Property Owners' Association Meeting
 

Don't forget, the Property Owners' Association is meeting on Tuesday, April 21, at 7:00 p.m. at Laurel Manor. Learn about what you need to do to protect your home from lightning strikes. There will also be an open forum on the IRS investigation of the tax-free recreational bonds issued by the Villages Center District-- an issue of potentially great importance to all of us. All residents are invited.

The POA has the objective of making The Villages an even-better place to live. It is the only residents' organization that is free of ties to the Developer and that is dedicated to protecting the rights of the residents. Among the POA's many accomplishments was securing a $43 million class-action-lawsuit settlement from the Developer in order to help preserve and protect the future of our amenities.

As a part-time resident, I am not a director or officer of the POA. However, I believe that all residents, year-around and part-time, have the obligation, both to themselves and to their neighbors, to protect the future of their Villages home and lifestyle by joining and supporting this very important organization.

It saddens me ...
 

... to have to say that the POA has lost all credibility with my family and many of our friends in TV who've been following my story. For months your organization has been soliciting stories about experiences at TV Regional Hospital. I wrote a lengthy one about the extraordinarily outstanding care I received there following an accident in December and even sent a copy of the complimentary letter I had sent to the chief hospital administrator. I not only did not receive the courtesy of a reply, but our friends and we patiently waited to see my letter appear in the POA newsletter.

Given the totally negative approach of the POA to the hospital, it did sadden but it did not surprise us that not only did my story/letter not appear, but rather it printed only more negative stories and negative headlines more suitable to a supermarket tabloid rag--in two successive issues. Every organization is certainly entitled to a point of view, but when it absolutely consistently refuses to acknowledge the existence of a varying point of view, then it is simply untrue to call it 'the voice of the people' when it is obviously 'the voice of a handful of very specific individuals with an incontrovertible agenda,' leaving people like myself feeling edited, or worse, censored.

If any member/supporter of the POA is not an automaton and is truly open to other points of view, please feel free to read the thread I posted about my experience at the hospital and have the courtesy to at least acknowledge, if not respond; the link follows. If you're not open to this, then don't bother. 'Those who matter, care; those who don't care, don't matter.'

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/fo...ional+hospital

I recall the settlement of the class action lawsuit included $50,000 payments to each of the three plaintiff's. Joe Gorman, President of the POA being on of them. Never saw that in the POA bulletin or treasury report. So who brought the lawsuit the POA or Joe Gorman? Just wondering.

Sorry, I'm lost. What lawsuit are you referring to? When was the settlement awarded?

You can start here.....
 

Care
 

It is wonderful that you received such great care. It is also possible that the dedicated efforts of the POA in working to improve the medical facilities in The Villages may have contributed to your receiving the best treatments.

PennBF........I find that laughable having personally been involved in other success stories prior to the POA "involvement".

Kudos to POA...
 

Really now ...
 

PennBF, I accept that this is your reasoning, just as I am sure that you will accept that my reasoning is different and that I cannot fathom yours. If what you said were conceivably true, which IMHO I doubt, then the POA WOULD have had the courtesy to respond to my email to them (after all, they were the ones who asked for stories about experiences with the hospital) and WOULD have been happy to acknowledge my story while taking credit for it. But no, to have done so would have detracted from their agenda of beating down the hospital and implying that there is not a single positive experience to be had there!

All one has to do is read the stories that the POA selects for publication and the headlines about the hospital in the POA Newsletter. They claim to want ALL stories, but this is simply not true; all they want are the negative ones. We have a fair number of friends in TV who know of my accident, my hospital experience, and my sharing the story with the POA in response to their asking for stories of personal experiences at the hospital, and who, like ourselves, have carefully examined particularly the last two issues of the POA Newsletter looking for any reference to my positive experience, only to have found nothing but what was referred to during the cold war as “the party line.” My wife and I are joiners and activists, but the overt negative agenda of the POA is totally alienating to us....

Being Positive
 

Sidney, I believe you have allowed your anger at the lack of publishing your letter to cloud the facts regarding the POA. If you read the latest Newsletter it contained positive statements regarding the TVRH improvements, the need to use recycling bags, being careful when allowing your golf bags to remain on the carts, to remain calm until the IRS results are actually in, requesting the residents be alert to a potential conflict of interest in the Water Utility Sale which is positive if you are interested in the well being of the Villages, it printed a minor rebuke from a retired police officer, it highlighted the removal of the only indoor swimming pool in the villages at the Wellness Center which again just good information for residents and last but not least dedicated almost a whole page to gardening in the villages.
Again, I am sorry they did not publish your story and sad that you are allowing this in your eys to be the benchmark as to whether the POA is positive force for the residents of The Villages.

Was there any discussion last night regarding the IRS and bonds?

IRS & Bonds
 

Yes, there was a lot of discussion about bonds,and the IRS looking into TV goings on.

Most importantly, there was, and always is, an OPEN Q&A session where anyone can ask anything they please about TV. No need to ask ahead of time like grade school. (VHA?)

A nice meeting, fast paced, friendly people. Try it, you will like it.

50-50, coffee + donuts, too.

Tony

:coolsmiley:

This is wonderful, but compare the recent bulletin to any other over at least the last 3 years. There has been a significant change in the tone of the POA in the last month or two. This was first noticeable when Joe G defended TV in the Ritchie tax tirade. At about the same time it seemed that the POA had tempered their crusade against the hospital. I expected to see Joe Gorman and Roger Kass having dinner together.

The POA has its purpose and could be a real service to TV, but it has a lot of negativity to live down. It could do wonders working with rather than against the VHA, the developer, and CDD management. We can only hope.

And by the bye, can't swear to this, but I seem to remember that Joe Gorman was one of 5 people sharing in $300,000 as a result of the lawsuit. The other 4 were also former officers and/or active members of the POA.


`

Poa
 

Muncie;

For your info, Joe Gorman got no money, and others worked two years before a settlement was reached.

You must know if you have followed this lawsuit that we(residents)
would have no moneys at all for the upkeep of golf cart trails and the update of the Paradise center were it not for the lawsuit and resulting $$ to be used for that purpose.

If you, or anyone else had gone through the trouble to get a settlement for these funds, you too would deserve to get paid for your time.

I, for one, am glad someone had the time and fortitude to go through the system and get justice.

Tony

Tony, someone is giving you bad information. In the class action settlement on page two it reads in part .....$300,000 for incentive awards to the plaintiffs' Class Representatives......
Joe Gorman was one of the Rep's.
Go here and you can read it all:
http://www.thevillagesfl.us/classactionsettlement.htm

I have copied a post from a previous thread that was written by Villages Kahuna. It details the lawsuit settlement and the reason that certain residents received payments. And by the bye, can't swear to this, but I seem to remember previous posters being aware of this thread.


[QUOTE=Villages Kahuna;102753]I spoke with the plaintiff's attorney at some length this afternoon. She was very open and answered all my questions at length and with no attempt to parse words or be evasive in any way. She and the plaintiffs have entered into a confidentiality agreement with the developer, but that did not interfere with my gathering of what I thought was important information. Here's a summary of the major points of our conversation.[br]

• The five plaintiffs, all associated with the Property Owner's Association (POA), have been in discussions regarding various issues in The Villages for some time, apparently more than a year.

[br]

• A couple of the major issues they were attempting to get action on from the developer were the absence of any sort of sinking fund to pay for future rehabilitation or replacement of facilities which the developer had sold to the CVCCD as well as the widening of the golf cart paths north of CR 466. While some progress was made, the discussions finally reached a point where the developer's representative, former CVCCD Supervisor Pete Wahl, advised the group that nothing was going to be done to address certain of their concerns and they'd have to hire a lawyer to proceed any further on discussion of those issues. Apparently, the five principal "resident's representatives" from the POA decided that they would do just that.

[br]

• Once the five plaintiffs engaged counsel, their list of issues expanded somewhat and the discussions with the developer's representatives and lawyers became more regular and serious. While a lawsuit was certainly threatened by the plaintiffs, discussions continued for many months with no formal legal action actually being initiated. With the assistance of the five plaintiffs, all of whom were residents of The Villages and knowledgeable about the issues, plaintiff's counsel was able to organize a body of evidence that would almost certainly prevail should a lawsuit actually be filed and go to trial. The discussions then began to take the form of negotiating a settlement of the many issues identified by the plaintiffs.

[br]

• In the midst of these discussions the "straw vote" regarding the ongoing management of recreational facilities and programs was placed on the ballot of the 2006 local and county elections. Villages residents expressed a desire to have residents manage recreation programs and facilities rather than the developer although the plurality of the vote was very thin and inconsistent across the several districts in the Villages. But after some discussion and further negotiation, the Resident's Advisory Committee (RAC) was formally organized by an ordinance passed by the CVCDD board. That committee has been active in advising the CVCCD management and the Recreation Department for several months now.

[br]

• Plaintiff's counsel advised the five plaintiffs that proceeding with a lawsuit on their issues would require a major personal commitment of time and could result in considerable financial risk to them personally. They were advised regarding the amount of work and time which would be required to assemble sufficient evidence to prevail in a negotiation or lawsuit against the developer. They were also advised of some fairly significant financial risks they would be exposed to should they decide to proceed. They agreed to continue.

[br]

• Both the developer and the plaintiffs continued their negotiations without any transparency to the public thru press releases, articles, letters or any other form of explanation of what was happening. This was done with considerable forethought and purposefully on the part of both counterparties to the discussions. The motivation of the developer not to have the issues publicly discussed is obvious. The plaintiffs decided to continue their negotiations/discussions in almost complete confidentiality and anonymity for the purpose of maintaining a non-confrontational negotiating relationship with the developer. They were making progress and believed that taking their arguments "public" would make their relationship with the developer more confrontational and materially reduce his willingness to continue negotiations towards a settlement.

[br]

• As the body of evidence assembled by the plaintiffs became obvious to the developer, the discussions morphed into the negotiation of both the form and amount of a settlement. The plaintiffs continued to be firm in their demands and the developer was responsive both because of the body of evidence that had been assembled to support the plaintiff's claims and demands, but also because the developer was consistent in his stated intention to continue to play a major role in the operation of The Villages even after the final residential build-out was completed. The developer and his family consistently said that The Villages was such an integral part of their family history that they would never leave the management of the lifestyle that they had created to someone else.

[br]

• The negotiations regarding the plaintiff's issues were substantially completed sometime last fall. The major issues where agreements were reached were: the amount and timing of the formation of a sinking fund for use in funding any necessary future rehabilitation or replacement of facilities which had been sold to the CVCCD in the future; an agreement and schedule for widening the golf cart paths north of CR 466; how recreation facilities and programs would be managed with resident input; and a few other less significant issues such as golf tee times used by the developer for marketing, etc. Once an agreement was reached, it became apparent that to properly implement it, a "class" of plaintiffs would have to be formed to in essence be the recipient of the benefits negotiated by the five plaintiffs. That became the basis of both the class action lawsuit and proposed settlement, all of which was rolled up into one legal proceeding. That lawsuit was filed in December, 2007. The settlement currently being adjudicated affects only residents north of CR 466. But both parties have agreed that a similar settlement will be negotiated for residents south of CR 466 in the future. The plaintiffs are hopeful that the scheduled meeting with the judge in March will result in final adjudication of the formation of the class and the settlement.

[br]

• The RAC will be replaced by the AAC once the case is adjudicated. The intent of both parties to the litigation is that the membership of the RAC be elected by the residents. Accomplishing that objective won't be easy given the fact that The Villages is spread over three separate counties. But the litigants have at least two plans for accomplishing that objective. The AAC will operate essentially the same way as has the RAC, advising the CVCCD board and Recreation Department on the desires and needs of residents. It's not clear whether the authority of the new AAC will be supported by the force of law, but the developer has agreed to accept and implement duely authorized RAC recommendations with few exceptions. So it is now clear that the existing management of Villages recreation facilities and programs will continue on an essentially unchanged basis.

[br]

• On the issue of the fees prescribed by the proposed settlement, the plaintiff's attorney made the following observations: Neither legal fees or fees paid to the plaintiffs for their work in assembling rhe necessary evidence, negotiating the settlement and forming the class were discussed until after the negotiations regarding additional financial payments by the developer were completed. Only then were legal fees and plaintiff's fees negotiated. Plaintiff's counsel stressed that none of the fees being paid the attorneys or the plaintiffs reduces the amount of financial settlement by the developer in any way. The legal fees are well within the range of normal fees paid to counsel in class action litigations. As far as the $300,000 proposed payment to the five plaintiffs, their attorney observed that without their willingness to expend significant amounts of time and effort to assemble the necessary body of evidence and negotiate a settlement as well as assume not insignificant financial risks, there would be no settlement that benefits all residents of The Villages.

[br]

As far as the current state of play of the formation of a residents class and the proposed settlement, personally I feel quite bit better about the situation. I certainly can't opine on the adequacy of the financial settlement. I can only assume that the five plaintiffs were knowledgeable and complete in their analysis of the situation and negotiated an amount that will be adequate for the purposes identified by the settlement. I also feel somewhat better that the developer and his management team, who in my opinion have done a magnificent job in creating the community that we have all chosen to live in, intends to remain in that role indefinitely. There are no guarantees of that for sure, but just that type of statement provides some comfort, to me a least.

Of further importance, learning of the process that was followed has eliminated the enmity I initially felt for the five residents who chose to proceed on this odyssey when they could have otherwise simply enjoyed golf and swimming.

I hope this final posting resolves the questions that I posed in starting this thread in the first place.

Thanks, iaudit. This helps me understand matters more clearly. Oh, and THANKS to Villages Kahuna for his effort and time.

Not living in TV yet I can't comment on whether the POA has a positive or negative effect on my life in TV - I'll withhold judgment.

On the matter of TVRH and emergency rooms in general I can offer some first hand knowledge (maybe other nurses/medical people can chime in):

TVRH, like any emergency room, runs on a medically necessary triage system. The triage nurse (and/or emergency certified RN) is specially trained in making sure that medically needy patients are seen within the time scope to intervene in the process. For example the triage nurse knows the sings and symptoms of a stroke like the back of his/her hand. It is their job to get that patient to see a doctor immediately so that he/she can get them to a CT within 1 hour (JCAHO standard) and administer tPA within 3 hours (another standard) if the CT reveals that a clot caused the stroke. This is just one example of a time bound patient situation.

In the meantime a sprained ankle patient may sit in the chairs section for hours and hours waiting until a doctor is freed up enough to see them and send for x-rays etc.

In the meantime a stuffy nose patient will sit for even longer and wait for the doc to tell them 'it's nothing - go home'!

I'm not telling you anything guys don't know or haven't witnessed for yourself. This happens at my ER in Boston and it happens in TVRH. Granted the POA has more to complain about than the ER but the majority of stories are about how long someone waited or who had to get shipped to Leesburg for a procedure that TVRH doesn't specialize in due to resource sharing with its sister hospital.

But when SL took the time to write that positive story about TVRH to the POA, the least they could have done is print that alongside the others. The POA, VHA etc. can and should be a catalyst for change but they need to keep an open line of communication to do so.

Disclosure: Not an RN yet (taking boards in a month or so) - working in a Boston ER for clinical experience.

Poa
 

I think the paragraph below is an indication of the commitment that was made by a few individual in behalf of the residents. If nothing more they deserve a "thanks".

Plaintiff's counsel advised the five plaintiffs that proceeding with a lawsuit on their issues would require a major personal commitment of time and could result in considerable financial risk to them personally. They were advised regarding the amount of work and time which would be required to assemble sufficient evidence to prevail in a negotiation or lawsuit against the developer. They were also advised of some fairly significant financial risks they would be exposed to should they decide to proceed. They agreed to continue. The question is, are the residents better off because there is a POA watchdog organization or not? Given their success, (e.g. house siding issues, hospital, etc.) I would vote yes.

Critics should get involved in the POA
 

In response to the the critical comments regarding the POA that have appeared in this thread, I would say:

The fact is that Villagers are essentially disenfranchised and live in a government of byzantine Community Development Districts which hardly anybody understands, but which are essentially controlled by the Developer. There is no independent private or governmental organization besides the POA looking after our interests. Take a look at the book Leisureville (and ignore the accounts of the raging sexual promiscuity of Villagers and a some other exaggerations and distortions). The book contains interesting accounts of other senior communities that have disintegrated, as well as descriptions of the abuses of the CDD system that have occurred here.

The volunteers who are active in the POA are highly dedicated to serving the residents. I agree that, in the past, some articles in the POA Bulletin have, from time to time, come off as being overly negative and snarky. However, a lot of the facts that they have reported on (e.g., the conditions that prompted the class-action lawsuit) were in fact negative. We are damn lucky that the volunteers in the POA cared enough to do something about them! It is awfully easy to sit back, enjoy the great lifestyle here, think we are on a perpetual vacation, look at the world through rose-colored glasses, and convince ourselves that all this will magically continue forever-- even though it never has anyplace else.

Could the POA be improved? Sure, but rather than carp about it, why not get involved and do the improving?;)

Advogado, excellent post! Some of the comments remind me of the editorials in my local newspaper. Don't just tell me what's wrong, I probably already know that, but give me some alternatives to fix the problem and what I can do to help fix it. Having said that, let's make sure all sides of an issue are heard and everyone understands the underlying processes and procedures that are currently in place. CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT!

Russ Boston - Last part was in response to your post. It is certainly important to understand those processes & procedures before trying to "improve" them. Thank you for providing the detail for anyone not familiar with that.

Just because you do not understand the CDD concept, do not assume that fellow villagers are equally ill-informed. If you can understand the infield fly rule, golf handicapping, or how to make good gravy, CDDs are a snap. Read some of 07's posts and you might learn something. She understands the processes and explains them in a very basic manner far better than I could. Read up on Florida Statutes Chapter 190. This law delineates the exact procedures for evolving a CDD from developer to voter control. You might even attend a CDD orientation seminar or two and ask some questions. The best defense against ignorance is knowledge.

Interesting point about disenfranchisement, you have actually, albeit probably unknowingly, stumbled across something. Once a CDD has fully evolved into an elective body, only registered Florida voters are eligible to vote. This means that many snowbirds and all foreign nationals have no vote. Life goes on.





`

Reply to Muncie
 

To Muncie

Thank you for your post advising me that I am "ill-informed" about CDD's and for pointing out that understanding CDD's "is a snap".

Actually, I had already spent a fair amount of time studying CDD's and foolishly thought that I had at least a basic understanding of them. But as Clint Eastwood, playing Dirty Harry, once said, "A man's got to know his limitations."

I learned my limitations when trying to fully understand the transactions between the Developer and the VCCDD described by the IRS in its 100+ page attack, in three Form 5701-TEBs, on the VCCDD's issuance of tax-free municipal bonds. You have confirmed the full extent of my ignorance because, until your post, I never realized that all this is as simple as the infield fly rule.

The rest of the Villagers and I can rest easy now-- knowing that you are on top of the situation and looking out for the interests of all of us.

You're welcome. It was big of you to acknowledge your shortcomings.


`

I, like you, also have a story to tell. I sent my letter of disatifaction to the Daily Sun. Guess what? It was a negative opinion, and of course they wouldn't publish it.

I guess in todays world, if you are of different views, the two sides will never agree. The POA will look after our interests. Everyone knows the Daily Sun has it's own interests covered.

So what you're saying is that the POA is no better than the Sun? They both decide to print only what they feel like saying?

The Sun can do that since they are a private organization who only report to themselves. The POA, by its own mission statement, is supposed to represent the TV population - not just the negative comments.

Isn't that correct?

What is Going On??
 

How did this site get hijacked by someone discussing whether "The Sun" or "POA" is better..!! The question was, are the residents better off because there is a POA watchdog or not? To say it is better not to have anyone looking at the practices and policies of the governing bodies that manage the residents investments is foolish at best. Whether they publish a positive or negative letter is not important. What is important are their results and you don't have to look too far to see the impact the POA had on siding, the hospital, etc.etc.

Well said, PennBF.

So, then how does someone form an objective opinion if the positive and negative do not get published?

Whether residents are better off or not is subjective, mainly because it would appear that there is a general apathy among the residents about how TV runs itself.

I was at the monthly District 6 meeting a few days ago. It was my first time there, and after over a year of part-time residency, and now three months of full-time (hopefully many more to come), I wanted to see how it goes here. There were a total of five sign-ins of residents who showed, and I was informed that the number was typical for a monthly District open meeting.

So, with all of the busy schedules, out of the 12,000 District 6 residents, less than 0.0005% showed to hear, listen, comment, etc.

This is not to say that the POA doesn't provide a worthwhile service. The real question is - does anyone care? By the number or attendees at District monthly meetings, there doesn't seem to be many who do.

They both get published but in different publications.
It is difficult to form an objective opinion as both publications state their views to an extreme.

I am thrilled for those who received excellent care at the Villages Hospital. Personallly, I had to use the ER three times and the last time I was "treated" by a nurse that attended the medical school ofDr. Mengele!!!

Each experience is unique and I think ALL positions need to be aired. While I am, since 2005, a lifetime member of the VHA, I believe in the importance of the POA to ensure that both sides of a story are told.

The Daily Sun which is owned and operated by the developer, has not been known for reporting ALL the news. After many complaints by residents, myself one of them, it appears that the Sun might be going the way of total truth!!!

If we did not have the POA or some similar organization, we would likely never know about the issues that need to be resolved.

God bless America where we have the freedom to say it like it is!!!

Trying to research what you said - I can see the impact on the siding issue as I just read about it on the POA site. But where on the site is the impact that they had on the hospital?

Could you point me to that? Thanks.

Question
 

I don't intend to do the research for you..BUT having said that I think you will find the efforts of the POA to make inroads into the problems of the TVRH take up significant room in their previous publication and demonstrate the outstanding work they have done. I will add that I am very familiar with some of the hospitals in Boston, (e.g.New England Deconness,) and spent many an hour at Lahey Clinic when it was in Kenmore Sq and then Arlington) and my wife had been a Head Nurse for many years at a couple of well known hospitals. There were many good stories regarding ER's and many awful stories so it is not proper to paint them as being consistent in treatment and care.