Quote:
Originally Posted by JimJoe
WOW.. Do you feel better now? I have tried very hard to obtain information on these subjects from more than just the sources you cite so please don't scold me for asking questions. The problem is no one apparently has been able to clearly explain all of this.. and I think it should be clear both to the current residents and potential buyers. Don't you agree all of this should be clear to all of us? If not, why not? The Villages is a FANTASTIC place to live!! Is there a problem in us knowing the financials involved in it?
Was your answer a yes or a no? Can you confirm that the central CDD is controlled by a few owners and it makes the decisions about the recreational bonds for everyone (amenity fees)? When I read that I didn't make much sense to me but this IRS issue makes me wonder. That was my question.
No one disputes the need for infrastructure that is paid for with "the bond" (20k or so on a new house). It is either inside the cost of a new house (like up north) or paid for separately in the Bond (as done here). Either way it should be and will be paid for by the homeowner. But for example what happens when a repair or replacement needs to be made on that infrastructure? Will that be paid for by special assessment against the property (some places up north), by property taxes (most places up north), or by the annual Development District Assessment?
Don't Forget, The Villages is Florida's friendliest hometown!!
|
I know my post was long -- as noted in the last line. Did you bother to read it before responding. If not, I'll try to clarify.
I scolded no one (this time) for asking questions. You said "And I still think the members of the numbered CDDs probably know alot about this issue and could enlighten all of us." That is why I brought up the board meetings. Some may not realize the meeting were open and easily available to them. I don't expect to see a post on TOTV that starts, "Hi, I'm Joe Schmoo and I'm a member of the board of CDD 65. Here's the real, true, secret, classified, and totally not confusing answers to all your questions."
As to whether "no one is able to explain" all the issues involved, I doubt that. The problem is that no one from the developer or the district has come up with a procedure to do so. The whole purpose of my long msg was to cite some of their shortcomings and suggest some opportunities to improve their communications. "Don't you agree all of this should be clear to all of us? If not, why not?" As I said, didn't you read the post?
No, I did not answer your question about the spending of amenity fees, primarily because I don't fully understand it myself and also because it is an evolving process. North of 466, there's an elected Amenity Authority that control, in some manner, spending of amenity fees. There will be one in the south and likely there will eventually be one south of 466A.
The reason I used the residence bond as an example is that it's easiest to explain. I agree that almost no one disputes the need for infrastructure, but many people are confused about the bond, as witnessed by the many posts on the subject from Day 1. And the questions you asked about what happens with follow-up costs --- great questions that could be readily addressed if the district had phase 2 orientation sessions as I suggested, or possibly in the detailed documents prepared by the developer as I suggested or, as I didn't suggest yet, in a real life regular Q&A process either in the newspaper or weekly on the WVLG noontime talk show. But they have none of those.
And no, I don't feel better now.
`