“the vha” is a trademark of the villages developer
 

The VHA Recommendation. The misleadingly named Villages Homeowners Advocates (better known as The VHA) has now come out in support of a Yes vote on the proposed fire district. This should surprise no one. The new fire district is being supported by the Developer (note the cap on taxes on commercial property), the Developer's appointed officials, and the Developer's newspaper.

The VHA's History. The VHA was founded in collaboration with the Developer, as VHA's own website kind of admits. Details on the ties between the VHA and the Developer can be found here: POA Accomplishments | POA of The Villages In any event, I have lived here for 15 years. During that time, the VHA has always served as mouthpiece for the Developer and as the Developer's minor league team--whose directors, if they behave and toe the Developer's line, can, with the Developer's backing, move up to the big league of the County Commission.

Developer Ownership of “The VHA” Trademark. Residents who have been paying attention to local politics understand the above facts. But what most residents (including members of The VHA) do not understand is that “The VHA” is actually a trademark of the Developer. You can't make this stuff up! Here is a link to the trademark office search page: Search trademark database | USPTO Do a Basic Wordmark Search for “The VHA”.

The Platter of Platitudes in the VHA Voice. The VHA Voice serves up the usual platter of platitudes in its latest issue advocating a Yes vote on the fire district and glosses over all the reasons to vote NO. For example, it claims that “most residents will not see a significant increase in their tax bill.” What does “most” mean: 51%? What does “significant” mean? The truth is that there is no way of telling how much the initial unelected fire-district-board members (who, as a practical matter, will be designated by or acceptable to the Developer) will increase our taxes. One thing is clear, however, our taxes will increase! And for what???

Learn the Facts and Vote NO. One bit of advice that the VHA Voice does get right is: In researching the proposed fire district, “Always CONSIDER THE SOURCE”. By all means do so, and think about who owns The VHA trademark and the history of The VHA. Then read, or re-read, the October POA Bulletin ( https://www.poa4us.org/wp-content/up...0-Bulletin.pdf ), and, if you haven't already done so, reject the recommendation of the Developer's VHA and vote NO on the proposed fire district.

Interesting. Knew the vha usually voted for what the developer wanted but didnt know it was sort of owned by him.

[ The new fire district is being supported by the Developer (note the cap on taxes on commercial property),


I agree - VOTE NO

To fund the fire district, there will be a millage rate tax on property UP TO A MAX VALUE OF $10 MILLION.

Look at any shopping plaza (they are all owned by the Developer). Look at Brownwood Hotel, or the Waterfront Hotel (owned by the Developer). Look at the new Brownwood Medical building (owned by the Developer.) If they are not each worth $10 million now, they soon will be. But the $10 million cap will stay $10 million forever.

And each of those buildings pay the same $124 per rooftop that you are paying because they have just one rooftop. Those apartment buildings at Brownwood, with dozens of units under one rooftop, also pay just $124 per building.

Why should the Developer's contribution to the fire department be capped artificially low and we have to pay full amount? Those commercial buildings and tall buildings require special equipment (which means larger firehouses).
He should be paying on the full value of his buildings, which he does now on the County property tax.

The proposed funding system is not fair.

Exactly!

Stu, why do you say "usually"? If you can cite one instance where the VHA has not "voted for what the developer wanted", I would be glad to be educated.

Just because you don't understand it does not mean it is not fair.

Do the research - I found 17 properties that will benefit from the $10M cap. Not hundreds, not dozens, just 17 and not all of them are owned by the Villages.

The rest of the 2000+ properties clearly owned by the Villages will have the same increase that you do. Well, not exactly the same: yours will be maybe $100. Theirs will range from $100 to at least $750.

AND FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME: YOU ARE PAYING MUCH MORE THAN $124 TODAY!

That EVIL developer, who built a community that is so nice, we all chose to move here.

Are you sure the VHA doesn’t pay a royalty to the developer to use the trademark or at least has a use agreement.
I am glad the developer trademarked it early on, prevented another organization from using the name.

Ok, yes, six properties benefit from the cap today. As property values rise, how many will benefit from the cap 10 years from today? And why should there be any cap at all? What is the rationale?

And yes, I know we are paying more than $124 today. I would like to see that portion of the funding eliminated entirely, and the cost be fully put onto the millage rate tax, with NO cap. I think that would be more fair.

Hmmmm. Who to support? A group who is supported by the Developer or a lawyer who hates the Developer? Don’t care much for lawyers to begin with. But when ALL of said lawyer’s posts on this site are anti-Developer all I can conclude is that this lawyer is blinded by his hatred. Sad life to live.

NOTE: I updated my numbers. 17 properties benefit from the cap, not all owned by The Vilages, and over 2000 properties apparently owned by The Villages do NOT benefit from the cap in any way.

You still don't seem to understand. The VPSD today is funded with the $124 plus about 0.71 mils of your millage rate today, with NO cap. And with no limit on the millage rate, that 0.71 today could be much higher next year. I believe the $124 is separated from the ad-valorem so that properties that would otherwise be exempt from ad-valorem due to exemptions will still pay something towards fire protection. Roll the $124 into the ad-valorem and some portion of those fees will no longer be collected.

Those who are against the IFD aren't going to point out that that there are several caps on the IFD funding. Yes, there is the $10M cap that benefits those 17 properties but there is also a cap on the 0.75mils and on the 1mil that benefit all of us. Increasing the 0.75mils is difficult and increasing the 1mil is impossible without another referendum. Compare that with the system in place today where the BoCC controls the millage and just three years ago increased it by 33%.

How many will benefit from the cap 10 years from now? There is no way of knowing. Perhaps only five if the economy has a downturn and assessments drop. Or maybe assessments keep climbing and more benefit. But remember, the $10M cap only applies to the 0.75mil portion, it does not apply to the 0-1mil ad-valorem piece and any increase in value will result in an increase in IFD fees for those properties as well.

Yes, I understand all that perfectly. Just because I disagree with you does not mean I don't understand. I believe that having the fire dept cost on the county property tax, with no caps, will be more fair. Should County Commissioners abuse our trust again, they will also lose the next election.

You prefer this new method.

I guess we have to let everyone read our reasoning and decide for themselves.

So you are seriously suggesting that the VHA is paying a royalty to the Developer? Wow, the would be news and even worse than a royalty-free use. Do you understand that a trademark owner who licenses a mark, in order to protect his registration, has to monitor the quality of the product or service that uses the trademark? How do you think that it that is done in the case of "The VHA" mark? I don't know, but the relationship has an odor to it. Developer ownership of "The VHA" mark certainly shows the influence that the Developer has over The Villages Homeowners Advocates organization.

I live in Lake County and therefore don't have a dog in this fight. As an observer from the outside, here's my input on the fire district situation.

From a purely capitalistic point of view, it's in the Developer's best interest to contain the district under their umbrella. In this way, they reap the rewards. They own the "company" (the fire department) and can charge the county, the CDD, whoever - whatever they want for the service. They don't have to put the service out to bid, they don't require that anyone vote on it. You might have to pay extra tax dollars, imposed by the county. That's to pay the company (the fire department) for their services. Services that will cost whatever they tell you they cost, since they OWN them and you voted to GIVE them that authority.

For that reason, I'm against giving the ownership of the fire district to the Villages. While the service is under the authority of the county, it answers to the taxpayers. While the service is under the authority of the Villages, it answers to no one.

What you describe in your middle paragraph is what we have today. The VCCDD "owns" the VPSD. The VCCDD tells the BoCC what is needed to provide the service and the BoCC passes it along to all of us as ad-valorem taxes.

If the IFD passes then the "ownership" of the VPSD passes from the VCCDD to the IFD board elected by the residents.

I am very concerned about the cost of the proposed fire district. The voters are basically being asked to approve writing a blank check. Come back to the voters when you have hard cost information and can report to voters with transparency what the are being asked to approve. And besides, this whole thing is putting the cart in front of the horse. Improved response time is not nearly as important an issue as the fact that medical patients will be dumped at a horribly incompetent hospital. What good is faster response time when the ultimate outcome is that one will get dumped off at a hell hole so they can hurry up and wait for absolutely terrible health care. Based on my (and many others) experience with the Villages hospital, I would rather die at home than be brought to that nightmare.

The VHA is another tool in the developer's sales/management kit. As I understand it the VHA started in 1990 or 1991 in response to the Property Owners' Association's looking out for the interest of homeowners versus those of the developer. I cannot recall the VHA ever taking action on behalf of homeowners against the interests of the developer. The developer settled a lawsuit with the POA for $40,000,000 or so. Villages Settles Lawsuit | POA of The Villages

Look at the facts

An article in October’s POA discuss this very thing. Vote NO on the new proposal.

In August, you resigned from the POA because of their management and leadership. Here, you cite the POA as a reference for the VHA being a puppet of the developer. Make up your mind; just like the people should make up their minds with all the facts (not just yours). All of your posts are full of ire. Why so angry?

The following is a simple, short comment from VHA rep Mike Dollard about the ballot measure that would create the new fire and emergency services district:
-----
This fall we vote on the creation of a fire district specifically for The Villages. I’ve thought about this a lot, even changed my mind a few times. I will vote yes; this will be a good thing for us. Here is why:

The cost? You will pay either way, it is just who gets the tax dollars first. One party cannot be cheaper than the other – fuel, equipment and wages are the same if you vote yes or no. The fire budget will be X amount. If I am billed that under “county tax” or under “fire tax” the budget is still X amount.

The deciding factor – when the county oversaw the ambulances, we had terrible service and nobody seemed to care. It slowly got worse and worse; still nothing was done. Tempers flared, example after example of failure but nothing was done. You had your chance (actually, many chances). It is time for new management.

That’s because YES on the fire district is the correct vote.

The VHA is Pro-Developer and POA is Anti-Developer. Sounds balanced! What are the Positives and the Negatives?

The Positives— the Developer made this great and beautiful place to live and enjoy our lives!
The Negatives— the POA makes hatefulness and grief to distract our lives!

If the POA supporters hate so much, they should sell out at what is nearly the top and move to a nice trailer park!

Amen sayonara POA

I have voted No, taxes high enough

It appears that some people support paying more (amounts vary) under the assumption that extra money would make things better. But the numbers don't seem to add up. Paying more by residents is not going to result in more money for fire and EMS service because some other group will pay less.
Published info say the final FD funding is the same either pass or fail. I see all residential properties will pay more (per the online cost estimator, and the published sample estimates). However, the total budget is the same. So if residents pay more, but the total doesn't go up, something else must be paying less to make that balance out? Total = Resident + Commercial. What information is missing?

The county fixed the ambulances without a fire district. Why is a fire district necessary to fix other things? Isn't that the job of the people in charge today? If the district is truly only about changing funding, then won't the same people still be managing things?

Championing how this will be overseen by "independent elected citizens". But that's not happening for 2 to 4 years. Lots of comments that "puppets" for the developer will be appointed because we do not know in advance who will be on that board. If that happens, for at least 2 years these appointed people could make any number of permanent changes that cost residents a lot more money without any "citizen" oversight. They could grant exemptions, lower the cap, hire friends and family, go on a spending spree, raise the tax rates...

It is widely known that the VHA was founded by the developer and loaded up with his minions to try to put the POA out of business. They always have been controlled by the developer and everything they do is controlled by the developer, just like PWAC, AAC and most of the CDD's. It is one family rule here in The Villages.

Unfortunately, because of the way the levy is based, I, and anyone else who has any sort of exemptions (homestead, veteran, disabled) is going to end up paying a larger share of this 'bucket of money'.

First, because of the 10 mil cap, there are currently 17 properties that exceed this amount and their "savings" because of this will be over $120,000. Who's going to make up that amount? The rest of us.

And second, because the levy is based upon the full value of your property (less land value) without any EXEMPTIONS, my tax is going to be based upon a much larger number that the corresponding tax I'm currently paying to the county.

So who does this benefit financially? Commercial properties, non homestead properties, non exempt properties.

Given that this is all about who gets the money and who divides up the money, and not who actually uses the money, it's a NO vote for me.

IF you still had school aged children, would you wish to send them to Wildwood High School or to The Villages Charter School? It’s the exact same argument/scenario - public/county/government run vs developer controlled. I tried to go vote yesterday as I thought this issue was one that is open for all property owners to vote on with a villages iD, but I was mistaken that it’s only for those who are registered to vote in FL so you won’t get the opinion of all property owners who will be impacted accounted for with the vote anyway.

I voted no
 

.It’s too confusing to sort out and poorly presented as to cost so I didn’t support it

Exactly, it's the quality and caliber of the management.

We get good long range planning and value for what we pay the Villages managed operations.

Sumter County not so much, and maybe even a little spiteful to the Villages residents with their zoning approvals. Anything they start takes forever to finish.

Homeowner still in Michigan
 

My husband and I own a home but are not there yet not for another year are we able to vote on the proposed fire district ?

Election is Tuesday .....you are a little late to the dance.

I never thought I would see people in Florida advocating to leave the management of anything to government. As TV is still selling houses all over the place with no sign of slowing down, would they advocate for some runaway train of tax increases for fire and ambulance protection? Of all the possible ways they can bilk us out of cash, the firehouse is a little far fetched isn't it? I know we all want the best for nothing but as for me, I'll vote for faster response and more control over less.

Not unless you are registered to vote within the proposed fire district.

Voting
 

Nope - But you are not in that boat by yourself.

Government
 

“Government” don’t be too hard on yourself as the government is the people.

Vote yes or no
 

One post says new tax could only add. 1 mil. That post should have said 1 mil per year could be added to tax bill. Maybe I’m jaded as I come from Chicago, but I have never voted for a tax increase in my life and I doubt anything could ever change my mind on that.

Find the truth
 

Correct - how do others not see the VHA looks out for the developer and the POA looks out for the homeowners. Kinda reminds me of another situation where who should come first doesn’t.

Cost information? You have been provided with this information based on current costs. The "hard cost" will can only be calculated when there is a track record....and this is what the current projection is based on. As for your statement you will get dumped off at a "hell hole"... you must have no idea how the emergency medical services work and that a person does have choices as to the facility they will be taken to.

Vote "YES" if you want to have a say in how the VPS operates and what and how they provide life saving service.

Keep that thought in mind when you are waiting up to 2 hours for a county provided ambulance. From Chicago area too and I really enjoy the lower tax burden in Florida....and The Villages. I've voted and I voted "YES".