking twice, vinyl siding, cracked cement in lanai, broken cement
driveway, dedicated plug (golf cart line hooked up to outside lamp), and main
water line. Drain under sink, roof shingles, ceiling rafters, cracked walls,
air conditioning coil replaced, French drain placed around house, storm drain
needs to be lowered because it cannot catch rain and causes flooding and it
still is not repaired for over a year. Shower
door and bathroom cabinet had to be repaired.
Walls in kitchen all concave. -
Another resident had to have all kitchen cabinets replaced; some were
installed upside down, and all counters had to be replaced.
A French drain had to be installed.
There were cracks in walls throughout house. -
French drains are still needed for most homes to solve flooding problems.
However, until residents complain, the warranty department will not
install them, according to one supervisor that installed a drain around a
home. He commented: “The
Villages is aware of this problem but will not fix it unless someone
complains.” One resident on Another
Home: There was no bracing in cutout hole, and the roof holes were not cut out
with hole saw but a hammer was used instead to cut the holes.
The kitchen cabinets were put in upside-down and the sides were cracked.
Counter tops had bubbles in them. A
sink had to be replaced due to stress lines. Screens were replaced in the lanai.
Furnace seals had to be replaced. Electrical
box in the garage was not secured. The
bathroom had to be re-caulked. There
were cracks in the ceiling. The
second bathroom had to have tile replaced. The
mirrors in the bathroom also had to be replaced.
Shower door molding had to be replaced. Note
to The Developer, Warranty Department Builder and Superintendents: How
would you feel if this was your new home? You
stressed the fact more than once that we did not need independent inspectors.
Boy were you wrong. We as
homeowners have gone through all the necessary channels in trying to resolve
these construction problems and have been treated in an unfair and rude manner. In
a recent article in the POA, “Open Letter to the Morse Family,” you were
thanked for making such a beautiful place for us to retire in.
I wish I could thank you also, but I cannot.
This has been such a stressful time for all of us that have lived here
for the past year that we did not have much time to enjoy the concept of an
ideal retirement community. In
summary, the residents feel that they bought homes in good faith and these
problems were overwhelming and took most of their first year of residence to be
fixed and in some cases the problems still exist. Some
residents were told by the builders that they did not need to have outside
inspectors come in and look at their homes.
As a group these residents did have their homes inspected and the cost to
them was $200.00 each. The residents
felt it was well worth it because, if they had not had the inspections, many of
these defects would not have been found. They
are left with the feeling that the Villages did not live up to their
commitments, and that the builders and the warranty department in many cases
treated them disrespectfully and in an unfair and unresponsive manner. In
all probability this may be last house these residents will invest in, and they
expected that it would be built properly without having these overwhelming
problems that took most of their time in The Villages to have corrected.
We
came here to take advantage of a life style that was promised to us, not to make
phone calls and wait for repairs that often had to be redone.
For most of us it has been and still continues to be very frustrating.
The residents feel that developer and the contractors should give us what
we paid for: the quality home we thought we were investing in.
The
next POA membership meeting will be on Tuesday, February 19, in the big room
(Lincoln) at the We
have changed meeting days (from the third Wednesday to the third Tuesday) in
order to have our meetings in the bigger room.
This should eliminate the “standing room only” situations we have
had in the past. Sumter
County speakers will be Tom Swain, Tax Collector, and Ronnie Hawkins, Property
Appraiser, discussing what to do now after Approval of the Property Tax
Proposal on January 29th. Please join us for this important meeting. Coffee and donuts afterward make for a nice social time. And, the discussion and opportunity to meet fellow Villagers add up to a thought-provoking and interesting evening. Jan
11:
I grow weary of reading about all the I
would like to inform residents of the absolutely horrid experience I endured
at the Emergency Room after receiving 2nd & 3rd degree burns.
I am sending a letter to The Village Daily Sun, but I really don't
think it will get published. The
waiting room was almost empty, but no one was at the desk or window. They
would not give anything for the pain until I filled out paper work (my husband
said he would do it, just help her). No, that wasn't good enough.
Then onto the woman who inputted on the computer (still no pain
medications) then into a room and told the doctor was busy and would see me
when she was finished. Still
nothing for the pain and by this time I am screaming in agony.
Finally in she comes and looks at my throat, eyes, ears but never at my
hands which by now feel as though they are on fire. She leaves and after 15 or
20 minutes someone comes in and proceeds to put on some salve which makes
everything burn more. Finally an
injection to try to relieve the pain. Well,
at that point, my husband says "we are out of here" and we head to They
could not identify the salve that was put on at The Villages and they
immediately removed it. Then they proceeded to cut away all the burnt skin,
knowing and understanding the pain I am in and acting in a caring and
professional manner. What is happening at The Villages Emergency Room? There are too many elderly folks living here to have to worry about not getting the correct treatment at the emergency room and dealing with people who are indifferent to your suffering. What a disappointment this was for me! This
month’s VHA column deals with Red Herrings. What,
you say, are Red Herrings? Red
Herring is a slang term used to describe a irrelevant argument used to divert
attention away from a more important issue. The
usual example is of a group of people debating an important issue when someone
throws a real Red Herring onto the table. All discussion stops as the groups
attention is diverted to and focused on the Red Herring. In
this example, the Red Herring is the irrelevant distraction from the main
topic of importance. The
VHA has a big Red Herring that it refers to as its Annual Spaghetti Dinner. Now,
let’s be clear: a homeowners organization should focus on homeowners issues
and concerns. Right? But,
the VHA has a Spaghetti Dinner. The
Spaghetti Dinner may have a noble purpose of raising scholarship funds, and we
do applaud the VHA for this effort. But,
it is a Red Herring in the sense that the VHA avoids comments on the important
resident issues while it serves up Spaghetti. For
example: Did
the VHA support the POA on its call for the developer to pay the $165,000
repair cost for the pond sinkhole on his Nancy Lopez golf course rather than
sticking residents with the bill? No!
Did
the VHA support the POA on its comment that the passed Activity Policy of our
Central Districts was an unconstitutional violation of the Resident Rights of
Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly?
No! Did
the VHA support the POA on its call for defeat of the Sumter County hospital
tax and the related giveaway of 20% of the tax off the top to the developer of
The Villages? No! Did
the VHA accept the POA’s invitation to its president for an open forum
discussion/debate about issues in The Villages as a way of informing residents
about these important issues? No! Did
the VHA support the POA on its support of the Straw Vote for residents north
of Hwy. 466 to take over decision-making for their own amenity programs?
No! Did
the VHA support the POA call for the developer to fix the vinyl siding
problems that his contractors caused through sloppy workmanship and poor
quality control? No! |
