MVC Trust Points 2023 Annual Meeting Vote Proxy

[SkyBornDancer]

Hi all, I just received my mailer to vote in the annual meeting.

If I am understanding the form correctly, I can vote YES or NO on the agenda item to waive fully funding reserves. Beyond that only my appointed proxy holders can vote on any "non agenda" items that come up (or me if I were able to be there in person). Given the only proxy choice is the MVC Jeff Comfort, that seems rather rigged.

Is anyone from TUG attending and can I designate you my proxy?

 

[dioxide45]

This seems like an odd proxy to send out. The waiving of fully funding reserves happens at the individual HOA level. The trust doesn't hold any reserves as it just passes any maintenance fees received down to the resort HOAs. So what if the ownership of the trust votes to not waive fully funding reserves? Does Marriott then use the trust ownership votes to not waive fully funding reserves at all the resorts in Florida? Is the opposite true if they do waive fully funded reserves? I actually thought the fully funding/not fully funding reserves was going away in 2024 with Florida SB-4D?

 

[SkyBornDancer]

 

[SkyBornDancer]

 

[SkyBornDancer]

 

[SkyBornDancer]

 

[SueDonJ]

This seems like an odd proxy to send out. The waiving of fully funding reserves happens at the individual HOA level. The trust doesn't hold any reserves as it just passes any maintenance fees received down to the resort HOAs. So what if the ownership of the trust votes to not waive fully funding reserves? Does Marriott then use the trust ownership votes to not waive fully funding reserves at all the resorts in Florida? Is the opposite true if they do waive fully funded reserves?

Don't the voting rights for the individual/specific Weeks which have been conveyed to the Trust, convey with the Weeks to the Trustee? And wouldn't the Trustee then be compelled, if it's legally required, to put certain voting issues to the entire Trust membership? So, for example, if 100 Oceana Palms Weeks are conveyed and 60% of the Trust members vote to waive fully-funded reserves, then the Oceana Palms board would count 40 of the conveyed Weeks as voting in favor of fully-funded reserves and 60 of the conveyed Weeks not in favor? And the same for every other Florida resort?

I actually thought the fully funding/not fully funding reserves was going away in 2024 with Florida SB-4D?

Here it is for the lawyers to dissect: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022D/4D/BillText/er/HTML

*************
Also, here's last year's thread about waiving Fully-Funded Reserves: [2022] MVC Trust Owners Association - Reserve Funding Waiver etc?

 

[Fasttr]

The bottom of post 5 spells it out. Even if the all of the component resorts vote to waive fully funding, if the Trust does not also vote to waive, then the Trust will need to reserve additional funding on its own.

 

[dougp26364]

The bottom of post 5 spells it out. Even if the all of the component resorts vote to waive fully funding, if the Trust does not also vote to waive, then the Trust will need to reserve additional funding on its own.

I find this an interesting thought. Logically, if the trust units vote to fully find but the individual week owners do not, the trust weeks would be fully funded with the remainder not being fully funded.


That would make for an interesting scenario should a hurricane flatten a resort. Weeks owners would likely see a huge SA while the trust would simply pay from its fully funded “bucket”.

 

[SueDonJ]

The bottom of post 5 spells it out. Even if the all of the component resorts vote to waive fully funding, if the Trust does not also vote to waive, then the Trust will need to reserve additional funding on its own.

I find this an interesting thought. Logically, if the trust units vote to fully find but the individual week owners do not, the trust weeks would be fully funded with the remainder not being fully funded.


That would make for an interesting scenario should a hurricane flatten a resort. Weeks owners would likely see a huge SA while the trust would simply pay from its fully funded “bucket”.

Is it only the Trust Members who live in Florida who are eligible to vote the fully-funded measure in their proxies, or is it a voting issue for every Trust Member? I would think it's every member, yes? Meaning that the cost is spread over a much larger pool than the pools of Weeks Owners at each affected resort?

I'm trying to figure out the math. (Honestly, every time I do, I fully expect to be corrected!) The amount is "estimated to be an additional amount between $8.43 and $9.47 per Beneficial Interest." With each BI equalling 250 points, that's a gigantic pile of money that the Trust will be sitting on for which the timing and necessity of its use can't be reasonably scheduled.

I also just want to make the same point here that's made every year - voting to waive Fully-Funded Reserves as they're legislated DOES NOT equate to under-funding the routine/scheduled maintenance/refurbishment of Marriott resorts. Expert outsiders (non-Marriott employees) are hired by every resort to perform reserve studies on a routine basis and Marriott determines the individual resort budgets based on those reports. If waiving the legislated Fully-Funded Reserves component of the Weeks Budgets were to result in Special Assessments because of routine/scheduled/necessary ongoing maintenance not taking place, the Florida and South Carolina resorts would have a history of SA's for other than one-off catastrophic events. That hasn't happened over the decades of Marriott's management.

 

[dougp26364]

Ocean Pointe has had a couple of small SA’s over the years of our ownership. However, IMHO they were reasonable all things considered

 

[SueDonJ]

Ocean Pointe has had a couple of small SA’s over the years of our ownership. However, IMHO they were reasonable all things considered

Did you attribute them to these legislated Fully-Funded Reserves being waived, or to one-off issues that couldn't be reasonably expected? Or, to a rare but not unheard of instance of the Board electing to underfund a budget submitted to them by Marriott?

 

[Fasttr]

Is it only the Trust Members who live in Florida who are eligible to vote the fully-funded measure in their proxies, or is it a voting issue for every Trust Member? I would think it's every member, yes? Meaning that the cost is spread over a much larger pool than the pools of Weeks Owners at each affected resort?

I'm trying to figure out the math. (Honestly, every time I do, I fully expect to be corrected!) The amount is "estimated to be an additional amount between $8.43 and $9.47 per Beneficial Interest." With each BI equalling 250 points, that's a gigantic pile of money that the Trust will be sitting on for which the timing and necessity of its use can't be reasonably scheduled.

I also just want to make the same point here that's made every year - voting to waive Fully-Funded Reserves as they're legislated DOES NOT equate to under-funding the routine/scheduled maintenance/refurbishment of Marriott resorts. Expert outsiders (non-Marriott employees) are hired by every resort to perform reserve studies on a routine basis and Marriott determines the individual resort budgets based on those reports. If waiving the legislated Fully-Funded Reserves component of the Weeks Budgets were to result in Special Assessments because of routine/scheduled/necessary ongoing maintenance not taking place, the Florida and South Carolina resorts would have a history of SA's for other than one-off catastrophic events. That hasn't happened over the decades of Marriott's management.

All members….not just those that reside in FL.

 

[dougp26364]

Did you attribute them to these legislated Fully-Funded Reserves being waived, or to one-off issues that couldn't be reasonably expected? Or, to a rare but not unheard of instance of the Board electing to underfund a budget submitted to them by Marriott?

They were one off issues secondary to hurricane damage. However, if the resort had been fully funded, they wouldn’t have been necessary.

I’m not certain what to make of the Kingfish issue. On the one hand I a see where it wasn’t an expected or planned expense. On the other hand, what do you expect with a building on the ocean and butted up against the inlet? I often wonder about the pilings driven down to support both Ocean Pointe and Oceana Palms and how they’ll fair in another 20 or 30 years. By that time it might be a moot point anyway.

 

[SueDonJ]

They were one off issues secondary to hurricane damage. However, if the resort had been fully funded, they wouldn’t have been necessary.

That's how I see the SA's we've been assessed at the Hilton Head resorts, as the result of two hurricanes that came through causing extensive damage following a period of 40 years during which no hurricane damage occurred. Had we voted in favor instead of waiving the Fully-Funded measures (thus funding the catastrophic insurance deductibles and co-pays) then the SA's wouldn't have occurred. At least, the first wouldn't because the resort would have been sitting on a gigantic pile of money but the second? I don't know, because even the "Fully-funded" legislation requires enough to cover one-time total replacement costs, so possibly it would not have been replenished in time for the two storms which hit in quick succession? Having paid those SA's I still vote in favor of waiving the legislated full-funding measures because there's no way to predict if/when another hurricane will come through!

I’m not certain what to make of the Kingfish issue. On the one hand I a see where it wasn’t an expected or planned expense. On the other hand, what do you expect with a building on the ocean and butted up against the inlet? I often wonder about the pilings driven down to support both Ocean Pointe and Oceana Palms and how they’ll fair in another 20 or 30 years. By that time it might be a moot point anyway.

Of course, we owners of resorts adjacent to oceans do have to wonder because building codes are ever-evolving, right? 20 or 30 years from now if the codes are cost-prohibitive then Marriott might decide to not rebuild a catastrophically-damaged resort?

 

[SueDonJ]

All members….not just those that reside in FL.

A follow-up - this particular waiver vote issue explanation is specific to Florida law. But what if Trust Members don't vote in favor of the waiver and a resort in any other state which has Trust conveyances suffers a catastrophic loss that's subject to one-off catastrophic insurance coverage? Would the Trust be able to designate the collected funds for use in that instance, or must it be held solely for the purpose of funding the Trust's share of losses at only the Florida resorts?

{ETA} I think the answer is also on the bottom of that page in post #5, and it's Florida-only resorts? "... the Trust Association will need to maintain its own reserves for the MVC Trust Accommodations in such Components. ..."

 

[dioxide45]

I find this an interesting thought. Logically, if the trust units vote to fully find but the individual week owners do not, the trust weeks would be fully funded with the remainder not being fully funded.


That would make for an interesting scenario should a hurricane flatten a resort. Weeks owners would likely see a huge SA while the trust would simply pay from its fully funded “bucket”.

Would the trust hold on to that extra "fully funded" money or does it not just get passed on to the HOAs once collected? I don't seem to recall people posting about these votes in prior years, is this a new thing or has this proxy always been sent out?

 

[dougp26364]

Would the trust hold on to that extra "fully funded" money or does it not just get passed on to the HOAs once collected? I don't seem to recall people posting about these votes in prior years, is this a new thing or has this proxy always been sent out?

I don’t recall this specific question. To be honest, I learned long ago that mother Marriott was going to do whatever Marriott wanted regardless of my opinion…….as with nearly all other timeshares managed by a big name timeshare management company, so I pretty much stopped paying attention.

 

[Fasttr]

Would the trust hold on to that extra "fully funded" money or does it not just get passed on to the HOAs once collected? I don't seem to recall people posting about these votes in prior years, is this a new thing or has this proxy always been sent out?

I looked back through my email archives, and the fully funding waiver vote for the Trust has been there every year at least as far back as 2018.

 

[pspercy]

The link from my email brings up the agenda & notice of meeting etc, one page pdf and nothing else.
Have tried Chrome and MS Edge, same result.
????

 

[Fasttr]

The link from my email brings up the agenda & notice of meeting etc, one page pdf and nothing else.
Have tried Chrome and MS Edge, same result.
????

On the same page where you can click to view the agenda, at the bottom there is a green box which says, click here to view the limited proxy.

 

[pspercy]

Thanks

Must've been having a senior moment . . .