Quote:
Originally Posted by mickey100
Certainly the Developer has the right to make money, and he has done a fine job of doing that. But as residents, we are foolish if we elevate his right to make money, above our right to have a wonderful retirement community. Our needs come first, and we are paying for that right with our amenity fees. Some would say the past lawsuit is not relevant because it only involved those villages north of 466. I happen to live south of 466, and in my eyes, what happened there could be a precedent. The lawsuit alleged money had been misappropriated by the Developer and funds were not available cover improvements and repairs to recreation centers, swimming pools and other facilities that make the retirement community alluring. The people who filed the lawsuit had noticed a steady decline in building maintenance and conditions and services, and calls for action were completely ignored. The lawsuit was a last resort, and lucky for us a settlement was reached. We hope that lawsuits are a thing of the past, but I see no guarantees. And now we are embroiled in this whole IRS business, thanks to the Morses business acumen. Again, the residents could suffer financial consequences as a result.
We all have our own opinions. I am a financial conservative, and I do not like being beholden to a Developer that has this dubious record with lawsuits and the IRS. It just raises a red flag with me. I don't trust them. I personally will feel much better when we escape their omnipotence, and hire qualified people, like Janet Tutt for instance, to run things and to report to the residents directly. Our needs will come first.
|
Not meaning to stir the pot nor argue, but could you please explain some of your statements?
1) Putting his right to make money over our needs to have a wonderful retirement community? Is that not what we have now? If not, why not?
2) Did you know about any of this or do any research before moving here? If not, why not? If you did, why didn't you have problems with the 'history' then and the way things are run now?
3) Since the Developer pays her check, why wouldn't she consider him over what every Tom, Dick, and Harry here wants to change?
4) The IRS issue has a long history with TV and has either lost or backed off in the past. If it had the substance that many think it has, don't you think it would have been resolved years ago. They (IRS) already have some issues themselves, so.....
5) Did you not read my post about how it is here north of 466 with the AAC? I believe I also said, "Be careful what you wish for..."
6) "The lawsuit alleged" you said and could set a precedent. As for residents being totally ignored, no. In the case of the cart paths, they wanted newer and wider ones. Patches to existing ones were all that was going to still be available. The suit was settled rather than fight because it was deemed by the defendants to "be in the best interest of the Villagers". The terms are also sealed and cannot be discussed by either side. Why live in the "what if" this happens/that happens?
7) Last, and most importantly, what of your needs are not being met by Ms. Tutt and the Developer; and if things are so bad, why do you stay? With that question I am not suggesting that you don't need to be here. Everyone is welcome. I just know that I do not settle for things that I have a major problem with or are not acceptable. Just ask my ex.