Jason Soifer/ The Daily Courier Lakeside resident Kenyon Banfield, right, spoke out at Wednesday night's Prescott Lakes community meeting to oppose the proposal. "I don't want to have to pay for somebody else's (investors') mistakes," he said.
M3 Companies is trying again to unload controlling interest in two vital pieces of its Prescott Lakes subdivision.
Residents are mulling over a ballot that would give Arnold Palmer Golf Management Co. power to run the golf and athletic clubs effective early next year.
At community meetings this past week, homeowners spent hours listening to the specifics of proposal.
It was mid-June when the developer came to residents of the master-planned community north of Highway 89 with a proposal to sell the athletic club to the homeowners association for about $4.5 million, using the money to finance construction of a $3 million clubhouse for the golf course and then turn over the clubhouse for $1 to golf club members to maintain and run it.
That proposal fell apart because golf members didn't think it was financially viable.
In early October, the homeowners association was working with Arnold Palmer Golf Management Co. on another proposal to have the association own both clubs and lease it to the management company to run, but that didn't make it because the association couldn't get financing.
This time around, M3's proposal gives the management company 51 percent ownership and control of the clubs, and members of both clubs would see their dues increase.
It's a plan Lakeside resident Kenyon Banfield isn't buying.
Banfield doesn't golf and he'd like to see the course turn public.
"I don't want to have to pay for somebody else's (investors') mistakes," he said.
Prescott Lakes Community Association board member Dave Hackathorn said there is no plan if residents vote against it.
Hackathorn said he didn't get any traction from city officials about having the city take over the golf course or turn it in to open space.
"It's totally unknown what could happen," he said. "Investors, the builders, they've all put something together to say they want this to happen."
George Sheats came to the community four years ago and he said this proposal might be the best option.
"It's the only alternative that has been offered at this point," he said. "The hidden cost of doing nothing could be greater than what's being offered here tonight."
M3 needs 764 votes out of 1,526 votes for approval.
Other parts of the proposal include M3 giving up its declarant rights and giving residents complete control of the homeowners association and excusing the association from paying athletic club delinquencies in the future, which is about $46,000 this year.
And Arnold Palmer Management Co. is offering to rebate 5 percent of net athletic dues once it reaches 1,850 athletic club members and 325 golf members.
M3 and community builders are bringing a total of $4 million to the table to cover building construction of a multi-purpose room and restaurant, golf cart storage space, pro shop and offices.
"I think that we're at a crossroads for the community," said Bill Brownlee, managing member of M3. "What we've been trying to do is bring to the table solutions and we believe that the Arnold Palmer Golf Management plan is the best solution for the community and the right manager for the lifestyle amenities in the community."
About 800 lots in the community that haven't been sold to residents or third parties are sitting undeveloped at this point, according to Brownlee, who said M3 is losing $1.2 million annually on the clubs.
"Under the Arnold Palmer structure, it puts it at a break-even, assuming that Arnold Palmer can hit its membership sales projects," he said.
If residents don't vote for the proposal, Brownlee said closing the course is a possibility.
"That type of an economic loss, especially in today's world, is unsustainable," he said.
Reader Comments
Posted: Tuesday, December 08, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
What the homeowners fail to see is that they indeed paid for a golf course whether or not they intended to pay to join and play. It's part of the schtick at Prescott Lakes. It's a golf course community that 'yall paid to live in. So they can just sell the thing and be done with it (assuming somebody want it), or they can pay what it costs to maintain it. To just let it go and be weeds is dumb. That will make Prescott Lakes a dump over time, and it's pretty nice right now. Keep it that way. The homes there are very expensive and I'm sure most people can pay a little more money toward the golf course to keep it nice. You did indeed choose to live in a golf course community. Everyone know the job was dangerous when they took it.
Posted: Monday, December 07, 2009
Article comment by:
Writenow
Right Wing Conservative,
M3 is Jeff Davis, Bill Brownlee,Scott Schirmer
Posted: Monday, December 07, 2009
Article comment by:
Rough n Ready
Right Wing Conservative,
M3 is: Jeff Davis
Bill Brownlee
Scott Schirmer
Posted: Monday, December 07, 2009
Article comment by:
Christopher
Damn Home Owner Associations socialism! You pay more to have less freedom. The HOA's and gated life style really does not fit with the western ethic of individualism, but has the illusion of safety, exclusivity and property value protections. You really own a part interest in your property; the HOA collective and developer rent you the rest of your property, for which you pay ever ascending fees. It's better to own your own property than to rent it. It's better to be rich than to look rich. Now you know why.
Posted: Monday, December 07, 2009
Article comment by:
Buck up Prescott Lakes!
The problem with the golf course is they never could get enough members, and they made it private way before they had enough members to sustain it. The course is very nice, but it's empty. At least Hassayampa built a nice clubhouse before they started selling golf memberships. Prescott Lakes tried to do the golf thing on a shoestring budget and probably swiped money from the mandatory athletic club and propped up the golf operation. Any homeowner that thinks their property value will not decrease if that golf course goes to weeds is delusional. It's not "open space" lol, it's a golf course now. If it goes to pasture, not watered, mowed, maintained then it will be an eyesore and people who can see it from their homes will see their values go down and the trick down will affect others. So somehow the golf course needs to keep going, and someday it will break even with public play if they do it right. Cowboy up Prescott Lakes. You bought into the thing and now you're stuck there unfortunately. It isn't the first golf course country club deal that went south in the USA.
Posted: Monday, December 07, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
Presscott Lakes should have never been built in the first place. Give it back to the antelopes instead of Californians with golf clubs!!
Posted: Monday, December 07, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
Served all of you Prescott lakes resdients right. You are all the reason the antelope are gone and our water is drying up.
Posted: Monday, December 07, 2009
Article comment by:
Right Wing Conservative
Can anyone identify who the M3 members are?
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Happy not live in Prescott Lakes
Hello, how did all of you who built in this subdivision not see this coming. You all spent way over what your property was worth, knowing you were going to have a private golf course, and private clubhouse area. Did you all just think that building in that over hyped area with you gated communities that M3 was going to pay for it for ever. They are in the business of making money, not very well maybe, but they got yours didn't they! What am I not seeing here except common sense?
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
The REAL ISSUE at hand is getting rid of the m3 pestulence. It is their bungling that has Prescott Lakes in the shape its in today. Their involvement in any manner is frought with disaster and must be brought to an end.
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
To the golf member of Prescott Lakes who is not a resident of Prescott Lakes: You have no basis whatsoever stating that our home values will go down without a golf course. Look at The Ranch and Forest Trails...they have many homes with high values and neither development has a golf course. If the golf course goes under, then we would still maintain the green hills and water features and the community would still look beautiful. Also, what are you basing your assumption on about the litigation? How would the HOA be involved? I could possibly see a lawsuit between M3 and the golf members, but not the residents of Prescott Lakes or the HOA. If the golf course goes under and M3 goes bankrupt or goes out of the picture, the residents of Prescott Lakes would dance for joy not sue M3!
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Fed Up
The non-resident golf member who posted earlier should get a clue. Property in Prescott Lakes would be worth MORE without the golf course, the golf course fees, and the ... way it's currently being subsidized via extortion though mandatory athletic club dues. "Don't like it? Not gonna pay? We'll put a lien on your property and make your neighborhood association collect it for us!" It's time for legislators to listen to the MAJORITY of their constituents and put an end to this legalized fraud. If this was such good deal for the residents, why did M3 have to enable developers to have a vote for each parcel they owned?
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
When we bought in Prescott Lakes, the CCR's stated we would only be members of the Athletic Club and our dues should only have gone to it. Through what we consider to be illegal dealings on the part of M3, we have been forced to support the Golf Course and will do so even more if this proposition is passed. Unfortunately, this means that not only will we leave the Prescott Lakes Community, we will also leave the Prescott area.
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
I am a Golf Member at Prescott Lakes. I am not a resident of Prescott Lakes. All the WHINING from the residents over a $45 increase in dues is incomprehensible. If the golf course goes under, so does 20% of the property values. The residents of Prescott Lakes need to get this issue dealt with by voting YES on the proposal. IF the golf course goes under, there will be multiple law suits against M3,the HOA, and the Board of Directors of the HOA. ATTENTION PRESCOTT LAKES HOMEOWNERS..If you're thinking selling a home with higher fees is an issue, Try selling one with the HOA in litigation!!
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
BE VERY AFRAID
I am a senior homeowner in Prescott Lakes and this proposal is a travesty. I cannot afford to pay another $50.00 dollars a month in homeowners fees especially since I do not golf or use the athletic club. I hope all the residents here carefully consider the outcome of this proposal. Real estate transactions here are at a standstill. Homes are for sale on my block for $100,000.00 less than the owners paid for them. Who will want property here with these increased fees? Please look at the big picture and vote accordingly. Do not listen to the threats and hype by M3 and Arnold Palmer. We need a much saner solution!
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Rick Hartman
Hello... Poor reporting, sir. The Ballot we possessed, voted upon, and submitted to HOAMCO HAD NOTHING on it regarding the Arnold Palmer Golf Management take over. There were only three changes in the existing CC and R's; those were the only issues on it! You might be able to obtain a copy of the Ballot at: HOAMCO offices to see for yourself! Or... contact me, I have a copy of it! AND in the meeting (12-1-09) Mr. Doug Howe stated that the -5- main members of M-3 Properties were now partners in one of the two L.L.C. buyers (WWJ Prescott Lakes, LLC) wishing to purchase the Golf Course and Athletic Club. A clue there? This is a "Bait and Switch" game being played upon us!
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Fed Up
Here's a crazy idea. How about having the people who USE the golf course and athletic club PAY for their proportionate use without requiring their non-golfing neighbors to subsidize their passtime? If the golf club and athletic club fail due to not enough demand, Prescott Lakes will still be a nice place to live with the golf course turned into open space and the clubhouse sold or left unbuilt entirely. The idea of non-member residents paying for the recreation of others is un-American in my opinion. M3 is scrambling to unload their mistake by any means necessary. What the article also did not say is that M3 wants developers with undeveloped parcels to be able to vote despite the fact that they never had to pay the mandatory fees like the rest of us! I'm afraid that the only way to make this situation right for the majority of home owners is to legislate it. By that I mean legislation that would deny developers and associations the ability to collect mandatory fees. They even want to make it harder to sell your house AND to profit from the sale if you DO manage to sell it by charging you $2500.00 to sell! In effect, that's what their $2500.00 "initiation fee" is! Close the damn golf course and create a park. It's time for HAMPA to make a move.
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Another Idea
Lot owners bordering the golf course should be required to pay increased dues to help maintain the course and offset the cost. These owners are currently getting a free benefit of a beautifully maintained golf course. They should be required to pay for a portion of its maintenance cost.
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Alvin
M3...look what they've done to the desert around Wickenburg! Totally disgusting!
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
I am a resident of Prescott Lakes. What this article does not state is that our mandatory club dues will now increase by a minimum of $45 PER MONTH and there will be a $2,500 fee passed on to any prospective buyer of our property when we elect to sell. Only 10% of the residents of Prescott Lakes are golfers. Many of those golf members have their memberships up for sale. Why should 90% of the residents pay for something that only less than 10% of the development cares about? The golf course could become non-existent and we could maintain the beautiful green hills and water features for a lot less than what they are offering us. Our property values would not decrease because Prescott Lakes would still be a beautiful development. We do not want M3 or any principal of M3 in any new deal. They have lied to us and not fulfilled their promises in the past. Why aren't other options being explored? The only alternatives they have ever presented to us relate to golf. They have spent $60,000 to $65,000 already of our HOA money and the only thing they spent the money on is exploring golf alternatives. They have tunnel vision!
Posted: Sunday, December 06, 2009
Article comment by:
watching the developers
Unsustainable? What proved to be unsustainable is the growth that M3 projected. It does not sound like M3 is in much of a bargaining position here. Good luck to Prescott Lakes residents.
