CDD12 & 13 out - what say you about this ?
 

I received this in my email today ->

((Date: 3/8/2021

After receiving a recommendation from the Project Wide Advisory Committee, the Sumter Landing Community Development District (SLCDD) supported the concept of establishing a Project Wide Agreement south of S.R. 44 which would encompass Districts 12 and 13. The SLCDD specifically directed legal counsel to prepare communication to all parties to the existing Project Wide Agreement, requiring unanimous support to:

Remove District 12 and 13 from the existing agreement with a start date of October 1, 2022

Amend Exhibit ‘A’ of the existing agreement to remove infrastructure specific to District 12 and 13

The new agreement shall be established concurrent to the existing agreement to remove Districts 12 and 13 and will be presented Village Community Development District Nos. 5-13. ))

Very interesting !

What I understand of this (which is limited), is that it'll essentially split the Villages up into Villages North and Villages South. I don't know how that will impact utilities or amenities, but I imagine it will most definitely impact them.

This would be a mistake. Our strength is the economy of scale that comes from being part of a large group. This sounds like another case of newcomers trying to fix the most amazing place ever..

There won't be any impact on the utilities or the amenities. Utilities have nothing to do with the CDD or the PWAC and the amenities south of SR44 are still owned by the developer.

The economy of scale is unaffected, the contracts and POs are let by the District Purchasing Department not the individual CDDs. The costs per property/CDD/other unit are included in the breakout of the bids that are returned. Purchasing then lets one contract to the supplier/contractor and then bills the appropriate amounts to the correct party.

This has been in the works for almost 2 years that I know of because of the growth that is and will continue to happen.

There are a lot of things driving this, mainly the major differences in landscaping, nature areas, and other infrastructure that are significantly different between north and south of SR44. The other is the size of PWAC, currently 9 members, this will drop it to 8 and stop the addition of new CDDs to PWAC with 12 and above being in PWAC2.

Please attend you CDD meetings over the next 2 weeks, district staff in presenting the information that was given to PWAC and SLCDD to each of them.

This is not something your Supervisors/PWAC is jumping into without a lot of thought and planning. District staff recommended making the transition 10/1/2021 but PWAC disagreed and made the decision to wait until 10/1/2022. There's no hurry to do this and it keeps the shared risks shared between more CDDs and limits the developer's power over the PWAC2, residents can be elected to the CDD13 board in the 2022 Landowner election for 3 of these seats and then have a say for CDD13 on PWAC2.

Will our village ID still work in both North and South Villages? We helped pay through our property tax increase the south development and now will we still be able to enjoy the southern amenities?

Old vs New..., seems that one group gets the new stuff and the other group gets the antiquated stuff ! Saw this happen with the Aerospace Workers Union! The Grand Lodge was behind the split, and they now regret it everyday! A complete disaster in the making! Who is behind this?

No change
 

This is no different than those of us in the current PWAC having access to the AAC north of 466.

If you learn the structure and how our government works you wouldn't need to make this statement, you would know.

After we in the northern section get our taxes raised to pay for NEW roads in the southern section, the southern section doesn’t want to help pay for the road repairs to the OLD roads in the northern section. I think if there are two PWAC then there should be a toll on the bridges for any southern resident who wants to use facilities in the northern section. And let’s go further and completely separate into two different communities with those da#m bridges the sole responsibility of the south. This is another scheme by the developer to favor the new section at the expense of the old.

The development of PWAC2 has no impact on the amenities for anyone. While the AAC has a say on the amenities north of CR466 (owned by VCCDD) and PWAC has the same responsibilities for the amenities south of CR466 to SR44 (owned by SLCDD) there exists interlocal government agreements that prohibit preferential treatment of residents from any area over any other resident on amenity use, priority, and availability. The amenities south of SR44 are owned by the developer and also fall under these same agreements.

I separated the statement about south of SR44 because there is the perception of preferential treatment for residents south SR44 when it comes to golf carts when they come north of SR44 to play, the developer made a business decision to provide these to their customers south of SR44 until the connectivity is established. The developer is paying for this not the amenity or golf division or any other Amenity Fee/resident funded source. This will obviously be going away very soon when the Water Lily bridge opens.

Your property taxes had NOTHING to do with the Amenities, developing them, or providing them. You did NOT help pay for them. All the amenities south of SR44 are privately developed, built, and owned facilities, owned by the developer. These are another business for them, and they exist to make a profit. We all remember what a profit was, it is what businesses is in business to make, otherwise they go out of business. It is what enabled each of us to amass our retirement nest egg so we could retire and move here.

Bottom line, none of this will have any impact on anyone's ability to use any of the amenities, we are all the same.

You bought a house not a rich uncle who will take care of your every want. The developer builds houses and amenities to support these houses and communities and then moves on to develop the next area. There is nothing in your sales contract that says the developer must continue to provide you with anything new just because they do it in another area of the development. The developer has not responsibility or obligation to continue to provide you with anything. The developer doesn't own the amenities north of SR44, these are owned by our local governments (SLCDD and VCCDD) and if you want anything new you have to go to them and ask for it, but be careful what you ask for, you will have to pay for it.

Thanks GWN. You're the voice of knowledge, reason and understanding.

Which CDD are the bridges over 44 in? And what type of maintenance will they need?

The new bridges are in CDD13. Because of the material that they are made of they won't require paining and preservation. The support structure will require minimal maintenance from time to time. There will be annual inspections of the bridges to verify their integrity and safety. Perhaps the biggest expense will be maintaining the electrical systems that light the giant advertising billboards on each side and repainting the advertising signs, just like on the water towers. (shoot, I went down that rabbit hole again...)

Didn't we go through with this in 1860? History repeating it self. Let's invent the wheel again.

When, if ever, will the residents actually have control of amenities, etc. South of 466 to 466A? Just like North off 466.....

"divide and conquer"
 

That sounds familiar. North and South remember how that came out! !

What Say Me...?
 

I know you pretty much stand with the developer or a lest that is how it appears. Specifically why was this necessary? It implies something wasn't liked about how things were set up in 1-11. Given the politics of late excuse me sas I seem to want to challenge given recent untruths and deception of certain parties.

Wow you sure shut down this conversation. Some, no many of us were told things when we bought and all were lies. Sorry holding , I'm quite sure you cannot gaurenteed what you are saying as the words of direct past representatives as untrue. This is what happens when a developer is and has been dishonest. Is called dis-trust.

There have been many posts over the last 4 years regarding a north and south Villages and here it comes like it or not. Personally it doesn't bother me one way or the other.

Actually, I think some people don't like how things are set up in 12-13.
For example, there has been talk about how the paths there do not have ribbon curbing and are deteriorating faster.
For example, I recently read that some homes there are experiencing drainage problems after rain, and it was said that the Developer had reduced the standard design.
For example, 12 and 13 have lots more nature areas.
For example, 12 and 13 have different landscaping in the public areas.

And the bridges, where the name affixed to them will require maintenance.

Project Wide has nothing to do with amenities. It has to do with maintenance. Let the areas with similar maintenance requirements work together. And separate the areas with different maintenance requirements.

Amazing how powerful facts can be! Nice job👍🤠

I agree anyone who is concerned about it, if it affects them (or if they think it will affect them) should attend the meetings.

Just as an aside, I don't live in a CDD. I also don't live in Sumter County. So this has no effect on me at all. But it's about the Villages, and I live in the Villages, and it's a topic of interest.

What lies were told to you when you bought your home. in what way has/is the developer been dishonest. Specifics are always much better than generalized statements. I hear this stuff every once in awhile but I didn't have that experience at all. Maybe you had a bad agent, we got references before we chose Beth Pope to be our TV agent and she was upfront on everything so we chose here once again to buy a second home. No lies, no dishonesty involved in either transaction. If anyone is looking for a great, hard working and honest agent give Beth Pope a call and you won't be complaining on here a year down the road.

A taie of two cities. Just not London and Paris.

Double that thanks. If people would only read . . . the newspaper, Districtgov.org, etc.

Interesting how you can assume so much about people. As for me, I try to look at the facts in most matters and leave my personal likes and dislikes aside. If I were to let emotions play out then I would be one of the loudest critics to protest against anything the developer does, they've tried just about everything possible to stop me from flying, stop my videos, and shutdown my business. But none of this is relevant to the issue and doesn't cloud my judgement.

Why is splitting PWAC a good idea?
First and foremost is the design differences between the areas north and south of SR44. The areas south of SR44 have more open/green space than north. The design of the fencing, gates, retention ponds, MMPs, walking paths, and many other features are different to the extent when dealing with CDD12 issues PWAC has to remind itself that the differences exist and are intentional and trying to make one area like the other is not always a good thing. Since PWAC's primary concern is the common infrastructure areas it makes sense to split it where the infrastructure differences are markedly different, at SR44.

Next is the size of the PWAC, with CDDs 5-12 and BWCDD there are 9 people sitting the committee, how many is too big? 10, 11, 12, 15...? Right now, it is big enough, if every supervisor gives 3 minutes of input on a topic, we've easily burned through a half hour at a meeting. At some point we have to say enough, this is a good and logical point for that. We don't want to make ourselves like Congress with so many voices that nothing ever happens, and no work gets done.

There were other options taken into consideration, the most logical one was the combining of some of the smaller CDDs into larger CDDs as is now allowed under FS190. This however had its drawbacks and did not address the differences that still exist between areas north and south.

There are some negatives that can arise out of this separation. There currently exists a social rift between the areas north and south because of the extended physical separation that has existed for so long. This was a consideration for me in recommending the delay until 2022 for the split, to give the community time to grow back together and do a little healing before we make yet another demarcation in the community. The US and THEM needs to go away.

The biggest downside to the splitting of PWAC will be the reduction in risk mitigation. Less CDDs means less places to draw from if a major issue were to arise. The easiest example of this is CDD4's sink hole not long ago. Residents in CDD4 had to go it alone to cover $1.5M in costs and felt a 20-30% increase in maintenance assessments to cover these costs. Had the issue happened south of CR466 the Project Wide Agreement would have played its role and every CDD would have kicked in to cover the costs. This would have put some temporary stress on working capital or R&R funds but would not have resulted in any maintenance assessment increase. With the loss of CDD12 and 13 that impact become a little more difficult to handle. Let's not forget that 12 and 13 will be going it alone in a new project wide agreement, so for now they would only have the 2 CDDs to rely on, not 8.

If you have a problem or a concern with the planned separation, NOW IS THE TIME TO SPEAK UP. The CDDs involved will be going over this topic in detail in this month's meetings and will be making a decision that will be passed on to PWAC and SLCDD next month. Let them know how you feel. Attend the meetings, speak your mind, get involved, show more than digital courage!

@ GoldWingNut, thx for posting

You really need to use the "reply with quote" button. No one knows who you are talking to, in any of your posts. We have no idea who you're agreeing with, who you're arguing against.

We all live in the villages and we should not start dividing the north from the south as far as who is paying for what -- please let's not make this political, isn't our country divided enough!!!!!! There is no such thing as amenities for the north and south -- we are one community and we all share the same things!!

I absolutely agree with you, we are ONE community. The division of the PWAC has more to do with the differences in the development areas construction north and south of SR44. It will have no impact on the amenities in either section.

The one thing I could see happening when connectivity is established (very soon now!) is that some of naysayers and fence sitters will see just how incredibly beautiful the new southern areas are and may decide to move there. I would move there myself if it were not for the incredible friends and neighbors I have in my local community.

I absolutely will be at the CDD12 meeting this week to learn all about this. Unlike some, I plan to become informed before forming an opinion. Once that opinion is formed, I may well be giving it to the five supervisors. That is what I have always done.

Goldwing - Will PWAC2 be advising SLCDD, or will there be a second board formed for the south? One of the questions that I have and thought maybe I could get an answer before Thursday.

It is really beautiful down here; we moved from St. James to Bradford in September. I enjoy the drive to work and golf mornings from Bradford to points north in the cart.

To those who write that they were told this, or promised that, all that is actually owed to you is what is in the sales contract you agreed to when you purchased and closed on your home.

I've been here for a year, and have been reading posts and comments here on the Forums. It is quite surprising to see so many who don't understand where they are living or what is guaranteed.

And thanks to Gold Wing Nut for his helpful posts and YouTube videos.

PS I realized that the Water Lily Bridge, and Magnolia Plaza would eventually be completed. When we purchased, Edna's and the Pitch&Putt had just opened, Lowlands and Everglades were under construction, Warm Springs was still mostly 2 lanes, Chitty Chatty was only a swamp, 1/2 of Marsh Bend was still sand and grazing land, DeLuna was a dream, and I could still drive on a bumpy, gravel Marsh Bend Trail all the way to 301.

Amazing progress in little more than 18 months.

The current plan is for SLCDD to be the parent board over PWAC2. It's anticipated that at some point in the (near?) future that another commercial district (south of Monarch Grove?) will be formed, and the responsibilities be passed to them for the areas covered by PWAC2.

Before the haters and uninformed start their "commercial district doesn't pay it fair share" mantra again one needs to consider the possibilities of vesting the authority to sign the checks in the other possible parties. If vested in one of the numbered CDDs, all the other numbered CDDs will be constantly checking the numbers in search of inequities and self-favoritism by the "controlling" numbered CDD. Pitting CDD against CDD, neighbor against neighbor. Don't say it won't happen because it already is, this is exactly the situation that fuels the haters and uninformed argument over the assessable acreage calculation currently used to determine the cost allocations. (I'll not delve into this any deeper, it would fill too many pages).

Keeping the check signing authority in the hands of the CDD with the least possible to gain has great value in keeping the community peace.

Since its inception, all of PWAC's decisions and directions to SLCDD have always been accepted, endorsed, and acted upon by the SLCDD. This includes both the areas of the Project Wide Agreement/Fund as well as ALL actions related to Amenities. It is highly unlikely that they ever will take actions contrary to PWAC (or PWAC2) direction, they don't want to. The first-time action is taken contrary to PWAC (PWAC2) direction, PWAC is rendered impotent and ineffective, putting ALL RESPONSIBILITY ON SLCDD and by proxy on the developer, something neither wants. PWAC gives them plausible deniability, if the actions of PWAC turn out to be wrong, ineffective, or unpopular with the residents they can redirect the angst back to the resident elected representative on PWAC. Without a strong and effective PWAC supporting and representing the residents and providing the direction and guidance to SLCDD the responsibilities would then fall to SLCDD, something neither SLCDD nor the residents would want.

The current system with the PWAC and SLCDD relationship has worked well for all of us and should continue. There are new changes in the works for how these two boards interact. In the past PWAC would hold its meeting and make their decisions and staff would record these. Then 3 to 10 days later, depending on the schedule, the district staff would deliver the information to SLCDD. Last month we (PWAC, SLCDD, and staff) made some changes to this process. PWAC meets on a Monday morning, that same afternoon SLCDD now meets, and instead of staff providing the PWAC information, the PWAC Chairman (me) provides them with the synopsis of all of the PWAC's decisions, discussions, actions, and feedback of the board and residents. This is now a two-way conversation and SLCDD board members are able to ask questions and seek clarifications on PWACs actions. The goals of the changes are twofold, it should foster a closer relationship between the two boards, and should make for clearer and faster communications without the need of 3rd party interpretation and the previous time delays. If additional actions are needed this gives PWAC the opportunity to be able to meet again and not wait a full month, to take action.

I hope this helps to clarify thing a little on this issue. I would not be advocating this move if I didn't believe it was in the best interest of ALL the residents of The Villages.

If you have specific questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to me on this forum or at my district email address donald.wiley@districtgov.org

Don Wiley
CDD-10 Supervisor/Chairman
PWAC Chairman

I plan to listen with an open mind.

My gut is telling me that there is a concern that the southern CDD's represent a higher cost that the northern CDD's do not want to share. The talk about how landscaping, etc "is different in the new areas" is driving my gut feeling.

I just don't see a benefit to Southern Oaks residents. Not right now. But, that may change at the meeting.

Is there a feel for how many CDD's there will be in the south end once the Developer fills in all the land they have bought? I would think if there is another 4 or 5 CDD's it would make sense to split the PWAC's into two groups.

That's a good question. I would guess the future villages that will be in Leesburg will become District 14. Villages around the planned Lifestyle Center could be District 15. There will definitely be more to follow.

I don't disagree with this. However, why do it now rather than after the CDD's are developed. And, after there is a new commercial CDD to act as the financial authority.

What if things get delayed for an extended time, or don't happen at all? Seems to me that using projections to make such an important decision is not the wisest path. What's the hurry?