Independent Condominium Association?

[WilsonFlyer]

This idea has been running around in my head for a few months now. Every once in a while, it resurfaces based on things being said in a praticular thread or during a particular discussion point. Such a resurface occurred this morning whilst posting in another thread so I decided to just throw it out there just to see if anybody agrees.

Would you and your family be interested in group representation to Disney that was seperate from the DVD-sponsored condominium association?

I am not talking about something half-hearted but rather something professionally run and organized that would have a stated purpose and mission and would represent you independent of Disney influenced input.

This sort of association would, of course, be completely voluntary yet would likely have to have a certain percentage of association members in its ranks in order to have viability in the eyes of Disney.

Since the assosication would have an administrative office and administrative overhead, it would likely have nominal annual fees or dues associated with membership.

Please allow me to stress that this association's mission is to represent the membership to Disney as a united group. It would not be used to try to bully Disney and would not be used for such purposes but would rather be a positive voice representing the collective outside the influence of DVD.

I believe that a private forum/board such as this could be used as a methodology for collecting membership concerns and requests, at least initially. Some sort of meetings, likely regional, would be essential as well.

Let's discuss. I'd be interested in your feelings regarding this.

 

[DisneyWalker44]

Please allow me to stress that this association's mission is to represent the membership to Disney as a united group.

The problem is we aren't a united group. Spend 10 minutes on any DVC message board and you'll see how much we disagree.

Right not we have a condo association looking out for us. It's run by Disney. I know there's a huge conflict of interest, and they don't always do the absolute best thing. But we pretty much have to trust them. When they stop trying to look out for us, we are in big, big trouble (and no independent group is going to save us.)

Short answer - I trust Disney more than I trust you guys (no offense). And I would hope you guys trust Disney more than me.

 

[dianeschlicht]

Absolutely NOT! If you think a camel is a horse put together by a committee, just wait until you see what a couple hundred thousand members could do to DVC! I can guarantee you it would definintely NOT be operating in the black!

 

[dcamdad]

NO WAY, can't even get the HOA for may neighborhood of less than 40 homes to agree on cutting the grass in the common area and you want over 100,000 owners to agree.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

Absolutely NOT! If you think a camel is a horse put together by a committee, just wait until you see what a couple hundred thousand members could do to DVC! I can guarantee you it would definintely NOT be operating in the black!

I'm afraid that I don't understand your point. I think a camel is a camel.

Supposedly, we are represented now albeit with a Disney bias. That's what the current condominium association is. Have you ever been asked your opinion about a change? Ever been asked to vote on a board or board member? I'm fairly new to this. Maybe ballots go out for these things and I just haven't been through the cycle yet.

As to your last sentence, maybe I haven't expressed the intent of the association very clearly. I apologize for that. Please allow me to attempt to clarify fruther (or further refine, as the case may be).

I am not proposing, in any way, shape or form, an association to run DVC for the membership but rather to be a unified voice to Disney for expressing concerns and needs. The only budget this association would be responsible for would be its own. If it failed in intent or financially, it would fold with no harm/no foul to the membership. You'd be right back where you are now.

The current association is fundamentally run by and controlled by Disney proper, not unlike Reedy Creek. This can be good and this can be bad depending on your perspective. What be can be certain of is that it will always be is controlled and influenced more by Disney than by you or me.

NO WAY, can't even get the HOA for may neighborhood of less than 40 homes to agree on cutting the grass in the common area and you want over 100,000 owners to agree.

We are represented in Congress every day without a unified voice. That is what our Congressmen do. Hopefully, they fairly represent the views and opinions of a majority of thier constituents. They cannot possibly make everyone happy all the time but what they can do is represent them collectively as best they can.

That begs this fundamental question. Do you have representation now with DVC that you are comfortable with and that you feel adequately represents your ownership interests? That's what this is all about. If you feel you already have this then you are correct. This conversation need go no further. Likewise, if we feel we are adequately represented, I'm not sure why we feel we have a right to complain about things.




I'm quite taken by the results of this poll, quite honestly. I certainly thought it would at least provoke dialog and discussion but admittedly, I didn't see this coming at all.

I see posts in threads constantly saying or implying that we are not represented and that we should be. It's tragic that we, apparently, may not understand the powers in our numbers and for that reason, may never control our own fate as a collective group.

At least as of now, what this thread and the poll results have shown me is that we'd rather complain than to try to do anything about it. I guess we can all just stand on our roofs and wait for the rescuers from FEMA to show up when something goes wrong that we didn't try to do something about on our own.

The next time something comes up like the point chart changes for 2010, I plan to point the complainers straight to this thread. I plan to continue to complain when I don't agree with what's going on. Seeing how I am the lone vote "for" so far, it apprears that I'm the only one who has a right to.

 

[DisDaydreamer]

Hello Bob, I am Rob (Wilson),

I voted no. I am an owner and I have a voice. I like to complain sometimes and I don't particularly like having someone do my complaining for me. Especially, if I'm not agreeing with the majority and this representative entity isn't representing my view.

You strike me as someone who sees many things in black and white, and feels that if others don't agree with you then you haven't done a good enough job explaining yourself. So don't take it personally if I don't agree with your line of thought. Sounds like a Pandora's box to me.

I appreciate your thoughts though

 

[WilsonFlyer]

Fair enough, Rob. I can't argue with that. I would like to propose a question, if I may.

Why would we not want representation? Why wouldn't we want to leverage the potential leverage we have to our own advantage (in a good way)?

Help me understand why I'm on the wrong side of this black and white issue.

 

[Dean]

More owner representation would be a good thing and is actually legislated in the POS. The problem is the POS contains conflicting information that legislates membership on the board but also in different places signs over our voting rights to DVC. Likely a better approach would be to push for that portion of the POS to be enforced so there were actually regular members on the BOD. The only other approach would be to petition for separation which I think is the only was to have a separate entity. DVC could certainly set up an advisory panel, I suggested that to them in writing 10 years ago.

 

[Tara]

That begs this fundamental question. Do you have representation now with DVC that you are comfortable with and that you feel adequately represents your ownership interests? That's what this is all about. If you feel you already have this then you are correct. This conversation need go no further.

Yes, I do, which is one reason I voted "no."

Likewise, if we feel we are adequately represented, I'm not sure why we feel we have a right to complain about things.

All that matters here to me is "I" - because "we" don't pay for my membership. Just pointing out the shift from I to we there - and in my mind, it's an important distinction.

I'm quite taken by the results of this poll, quite honestly. I certainly thought it would at least provoke dialog and discussion but admittedly, I didn't see this coming at all.

I see posts in threads constantly saying or implying that we are not represented and that we should be. It's tragic that we, apparently, may not understand the powers in our numbers and for that reason, may never control our own fate as a collective group.

At least as of now, what this thread and the poll results have shown me is that we'd rather complain than to try to do anything about it. I guess we can all just stand on our roofs and wait for the rescuers from FEMA to show up when something goes wrong that we didn't try to do something about on our own.

Again, it's dangerous to use "we" when you have a minuscule portion of this board's members, let alone DVC members voting. What I don't want to do is spend my time and energy on something that I don't believe will make a difference, because I suspect that not enough people care to form such a group (especially since at some point a lot of money would have to be collected, and random people on the internet aren't known to be the safest "investments").

I personally would rather use my own voice directly as I choose. And if need to complain, I'll do that. Yes, I only have one voice, but I suspect that 1. some decisions are not open to debate and 2. those decisions that might be revisited will be if needed, i.e., if enough people make themselves heard. I don't think an independent association is necessary for that.

The next time something comes up like the point chart changes for 2010, I plan to point the complainers straight to this thread. I plan to continue to complain when I don't agree with what's going on. Seeing how I am the lone vote "for" so far, it apprears that I'm the only one who has a right to.

You're kidding, right?!?! What you are the lone voice for is just ONE WAY of complaining. It happens to be a way that 23 readers don't agree with. Posting a poll on the subject doesn't give you any more right to complain.

 

[DisDaydreamer]

Fair enough, Rob. I can't argue with that. I would like to propose a question, if I may.

Why would we not want representation? Why wouldn't we want to leverage the potential leverage we have to our own advantage (in a good way)?

Help me understand why I'm on the wrong side of this black and white issue.

It's too complex. Too many different types of likes. The resorts are sooo different... from BLT to BCV to AKV, to SSR, to HHI. The range of issues all these people could possibly agree on are minimal and very generic. Resort unique issues would be impossible to get a genuine consensus or even literal majority of members to agree on.

The word leverage has multiple meanings to me. In this sense, to me, it means to compel Disney/DVC to do something by making them think they have to for positive or negative reasons. Anything short of this type of "union" would be nothing more than a publisher of polls.

Lastely, I don't like it when the representative of my district or state, or whatever represents the views of a group of people who don't even make up 50% of the whole. These simple majorities are usually the ones who speak the loudest or are ideologically aligned with the representatives.

That's just me though... I see things in many shades of grey...

 

[Chuck S]

Other than DVC itself setting up an advisory panel, any outside group would (and should IMO) have no influence. And how would the membership of that panel be determined?

The only other way for a members group to have any influence would be to have an owners vote to disassociate their resort from DVC. I can only imagine the complaints if that happened.

You asked if Disney ever asked for input. The answer is yes, they did poll a large percentage of early OKW owners. The poll asked whether DVC members would support construction of a pool slide, and it gave an estimated cost, and extended upkeep. The overwhelming response was no.

Now, they did build the pool anyway, at their own expense...but dues have to cover the continuing maintenance and cost of a life guard.

As stated on the POS Disney/DVC can change amenities at the resorts at their option, and at their expense...with members picking up the tab for upkeep.

I also don't feel that Disney/DVC Management is doing such a poor job that it would warrant additional dues to belong to what would be in effect a powerless HOA.

 

[tjkraz]

Have you ever been asked your opinion about a change? Ever been asked to vote on a board or board member?

No, but even if we were there would still be wildly varying opinions on many issues. And even when there is a majority there's always the risk that members would not act in their own best interests.

Look at a controversial topic like the point reallocation. If put to a vote I am entirely confident that members would have agreed to lower weekday points further while raising weekends. But does anyone really believe that move would be in the program's best interests?

Chuck provided a great example with the OKW pool slide. Members actually voiced their opposition to a slide being added. But I venture to guess that there were thousands of owners convinced that the slide should be added. Nobody wants to believe that they stand firmly in the minority.

Even with different representation, the results would be similar. There would rarely be universal agreement. Some would vehemently disagree with every move. Others would look to form their own factions. In the end it would probably just cost owners more money.

 

[Sammie]

Besides, we all know that every change made to DVC is based entirely on "Member Feedback"

 

[Boardwalker]

As I see it, the value of my investment in my beloved BWV (and all of the other onsite DVC resorts) is so deeply entangled with the profitablility of WDW, and thus, Disney itself, I don't see much to be gained by adding a buffer, and potentially more to be lost than gained.
What issues do you feel need to be addressed? I am not understanding what you are alluding to... what threads are actually addressable concerns? I thought we were all mostly just belly-aching.
Disney, WDW and even DVC would be fine without the Boardwalk Villas. But it doesn't work the other way, and whereas I like to complain about perks lost, I am not ready to risk the appreciation of my investment for pool hopping to the Beach Club. So I voted no.

 

[Mickey'sApprentice]

NO WAY, can't even get the HOA for may neighborhood of less than 40 homes to agree on cutting the grass in the common area and you want over 100,000 owners to agree.

Amen! I spent 2 years building a successful HOA just to have other homeowners use strong arm tactics to take control. These people were much more interested in control than the betterment of the neighborhood.

Just because you start a good thing...doesn't mean it stays that way. Never again!!

 

[bookwormde]

I voted yes, not to have it as a organization that would make decisions about “breaking away", but as an information clearing house which could exercise owner rights of "financial and operational review” which are not practical for an individual owner to do.

bookwormde

 

[Dean]

I voted yes, not to have it as a organization that would make decisions about “breaking away", but as an information clearing house which could exercise owner rights of "financial and operational review” which are not practical for an individual owner to do.

bookwormde

Can't really have one without the other if it's independent.

 

[DisneyWalker44]

What be can be certain of is that it will always be is controlled and influenced more by Disney than by you or me.

And that's a really good thing.

Condo/Homeowner associations don't work for the good of the members. They work for the good of the association and for the pet interests of the association board members. And, unfortunately, there tends to be a strong negative correlation between "the kind of people you want to represent you" and "the kind of people who are interested in association boards".

The next time something comes up like the point chart changes for 2010, I plan to point the complainers straight to this thread. I plan to continue to complain when I don't agree with what's going on. Seeing how I am the lone vote "for" so far, it apprears that I'm the only one who has a right to.

 

[DebbieB]

I voted no because I don't think it would have any power. Disney has the contract written up in a way that they have total control. It's like a group of USAir disgrunted frequent flyers who got together to form a group (FFOCUS). They got nowhere.

 

[crisi]

Absolutely not. There have been frankly some insane ideas floated around here over the years that have had a lot of popularity. I really don't need to pay dues into another organization so DVC members can lobby for things that would make my membership work a lot worse - or cost me a lot more in DVC dues because the members want to implement circuses.