# Monarch 2016-19 4-Year Special Assessment/Refurbishment, etc [Update]



## happyhills (Jun 30, 2016)

We own a fixed week 41 at Marriott Monarch and love it.  We are considering buying a second week on the resale market.  I know they are going to resurface the outside of the buildings and redo the units in 2017-19 and we are paying a special assessment for the next 3 years.  We do love Monarch but I wonder if we should buy at another HHI resort.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 30, 2016)

I own 2 weeks at the Monarch, the first purchased a little over 20 years ago (week 29 unit 3846) and the second purchased 2 years ago (week 32 unit 3843).  Questions.. what season are you looking to purchase and are you looking to trade or use?


----------



## happyhills (Jun 30, 2016)

l0410z said:


> I own 2 weeks at the Monarch, the first purchased a little over 20 years ago (week 29 unit 3846) and the second purchased 2 years ago (week 32 unit 3843).  Questions.. what season are you looking to purchase and are you looking to trade or use?


We own week 41 that we bought 3 years ago on the resale market.  We love it and want to have two weeks.  We are looking at week 40 as a resale.  We use it and don't trade unless something comes up that we can't change.  I'm just worried about what they will find when they start opening the outside walls.


----------



## Robert D (Jul 1, 2016)

How much is the special assessment and why was it needed?  Special assessments are usually a sign of poor management.  Refurbs should be covered by replacement reserves.


----------



## l0410z (Jul 1, 2016)

Robert D said:


> How much is the special assessment and why was it needed?  Special assessments are usually a sign of poor management.  Refurbs should be covered by replacement reserves.



The HOA at the Monarch has always been on top of things.  This is coming from my 20 years of ownership.  They also have an owners website and a liaison that gives you access to them.  Communications has never been an issue.  

  The Monarch has the following challenges :
Age (30 years old)  and proximity to water (closest of any Marriott) requires work on the facade of the building.   They pointed out that until they get underneath, it may or may not require more work. 
Fire code changes require front door replacement at some point. 

The assessment is being stretched out over three years. .  Even with this our MF is about 1450 per year.


----------



## l0410z (Jul 1, 2016)

happyhills said:


> We own week 41 that we bought 3 years ago on the resale market.  We love it and want to have two weeks.  We are looking at week 40 as a resale.  We use it and don't trade unless something comes up that we can't change.  I'm just worried about what they will find when they start opening the outside walls.



A valid concern.  I would think you can get the week you want at a very reasonable price compared to other oceanfront properties.  Look at the price delta and that becomes the buffer on any unknown repairs.  I will assume you enjoy sea pines so based on that, the Grand Ocean is always a good choice.  The GO has an indoor pool.  I am guessing in October the outdoor pools and ocean is borderline week 40. If Ocean is not important and you enjoy golf, the Hertiage offers free rounds of golf.  If sea pines is not important than you have many more choices.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 1, 2016)

l0410z said:


> The HOA at the Monarch has always been on top of things.  This is coming from my 20 years of ownership.  They also have an owners website and a liaison that gives you access to them.  Communications has never been an issue.
> 
> The Monarch has the following challenges :
> Age (30 years old)  and proximity to water (closest of any Marriott) requires work on the facade of the building.   They pointed out that until they get underneath, it may or may not require more work.
> ...



But why didn't they anticipate this? It isn't like the resort hasn't been close to the water all these years. It isn't a surprise that this type of work would be needed. They should have been building the reserve to cover this for the last 20 years, not just three. Special assessments are a sign of a board not wanting to increase MFs when they really should be higher. Why should the owners now pay for something that all the owners over the last 30 years have been enjoying. I don't know how much the assessment is, but it seems that $5 a year over the last 30 years would have probably covered it.


----------



## bogey21 (Jul 1, 2016)

Back when we owned a large portfolio of TS Weeks Monarch was always our favorite.  We bought a Crown Suite Week resale at a great price; used it about 7 years while kids and kids friends were with us; then sold it (at a profit).  Yes, the MF was double that of the regular units but it was worth every penny.  Probably the best TS decision we ever made.  Love Monarch.

George


----------



## l0410z (Jul 1, 2016)

dioxide45 said:


> But why didn't they anticipate this? It isn't like the resort hasn't been close to the water all these years. It isn't a surprise that this type of work would be needed. They should have been building the reserve to cover this for the last 20 years, not just three. Special assessments are a sign of a board not wanting to increase MFs when they really should be higher. Why should the owners now pay for something that all the owners over the last 30 years have been enjoying. I don't know how much the assessment is, but it seems that $5 a year over the last 30 years would have probably covered it.



You can't account for everything years in advance.  Like our own health as we age unplanned stuff happens and you have to take from peter to pay paul.
For a number of years the reserve fee seemed over funded and people complained

  The monarch has an owners website  They list every MF from 1983 to 2016.  They have line items for Operating Fee, Reserve Fee, Prop Tax, Cleaning fee (stopped  in 1995) and one time special assessment  (3 in 33 years).  They do the math providing increase with and without assessment.  

This assessment is not one time but 150 a year for 3 years (450).   The total  assessments over the 33 year history is 1000 (including this one).   

I would bet you will not find a HOA as transparent in the Marriott system.   Would love to be proven wrong.  What other  Marriott Timeshare  has a owners website that has the MF information from day 1, areas you can post buy/sell/rent/trade information, layout of the property listing each unit number on it and a liaison (employee) to communicate to update the website.
Sorry...as far as I am concerned I believe they have done a good job.  Do not get me wrong, there are things I would like changed but in this area I can't find fault.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 1, 2016)

l0410z said:


> You can't account for everything years in advance.  Like our own health as we age unplanned stuff happens and you have to take from peter to pay paul.
> For a number of years the reserve fee seemed over funded and people complained
> 
> The monarch has an owners website  They list every MF from 1983 to 2016.  They have line items for Operating Fee, Reserve Fee, Prop Tax, Cleaning fee (stopped  in 1995) and one time special assessment  (3 in 33 years).  They do the math providing increase with and without assessment.
> ...



It's great that the Board is so transparent but still, that doesn't lessen the blow of a Special Assessment.  Hearing that people "complained" in the past that the "reserve fee seemed over funded," does that mean the Board caved to pressure then to reduce it so now current owners are having to pick up the slack?

In most cases "Special Assessments" are equally dreaded by owners despite there being two schools of thought when it comes to reserves: some folks want a healthy reserve with current and long-term repairs/improvements anticipated, some folks would rather a lower annual fee and major repairs/improvements paid for separately through an SA at the time of repair.  I'm squarely in the first camp and agree with Dioxide that the funding needed now by Monarch should have been anticipated (and if the Board capitulated to owner unrest about reserves in the past, maybe they should have instead explained better their anticipated spending concerns?)

{ETA} l0410z, I can't tell from your 2016 MF's post if this SA was included in the Reserve component of the annual bills.  Can you please share the details of when you were notified of the SA and when the three installments are due?  That info can be incorporated into your post in the MF thread so that anyone interested in Monarch will be aware.  Thanks!


----------



## l0410z (Jul 1, 2016)

SueDonJ said:


> I'm squarely in the first camp and agree with Dioxide that the funding needed now by Monarch should have been anticipated (and if the Board capitulated to owner unrest about reserves in the past, maybe they should have instead explained better their anticipated spending concerns?)



I respectively disagree with both you and Dioxide.  Again, asking with a  respectful intent a question I am curious about...have you or Dioxide sat on a timeshare HOA.  I have never sat on a timeshare board but I have set on boards  of organizations. You have members that are happy and unhappy.  The unhappy happen to be more vocal even if they are a much smaller group.  With week ownership that's a lot  voices.  You consider the HOA as having caved in.  Me, they gave their owners what they asked for. I do not mind an assessment every now and then and I am happy with my ownership.  Bottom line this is the measurement of how the board is doing.     


Every year that I go to the Monarch, I attend the owners meeting and listen to what is going on.  We hear the status of the reserve fund, what potential projects are coming up, new things being considered  and how the HOA is prioritizing them.    

In fairness to this subject, I own summer HHI and so the "value of the week" compared to MF needs to be considered.   Would love hear from other Monarch Owners.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 1, 2016)

l0410z said:


> I respectively disagree with both you and Dioxide.  Again, asking with a  respectful intent a question I am curious about...have you or Dioxide sat on a timeshare HOA.  I have never sat on a timeshare board but I have set on boards  of organizations. You have members that are happy and unhappy.  The unhappy happen to be more vocal even if they are a much smaller group.  With week ownership that's a lot  voices.  You consider the HOA as having caved in.  Me, they gave their owners what they asked for. I do not mind an assessment every now and then and I am happy with my ownership.  Bottom line this is the measurement of how the board is doing.
> 
> 
> Every year that I go to the Monarch, I attend the owners meeting and listen to what is going on.  We hear the status of the reserve fund, what potential projects are coming up, new things being considered  and how the HOA is prioritizing them.
> ...



Oh!  I didn't mean to be disrespectful to you and am sorry if that's how you took it.  It's perfectly fine to prefer one method of funding reserves over the other.

No, I haven't sat on a Board and wouldn't want to, knowing that no matter what you do there will be happy and unhappy owners.  At my resorts on HHI there are weekly owner meetings similar to what happens at Monarch and I agree with you that the information shared during those meetings goes a long way toward making owners feel as though their thoughts are carefully considered.  It seems that you and I definitely agree on how important Board/owner communication is, regardless of the different ways we want them to approach reserves at our owned resorts.


----------



## bazzap (Jul 1, 2016)

l0410z said:


> I respectively disagree with both you and Dioxide.  Again, asking with a  respectful intent a question I am curious about...have you or Dioxide sat on a timeshare HOA.  I have never sat on a timeshare board but I have set on boards  of organizations. You have members that are happy and unhappy.  The unhappy happen to be more vocal even if they are a much smaller group.  With week ownership that's a lot  voices.  You consider the HOA as having caved in.  Me, they gave their owners what they asked for. I do not mind an assessment every now and then and I am happy with my ownership.  Bottom line this is the measurement of how the board is doing.
> 
> 
> Every year that I go to the Monarch, I attend the owners meeting and listen to what is going on.  We hear the status of the reserve fund, what potential projects are coming up, new things being considered  and how the HOA is prioritizing them.
> ...


I definitely agree with SueDonJ and Dioxide.
With 8 weeks ownership, soon to be 10, I certainly don't look forward to the annual MF bill and associated increases.
However, I would far rather face this than unpredictable, potentially huge special assessment bills because of underfunded reserves.
I do sit on a timshare HOA and it can be a challenge ensuring the reserve fund is suitably balanced to be neither under or over funded, but at least trying to strike the right balance must be the best way forward.


----------



## l0410z (Jul 1, 2016)

SueDonJ said:


> Oh!  I didn't mean to be disrespectful to you and am sorry if that's how you took it.  It's perfectly fine to prefer one method of funding reserves over the other.
> 
> No, I haven't sat on a Board and wouldn't want to, knowing that no matter what you do there will be happy and unhappy owners.  At my resorts on HHI there are weekly owner meetings similar to what happens at Monarch and I agree with you that the information shared during those meetings goes a long way toward making owners feel as though their thoughts are carefully considered.  It seems that you and I definitely agree on how important Board/owner communication is, regardless of the different ways we want them to approach reserves at our owned resorts.



I didn't think you were being disrespectful.  I really wanted to know if you sat on an HOA before. I didn't want to come across as asking in a mean spirited way.  This is why I used respectful.  

I have been vocal on parking issues at the Monarch and putting two double beds in the second BR so I can't say I have no issues. I feel I get my money's worth for what I pay.    I am happy with the job they do.   

I do hope other Monarch  owners weigh in.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 1, 2016)

l0410z said:


> I didn't think you were being disrespectful.  I really wanted to know if you sat on an HOA before. I didn't want to come across as asking in a mean spirited way.  This is why I used respectful.
> 
> I have been vocal on parking issues at the Monarch and putting two double beds in the second BR so I can't say I have no issues. I feel I get my money's worth for what I pay.    I am happy with the job they do.
> 
> I do hope other Monarch  owners weigh in.



No harm, no foul.  I also hope others chime in.

I'm not sure if you saw the edit in my post above.  Looking at your MF's post it appears that the $150per/3years SA may have been included in the 2016 MF's, because the Reserves jumped from $304.75 in 2015 to $454.76 in 2016.  Can you confirm that the SA wasn't established as an additional fee this year and the next two, or if it has been, what the SA payment schedule is?  And, do you have any objection to this thread being linked to your 2016 MF's post?  Thanks!


----------



## l0410z (Jul 1, 2016)

SueDonJ said:


> No harm, no foul.  I also hope others chime in.
> 
> I'm not sure if you saw the edit in my post above.  Looking at your MF's post it appears that the $150per/3years SA may have been included in the 2016 MF's, because the Reserves jumped from $304.75 in 2015 to $454.76 in 2016.  Can you confirm that the SA wasn't established as an additional fee this year and the next two, or if it has been, what the SA payment schedule is?  And, do you have any objection to this thread being linked to your 2016 MF's post?  Thanks!



It is contained in the 2016 MF fee as the increase in the reserve fund you pointed out.  So  you  are correct.  When the HOA includes this years MF in their running chart of MFs through 1983, it will be listed separately as a icharge outside of the reserve fund.  This way it captures  it as an assessment   The 150 increase will be in the MF through 2018.    The linkage to the MF  is fine.


----------



## Fasttr (Jul 1, 2016)

dioxide45 said:


> But why didn't they anticipate this? It isn't like the resort hasn't been close to the water all these years. It isn't a surprise that this type of work would be needed. They should have been building the reserve to cover this for the last 20 years, not just three. Special assessments are a sign of a board not wanting to increase MFs when they really should be higher. Why should the owners now pay for something that all the owners over the last 30 years have been enjoying. I don't know how much the assessment is, but it seems that $5 a year over the last 30 years would have probably covered it.





l0410z said:


> You can't account for everything years in advance.  Like our own health as we age unplanned stuff happens and you have to take from peter to pay paul.
> For a number of years the reserve fee seemed over funded and people complained



I'm with dioxide45 and others in his camp on this one.  As an example, if an owner had just purchased a resale week here a year ago, and now has this special assessment hitting to make up for prior owners essentially underpaying for this maintenance that surely should have been known about and planned for, that new owner would surely be justified in being more than a bit upset.  This is the very reason there IS a reserve that gets paid into in the first place.


----------



## dioxide45 (Jul 1, 2016)

Even unpredictable events should be planned for. A hurricane is a very unpredictable event. However, resorts that could possibly be faced with one should be planning for it. If a hurricane were to hit a property, there should be no need for a special assessment. The reserve funds should be funding enough money to cover the deducible on the insurance policy that would cover such a catastrophic loss. The deducible could be a million or more.

Surely a refurbishment of the units from 2017-19 is something that the board should be planning for years in advance. Isn't the resort on a 5/10 year refurbishment cycle? Resurfacing is something that should be a surprise. Buildings need new roofs, new paint and at times new siding.

The board appears to have chosen a different way to fund these kinds of repairs. I certainly don't agree with the method they chose. Just because the owners complain that the reserves are too high, doesn't mean that the board should listen to them. IMO, they made a bad choice here.

If I were an owner here, why should I have to pay $450 when some of that should have been paid by bogey21. Who by my counts is up to 40 when it comes to talking about the crown suite he owned and sold years ago.


----------



## bogey21 (Jul 2, 2016)

dioxide45 said:


> Even unpredictable events should be planned for. A hurricane is a very unpredictable event. However, resorts that could possibly be faced with one should be planning for it. *If a hurricane were to hit a property, there should be no need for a special assessment.* The reserve funds should be funding enough money to cover the deducible on the insurance policy that would cover such a catastrophic loss. The deducible could be a million or more..



Agree.  I owned at two Resorts crushed by hurricanes (Chateau LeGrande in Biloxi and Peregrine near Galveston).  Both are HOA Controlled Independents.  I did lose usage for a year at both while massive reconstruction was completed.  Both ended up better than before they were hit by the hurricanes.

Geoge


----------



## l0410z (Jul 3, 2016)

Fasttr said:


> I'm with dioxide45 and others in his camp on this one.  As an example, if an owner had just purchased a resale week here a year ago, and now has this special assessment hitting to make up for prior owners essentially underpaying for this maintenance that surely should have been known about and planned for, that new owner would surely be justified in being more than a bit upset.  This is the very reason there IS a reserve that gets paid into in the first place.



Specifically from the HOA 
It is  always the Board's intention to adhere to its fiduciary responsibility of managing the ownership's money carefully and curtailing increases to the annual maintenance fee, while at the same time maintaining owners' expectations of the resort. In order to do so, the Board was forced to choose between a substantial one-time 'special Assessment" in 2018 or an increase in the reserve fee by a fixed amount over a four-year period, in order to fund the upcoming work. 'We chose the latter to be a more acceptable approach

Now back on point.  I do not have that crystal ball that gives advance warning of what will go, when it will  and how much it will cost. I do not expect my HOA to have one.    If something big goes before it is suppose to and it costs a lot of money, you have a short fall.  

As far as a recent owner having to foot the bill on underfunding is no more an issue than a the person who sold to an over funded situation.  I do know someone who purchased at the Monarch two years ago that did so at a price of 50% less than I did my resale 20 years ago.  My resale 20 years ago was purchased 50% less than new.  In the 33 years the Monarch is open they has 1100 of special assessments including the total of the last one.  All of it has been in my 20 years of ownership.  I have no problem with that.   I do not feel the least bit sympathetic  to the person who purchased two years ago and neither should anyone else.  They got a steal even with the assessment. BTW, the person was me.      

An SA may or may not be the fault of the HOA.  Every situation is different.    I am sure that there are situations where an assessment should have been avoided.  The owners get to decide that, not me as an outside looking in.  

I just purchased an EOY 2 BR at the Grand Chateau.  I did look at the increases the last few years along with details of the reserve fund and the useful life of the items in it along with were the items are in the useful life.  I looked to see if the builder was supplementing the MF.  I tired to do my due diligence because like diamonds, MF's are forever.    I paid under 1800 and if there is an assessment, I can understand many people being upset if it was underserved.  Paying 1800 I did not earn the right to be one of them.


----------



## Calcio (Jul 6, 2016)

l0410z said:


> I didn't think you were being disrespectful.  I really wanted to know if you sat on an HOA before. I didn't want to come across as asking in a mean spirited way.  This is why I used respectful.
> 
> I have been vocal on parking issues at the Monarch and putting two double beds in the second BR so I can't say I have no issues. I feel I get my money's worth for what I pay.    I am happy with the job they do.
> 
> I do hope other Monarch  owners weigh in.



I'm with you on this one.


----------



## bogey21 (Jul 6, 2016)

bogey21 said:


> Agree.  I owned at two Resorts crushed by hurricanes (Chateau LeGrande in Biloxi and Peregrine near Galveston).  Both are HOA Controlled Independents.  I did lose usage for a year at both while massive reconstruction was completed.  Both ended up better than before they were hit by the hurricanes.



Forgot to say that in neither case was there a Special Assessment.

George


----------



## David10225 (Jul 8, 2016)

I'm also considering buying a second week on HHI.  We have a summer week at Barony and would like to get a second week somewhere in Sea Pines.  I've always heard good things about Monarch.  I wonder if this would be a good time to buy since people may be thinking about selling due to the assessment?

PS - I know you probably think we are crazy but we are thinking of moving to Bluffton in 2 years - why would I buy where I live...well the kids and grandchildren will have a place to stay!


----------



## l0410z (Jul 8, 2016)

David10225 said:


> I'm also considering buying a second week on HHI.  We have a summer week at Barony and would like to get a second week somewhere in Sea Pines.  I've always heard good things about Monarch.  I wonder if this would be a good time to buy since people may be thinking about selling due to the assessment?
> 
> PS - I know you probably think we are crazy but we are thinking of moving to Bluffton in 2 years - why would I buy where I live...well the kids and grandchildren will have a place to stay!



I looked at the Monarch Owners website and I saw a week 32 (third week August) and 4 week 33 (Last week August) for sale .  There are no other Summer weeks.   The website is Monarchowners.com    Anyone can get access.   

Personally, I do not think people in the summer are going to sell because the MF went up 150 dollars for the next few years.   I do believe the Monarch will be cheaper than the other ocean fronts because of age and  sleeps only 6.


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Jul 9, 2016)

The problem with trying to secure a summer week is you're going to pay a premium. I'd consider a fall season week. That will be considerably cheaper and if history continues and there is a good chance it will, you can trade back into a summer week.  We own weeks 39 and 40 at the Monarch and we've traded back into the Monarch for week 30 2 years running.  And in a few years the fall will be our preferred time to travel to HHI as it is the best time of year to go anyway.


----------



## l0410z (Jul 11, 2016)

MOXJO7282 said:


> The problem with trying to secure a summer week is you're going to pay a premium. I'd consider a fall season week. That will be considerably cheaper and if history continues and there is a good chance it will, you can trade back into a summer week.  We own weeks 39 and 40 at the Monarch and we've traded back into the Monarch for week 30 2 years running.  And in a few years the fall will be our preferred time to travel to HHI as it is the best time of year to go anyway.



Never new you could trade into week 30 with a none summer week.  Good for you.


----------



## NKN (Oct 15, 2016)

*Marriotts Monarch - Scheduled Refurbishment*

We knew they were going to be re-doing the 30 year old buildings in 2017, but never thought of this.

Had interesting voice message from mgmt.  from early Jan to sometime in March 2017, all Azalea and Camellia units will be closed off and not usable.  They were calling us because we own a week in that time frame and may need to make other plans.    

Assuming the other sections will have same issue later in year.
We actually space-banked our weeks a year ago.


Nkn:annoyed:


----------



## TheTimeTraveler (Oct 15, 2016)

NKN said:


> We knew they were going to be re-doing the 30 year old buildings in 2017, but never thought of this.
> 
> Had interesting voice message from mgmt.  from early Jan to sometime in March 2017, all Azalea and Camellia units will be closed off and not usable.  They were calling us because we own a week in that time frame and may need to make other plans.
> 
> ...






I actually don't blame you for being annoyed, especially if you are just receiving notice of this now as this doesn't seem to be very much notice.

Hopefully you haven't purchased any airline tickets yet.




.


----------



## riverdees05 (Oct 15, 2016)

How did Monarch handle the hurricane?


----------



## NKN (Oct 15, 2016)

Monarch did mostly okay with the storm.   The Monarch Owners website has a good recap there and that is where they will post the updates.

Nkn


----------



## l0410z (Oct 16, 2016)

I posted this on Monarch and HHI Facebook page last week.  

Feedback on the Monarch... the person who sent it did not give me permission to use the name so I will only quote
"Overall Monarch fared well. She’s built like a tank. 
But lots of trees down, water intrusion units, dune erosion, walls and ceilings have been opened up at the desk for remediation efforts. Harbour Club and Heritage Club did not hold up as well "


I do not remember a refurbishment scheduled in 2017.  I am curious what is going on and is it related to water damages from the hurricane.


----------



## bogey21 (Oct 16, 2016)

TheTimeTraveler said:


> I actually don't blame you for being annoyed, especially if you are just receiving notice of this now as this doesn't seem to be very much notice.



This is for March when I guess the Resort won't be full.  Won't they just switch users into one of the other buildings?

George


----------



## dioxide45 (Oct 16, 2016)

l0410z said:


> I do not remember a refurbishment scheduled in 2017.  I am curious what is going on and is it related to water damages from the hurricane.



The refurbishment was planned and not related to water damage. You can find some discussion in [_Link disabled_]. The refurbishment also came with a three year special assessment.


----------



## l0410z (Oct 17, 2016)

dioxide45 said:


> The refurbishment was planned and not related to water damage. You can find some discussion in [Link disabled]. The refurbishment also came with a three year special assessment.



I consider refurbishment as updating the interior.  By my definition, the work discussed in the thread was all exterior world.  There is exterior work required..exterior doors first followed by windows and patio doors.  I attended owners meetings the last two years but did not pay close enough attention to remember how much of that is covered by the added temporary MF increase. I would remember if any planned work required closing 50 percent of the resort....2 of 4 building.  The reason will become clear at some point.


----------



## bogey21 (Oct 17, 2016)

Monarch was our favorite Resort (we owned a Crown Suite) and was our last Marriott to go when we divested a number of years ago.  Seems to me only prudent to do work on the exterior as Resort is what 35 years old?

George


----------



## dioxide45 (Oct 17, 2016)

bogey21 said:


> Back when we owned a large portfolio of TS Weeks Monarch was always our favorite.  We bought a Crown Suite Week resale at a great price; used it about 7 years while kids and kids friends were with us; then sold it (at a profit).  Yes, the MF was double that of the regular units but it was worth every penny.  Probably the best TS decision we ever made.  Love Monarch.
> 
> George





bogey21 said:


> Monarch was our favorite Resort (we owned a Crown Suite) and was our last Marriott to go when we divested a number of years ago.  Seems to me only prudent to do work on the exterior as Resort is what 35 years old?
> 
> George



Twice in one thread . I think that is a first!


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 17, 2016)

dioxide45 said:


> Twice in one thread . I think that is a first!



To be fair, it was once in each thread until the two threads were merged.  Bogey, you never disappoint.


----------



## sparty (Oct 17, 2016)

Interesting about the beginning of this merged thread.

I met the GM of Harbour Club, Heritage, and Monarch late summer of this year.  She spoke of the exteriors needing some work and eluded to high costs like taking down all the rails to do the work, but  I don't remember any discussions of special assessments.  $150 per year seems relatively small to me, maybe that is why. 

She did talk about the "older age" of Monarch compared to other resorts, the need for some greater repairs, and they were seeing 3rd or 4th generation of family owners at Monarch.

Some other things, aside for explaining MF pricing,  that I found interesting from the discussion, but maybe common knowledge here

1) She was going to join the CSA board in Sea Pines.  She wanted to advocate for Marriott Sea Pines owners to have free or discounted trolley rides as one of her issues.

2) Parking at all Sea Pine resorts were becoming more and more an issue.  I thought she said the barriers were relative new at Monarch and they needed to take similar action at harbour club and heritage.

3) Harbour club - the desk closes at 10 PM I believe and they wanted to increase MF's to try to staff and have it open 24 hours for check-in.  To me it might be a good way to save money - if you have 4 resorts in Sea Pines alone - do all 4 need 24 hour check-in?

4) Many complaints about having to buy a Sea Pines pass to check-in.  She was advocating for a print-at-home and bring-with type of operation so you didn't pay and could drive right in.  She seemed pretty confident this was going to happen in 2017 I believe.


----------



## bogey21 (Oct 18, 2016)

happyhills said:


> We own week 41 that we bought 3 years ago on the resale market.  We love it and want to have two weeks.  We are looking at week 40 as a resale.......I'm just worried about what they will find when they start opening the outside walls.



When you find a Week 40 for sale chances are the Seller will be apprehensive about the upcoming Special Assessment.  Use their apprehension to your advantage and substantially reduce your offer by an amount 2 or 3 times (or even more than) the anticipated amount of the Special Assessment.  Tell the Seller you are willing to assume the uncertainty regarding the Special Assessment in exchange for a lower price.

George


----------



## l0410z (Oct 18, 2016)

bogey21 said:


> When you find a Week 40 for sale chances are the Seller will be apprehensive about the upcoming Special Assessment.  Use their apprehension to your advantage and substantially reduce your offer by an amount 2 or 3 times (or even more than) the anticipated amount of the Special Assessment.  Tell the Seller you are willing to assume the uncertainty regarding the Special Assessment in exchange for a lower price.
> 
> George



Pre hurricane Matthew.... The Special Assessment of 600 per unit was required to add to the reserve fund for the outstanding work that needed to get done. The HOA decided to break this up into 4 payments of 150 each, This was instead of a one time charge.  

There is no other special assessment that has been announced or suggested.

Post Hurricane Matthew ... Any financial impact is yet unknown.  Most of the timeshares carry high deductibles.  This will be the same for any of the timeshares on HHI.  I will say based on my experience with Sandy, I am sure near zero  interest loans and money from FEMA will be available for HHI.  I am not sure how timeshares play in this


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 18, 2016)

l0410z said:


> Pre hurricane Matthew.... The Special Assessment of 600 per unit was required to add to the reserve fund for the outstanding work that needed to get done. The HOA decided to break this up into 4 payments of 150 each, This was instead of a one time charge.
> 
> There is no other special assessment that has been announced or suggested.
> 
> Post Hurricane Matthew ... Any financial impact is yet unknown.  Most of the timeshares carry high deductibles.  This will be the same for any of the timeshares on HHI.  I will say based on my experience with Sandy, I am sure near zero  interest loans and money from FEMA will be available for HHI.  I am not sure how timeshares play in this



In this one and your other posts in this thread you say that the ongoing (pre-Hurricane Matthew) Monarch Special Assessment total is $450/Week, $150 in each of the three years spanning 2016, 2017 and 2018.  Now you're saying it's $600 total over four years.  Can you please confirm which is correct so that the information will be correct in the MF threads that get put into FAQs?  Thanks!

As far as any future Special Assessments that will have to be levied due to Hurricane Matthew damage, I agree with you that it's too soon to know if any of us HHI owners are going to face those.  I disagree with you, though, that we're all facing the same risk.  It stands to reason that the older resorts on the island that are already looking at building exterior updates/repairs may be more susceptible to water intrusion within the exterior walls (as opposed to water intrusion at doorways/windows that probably affected at least some units at all of the resorts.)  I think the condition of the exterior walls at Monarch was one of happyhills' concerns long before the storm.


----------



## l0410z (Oct 18, 2016)

SueDonJ said:


> In this one and your other posts in this thread you say that the ongoing (pre-Hurricane Matthew) Monarch Special Assessment total is $450/Week, $150 in each of the three years spanning 2016, 2017 and 2018.  Now you're saying it's $600 total over four years.  Can you please confirm which is correct so that the information will be correct in the MF threads that get put into FAQs?  Thanks!
> 
> As far as any future Special Assessments that will have to be levied due to Hurricane Matthew damage, I agree with you that it's too soon to know if any of us HHI owners are going to face those.  I disagree with you, though, that we're all facing the same risk.  It stands to reason that the older resorts on the island that are already looking at building exterior updates/repairs may be more susceptible to water intrusion within the exterior walls (as opposed to water intrusion at doorways/windows that probably affected at least some units at all of the resorts.)  I think the condition of the exterior walls at Monarch was one of happyhills' concerns long before the storm.



Logic would suggest you are correct on older vs newer resorts. No question that the building facade was one of the big ticket items to be fixed in 2018 timeframe specific to the Monarch. The Monarch buildings are also closer to the water than the other properties and during a hurricane it matters. 

I decided to not go by memory and looked at the Monarch owners website for information on the shortfall.  a 17/18 refurbishment is scheduled along with the building facade in 2018.  It was pointed out that this would create a short fall in 2018 and the HOA decided to collect this over a 4 year period beginning in 2016.  They lumped this increase together into the reserve fund. The reserve fund increased by $153 in 2016.  What was unclear is how much was due to the short fall.  So the best I can say is that our increase was 153 in 2016 specific to the reserve fund  and a portion of the increase will continue for the next 3 years. 

I can't find where I got the 450 number from for the shortfall but I had to have heard it during an owners meeting. So maybe 112 of the 153 for 4 years is for the shortfall.  In any case the short fall covered over 4 years.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 18, 2016)

l0410z said:


> Logic would suggest you are correct on older vs newer resorts. No question that the building facade was one of the big ticket items to be fixed in 2018 timeframe specific to the Monarch. The Monarch buildings are also closer to the water than the other properties and during a hurricane it matters.
> 
> I decided to not go by memory and looked at the Monarch owners website for information on the shortfall.  a 17/18 refurbishment is scheduled along with the building facade in 2018.  It was pointed out that this would create a short fall in 2018 and the HOA decided to collect this over a 4 year period beginning in 2016.  They lumped this increase together into the reserve fund. The reserve fund increased by $153 in 2016.  What was unclear is how much was due to the short fall.  So the best I can say is that our increase was 153 in 2016 specific to the reserve fund  and a portion of the increase will continue for the next 3 years.
> 
> I can't find where I got the 450 number from for the shortfall but I had to have heard it during an owners meeting. So maybe 112 of the 153 for 4 years is for the shortfall.  In any case the short fall covered over 4 years.



As an Owner there is no way that I'd settle for my Board explaining a Special Assessment as incompletely as you've done above, and no way that I'd accept them folding an undetermined SA amount into the Reserves.  You should be able to look at your annual Budget Statement/MF's bill, and any related GM correspondence, and see exact figures for both the SA and the Reserves.  If for no other reason, you should be able to track the ongoing Reserves through the years that the SA is levied so that when it's done, you'll have a reasonable idea of how much the Reserves component should decrease in the first year following the SA.

Other than that, maybe we can get the dates correct - is the Special Assessment being levied in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019?


----------



## l0410z (Oct 19, 2016)

SueDonJ said:


> As an Owner there is no way that I'd settle for my Board explaining a Special Assessment as incompletely as you've done above, and no way that I'd accept them folding an undetermined SA amount into the Reserves.  You should be able to look at your annual Budget Statement/MF's bill, and any related GM correspondence, and see exact figures for both the SA and the Reserves.  If for no other reason, you should be able to track the ongoing Reserves through the years that the SA is levied so that when it's done, you'll have a reasonable idea of how much the Reserves component should decrease in the first year following the SA.
> 
> Other than that, maybe we can get the dates correct - is the Special Assessment being levied in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019?



The HOA did send out a letter specific to the shortfall in the reserve fund but i do not remember what was in it. I just didn't care that much.  I do care about being as accurate as I can be when I post so I will get you the information.    I do remember it was for 16-19.    I know the GM has been personally impacted by the hurricane as are all of the Marriott Sea Pines properties she is responsible for.   I will email her when the dust settles from the hurricane and update the thread.


----------



## l0410z (Oct 20, 2016)

_[Deleted ... duplicate information already shared in Post #172 in the Hurricane Matthew-related thread here.]_


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 20, 2016)

Another Monarch owner has confirmed this info:  "The SA is 153.00 per year for 4 years. The total estimated cost of the refurb is $12 million, not yet a hard number as they are going out for bids."

And worth mentioning again, none of us HHI owners knows yet if we'll be subject to SA's levied due to damage from Hurricane Matthew.  I expect MVW is working to alleviate that uncertainty as quickly as possible.


----------



## dioxide45 (Oct 20, 2016)

Is this SA going to be a separate line item on the MF bill, or is the $153 just going to be added to the reserve amount for the next four years? If it is the latter, I would worry that once it is there, it stays there.


----------



## SueDonJ (Oct 20, 2016)

dioxide45 said:


> Is this SA going to be a separate line item on the MF bill, or is the $153 just going to be added to the reserve amount for the next four years? If it is the latter, I would worry that once it is there, it stays there.



As usual you use fewer words than I did but that's exactly what I was trying to say in my post #43 above.  A Special Assessment that's designated for specific purposes should be clearly delineated in the Annual Budget for a number of reasons, not the least of which is what the non-SA-related expenses and reserves should be during any years of SA's plus the years after.

Based on what was forwarded to me from a Monarch owner with the statement quoted above your post, this SA has been rolled into the Reserve Fee.  Granted, the website and statements from the GM say that the reserves are being increased to cover the expenses for this one-time exterior repair work, but the Operating Budget doesn't make it apparent.  The 2016 Operating Budget includes these numbers in the Reserve Fee line item:


> 2015 Budgeted Expenses; 6,100 Unit Weeks; (Per Unit Week) = $304.75
> 2016 Approved Budget; 6,100 Unit Weeks; (Per Unit Week) = $458.49
> 2015 Budget v. 2016 Budget, $ Increase = $153.74
> 2015 Budget v. 2016 Budget, % Increase =50.4%



It seems an odd way to include SA's that are designated for specific work.  I don't remember ever seeing that this how other Marriott SA's have been assessed?  Like I said, I'd be uncomfortable with the lack of transparency but the Monarch owners don't appear to be worried.


----------



## bogey21 (Oct 21, 2016)

SueDonJ said:


> Another Monarch owner has confirmed this info:  "The SA is 153.00 per year for 4 years. The total estimated cost of the refurb is $12 million, not yet a hard number as they are going out for bids."



Looking at this as an ex Monarch Owner, I think $612 is reasonable ($153 x 4).  If you are a homeowner of a 30 year old home just think of the *unforeseen* expenses you have incurred during the last 4 years.

George


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Oct 21, 2016)

dioxide45 said:


> Is this SA going to be a separate line item on the MF bill, or is the $153 just going to be added to the reserve amount for the next four years? If it is the latter, I would worry that once it is there, it stays there.



We're definitely concerned about this. Hopefully it does come off in a few years.


----------



## Fairwinds (Oct 24, 2016)

SA aside; if I were to find myself in the market for another week it would be at Monarch.


----------



## l0410z (Oct 25, 2016)

The choice was a one time fee or spread over 4 years.   I trust that no matter how they account for this, it will come out of the MF after the 4 year time period.  If not, it will be questioned.  In general, I am happy with the HOA and the balance they strike between MF and improvements. 

On a side note, posted on the Monarch facebook group page was an entry from someone who stopped by the Monarch.  They we told that the renovation schedule for both the exterior work and interior is still 18/19 and there will be no increase to cover damages from Hurricane Matthew.    I will be happy when I get this in an owners update email.


----------



## l0410z (Nov 4, 2016)

*Monarch*

We look at year to year but I thought it might be of interest to take a longer term look. The Monarch Owners website  has a link to a chart showing the yearly MF's from 1988 on.  I have owned since 1995  so I thought I would dig deeper into my MF’s .  

-	In 23 years I have paid abo$19,900 in MF’s broken down as $12,700 Operating Fees (64% of MF),  $5,690 Reserve Fund (28.5% of MF) and $1,510 in property Tax (7.5% of MF).  There have bee 3 one time assessments totaling $650 and a current assessment of about 300 (2016/2017 of 150 per year). This is included in the reserve fund.   Note we have 2 more years on the assessment. 
-	  I think in the early years the reserve fee was a learning curve since this was  Marriott’s first timeshare. The reserve fee  was on par with taxes (about 10% of the total MF).  It was way to low.    I am going to compare 1998 to 2015. This takes out the learning curve in the early years  and the assessment in 2016-2017.  I am Trying not to  skew the results.  In 1998 my  MF broken down was $341 Operating Fee, $100 for Reserve Fee and $40 for property tax for a total of $481.   In 2015 it was $794 operating fee (increase of 232% over 1998), $304 for the Reserve fund (increase of 300%) and $103 for property tax (257% increase) for a total MF of $1,202 (increase of 250%).  
-	In 1998 the Operating Fee was 71% of my MF, the Reserve fee was 20% and Property Tax was 9%.  In 2015 it was  66%, 25% and 9%.  Again the percent of the reserve fee is understated in 2015 because of the current 4 year assessment. 

So what does it mean…the older you get the more you spend on healthcare….  Gee, at 61 I am shocked.     

My average cost for my week over the 23 years was about $865 per year or 123 per night for my stay.  If I assume my week is now worth 0 this becomes  my cost of 23 years of family vacations. This doesn't seem like a bad deal to me.


----------



## bvogel7475 (Nov 4, 2016)

l0410z said:


> We look at year to year but I thought it might be of interest to take a longer term look. The Monarch Owners website  has a link to a chart showing the yearly MF's from 1988 on.  I have owned since 1995  so I thought I would dig deeper into my MF’s .
> 
> -	In 23 years I have paid abo$19,900 in MF’s broken down as $12,700 Operating Fees (64% of MF),  $5,690 Reserve Fund (28.5% of MF) and $1,510 in property Tax (7.5% of MF).  There have bee 3 one time assessments totaling $650 and a current assessment of about 300 (2016/2017 of 150 per year). This is included in the reserve fund.   Note we have 2 more years on the assessment.
> -	  I think in the early years the reserve fee was a learning curve since this was  Marriott’s first timeshare. The reserve fee  was on par with taxes (about 10% of the total MF).  It was way to low.    I am going to compare 1998 to 2015. This takes out the learning curve in the early years  and the assessment in 2016-2017.  I am Trying not to  skew the results.  In 1998 my  MF broken down was $341 Operating Fee, $100 for Reserve Fee and $40 for property tax for a total of $481.   In 2015 it was $794 operating fee (increase of 232% over 1998), $304 for the Reserve fund (increase of 300%) and $103 for property tax (257% increase) for a total MF of $1,202 (increase of 250%).
> ...



Was it $865 per year just looking at maintenance fees?  You should factor in the depreciation of the timeshare over the 23 years you have owned it as well.  Otherwise, when you sell the timeshare you would technically take a big capital loss unless you expect the resale value to be larger than the price you paid, which would be a first for a Marriott timeshare.


----------



## l0410z (Nov 8, 2016)

bvogel7475 said:


> Was it $865 per year just looking at maintenance fees?  You should factor in the depreciation of the timeshare over the 23 years you have owned it as well.  Otherwise, when you sell the timeshare you would technically take a big capital loss unless you expect the resale value to be larger than the price you paid, which would be a first for a Marriott timeshare.



I purchased my first one (Ocean Front) resale in 1995 for about 12K.  My second one for 5K two three doors down called garden with a great ocean view.  I purchased it from someone who wanted to dump it to get away from the MF.  They are both summer weeks so I believe I can get more than I paid.  I hope my kids will want them but if not I value them at 0.   The last few years I rented one of them getting more than MF.  If I valued them at 0 it is still worth owning them because it forced me to think about vacations every year.  We usually took 2 week vacations and weekend trips to Boston, Philly and Baltimore (or washington).  

Vacations are discretionary spending and for us it was instead of newer cars and  a bigger house.  We tried to have our kids understand  this was our priority without passing judgement on what other people did.  Jury still out on what they learned.


----------



## Monarch (Jun 1, 2017)

_[*Monarch upcoming renovation 2018* thread merged into this thread re the ongoing refurbishment/Special Assessment at Monarch <-- SueDonJ]_

The current renovation at Monarch will include two structural changes, which most owners do not know about. We think many will be upset when they see the changes.

First is the removal and filling in of the “aquarium” corner glass window. All these aquarium windows held up during hurricane Matthew, yet management says the insurance is requiring them to be changed to be hurricane grade or removed. Estimates of $400,000 for the complex of 120 villas seemed too much for BOD, so all units will lose 20-25% of their view. We priced a Marvin corner hurricane grade window at $3000 each. Yet, the new front door at $4500 each will exceed that cost of the window replacement. Current doors are fire grade but management wants auto closers. Simple hinge springs or commercial closers at $50 would do the trick, but management says no.

Second is the replacement of the serpentine wall between the Master BR and LR with a straight wall. This is a loss of a design feature, which has won many awards. Building this type of wall is difficult and time consuming. To date we have talked with many owners and have never found one who does not like the artistic wall. However, management claims that they have complaints all the time about the curved wall. The money spent to straighten the wall could have been used to replace the “aquarium” with a new hurricane version.  This change will “add” a few square feet to the LR but will make a dresser in the BR very tight to the bottom of the bed.

We feel the BOD is not as transparent as implied in the earlier posts.  As owners we never hear or read anything other than the annual newsletter. We have gotten updates via owners meeting with management while on vacation but that information is slanted to give the best news and withholding anything we might find controversial. Our experience with BOD via Liaison is that it is a one way street. We never get a BOD reply, not even a thank you for your thoughts.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 2, 2017)

I have supported the BOD second to none. If what you say is true, i would be disappointed that none of the information was communicated. I started a Monarch Facebook page and while there is not a huge membership, many of the members own at least as long as I have (20 years). None of this has been mentioned. I will  call the GM today. 

I am also going to cut and paste this on the Facebook page letting them know it was pulled off of TUG.

The window replacement was taking place unrelated to Matthew's because of constant condensation on the interior on many of the units based on age and proximity to ocean.   The door while fire rated did not meet new fire code standards put your place.  This was explained in 2015 before the special assessment was put in place. 

I have never heard or read about the replacement windows decreasing window view or the curve wall being removed.  Neither makes sense to me.


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 4, 2017)

Monarch said:


> _[*Monarch upcoming renovation 2018* thread merged into this thread re the ongoing refurbishment/Special Assessment at Monarch <-- SueDonJ]_
> 
> The current renovation at Monarch will include two structural changes, which most owners do not know about. We think many will be upset when they see the changes.
> 
> ...



Well, I guess you and I have had very different experiences at Monarch.

Last year in the fall, a few weeks before Matthew, we were there for TS Julia, and the aquarium window admitted literally gallons of water into the unit.  Not the first time I have experienced leaks, but certainly the worst.  Perhaps the windows survived Matthew without being blown out, but they have been leaking for some years.  Water incursion is an existential threat to a structure.

The notion that the unit will have a view reduced by 20-25% I guess depends on how and where one takes that measurement.  Since the entire wall facing the patio/balcony is glass, removing a 12-15? inch glass panel hidden behind curtains won’t matter much to me, and will greatly reduce the likelihood of future water incursion problems with ‘aquarium’ glass joints.

Monarch units are small by Marriott standards and the curved wall arguably (1) wastes space in both the bedroom and the living room, and (2) limits furniture selection to pieces whose size matches the areas around the curve.  Whether the ‘straight’ wall will reduce the size of the BR or LR or neither (by splitting the difference) remains to be seen, but the interior decorating options available to efficiently use space in furnishing the units greatly expands.

Finally, although I have only been going to Monarch for about 10 years, I have found the management to be responsive to questions and comments.  The information in your post certainly was not news to me. (If you want to be informed, the best venue is attending the weekly owner update, which I do for every week I am present.)  

You should also note also that the sliding glass doors also will be replaced, the soffit between the kitchen and dining area will be eliminated, all the soft goods will be replaced, a closet in the guest BR may become a ‘california closet’ or its equivalent, the area adjacent to the entry door may have a built in bench with storage, among other potential improvements.

The oldest timeshare in the Marriott family is about to become one of the newest by virtue of the mammoth renovations contemplated in the next two years.  I told Birgit that my view was that ‘doing it right will produce a better result than doing it cheap.’  (And yes, I own multiple weeks there, so it will cost me.)

Quality is remembered long after price is forgotten.


----------



## jme (Jun 4, 2017)

Monarch is well located but it has a small footprint, and is old. The units are also very small by Marriott standards, maybe the smallest on the island among the 8 Marriotts. (Toss-up with Harbour Point/Sunset Pointe regarding size.) Despite the greatest of renovations pending at Monarch, the units will remain small----too small for me. They can alter the walls somewhat, but they cannot stretch them. We've rented there occasionally, just the two of us (by choice) with no family or guests, getaway type spontaneous weekends, and we felt claustrophobic each time, won't do it again. 

Those that love it, love it. No problem at all, that's fine. Loving a particular place is very special and we all have preferences. 
I like the spacious villas at the Big 3 by far. I will say that the long overdue improvements at Monarch will enhance the place ten-fold, and a "quality" renovation is definitely extremely important going forward, as mentioned, and nothing less. For those that love Monarch now, the assessments will be worth it. 

In this discussion of Monarch's future, two oft-heard refrains have a bearing on my final analysis:

Yes, "Quality is remembered long after price is forgotten,"  but "Size matters."


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Jun 4, 2017)

For us the location on the beach and within Sea Pines more than makes up for the disappointing lack of views and the smaller rooms.  

Do the MFs come down when these assessments are completed?


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 4, 2017)

Moxjo,

My understanding is that there is a multi-year (3 or 4) special assessment that we are currently in the midst of.  MF should decline by that amount when that period of years is complete.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 4, 2017)

Sorry but I find it funny when I read some comments on the Monarch so I can't help but try and be funny in my response.  I remember what my grandmother used to say...."Opinions are like butts, everyone has one and no one thinks theirs smells."  The Monarch units are small but they are still 1200 sf and 1200 sf is not an opinion.  It's about location, location, location and Sea Pines is a pretty good location, so to be on it or have easy access to it is kind of nice.  Just like non alcohol near beer is not beer, near beach is not beach.  These are the reasons we stay at the GO if we sleep 8 or slum  it at our home Resort if we need to squeeze 6 or less.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 5, 2017)

All of us own where we do by choice.  I thought I might post why  the Monarch may not be beautiful to some, kind of cute to many but pretty to me. 

 Sea Pines
Monarch is the only Marriott Oceanfront HH property in Sea Pines.     Sea Pines has 4  golf courses (including the infamous Harbour Town Golf Links) and 15 miles of bike/walking trails maybe the nicest plantation in HH that houses timeshares.  It is close to Harbour Town (long walk  or short bike ride) and South Beach (Bike from by trail or beach).  It is across the street from the Sea Pines Golf Club (2 -18 hole golf courses, putting greens and a driving range).  It is adjacent to the Sea Pines Beach Club.   In fact the Beach Club just went through massive renovations and has a catering  hall,  restaurants and a bar most facing the ocean.  The Monarch doesn't have a food concession on the property.  You must walk 150 feet to get to the beach club. When you walk along the beach for 5 minutes moving away from both the Monarch and Beach Club crowds, you pass beach front  homes valued in 7 figures.   You are now almost in a private beach setting if you want

Monarch
 It is Marriott's first timeshare but it was not built by Marriott.  This says two things, it is older and will not have the Mariott look and feel.  It was actually architected to fit into Sea Pines. The landscape architect (Robert Marvin) was well known for his low country designs. The landscaping has a central courtyard nestled between the four buildings  with tall pines, gardens, walkways, boardwalks, fountains and reflecting pools  giving it  more of a tropical feel.  Can you imagine how odd the big three would look in Sea Pines.  The Sea Pines Association would not have approved it.  The builder was not Marriott marketing savoy and maybe the reason they had to sell.  They thought in terms of black and white...you are oceanfront or not.  Attached is my garden view.  My oceanfront unit is three units closer to the ocean without the garden in the way.   It is much smaller (122 units) than the "normal' Marriott  giving it a cozier and friendlier feel.  It has less concrete than the typical Marriott properties.     It is mostly fixed weeks (all but 15 units) so this means you often see the same families.  It  offers 130K (summer) Marriott points every year.  At one point that meant a lot.   

Warts... 
It is an older resort.  It needs to have a knee or hip replacement every now and then so yes buildings and windows do get repaired/replaced. I do not believe anyone would argue that the quality of building in 1985 for the most part is better than newer ones.  Lets see when  other resorts require  knee replacements.  The units are  about 1200 sf and the 2nd bedroom has two single beds. The unit only sleeps 6.  This might be its biggest drawback.    It was designed when two cars per unit were not the norm so the 144 parking spaces can be a challenge.    Second car passes can only park in certain areas and when that is full a second car pass must park at  the beach club lot  that is separated from the Monarch parking lot by a 50 foot walk past a some tall trees.   The Monarch has no  movie theater.   It has no indoor pool but it does have the typical Marriott activities.  

The Monarch units seem to have a steady stream of people wanting to rent and it trades well.  I think i'll keep it.


----------



## bogey21 (Jun 5, 2017)

Agree with previous post.  The reasons stated are the reason that I kept my Monarch Week long after bailing out of my other Marriotts.

George


----------



## Pathways (Jun 5, 2017)

I am a one year 'new' Monarch summer owner, a second week ready to close shortly. I haven't actually been on the property since I first stayed there in 1996, and I can't wait to be back!

From my research, I would back the board decisions I have seen so far. From the two schools of thought, I go against the grain and would much rather have a SA for certain upgrades and keep the lower fees.

After attending board meetings at numerous resorts, the overriding theme seems to be "we have this much money in the reserve fund, what upgrades shall we make? Or "We still have X dollars left over, what else can we come up with to do?"  Too many times a nonsense idea from an 'outlier' board member gets approved just because there is reserve money left over, and the rest of the board just capitulates so they can move on.

If a SA is required, the board seems to focus much closer on what is really 'required' and strives to get the best bang for a buck.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jun 5, 2017)

Pathways said:


> I am a one year 'new' Monarch summer owner, a second week ready to close shortly. I haven't actually been on the property since I first stayed there in 1996, and I can't wait to be back!
> 
> From my research, I would back the board decisions I have seen so far. From the two schools of thought, I go against the grain and would much rather have a SA for certain upgrades and keep the lower fees.
> 
> ...



That isn't how I know either Barony Beach's or SurfWatch's boards to operate, despite the fact that they both collect appropriate Reserves in anticipation of well-planned refurbs.  So while it's okay to have a preference for either method of collecting funds for refurbs (as needed in the form of SA as is being done at Monarch OR proportionally in advance as has been done at Barony and SurfWatch,) it's not okay to assume or intimate that any or all boards will be irresponsible with proportionally-collected funds.  I honestly can't remember a TUG discussion about any Marriott board being that irresponsible.

By the way, I am in the camp of preferring SA's in the event that repairs/refurbs become necessary following a natural disaster such that the catastrophic insurance deductible kicks in.  That's what happened when Hurricane Matthew blasted through Hilton Head last fall and I don't have any problem with them having had to increase the 2017 MF's to cover it.  In such cases a board is simply unable to predict when or even if they'll need such funds, and I don't want them sitting on any monies that aren't specifically earmarked for a certain item at a certain date.


----------



## jme (Jun 5, 2017)

View from my current unit at Grande Ocean, where we are spending the next 3 weeks:
(I feel like I can step onto the sand.)






View from Grande Ocean unit in 2016, where we also spent 3 weeks:






Ummmm, I think I'll stay at Grande Ocean.


----------



## Pathways (Jun 5, 2017)

SueDonJ said:


> That isn't how I know either Barony Beach's or SurfWatch's boards to operate, despite the fact that they both collect appropriate Reserves in anticipation of well-planned refurbs.  So while it's okay to have a preference for either method of collecting funds for refurbs (as needed in the form of SA as is being done at Monarch OR proportionally in advance as has been done at Barony and SurfWatch,) it's not okay to assume or intimate that any or all boards will be irresponsible with proportionally-collected funds.  I honestly can't remember a TUG discussion about any Marriott board being that irresponsible.
> 
> By the way, I am in the camp of preferring SA's in the event that repairs/refurbs become necessary following a natural disaster such that the catastrophic insurance deductible kicks in.  That's what happened when Hurricane Matthew blasted through Hilton Head last fall and I don't have any problem with them having had to increase the 2017 MF's to cover it.  In such cases a board is simply unable to predict when or even if they'll need such funds, and I don't want them sitting on any monies that aren't specifically earmarked for a certain item at a certain date.



I agree with you except with the characterization of a board being irresponsible. I find very seldom do they cross that line and put funds into a project that is clearly a 'waste'. But it is rare that when bids come in low, that an entity uses the leftover monies to 'refund' back to the originators.  I was at a meeting this week where the project bid came in at 41Mil with 50 Mil budgeted. Trust me when I say there was no discussion of refund, return, lowering of a bond or anything like that with the extra 9.  However, what the extra money was then earmarked for I would not say was a 'waste' or 'misuse' of funds, (others might) just 'enhancing' the original specs of the project.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 5, 2017)

This is our view from our July oceanfront unit at the Monarch.   Fixed week gives us the same view since 1995 when we purchased.   The second picture is my August unit which Monarch considers a Garden View.   Just for the record, I enjoy the GO when I traded into it.  Last year we stayed in Starfish and had a view of the pool.  Loved it.  I enjoyed the Heritage when I traded into it for a week of golfing and have no remembrance of my view.  I can say with no uncertainty the view from the unit has  a very small impact on enjoying my vacation. I have not tried the other Marriott resorts on HHI because I prefer Sea Pines but I have no doubt as Marriott's the units are nice.


----------



## hangloose (Jun 6, 2017)

l0410z & jme -   Great photos. You should post them in the "View from Balcony" thread.   I would take any of the three views!    The Monarch Garden view appears to be more of an "Ocean Side" view classification that you see at many others MVC resorts.  

Been to HHI many times, but never at either of these resorts. We're always at Barony or Surfwatch.  While I like both, each has their pros/cons.  I bet MGO would be our preferred HHI resort, given it's many pools.  In time, I'll visit both.  We're off to a 3 bedroom at Surfwatch late summer!


----------



## okie (Jun 6, 2017)

windje2000 said:


> Well, I guess you and I have had very different experiences at Monarch.
> 
> Last year in the fall, a few weeks before Matthew, we were there for TS Julia, and the aquarium window admitted literally gallons of water into the unit.  Not the first time I have experienced leaks, but certainly the worst.  Perhaps the windows survived Matthew without being blown out, but they have been leaking for some years.  Water incursion is an existential threat to a structure.
> 
> ...



well windje2000 maybe you don't look out the corner window much, but a corner as two sides and the aquarium window over all in approved 6ft by 5ft or 30 sq ft which offer substantial light and to some a very positive view. So if you had only one living room window which leaked your solution is to replace it with a wall. _[Deleted.]_


----------



## okie (Jun 6, 2017)

okie said:


> well windje2000 maybe you don't look out the corner window much, but a corner as two sided and the aquarium window over all in approved 6ft by 5ft or 30 sq ft which offer substantial light and to some a very positive view. So if you had only one living room window which leaked your solution is to replace it with a wall.


"do it right is not replacing a window with a wall, replace it with a window that does not leak.


----------



## okie (Jun 6, 2017)

okie said:


> well windje2000 maybe you don't look out the corner window much, but a corner as two sides and the aquarium window over all is about 6ft by 5ft or 30 sq ft which offer substantial light and to some a very positive view. So if you had only one living room window which leaked your solution is to replace it with a wall.





okie said:


> "do it right is not replacing a window with a wall, replace it with a window that does not leak.


Why can we spend $6,000 on a front door that good be fixed for much less but we can't afford to replace aquarium window with another window. The problem is that not all units have a positive view from the aquarium window but that is not a reason to throw the baby out with the bath water. Replace the windows with a view or are a good light source and only wall up the rest.
I disagree with your assessment of the curved wall which by the way one several architectural designs, you will be spending money we can't afford to add some square feet to one room while robbing square feet from another. By the way this is in violation of the "master deed" which states that to "substantially change the original plans and specifications of the condominium property requires 75% approval by the owners.


----------



## okie (Jun 6, 2017)

okie said:


> Why can we spend $6,000 on a front door that good be fixed for much less but we can't afford to replace aquarium window with another window. The problem is that not all units have a positive view from the aquarium window but that is not a reason to throw the baby out with the bath water. Replace the windows with a view or are a good light source and only wall up the rest.
> I disagree with your assessment of the curved wall which by the way one several architectural designs, you will be spending money we can't afford to add some square feet to one room while robbing square feet from another. By the way this is in violation of the "master deed" which states that to "substantially change the original plans and specifications of the condominium property requires 75% approval by the owners.


Also windje2000 you might want to open your curtain, may be you would be surprised by the view.


----------



## windje2000 (Jun 6, 2017)

okie said:


> Also windje2000 you might want to open your curtain, may be you would be surprised by the view.


Welcome to TUG. .


----------



## l0410z (Jun 6, 2017)

The Monarch Owners website and been a good source of communications between the owners and the BOD.  I was disappointed to find out about structural changes to the unit that was not communicated.  I reached out to the BOD to understand what is going on and asking them to communicate it to the owners.  The leaky windows were not a surprise.  The assessment was in part to replace them.  The door replacement was not a surprise, my understanding was they need not meet safety codes changes that are now in effect.  This should have been straight forward so if it is not or owner information is confusing, it is a BOD issue.


----------



## okie (Jun 7, 2017)

l0410z said:


> The Monarch Owners website and been a good source of communications between the owners and the BOD.  I was disappointed to find out about structural changes to the unit that was not communicated.  I reached out to the BOD to understand what is going on and asking them to communicate it to the owners.  The leaky windows were not a surprise.  The assessment was in part to replace them.  The door replacement was not a surprise, my understanding was they need not meet safety codes changes that are now in effect.  This should have been straight forward so if it is not or owner information is confusing, it is a BOD issue.


You stated that the leaky windows were not a surprise, what about replacing them with wall?


----------



## okie (Jun 7, 2017)

okie said:


> You stated that the leaky windows were not a surprise, what about replacing them with wall?


also did you know to substantially change the original plans and specifications of condominium property requires a 75% vote of owners according to Master Deed mentioned in By-laws?


----------



## l0410z (Jun 8, 2017)

okie said:


> You stated that the leaky windows were not a surprise, what about replacing them with wall?



I am not sure I understand how you might want to replace almost full length windows and sliding glass doors to the patio with walls but if you are,  what follows is my answer. 

I would rather pay a one time sliding scale assessment based on season where summer pays the most (say 300)  and winter the least (say 100) to keep the same glass exposure than replace with a wall that reduces my MF 75%.  The only reason for suggesting the sliding scale is in fairness of the "value" of the week.


----------



## icydog (Jun 8, 2017)

I was given a silver week 5 at Monarch.  Notice the past tense.  I used it once and hated it and not because of the weather, because that was glorious. I hated the resort's room layout.  I thought it was dark, I thought the furniture was small, I thought the rooms were small, I hated the guest bedroom with two lumpy single beds.  I didn't like the place in general.  I know Monarch owners love their timeshare but it simply was not for me.  I finally gave my week 5 away here on Tug. I'm sorry, this was the *only* MVCI resort to which I swore I would never return.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 8, 2017)

I am one that enjoys the Monarch.  I have no desire to change anyones mind because it doesn't matter to me.  I have no issue with anyone disliking the Monarch for whatever reasons (decor, layout, age. etc) they want.   There is no question the Monarch has the smallest unit footprint of all the Marriott oceanfront resorts.  The one issue I have is unit size as if all the other Oceanfront resorts offer huge mansions in comparison.  Let's quantify each Marriott  Oceanfront 2 bedroom resort square footage.  I know we are now in a world of alternate facts but facts are still facts.

I did this a number of years ago when my friend purchased at the Surfwatch for 40% more than the second unit I purchased at the Monarch and he tried  to convince me his  2 BR was 40% bigger.  Some of that was fun arguing between friends but we did get the numbers.   Just as an FYI, I verified this again just before this post with each of the front desks and the numbers still match... smallest to largest.

Monarch          - 1200sf
Surfwatch        - 1275sf (6.3% bigger)
Baroney          - 1300sf  (8.3 % bigger)
Grand Ocean    -1380sf  (15% bigger).

Unless there is a conspiracy by each of the front desks, can we take the numbers at face value.  Also, since they are all Marriott's can we for discussion purposes say it was calculated in a consistent way.


----------



## icydog (Jun 8, 2017)

I am not telling you not to love your resort. I said it is not for me. The rooms feel small to me. Maybe it is how they are laid out. I am not set on beachfront either. I like the other Hilton Head Marriotts as well, even the ones facing the inlets.I love my Disney Vacation Club Hilton Head resort too. It is probably smaller than the Monarch but the rooms seem to flow better but only in my opinion


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Jun 8, 2017)

I can't argue with anyone if they love one HHI Marriott over another because we own at the Harbour Pointe, Monarch and the GO and we love them all for their own special reason.

If you forced me to choose one it would have to be the Grande Ocean considering all things, location, best views resort, best gym, the best pools.

However the Monarch with it's location in Sea Pines is super close for me and if I i had view unit like 1040z it would be a flip of a coin.

And PP mentions the Marriott resorts on the Cove. We have unit 312 at the HP which is one of the nicest view units there and we absolutely love it.

I've never stayed at the Barony or the Surfwatch but i bet those are equally special so there are many great options on HHI.

I'm just glad we discovered them 12 years ago and now they will always be part of our travel plans forever.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 8, 2017)

icydog said:


> I am not telling you not to love your resort. I said it is not for me. The rooms feel small to me. Maybe it is how they are laid out. I am not set on beachfront either. I like the other Hilton Head Marriotts as well, even the ones facing the inlets.I love my Disney Vacation Club Hilton Head resort too. It is probably smaller than the Monarch but the rooms seem to flow better but only in my opinion



I am probably sounding more jerkish than I mean to be because I truely have no issue with anyone's assessment of the Monarch.  Please no need to explain.  The proximity to the ocean, being on Sea Pines, the exterior design and the Timeshare size have a lot to do with my enjoyment of the Monarch.   My oceanfront unit helps also.  We had many nice HHI vacations and really enjoy HHI.  This being said, from the beginning the Monarch was a means to an end.  Reward Points early on funded a three week European trip.  The last 5 year rentals funded Barcelona, Punta Cana, Aruba for my kids and their girl friends and others.    We traded for other resorts and of course we used it.   The goal from the beginning was for my kids to appreciate family vacations and have a love for traveling.     My last comment on subject...._[Deleted.  TUG Rules do not allow ad-like comments in the public forums.]_


----------



## sb2313 (Jun 8, 2017)

MOXJO7282 said:


> I can't argue with anyone if they love one HHI Marriott over another because we own at the Harbour Pointe, Monarch and the GO and we love them all for their own special reason.
> 
> 
> I'm just glad we discovered them 12 years ago and now they will always be part of our travel plans forever.


This is ultimately what it all comes down to!  I am just glad we discovered Surfwatch, and Hilton Head, when our oldest was 11 months and we have been going there annually since.  Each resort has its special points that endear it to some people and thats the reason Marriott has been able to sustain 8 resorts on just that little island.


----------



## okie (Jun 9, 2017)

l0410z said:


> I am not sure I understand how you might want to replace almost full length windows and sliding glass doors to the patio with walls but if you are,  what follows is my answer.
> 
> I would rather pay a one time sliding scale assessment based on season where summer pays the most (say 300)  and winter the least (say 100) to keep the same glass exposure than replace with a wall that reduces my MF 75%.  The only reason for suggesting the sliding scale is in fairness of the "value" of the week.


you misunderstand my point. I am not in favor of a wall just the opposite. 10410z said he was not surprised by the boards decision to replace the leaking windows but was he surprised (or against) there decision to replace them with a wall. I thought refurbishment of a window meant another window not a wall. That was my point. However I don't favor your sliding scale theory: in for a penny in for a pound.


----------



## okie (Jun 9, 2017)

okie said:


> you misunderstand my point. I am not in favor of a wall just the opposite. 10410z said he was not surprised by the boards decision to replace the leaking windows but was he surprised (or against) there decision to replace them with a wall. I thought refurbishment of a window meant another window not a wall. That was my point. However I don't favor your sliding scale theory: in for a penny in for a pound.


all so all the weeks trade for same reward points


----------



## SueDonJ (Jun 9, 2017)

l0410z said:


> I am not sure I understand how you might want to replace almost full length windows and sliding glass doors to the patio with walls but if you are,  what follows is my answer.
> 
> I would rather pay a one time sliding scale assessment based on season where summer pays the most (say 300)  and winter the least (say 100) to keep the same glass exposure than replace with a wall that reduces my MF 75%.  The only reason for suggesting the sliding scale is in fairness of the "value" of the week.





okie said:


> you misunderstand my point. I am not in favor of a wall just the opposite. 10410z said he was not surprised by the boards decision to replace the leaking windows but was he surprised (or against) there decision to replace them with a wall. I thought refurbishment of a window meant another window not a wall. That was my point. However I don't favor your sliding scale theory: in for a penny in for a pound.



SC law doesn't allow MF's or SA's for refurbs/repairs to be assessed on a sliding scale based on seasonal demand or unit view designations.  It doesn't matter if or how many owners want MVW to do it or not do it - they simply can't.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 9, 2017)

SueDonJ said:


> SC law doesn't allow MF's or SA's for refurbs/repairs to be assessed on a sliding scale based on seasonal demand or unit view designations.  It doesn't matter if or how many owners want MVW to do it or not do it - they simply can't.



 My point was really meant to stress that I am against any decrease of window area and I would pay more if I needed to if the wall was in the plans.  (if the law allowed), I would even pay more than an equal share.. up to a point that is.


----------



## okie (Jun 10, 2017)

l0410z said:


> My point was really meant to stress that I am against any decrease of window area and I would pay more if I needed to if the wall was in the plans.  (if the law allowed), I would even pay more than an equal share.. up to a point that is.


With you 100%


----------



## okie (Jun 10, 2017)

l0410z said:


> My point was really meant to stress that I am against any decrease of window area and I would pay more if I needed to if the wall was in the plans.  (if the law allowed), I would even pay more than an equal share.. up to a point that is.


You seem to be so knowledgeable about the law, etc. Are you familiar with the by-laws and master deed at the monarch? Base on this info do you think the BOD as the right to replace windows with wall and straighten living room walls, a substantial change to the original plans and specifications without 75% approval of owners as stated in master deed?


----------



## l0410z (Jun 11, 2017)

okie said:


> You seem to be so knowledgeable about the law, etc. Are you familiar with the by-laws and master deed at the monarch? Base on this info do you think the BOD as the right to replace windows with wall and straighten living room walls, a substantial change to the original plans and specifications without 75% approval of owners as stated in master deed?


It was mentioned in another response about SC law.  As far as by laws and master deed, I will assume it is part of my deed package and will look for it to read.  This thread is the only place that discusses the information on the window replacement and wall.  I reached out to the HOA and asked for any structural modifications be posted on the Owners website,  I was told he president of the HOA will respond to my email.  If true, this would be my first real issue with the HOA in 25 years.  In general they have done a very good job so until it gets confirmed, I'll take it to me a misunderstanding of the facts.


----------



## okie (Jun 11, 2017)

l0410z said:


> It was mentioned in another response about SC law.  As far as by laws and master deed, I will assume it is part of my deed package and will look for it to read.  This thread is the only place that discusses the information on the window replacement and wall.  I reached out to the HOA and asked for any structural modifications be posted on the Owners website,  I was told he president of the HOA will respond to my email.  If true, this would be my first real issue with the HOA in 25 years.  In general they have done a very good job so until it gets confirmed, I'll take it to me a misunderstanding of the facts.


Great hope you can find and get to read them also excellent idea with HOA. I hope they respond. I also agree with you about the last 25 years with the HOA, however I am afraid this time it is much more than misunderstanding as I as told verbally by monarch management of the planed structural changes.


----------



## Monarch (Jun 12, 2017)

l0410z said:


> It was mentioned in another response about SC law.  As far as by laws and master deed, I will assume it is part of my deed package and will look for it to read.  This thread is the only place that discusses the information on the window replacement and wall.  I reached out to the HOA and asked for any structural modifications be posted on the Owners website,  I was told he president of the HOA will respond to my email.  If true, this would be my first real issue with the HOA in 25 years.  In general they have done a very good job so until it gets confirmed, I'll take it to me a misunderstanding of the facts.


Okie is correct. After reviewing the by-laws and Monarch master deed, it appears that the BOD has been negligent in completing due diligence on the powers of the BOD.
According to the master deed, structural changes are out of the realm of the BOD powers. Renovation is one thing, but structural changes will require approval by 75% or more of owners.
Article X, sec 1.1 of the Master Deed “ any reconstruction or repair must follow substantially the original plans and specifications of the condominium property unless the unit holding seventy-five (75%) or more ….vote to adopt different plans and specifications and all unit owners whose units are affected by the alterations unanimously consent.”
Furthermore, Article XI of the Master Deed states that even if amendments are made to the By-Laws or the Master Deed, no amendment may change the dimensions of the unit. The Master Deed gives exact room dimensions in Article II, section 2 for all the interior spaces.


----------



## l0410z (Jun 12, 2017)

Monarch said:


> Okie is correct. After reviewing the by-laws and Monarch master deed, it appears that the BOD has been negligent in completing due diligence on the powers of the BOD.
> According to the master deed, structural changes are out of the realm of the BOD powers. Renovation is one thing, but structural changes will require approval by 75% or more of owners.
> Article X, sec 1.1 of the Master Deed “ any reconstruction or repair must follow substantially the original plans and specifications of the condominium property unless the unit holding seventy-five (75%) or more ….vote to adopt different plans and specifications and all unit owners whose units are affected by the alterations unanimously consent.”
> Furthermore, Article XI of the Master Deed states that even if amendments are made to the By-Laws or the Master Deed, no amendment may change the dimensions of the unit. The Master Deed gives exact room dimensions in Article II, section 2 for all the interior spaces.



As mentioned I sent (June 3) an email asking for an update on any structural changes going on at the Monarch.   I was told the President of the Board will get back to me on my concerns  I decided to follow it up on when I could expect a response and added the information on the 75% approval.  I did get an email letting me know that the liaison will stay on top of it until I get a response.  She also added  *I did want to point out, however, that the requirement of 75% (or more) owner approval is a mis-reading of our governance documents. That reference, from Article X of our Master Deed, specifically refers to restoring the property after a casualty, which isn’t applicable in current circumstances.     *

Keep in mind this doesn't mean anything other than a clarification to the Article Information above.


----------



## sudiski (Jul 5, 2017)

l0410z said:


> As mentioned I sent (June 3) an email asking for an update on any structural changes going on at the Monarch.   I was told the President of the Board will get back to me on my concerns  I decided to follow it up on when I could expect a response and added the information on the 75% approval.  I did get an email letting me know that the liaison will stay on top of it until I get a response.  She also added  *I did want to point out, however, that the requirement of 75% (or more) owner approval is a mis-reading of our governance documents. That reference, from Article X of our Master Deed, specifically refers to restoring the property after a casualty, which isn’t applicable in current circumstances.     *
> 
> Keep in mind this doesn't mean anything other than a clarification to the Article Information above.



I'm curious to know if you got a response from the President of the Board or if Terry (liaison) has been back in contact with you on the structural changes being proposed.  We "heard" that one of the units was to be modified in June 2017 so the Board could see what the new unit would look like AND to see if any "issues" were found when making the changes.


----------



## l0410z (Jul 5, 2017)

sudiski said:


> I'm curious to know if you got a response from the President of the Board or if Terry (liaison) has been back in contact with you on the structural changes being proposed.  We "heard" that one of the units was to be modified in June 2017 so the Board could see what the new unit would look like AND to see if any "issues" were found when making the changes.


The reference to the 75 percent approval required for modifications dealt only wirh damage from casualty.  Changing the wall will not require owner approval.  I have reached out at least one more time and still have not gotten an answer on if this has been decided.

 I have a Monarch Facebook page and asked members if they would want to change the wall.  Right now we have about 56 with no and 6 with yes. This has nothing to do with the board and I did not ask it to forward to the board.


----------



## sudiski (Jul 5, 2017)

Thank you for your response.  I really wish the Board would reach out to the owners as they did for the parking situation a few years ago.  Although we are definitely not for the change to the wall, if most owners use the sofa for a bed and want the extra room, I can accept that.  Your facebook member numbers are very interesting.  I have reached out to owners we know.  Like your FB numbers, we found far more are against changing the wall - even those that have 3 generations staying in their unit.

At the "Java with the GM" meeting we attended, we were told they would be putting the sofa on the bedroom wall.  In one of our units, this will put us facing the lagoon and not the ocean which we can now see from the couch.  We know someone who has a unit closest to the beach in Magnolia, and they were told "you bought garden view".  They bought their fixed unit because it does have an ocean view.  To put their sofa facing the pool/lagoon and also take away the aquarium window and not put in another window on the side so they continue to have a view of the ocean seems crazy to me. I would hope that since the windows/sliders are being replaced, they will continue to have the sofa face the ocean with those that have any kind of an ocean view.  Since we have an ocean front unit, we are also upset about the change to the windows.  This will decrease the amount of beach we can see from inside our unit.  Once we heard of the changes, we were amazed how often we do look out the small side of the aquarium window.  We hope the Board will at least give us a side window and not just a wall

Like you, we have always thought that the management team and the Board have done a great job communicating with the owners.  We love our Monarch weeks.  Right now, we are hearing of major changes to our units and it would be nice if these changes would at least be posted on the Monarch owner site.  The Board may not be required to get approval from the owners, but with the money being spent, I would hope they would want owner input.  They could easily e-mail most owners, as they have most of our e-mail addresses.   If any tuggers do get a response from the Board or if you see Monarchowners has posted the proposed changes, please post on TUG.   Thanks!


----------



## l0410z (Jul 6, 2017)

I sent an email earlier this evening asking the board to update the Owners website.  If they do not do this I am going  to suggest to anyone that voted to send an email.  did they mention the Why.


----------



## okie (Jul 6, 2017)

l0410z said:


> The reference to the 75 percent approval required for modifications dealt only wirh damage from casualty.  Changing the wall will not require owner approval.  I have reached out at least one more time and still have not gotten an answer on if this has been decided.
> 
> I have a Monarch Facebook page and asked members if they would want to change the wall.  Right now we have about 56 with no and 6 with yes. This has nothing to do with the board and I did not ask it to forward to the board.


I disagree with your interpretation of the Master Deed. Would like to know if you are a Contract Lawyer? The statement with regard to only damage from casualty does not consider the true intent of the master deed which was not to allow major modifications without 75% approval of owners. The master deed does not specifically state that the BOD has this power aside from casualty damage. I have consulted contract attorney who agrees with interpretation, the BOD DOES NOT have this authority without 75% owners approval. Of course this would probably  have to be settled in court.


----------



## okie (Jul 6, 2017)

sudiski said:


> Thank you for your response.  I really wish the Board would reach out to the owners as they did for the parking situation a few years ago.  Although we are definitely not for the change to the wall, if most owners use the sofa for a bed and want the extra room, I can accept that.  Your facebook member numbers are very interesting.  I have reached out to owners we know.  Like your FB numbers, we found far more are against changing the wall - even those that have 3 generations staying in their unit.
> 
> At the "Java with the GM" meeting we attended, we were told they would be putting the sofa on the bedroom wall.  In one of our units, this will put us facing the lagoon and not the ocean which we can now see from the couch.  We know someone who has a unit closest to the beach in Magnolia, and they were told "you bought garden view".  They bought their fixed unit because it does have an ocean view.  To put their sofa facing the pool/lagoon and also take away the aquarium window and not put in another window on the side so they continue to have a view of the ocean seems crazy to me. I would hope that since the windows/sliders are being replaced, they will continue to have the sofa face the ocean with those that have any kind of an ocean view.  Since we have an ocean front unit, we are also upset about the change to the windows.  This will decrease the amount of beach we can see from inside our unit.  Once we heard of the changes, we were amazed how often we do look out the small side of the aquarium window.  We hope the Board will at least give us a side window and not just a wall
> 
> Like you, we have always thought that the management team and the Board have done a great job communicating with the owners.  We love our Monarch weeks.  Right now, we are hearing of major changes to our units and it would be nice if these changes would at least be posted on the Monarch owner site.  The Board may not be required to get approval from the owners, but with the money being spent, I would hope they would want owner input.  They could easily e-mail most owners, as they have most of our e-mail addresses.   If any tuggers do get a response from the Board or if you see Monarchowners has posted the proposed changes, please post on TUG.   Thanks!


I could not agree more with you. I still don't believe the money the  owners have paid for "REFURBISHMENT" allows the BOD to use it for major structural changes that are not completely necessary and that refurbishing a window with a wall is not refurbishment.  I also have sent a letter to the board and have not heard back.  I hope it will not take a law suit to get a response. I wish all the owners could be notified and a vote taken. In addition I don't understand why board can't separate the various merits of each building at the Monarch, and not throw the baby out with the bath water. I as a owner will fight the board, I hope I am not alone.


----------



## okie (Jul 6, 2017)

okie said:


> I disagree with your interpretation of the Master Deed. Would like to know if you are a Contract Lawyer? The statement with regard to only damage from casualty does not consider the true intent of the master deed which was not to allow major modifications without 75% approval of owners. The master deed does not specifically state that the BOD has this power aside from casualty damage. I have consulted contract attorney who agrees with interpretation, the BOD DOES NOT have this authority without 75% owners approval. Of course this would probably  have to be settled in court.


I would also point out that the BOD is doing this under the guise of REFURBISHMENT


----------



## okie (Jul 6, 2017)

l0410z said:


> I sent an email earlier this evening asking the board to update the Owners website.  If they do not do this I am going  to suggest to anyone that voted to send an email.  did they mention the Why.


Do you still believe this is "just a misunderstanding of the facts"?


----------



## l0410z (Jul 6, 2017)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/754689184660062/

Here is the link to the Monarch Facebook Group if you want to join.  We have about 200 members but all of them are not Owners.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 6, 2017)

okie said:


> *I disagree with your interpretation* of the Master Deed. Would like to know if you are a Contract Lawyer? The statement with regard to only damage from casualty does not consider the true intent of the master deed which was not to allow major modifications without 75% approval of owners. The master deed does not specifically state that the BOD has this power aside from casualty damage. I have consulted contract attorney who agrees with interpretation, the BOD DOES NOT have this authority without 75% owners approval. Of course this would probably  have to be settled in court.



No comment other than, I don't think that the interpretation is actually l0410z's.  If you look again at his post #95 above, that statement was made to him by "the liaison" who responded to his email.


----------



## Monarch (Jul 7, 2017)

okie said:


> I disagree with your interpretation of the Master Deed. Would like to know if you are a Contract Lawyer? The statement with regard to only damage from casualty does not consider the true intent of the master deed which was not to allow major modifications without 75% approval of owners. The master deed does not specifically state that the BOD has this power aside from casualty damage. I have consulted contract attorney who agrees with interpretation, the BOD DOES NOT have this authority without 75% owners approval. Of course this would probably  have to be settled in court.



When you think about it, Okie’s lawyer has a point. What was the *intent* of the original developers? In case of severe damage, as from a catastrophic hurricane, they wanted a provision written into the master deed that required the building to be rebuilt to the original plan. This could only be changed with 75% approval vote of owners. They never expected the BOD to change the building. It is not written that the BOD can change the design. Therefore it is *implied* that they expect the building to remain in the original architectural design. So concerned about this, they listed the exact sq.ft. of each room to the ten of an inch in the Master Deed (Article II, Section 2. Beaufort County ROD, book 347, page 351).


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 7, 2017)

Wasn't Monarch originally developed by another company and Marriott bought it as their first foray into timeshares?  While the developers' Master Deed is certainly important, there are other components of the Public Offering Statements for other Marriott timeshares that are at least equally important.  Is there, for example, a Management Agreement component of Monarch's POS, and if so, does it contain relevant protections for Marriott that may supersede what's in the original Master Deed?  And are there any other components?

I don't know the answers here but based on similar discussions related to Marriott actions at other properties, I do know that challenging Marriott is never as simple as a single provision in a single document would make it appear.  I am ALWAYS in favor of obtaining a qualified attorney's opinion in matters like this, but any attorney will need to see all of the relevant documents in order to come away with an informed/actionable opinion.


----------



## sparty (Jul 7, 2017)

l0410z said:


> I am one that enjoys the Monarch.  I have no desire to change anyones mind because it doesn't matter to me.  I have no issue with anyone disliking the Monarch for whatever reasons (decor, layout, age. etc) they want.   There is no question the Monarch has the smallest unit footprint of all the Marriott oceanfront resorts.  The one issue I have is unit size as if all the other Oceanfront resorts offer huge mansions in comparison.  Let's quantify each Marriott  Oceanfront 2 bedroom resort square footage.  I know we are now in a world of alternate facts but facts are still facts.
> 
> I did this a number of years ago when my friend purchased at the Surfwatch for 40% more than the second unit I purchased at the Monarch and he tried  to convince me his  2 BR was 40% bigger.  Some of that was fun arguing between friends but we did get the numbers.   Just as an FYI, I verified this again just before this post with each of the front desks and the numbers still match... smallest to largest.
> 
> ...



Small correction, for Barony assuming the "Baroney" you are referring to is Barony.  Marriott often says approximately 1300 sq ft but they don't give an exact sq footage.  Some of the units are actually 1350 sq ft and officially they refer to them as typical units for particular buildings with an average of 1350 sq ft and all being pretty much the same, meaning there is some variance and why Marriott says approximate.  Better to be safe than sued. I am pretty sure GO is the same way but I never cared to look since I don't own there.


----------



## l0410z (Jul 8, 2017)

sparty said:


> Small correction, for Barony assuming the "Baroney" you are referring to is Barony.  Marriott often says approximately 1300 sq ft but they don't give an exact sq footage.  Some of the units are actually 1350 sq ft and officially they refer to them as typical units for particular buildings with an average of 1350 sq ft and all being pretty much the same, meaning there is some variance and why Marriott says approximate.  Better to be safe than sued. I am pretty sure GO is the same way but I never cared to look since I don't own there.



Thanks for the correction on the typo for Barony to clarify so there was no confusion. 

I called up each resort and they told me what they told me so please let me know who "officially" is you are referring to.  If it is Marriott sales, they can quote 2200 sf and not be held accountable.   My posting was to give facts not perception.  It was for compairson purposes but I will concede the 4 percent increase in sf to the Barony to 1350 if you concede you can get a smaller unit at times.  Heck, I will increase all but the Monarch by 4 percent.  It still doesn't changes facts by much or support perception of some. 

 The Monarch has a unit that is 2400 sf.  So the range of unit size at the Monarch is 1800 sf.  The largest range of any Marriott property on HHI.  No I am not a sales person in training.


----------



## bogey21 (Jul 8, 2017)

l0410z said:


> The Monarch has a unit that is 2400 sf.



You are probably referring to the Crown Suite of which there is only one.  At one time I owned a Crown Suite Week.  It was by far the best TS Unit I ever stayed in.  But with luxury comes cost.  The MF is double that of other Monarch Units.  Nonetheless, owning a Crown Suite Week was my ultimate TS experience.

George


----------



## l0410z (Jul 9, 2017)

I was referring to it and while I never stayed in it, my unit is right underneath and I have toured it.  It is really nice but I would spent 2x MF.


----------



## Monarch (Jul 9, 2017)

SueDonJ said:


> Wasn't Monarch originally developed by another company and Marriott bought it as their first foray into timeshares?  While the developers' Master Deed is certainly important, there are other components of the Public Offering Statements for other Marriott timeshares that are at least equally important.  Is there, for example, a Management Agreement component of Monarch's POS, and if so, does it contain relevant protections for Marriott that may supersede what's in the original Master Deed?  And are there any other components?
> 
> I don't know the answers here but based on similar discussions related to Marriott actions at other properties, I do know that challenging Marriott is never as simple as a single provision in a single document would make it appear.  I am ALWAYS in favor of obtaining a qualified attorney's opinion in matters like this, but any attorney will need to see all of the relevant documents in order to come away with an informed/actionable opinion.



Yes, when we purchased it was being built by American Resorts. At approx ¾ into the project Marriott became interested in timeshares, purchased the project, and completed the last of 4 buildings. The developer became the new VP for timeshares and developed others in HHI and Orlando. After completion of sales Marriott stayed on as the management company.

I do not know of any other agreements and if any occurred at transfer, all owners should have received copies of new documents. Management has always noted that the BOD makes all the final decisions. However, there is pressure due to corporate requirements. For example, we had to give up ½ of the lobby and install an exercise room to keep up with company standards. Spicebush and Swallowtail did not have a large number of owners so could not afford the update required. In turn Marriott did not renew their management contract and they are now managed by a local group on HHI.

We have been told that the new $4-6000 self closing door is required by corporate. Such a waste as other much less expensive closers can be installed as in most commercial buildings.  It is also a red herring as children will get locked out in the hallway with no key. This money could be well spent on the hurricane windows. Alternatively, for budget purposes, do the windows this year and the doors next year. Properly installed windows will not leak, so blocking them in is a stupid idea. Oceanfront and view units paid more and now will lose approx 20-25% of view. Hopefully Sea Pines ARB will turn it down as owners have not approved it.

Monarch owners are different than other time shares. They have a fixed time deeded unit. As the project ended, management came up with a new concept of floating time and designated about 15 units in the last building for that purpose. Deeded owners are like homeowners. We can use it, lend it, trade it, rent it, or leave it vacant if you cannot come at that time. Like home owners we do not want someone saying you have to change the wall because the design company has a plan. Designers are profit based and are destroying what we purchased for the sake of a new furniture floor plan. Monarch remains the only property which does not have the first right of refusal attached to the sale.


----------



## bazzap (Jul 9, 2017)

Monarch said:


> Yes, when we purchased it was being built by American Resorts. At approx ¾ into the project Marriott became interested in timeshares, purchased the project, and completed the last of 4 buildings. The developer became the new VP for timeshares and developed others in HHI and Orlando. After completion of sales Marriott stayed on as the management company.
> 
> I do not know of any other agreements and if any occurred at transfer, all owners should have received copies of new documents. Management has always noted that the BOD makes all the final decisions. However, there is pressure due to corporate requirements. For example, we had to give up ½ of the lobby and install an exercise room to keep up with company standards. Spicebush and Swallowtail did not have a large number of owners so could not afford the update required. In turn Marriott did not renew their management contract and they are now managed by a local group on HHI.
> 
> ...


I understood from this that there are quite a few MVC resorts which do not have ROFR attached to the sale?
http://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php?threads/marriotts-right-of-first-refusal-rofr.13111/


----------



## Monarch (Jul 9, 2017)

bazzap said:


> I understood from this that there are quite a few MVC resorts which do not have ROFR attached to the sale?
> http://tugbbs.com/forums/index.php?threads/marriotts-right-of-first-refusal-rofr.13111/



Nice research! I stand corrected.
Thanks


----------



## thickey (Jul 10, 2017)

_[Threads merged.]_

I recently learned though a MVCI Facebook page that the Board of Directors at the Monarch are considering changing the curved wall between the living room and master bedroom. This change will supposedly add a few inches to the living room.  They are apparently proposing other changes as well (corner window to smaller size), etc.
I have not heard anything about this other than through this Facebook page, but it is supposedly the real deal.  There is nothing on the MVC website, the Monarch Owners website, no email or letter from the B.O.D., etc. 
From the poll taken on the Facebook page, roughly 90% of responders (mostly owners) are against the proposed changes, as there is little or no benefit for the money.  Most of us LIKE the curved wall.  Many (including me) have written the B.O.D. and have had NO response, or even an acknowledgement of an email/letter.
Owners have bragged on the Board in the past, regarding their professionalism and transparency.  Huh?
What can we owners do to have a true voice in what is going on there?  It appears that our "representatives" are not representin'!
Thoughts?


----------



## l0410z (Jul 10, 2017)

thickey said:


> I recently learned though a MVCI Facebook page that the Board of Directors at the Monarch are considering changing the curved wall between the living room and master bedroom. This change will supposedly add a few inches to the living room.  They are apparently proposing other changes as well (corner window to smaller size), etc.
> I have not heard anything about this other than through this Facebook page, but it is supposedly the real deal.  There is nothing on the MVC website, the Monarch Owners website, no email or letter from the B.O.D., etc.
> From the poll taken on the Facebook page, roughly 90% of responders (mostly owners) are against the proposed changes, as there is little or no benefit for the money.  Most of us LIKE the curved wall.  Many (including me) have written the B.O.D. and have had NO response, or even an acknowledgement of an email/letter.
> Owners have bragged on the Board in the past, regarding their professionalism and transparency.  Huh?
> ...



I started the facebook page and I learned from a tug post of the changes and reported that along with information on where the information I read on Tug.   So to close the loop (and it was posted on facebook), *I did finally hear back  from the liaison to the HOA today.*  I will also post this on the thread on the Monarch

I believe 100% in what I was sent because it is consistent with and in character of how the HOA has operated in the past. The HOA is doing their due diligence and as owners that is all we can ask.

*"It is a misconception that the Board decided on these particular two design elements (serpentine wall and aquarium window). At the spring board meeting, the Board had been given a presentation by the commissioned design firm with an overall refurbishment recommendation. The Board asked key questions and gave relatively minor direction and opinions, but there were no firm decisions or approvals of any particular components. Instead, the MVCI project manager was supposed to continue working on pricing out the entire scope of the renovation, with those two design elements being just two of the HUNDREDS of components. Nothing has been decided for sure, and nothing CAN be decided until there is an overall detailed comprehensive final proposal with price tag, pros/cons, timeline, etc., for the Board to vote up or down.

Because nothing has been approved yet, and there isn’t enough data yet in hand, it simply isn’t possible to put specific plans on the MonarchOwners website.

I do promise that I’ll be back in touch once I have anything definite to report"
*
_[Edited/bolded for importance <-- SueDonJ]_


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 10, 2017)

You might try giving the liaison links to this thread, the FaceBook page and whatever other social media sites where this is being discussed.  No idea if they're interested in owner input but they should at least know it exists and where to find it.


----------



## l0410z (Jul 10, 2017)

SueDonJ said:


> You might try giving the liaison links to this thread, the FaceBook page and whatever other social media sites where this is being discussed.  No idea if they're interested in owner input but they should at least know it exists and where to find it.



Through the liaison and with the HOA approval, the link to the FB page on the Monarch Owners website.    

From the Monarch Owners website

Want to enter discussion about our resort? A Monarch Facebook Group has been established for owners (past, present, and future) as well as renters and exchangers to share ideas, ask questions, and exchange information about Monarch. Please note that this Facebook group is independent from the Monarch Owners Association and was not created by or endorsed by the Monarch Board of Directors or our Management associates, nor does the Board or the management team monitor the content. Go to https://www.facebook.com/groups/754689184660062/ to learn more.


----------



## okie (Jul 10, 2017)

l0410z said:


> I started the facebook page and I learned from a tug post of the changes and reported that along with information on where the information I read on Tug.   So to close the loop (and it was posted on facebook), *I did finally hear back  from the liaison to the HOA today.*  I will also post this on the thread on the Monarch
> 
> I believe 100% in what I was sent because it is consistent with and in character of how the HOA has operated in the past. The HOA is doing their due diligence and as owners that is all we can ask.
> 
> ...


I would like to believe this but I spent 4 weeks in may this year at the Monarch and this totally contradicts what  we were told by monarch upper management at owners meetings. Some of the owners even saw blue prints and  were told that we would be able to view a prototype unit early next year. So now who do we believe? I wish I could trust your liaison but I am afraid there may be something rotten in Denmark.


----------



## okie (Jul 10, 2017)

Monarch said:


> Yes, when we purchased it was being built by American Resorts. At approx ¾ into the project Marriott became interested in timeshares, purchased the project, and completed the last of 4 buildings. The developer became the new VP for timeshares and developed others in HHI and Orlando. After completion of sales Marriott stayed on as the management company.
> 
> I do not know of any other agreements and if any occurred at transfer, all owners should have received copies of new documents. Management has always noted that the BOD makes all the final decisions. However, there is pressure due to corporate requirements. For example, we had to give up ½ of the lobby and install an exercise room to keep up with company standards. Spicebush and Swallowtail did not have a large number of owners so could not afford the update required. In turn Marriott did not renew their management contract and they are now managed by a local group on HHI.
> 
> ...


Well said, I could not agree more.


----------



## l0410z (Jul 10, 2017)

okie said:


> I would like to believe this but I spent 4 weeks in may this year at the Monarch and this totally contradicts what  we were told by monarch upper management at owners meetings. Some of the owners even saw blue prints and  were told that we would be able to view a prototype unit early next year. So now who do we believe? I wish I could trust your liaison but I am afraid there may be something rotten in Denmark.



A Design firm made  a number of recommendations/proposals.  It is not uncommon to provide blue prints in support of this.  The blue prints might even have a few versions to cover multiple scenarios given there are "hundreds of components".  Seeing blue prints are meaningless unless they are approved and signed.  Were they approved by the HOA?  Prototypes are meaning full but what of the hundred plus components being looked at are in the prototype.   I do not mean to be a jerk but often people do not ask follow on questions when given information.  The HOA are owners also.  The HOA has never done anything in my 25 years of ownership that suggests they are self serving or deceptive.  In fact, I have often made suggestions about  towing second cars of owners who park their car where first car parking is with only one warning.  The HOA would not do it because they didn't want to antagonize owners.  Doesn't seem like a board willing to jump into something.      

My owners liaison is hired by the HOA works for the HOA and if I had to guess, an owner also.  My liaison is also your liaison and it is documented very clearly on the Monarch Owners website who it is, the role and how to get in touch.  Who provided you the conflicting information at these meetings (titles if you have them  and names if you don't).  While I rented my units this year, my wife and I are going to be in Charleston this weekend and staying in HHI Sunday and Monday.  Would love to chat with him/her on this topic.


----------



## okie (Jul 11, 2017)

l0410z said:


> A Design firm made  a number of recommendations/proposals.  It is not uncommon to provide blue prints in support of this.  The blue prints might even have a few versions to cover multiple scenarios given there are "hundreds of components".  Seeing blue prints are meaningless unless they are approved and signed.  Were they approved by the HOA?  Prototypes are meaning full but what of the hundred plus components being looked at are in the prototype.   I do not mean to be a jerk but often people do not ask follow on questions when given information.  The HOA are owners also.  The HOA has never done anything in my 25 years of ownership that suggests they are self serving or deceptive.  In fact, I have often made suggestions about  towing second cars of owners who park their car where first car parking is with only one warning.  The HOA would not do it because they didn't want to antagonize owners.  Doesn't seem like a board willing to jump into something.
> 
> My owners liaison is hired by the HOA works for the HOA and if I had to guess, an owner also.  My liaison is also your liaison and it is documented very clearly on the Monarch Owners website who it is, the role and how to get in touch.  Who provided you the conflicting information at these meetings (titles if you have them  and names if you don't).  While I rented my units this year, my wife and I are going to be in Charleston this weekend and staying in HHI Sunday and Monday.  Would love to chat with him/her on this topic.


Just learned that a unit is already in the construction process and is having the serpentine wall removed please check this out let us know what you find out when you are at HH.  I hope your faith  in the HOA is accurate but you might want to keep an open mind and your eyes open, something dose not add up. Could this design team and Marriott have some power over the HOA?


----------



## okie (Jul 11, 2017)

okie said:


> Just learned that a unit is already in the construction process and is having the serpentine wall removed please check this out let us know what you find out when you are at HH.  I hope your faith  in the HOA is accurate but you might want to keep an open mind and your eyes open, something dose not add up. Could this design team and Marriott have some power over the HOA?


Also I want to stress that at the owners meeting this may at Monarch we were told by management this was a DONE deal, not in the planning stage.


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 11, 2017)

Monarch said:


> ... Monarch owners are different than other time shares. They have a fixed time deeded unit. As the project ended, management came up with a new concept of floating time and designated about 15 units in the last building for that purpose. Deeded owners are like homeowners. We can use it, lend it, trade it, rent it, or leave it vacant if you cannot come at that time. Like home owners we do not want someone saying you have to change the wall because the design company has a plan. Designers are profit based and are destroying what we purchased for the sake of a new furniture floor plan. Monarch remains the only property which does not have the first right of refusal attached to the sale.



Most Marriott timeshare ownership is deeded in the sense you understand it regardless of whether the purchased interval is fixed or float (exceptions being the non-US properties and one-offs like Custom House where Marriott has long-term lease agreements with the property-holders.)  The only difference between Monarch (and any other MVW) deeded fixed Week owners and deeded float Week owners is that fixed owners are guaranteed the same interval every year which is auto-reserved for them, while float owners are guaranteed an interval that conforms to their ownership type but they must secure a reservation via MVW.  Once reserved, though, the interval is theirs to do whatever they want with it including the same things fixed owners can do, i.e. "use it, lend it, trade it, rent it, or leave it vacant."

I don't know how long you've been reading TUG but there's no doubt in my mind that many floating Weeks Owners share the same thought process that apparently Monarch fixed Weeks owners have, insofar as many consider themselves "homeowners" of a type and are as fiercely protective of their rights to have a say in how their property is managed/refurbed.  But the fact remains that at any and all timeshares with a Marriott Vacation Club sign hanging on the door, Marriott has rights by virtue of a contractual Management Agreement.  Barony Beach's is 15 pages; SurfWatch's is 23 pages.  They (among the rest of the governing documents) are part of the reason why I think a challenge by Weeks owners, over property changes recommended by MVW for board approval, is doomed to failure from the start if it's not a collective action headed by a qualified attorney who has all of the ownership documents at his disposal.  And even then, I'd lay odds on Marriott coming out the winner but possibly making minor concessions to appease the owners.  At worst, the MVC name could come off the property the same way it did at Swallowtail and Spicebush.

I'm not an owner at Monarch, obviously.  Anybody who is can probably obtain a copy of the Monarch Public Offering Statement the same way I got mine for Barony, by calling Owner Services and asking for it.  (SurfWatch's was given to us at purchase which is how I knew that one probably existed for Barony.)  I was told that a per-page printing fee may be charged which could add up because Barony's is a 325-page paperback book (SurfWatch's is 375) but they never sent me a bill.  Other than making that suggestion, to ensure that owners and any attorneys you may consult are fully aware of all relevant documents from both before and after Marriott began managing Monarch, it's pointless for me to comment on the specific design changes that your resort may be facing.  I wish you good luck, though, and hope that in the end no matter how this is all resolved, you continue to enjoy your Monarch ownership.


----------



## okie (Jul 15, 2017)

Just heard back form the Board. THE SERPENTINE WALL IS STAYING!!. Decision with aquarium window still pending


----------



## l0410z (Jul 15, 2017)

okie said:


> Just learned that a unit is already in the construction process and is having the serpentine wall removed please check this out let us know what you find out when you are at HH.  I hope your faith  in the HOA is accurate but you might want to keep an open mind and your eyes open, something dose not add up. Could this design team and Marriott have some power over the HOA?





okie said:


> Just heard back form the Board. THE SERPENTINE WALL IS STAYING!!. Decision with aquarium window still pending



The board did their due diligence and it didn't make financial sense.  When they explained the reason for considering it (more space for people who use the sofa bed and more felxibilty in living / bedroom furniture), it made sense.  I am glad it didn't make cents.


----------



## okie (Jul 16, 2017)

l0410z said:


> The board did their due diligence and it didn't make financial sense.  When they explained the reason for considering it (more space for people who use the sofa bed and more felxibilty in living / bedroom furniture), it made sense.  I am glad it didn't make cents.


I just wish there would have been better communication with the owners and a forum for our input.


----------



## l0410z (Feb 17, 2018)

_[Threads merged.]_

We will finally get to see what the 200 disaster recovery fee and the 150 four year assessment gets us.  The plan is for the  2019  MF to drop the 200 and in 2020 to drop the 150 (I am sure, minus any increases).  After 23 years I have given up on fighting to  expand the second bedroom to sleep 4.  As did the last two year, when I need to sleep 8, I exchange to  the GO.  My other unit I rented the last 5 years.  Maybe I can increase my price a little.

Right off the Monarch Owners website.

Monarch's huge villa façade project and concurrent villa refurbishment are now underway! The façade project starts with the Azalea (3800) and Camelia (3700) buildings this year, with renovation scheduled from early January through the second week of March. The Dogwood and Magnolia buildings will be undertaken next year, scheduled for January through the second week of March 2019. The villa refurbishment, as done every five or six years, is encompassing updates, replacements, and renovations in all four buildings

The exterior façade work encompasses:

Exterior Stucco Repairs - remove/replace localized areas of delaminated stucco; repair bulging/buckling material at floor lines; repair/replace rusting metal corner beads and other metal stucco accessories.
Sealants and Coatings – re-caulk all exterior joints including designed expansion joints in the stucco material; apply breathable, high-performance coating to all stucco surfaces.
Doors and Windows – replace triple-panel sliding glass doors with vinyl-clad framed doors with impact-resistant glass; replace balcony swing doors (some units) with aluminum-framed doors with impact-resistant glass; replace unit entry doors and glass sidelights with steel-framed doors with impact-resistant glass sidelights; replace typical unit windows with vinyl-clad framed windows with thermally improved and impact-resistant glass; replace "aquarium" corner glazed windows (some units) with window on same building face as the sliding doors and close/finish opening on other building face to match inside and outside materials. Note: The "aquarium" style windows no longer meet building codes and have been the source of water intrusion behind the stucco façade and into the units.
Miscellaneous Repairs – perform numerous exterior wall penetration repairs.

The 2018 Villa Interior Refurbishment has been meticulously planned and budgeted over the past many months. By the time you next visit Monarch, you will find fresh, newly rehabbed and redecorated villas encompassing the following scope:

Carpet/Pad – replace carpet and pad throughout plus new transition strips at all carpet/tile locations.
Tile – add kitchen tile backsplash.
Paint & Finishes - remove dated “popcorn” ceiling in the kitchen & living/dining rooms; perform drywall repairs as needed; paint throughout the unit.
Carpentry & Millwork – eliminate soffit above breakfast bar; relocate granite shelf from dining area to foyer; add drawers in one guest bedroom closet; add drawers in center of hall closet; add millwork for new living room TV.
Electrical – install makeup mirror in master bath; replace select other electrical fixtures throughout unit; install electronic equipment charging stations in living room, master bedroom and guest bedroom.
Furniture & Soft Goods - replace all furniture, window treatments, bedroom sets, lamps, ceiling fans, and accessories.
 The interior refurbishment of the Crown Suite (Azalea 5th floor penthouse) includes all of the components detailed above with these changes/additions:
Replace master bath tub with shower enclosure; convert old shower area to closet with single door configuration.
Refinish secretary desk in living room.
Refinish entry table.
Add backlit vanity mirror.
Reuse Murphy bed millwork piece with new mattress;


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Feb 19, 2018)

Thanks for the update.  I know I'm very excited to see how the updates look.   I know MFs are creeping up but for me I love the way Marriott maintains their properties and still feel we receive very good value for a very nice beachfront resort on magnificent HHI.


----------

