Talk of The Villages Florida - View Single Post - Janet Tutt Responds to IRS/Bond Rumors and Half Truths
View Single Post
 
Old 06-08-2009, 10:31 AM
SteveZ SteveZ is offline
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 32162
Posts: 1,835
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Advogado View Post
Reply to Katezbox:

I also wish the the initial Lauren Ritchie articles had been less sensationalized and contained fewer factual errors-- errors which she never has acknowledged. However, if you read the IRS documents, you will see that, unfortunately, each of the excerpts that you cite in your post as being "sensationalized" are, indeed, factually correct. It is really too bad that the Developer-owned Daily Sun suppressed this major story rather than reporting it in a balanced matter. If you want to attack any newspaper regarding this story, I would suggest it be the Sun, not the Sentinel.

In terms of the attacks by yourself and others on the "speculation" in this thread, I haven't seen speculation in the posts here. I have only seen an attempt by concerned residents to understand the implications for Villagers (and what action they should take) if the rosy outlook painted by Janet Tutt and some posters to this tread turns out to be wrong.
Then for those who want to understand a technical, legal and contested situation - and don't want to take on face value the VCCDD position voiced by Ms. Tutt - what to do that is to seek a professional and objective review of the matter by competent legal/financial counsel. So far, what has appeared in this forum hardly qualifies as professional or objective.

Forums like TOTV are great in many ways, but do not replace seasoned legal/financial professionals reviewing all of information - including what has NOT been made public, and there always is some - pertinent to the matter. As has been demonstrated on this board, there is bias - pro and con - with some showing obvious distrust regarding the VCCDD folk and the developer. A good example of such biased innuendo and opinion is referring to Ms. Tutt's comments as "rosy," while at the same time lauding what appeared in the Sentinel as factually correct, and insinuating that the Sentinel was "balanced" in its publications.

I can agree that since the VCCDD is involved, and the VCCDD is indeed our "local government," that it should provide its constituency with continuous updates on the matter to the extent that such updates do not compromise negotiations and any possible litigation.

The VCCDD isn't perfect, but what is? No matter what its faults or mistakes may be, compared to anywhere else I have ever lived: 1) its' safer here; 2) the streets are cleaner and better maintained; 3) the common area beautification (flowers, bushes, painting, etc) is top-notch; 4) the availability of services specifically meeting the needs of seasoned citizens is very must greater here; and 5) a "local government" officials are more visible and available.

If we are looking for "fair and balanced" information, it won't come from the Fourth Estate - whether that is from the Sentinel, the Daily Sun, or a town crier. If we want to estimate the outcome of a tax dispute, then the only true estimate would be to look at precedent cases (if they exist) to see how they came out and compare to this bond matter. That's what professional legal/financial counsel would do. Other than that, it's just a guessing game.