[eweissenbach]

but here is her article on the latest development in the IRS bond issue.
Lauren Ritchie: Villages refunds tax-free bonds with taxable ones - Orlando Sentinel

[justjim]

Interesting article "old Coach". Does this change anything for the residents of TV?

[Mikeod]

Detest Lauren Ritchie? No. She certainly has a message, but I believe it would carry more weight without all the derogatory adjectives and snide references. When I have been involved in negotiations, discussions or even heated debates, the person who resorts to hyperbole, innuendo, or name calling has simply admitted to having the weaker stance.

I had to chuckle at her assertion that, if the board had declined to purchase the amenities from the developer, we could have used the funds to provide our own amenities. Where? The golf courses, rec centers, etc., were all there! We would have to purchase land outside TV, or land within TV from the developer at what cost. Then construct amenities. Imagine all the controversy between the golfers and non-golfers over where to spend resources. Or between bowlers and non-bowlers. I look at what is available here at our current amenity fee and done mostly without resident input to planning, and wonder if the residents could do it as well.

[Bogie Shooter]

The first paragraph of the article. This is why she is so "loved".

That's the sound of The Villages giving up a $426 million battle with the Internal Revenue Service that started six years ago when a sharp agent figured out how fiendishly the developer had perverted a Florida law to be able to issue tax-free bonds.

[JourneyOfLife]

You have to admit... there is an unpleasant odor wafting about! Can't blame that on the messenger!

So...... who is going to get stuck with the tax bill... plus any related legal expenses?

[Xavier]

Originally Posted by JourneyOfLife

You have to admit... there is an unpleasant odor wafting about! Can't blame that on the messenger!

So...... who is going to get stuck with the tax bill... plus any related legal expenses?

Believe me, the sky is not falling, "Chicken Little."

Xavier

[T-325]

This seems like a happy ending to this long drawn out bond issue. No one is hurt... and the issue is in the rear view mirror.

Or am I missing something?

[manaboutown]

It seems to me that once again the developer made a well reasoned and correct business decision, settling the problem by taking advantage of extremely low current interest rates to refinance the debt. Now, back to the business of making lots and lots of money by providing a great product to a market that wants it.

[justjim]

It appears to me that The Developer made most, if not all, the final decisions. I am also certain that Gary Morse surrounded himself with some very capable and smart associates. It's often said that the camel was suppose to be a "super horse" that was put together by a committee who had the power of "decision making".

The former can work better than the latter IMHO. The results here in TV speaks volumes.

[rubicon]

I don't detest Lauren Ritchie and I won't show anger toward her for telling the truth.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by T-325

This seems like a happy ending to this long drawn out bond issue. No one is hurt... and the issue is in the rear view mirror.

Or am I missing something?

To answer your question, you are, in fact, missing something. The redemption of the purportedly tax-exempt (their actual tax exemption is the issue in the IRS investigation) bonds is a big step in the right direction. It does not, unfortunately, put the "issue in the rear view mirror".

The redemption keeps the potential liability of the Villages Center District from growing. The redemption, however, does not resolve the issue of whether the Villages Center District (which owns a big chunk of our amenities) will incur potentially crippling costs relating to taxes during the period between when the purportedly tax-exempt bonds were issued and the date on which they were redeemed.

In summary, the fat lady has not yet sung in the IRS investigation, but MAYBE she is warming up her vocal cords.

[Bogie Shooter]

Isn't it time for the IRS to assign a new agent to this case?

[janmcn]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

Isn't it time for the IRS to assign a new agent to this case?

The IRS has never equivocated in its opinion of this case. It would seem that the investigative portion is over, and the only remaining action is to total up the damages (interest and penalties). There would be no need for a new agent assigned to this case.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by janmcn

The IRS has never equivocated in its opinion of this case. It would seem that the investigative portion is over, and the only remaining action is to total up the damages (interest and penalties). There would be no need for a new agent assigned to this case.

How many times was it re-assigned in the past??

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

but here is her article on the latest development in the IRS bond issue.
Lauren Ritchie: Villages refunds tax-free bonds with taxable ones - Orlando Sentinel

In my view, Lauren Ritchie performs a valuable service for Villagers since she reports on stories, like the IRS investigation, that the Daily Sun either buries or distorts. The problem is that, while her articles tend to get the basic facts right, the articles sometimes misinterpret those facts.

For example, in this article:

Ritchie criticism: The price of the Villages homes does not include the use of amenities and the cost of infrastructure. Therefore, Villagers are paying twice for those when they pay their amenity fees and the bond amortization/interest charges.

Legitimate criticism: True, the price of the new houses does not include the infrastructure costs or use of amenities. However, mathematically, we clearly are not paying twice for those, and Ms. Ritchie is flat out wrong on this point. The legitimate criticism in this regard is the lack of disclosure by the Developer.

Nobody reasonably expects that the price of a home anywhere is going to include the free use of neighborhood amenities, and Ms. Ritchie is being disingenuous when she implies otherwise. However, the Developer does not, in his advertising, disclose the existence of the infrastructure bonds, which are unique to The Villages, amount to about 10% of the price of the new homes, are a lien on the property, and an obligation of the buyer. No other business could get away with understating the real price of its merchandise by 10%.

In fact, some buyers of new Villages homes apparently don't find out about the bonds until they have already contracted to buy a new home. In addition to those buyers, such unethical advertising also prejudices both (a) the Villagers who are trying to sell their pre-owned homes in competition with the new homes and (b) the independent realtors who represent those Villagers. It is surprising to me that the realtors haven't lodged a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission.