That’s not how I interpret the screenshot that you shared. The key word they use in the language is “equitable share” which I take to
mean as “proportional”. For example, if DVC has 30% of the CL rooms and the hotel has 70%, the annual dues are responsible for funding 30% of the lounge’s operation.
I’m not a lawyer, I don’t know the exact numbers, and I’m not trying to parse words, but my understanding is a vastly different scenario than what is being described.
Except the CL lounge belongs solely to the AKV association as it was declared as a limited common element.
So, it’s operation is ultimately the responsibility of DVC….which is included in the clause.
However, the hotel division wanted to continue to offer the services to their guests,…it existed before DVC did,,, that stipulation was added to the declaration that if they did, they would have to pay for that and as you say, it’s equitable share to help offset the dues charged to owners…
What we don’t know is how DVC and the hotel determine what the hotel pays as its “equitable share.
If the hotel side decides it no longer wants to offer it, then all expenses become solely the responsibility of DVC …which is why if that happens, the contract gives DVC the authority to shut it down and redistribute the extra points
IMO, that is exactly what would happen if the hotel got rid of CL for its cash guests.
Remember , AKV only has CL because the lounge was on the same floor as those 6th floor rooms, and there was no way to make them DVC and prevent guests staying in those rooms from using the lounge.
It is why I said that if there was no hotel side to help pay for CL, then it’s all DVC….and why I believe is the reason we haven’t seen it since.
Had the CL lounge been located on the 4th floor of AKV, it wouldn’t be part of DVC at all.
The current deluxe resorts all have their own CL lounge and therefore would have no need to use a DVC one…