The potential costs and implications of the IRS Settlement Offer-reply to djl8412
 

To djl8412:
You (and Lauren Ritchie) are right about this matter. The implications are POTENTIALLY huge for Villagers, but it is still too early to say how the matter will play out. Unfortunately, the posters who ascribe the IRS's position to a low-level agent gone wild are overly optimistic about what is going on and misinformed about how the IRS operates. The current investigation is, in fact, part of a well-organized, national IRS crackdown on perceived abuses in the issuance of tax-exempt bonds. One can be fairly certain that a matter of this size is receiving high-level IRS attention.

To try to put this in perspective, set forth below is an attempt to quantify the costs and analyze the consequences of an acceptance of the IRS settlement offer, based on what we know now. Remember, if this settlement offer is turned down, the IRS is threatening to go after even bigger bucks.

According to the IRS, the current TOTAL tax exposure on all Series of bonds is $16,458,484. The first condition in the IRS settlement offer is that the IRS will settle for just "the tax exposure for the Series 2003 bonds", which is ONLY $2,877,366 plus post-2008 taxes that accrue until the bonds are redeemed.

The real cost, however, to the Central Districts (the owners and providers of our amenities) and to the Developer (technically, the Villages of Lake Sumter, Inc.-- a corporation that is owned by the Morse family) lies in conditions #2 and #3 of the IRS settlement offer:

Condition 2. The Center Districts would have to buy back about $360 million of outstanding bonds. How do the Districts raise this money? They would either have to (a) tax properties within their Districts, i.e., the Developer's properties, which the Central Districts obviously won't voluntarily do, since they are controlled by the Developer and, in any event, the Developer does not have $360 million in cash lying around, or (b) sell taxable bonds. Taxable bonds will presumably have to pay a higher interest rate than the Districts are currently paying on the tax-exempt bonds. How much more? I don't know since it would depend on the bond market, and the financial condition of the Central Districts, when the bonds are issued.

In fact, one would think that, with their underlying history, such taxable bonds might be a little tough to sell at all. But let's assume the cost is an extra 3%/year, which seems reasonable, over the interest now paid. That would be an extra ANNUAL cost of about $11 million. Amenity-fee increases are contractually capped at the CPI rate. So, how do the Central Districts cover this additional cost and still provide our amenities???

Condition 3. The Center Districts can no longer issue tax-exempt bonds. The Developer's strategy has been based on the ability of the Center Districts to issue low-cost tax-exempt bonds to pay the Developer for physical-amenity assets and for the assignment of the amenities' contracts, the latter resulting in a huge profit for the Developer. What happens to the future viability of the Developer's business model if that ability is lost???

The answers to the questions arising out of #2 and #3 are unclear at this point. If there is an attempt to offload the additonal costs on the Villagers or if the amenities that we were all promised by the Developer are reduced or destroyed, then another class action against the Developer, as well as against the two Central Districts and the others involved in the bond transactions, may be necessary. In that case, as an earlier Poster said, "Thank God for the Property Owners' Association."

My dog likes me too....
 

... but I have to agree with Steve Z and V07.

We could speculate about this endlessly - and generate lots of heat but very little light.

IRS agents are people too - just like folks at Bear Stearns, et al. They can be ambitious and lose perspective in their quest for promotion, or to be kinder, justice.

We can read about this and learn the facts - keeping in mind that Ms, Ritchie is ONE viewpoint. Or, we can gnash our teeth and worry ourselves into a frenzy, while in reality we are some of the luckiest people in the world to live in this place.

In the meantime, offers will be made, negotiated, refuted or accepted. We have little (if any) influence in this. We do have influence over ourselves, and I don't plan to ruin a single day of my life worrying over this.

Kate

PS - and lest I be accused of burying my head in the sand... I am a CPA who has actually been involved in the issue of tax free bonds.. so have personally dotted the i's and crossed the t's etc.

I hate to admit my ignorance but this is all way over my head. I have never been intereted in bonds or political issues and that is to my disadvantage. I am waiting to sell my house in La and a devout Wannabee to TV. My concern is whether this issue is going to someday affect the homeowners in TV in their pocketbooks? I was already surprised to learn about the 'bond' involved in buying into TV and had never heard of it anywhere else. This latest dialogue involving the IRS and taxable non-taxable bonds is making me think perhaps TV in not the right place for me on a retirees income. I dont want anymore $$$ surprises than life already throws my way.

Mary Ann,

The bond associated with your home in TV is a common practice in many areas.

Again, we can speculate until the Buffalo "come home" but it is just speculation.

There are a couple of threads on this topic that may be worth a search for your own piece of mind. I went through some basics of how bonds work a couple of times.

Kate. Very good advice indeed.
I used to think that I was in charge of the universe. When I quit believing that, it continued on. We can't ruin our lives over this.

Kate. You are my kinda gal!

Kate I was hoping you'd post on this matter again. Your previous posts on this topic were very informative.

I'm wondering if you've had the opportunity to read the IRS documentation regarding this matter which has now been published, and if in your professional opinion they have grounds to pursue this? The reporters put their slant and opinion on their columns, but what does the actual IRS correspondence to the VCCDD tell you?

I know you have better things to do living in The Villages than read this stuff, but next time we have a rainy day maybe you could take a look.

Hope you're enjoying your new home in the beautiful village of Bonita!

Here's the link to the IRS documents in case anyone didn't see it.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/media...5/47202149.pdf

While it is way too early to draw any conclusions or get anxious about the potential IRS ruling, if the ruling finally made is to deem the bonds to be taxable instead of tax free, and the CDC has to either find a way to fund the increase in the interest rate or repurchase the bonds, there would then be another lengthy negotiation or litigation (depending on the position of the developer), because the implication would be that the developer was paid too much for the properties sold to the districts. The liability would most likely revert to the developer who profited from the sale of the amenities to the district at "fair values" that would be quite different were tax-free financing not available at the time of the sale to the district. I suspect the developer will take more of a hit from an adverse ruling than will the home owners.

snok,

the developer and the district are legally separate entities. the developer will not take a hit on this, unless he decides for reasons of his own that he wishes to become involved. he was simply the seller in a series of transactions, and he has two appraisals showing that the price is reasonable. (the IRS disagrees with the appraisal methods, but that only goes to the issue of whether this was an 'arm's length' transaction. the IRS doesn't care whether the district overpaid.)

the IRS is NOT investigating gary morse. as i've said in other posts, he paid taxes on his gains. he is not liable for any taxes on the bonds because he didn't issue the bonds -- your district did.

think of it as selling a car....if you sell a car to someone who gets a loan, you get paid, right? if later, the bank realizes that the person paid too much for the car and maybe didn't fill out the loan forms right, the car doesn't come back to you, does it? well, it's the same here.

these sales were structured so that morse is simply a willing seller and the district a willing buyer.

any "liability" that morse might have would have to come from a judgment in court...if someone takes him there. but it won't be the IRS.

hope that helps.
lauren

Reply to Lauen Ritchie
 

Lauen,

If the costs resulting from resolution of the IRS investigation prevent the Center Districts from delivering the amenities that the residents were promised by the Developer, the residents will presumably take the necessary legal action to hold the Developer accountable. When amenities previously declined, the residents initiated a class action and won a settlement, as I recall, of about $43 million--now being paid by the Developer in annual installments.

The posters in this thread who are taking an "It's-not-my-worry approach" to the present situation are the benefiting today from the efforts of their neighbors who did worry, got involved, and spearheaded that class action. The rest of us owe those neighbors a vote of thanks for our ability to continue to enjoy our amenities and the lifestyle we were promised when we bought our homes.

If the IRS prevails here, it may well be class-action time all over again because it would appear that the continuation of our amenities system will, at the very least, be threatened. (In that situation, the IRS documents will provide the basis for a particularly good case against the Developer.) If events do reach that point, the residents will be very fortunate to have the Property Owners' Association to help represent their interests-- because there is no other organized group of residents that will do so.

Lauren,

Please stop referring to it as Your district. As I've said in my previous posts, it's His district!

What is it about this that you don't seem to get? Read what I said before and if there's anything you don't understand, I'll be happy to explain it to you.

Reply to EdV
 

EdV, hey, let's be nice to Lauren. Her writing may, from time to time, need to be more precise (this situation is complicated), but she is on your side here, as am I.

Minor point: The Developer is technically an "it" (The Villages of Lake Sumter, Inc.) not a "he". In fact, Gary Morse and the family may attempt to hide behind the veil of that corporation if this IRS problem really goes south, but we all know the reality of the situation. It would certainly be comforting for the Morse family to step up, at this point, and reassure the residents that we have nothing to worry about and that the family will ensure that our amenities are continued, no matter what. Instead, thus far, all we have is silence and non-reporting by the Daily Sun.

I take exception with your representation that Lauren Ritchie is a "reporter". She is not. Reporters report news without bias, just facts. It appears to me that Ms. Ritchie contrives and selectively reports components of a story that support and advance her preconceived opinions and prejudices. To her credit, I believe she acknowledged this fact in one of her prior postings. She is a columnist and not required to be objective in her writing. I do not have my head in the sand....I just wish a real reporter would write or post, "Just the facts ma'am, just the facts". Attribution and apologies to Sgt. Joe Friday.

The saddest thing to me is the anxiety among salt of the earth friends, neighbors and retirees, her biased "fishing" and seed planting has created as evidenced by some posters.

Funny thing, no one has ever told be about a Lauren Ritchie column on the economic impact The Villages has had on Sumter, Lake and Marion Counties.Things like jobs, tax revenues increases in per capita income outside TV.

Just my opinions and random thoughts. What do I know.

I have no connection with the developer. IMHO, he's not a candidate for sainthood but he has done a lot more good than bad. Many, including my wife and I have been the beneficiary of the Schwartz/Morse dream and lifestyle.

I believe that SteveZ has articulated the majority viewpoint for Villagers.

There is another group to consider
 

I have been following this subject for many months on this site and as a potential property buyer in TV I just want to comment on an earlier post from another potential buyer who indicated her investment concerns. I understand all the laissez fare post from TV residents because if I already purchased there I would feel the same way.. guess what it is out of their hands so why worry about it.
But I think there may be others besides the previous concerned buyer and me that are concerned about the outcome and possible negative ramifications for the home owners.

Also, Lauren thank you for doing your job.
You people want to see really one sided, agenda based, bias reporting read the Boston Globe.

Orlando Sentinel May 30th article re TV vs IRS
 

I also want to thank Lauren and point out that this issue brings back to light a very important question.
What exactly are you entitled to get for your monthly amenity fee? Is that in writing anywhere? If not why not?? Do you really pay and just hope the money goes for what it is intended? Who decides if the money is really being spend on amenities, if the amounts are fair, and which amenities get funded? From what I can tell there needs to be some clarifications. Why are some things funded and some not? Why pools, game courts, and golf courses but not dog parks, gyms and bowling alleys? Many Villagers love their pets as much as others love their activities. Should not the Villagers decide this? Is this the problem that spawned the lawsuit which was settled for money and promises? This lack of involvement by the Villagers in decision making is the problem. Maybe the Villagers would not have bought the right to collect amenities fees and the tax exempt bonds would never have been sold? Maybe the Villagers would have hired a different bonding firm that would have advised that the bonds could not be tax exempt for the same reasons given by the IRS? If Villagers pay the bills, they should decide. The solution to all of this could be for the villagers to self govern, and isn't really that what Florida law contemplates happening at this point in development?
Maybe it is time to vote.

As a villages wannabee, its funny to see so many different personalties from sensible to self rightous to I told you so to panic.

I wonder if bonds issued in 2003 payed a higher interest then now so if the bonds had to be issued again today with a tanked economy if they would pay a lower interest, even taxfree vs taxed? Does anyone know, not just guess but really know?

Also of course the Daily sun and the Orlando newspaper has their own viewpoints. Every newspaper has their own viewpoint, like someone said about the Boston Globe. And theyre suppose to. They all have different owners with different point of views. Whats the suprise?

Don,

You are so right. Newspapers have always had an editorial bias. If you read American History, you can see how this shaped our nation.

I think the issue with the Sentinel (and many other media and print outlets today), is that it is hard to determine where opinion ends and news begins. This truly feeds the rumor-mongering as so many people only get their news from one place.

I may not always agree with the fairly liberal Boston Globe, but the quality of their writing is excellent and (IMHO) not anywhere near the level of the Sentinel.

Ivy,

My fellow Bonita-er... I have read the IRS document awhile back - but I will try to get around to re-reading and sharing my thoughts.

The problem with TV is that there is no time.... (especially for those of us who are still working).

Kate

I plan on enjoying the Villages everyday and what ever will be will be. Personally to get worked up over something that may or may not be an issue is not how I plan on living.:beer3: :icon_hungry: :pepper2:

I understand that the IRS is not investigating the developer. I am not referring to his taxes on his gain, but to the amount of the gain itself, and wether it was properly calculated, if the cost of financing is changed. While the district is a separate entity, the sale to the district was not an arms length transaction due to the effective control of the district by the developer. The developer was in control of the valuation of the assets and, even if not the entity arranging the financing, certainly very influential in the financing. I think the asset value paid by the district was, at least to some extent, dependent on the lower cost of the tax-free financing to the purchaser. Therefore, the developer profited to some extent from the financing method used. While the developer is not subject to the IRS ruling, I still think the district will have a legitimate claim against the developer for unjust profits based on over valuation of the assets, if the district loses the benefit of low cost tax-free financing. I'm sure there are lawyers that could make a good case if it comes to it. I also suspect that, before the cost is ultimately born by the residents, it will be an issue that must be investigated by the district.

I read (and reread) this tiresome thread and see that as far as the IRS situation is concerned, there's nothing factual and meaningful new. In fact, there's been nothing new of any import since Ms Ritchie wrote her first opinion piece. Even the Sentinel's attempt at straight reporting last Saturday was light on facts and long on innuendo. But that is to be understood. At this time, there are no facts of consequence.

Our Chicken Littles want to know how much the IRS decision finding someone in TV at fault is going to cost homeowners. First, there is no such decision. Second, "someone" seems to float between the central districts, the numbered districts, the developer as a corporate entity, and the Morse family as a group and individuals. Third, absolutely no one can even provide a ballpark figure for the most pessimistic of outcomes, much less which of our "someones" might be liable and for what. Some of these CLs claim that this dreaded Sword Of Damocles hanging over TV will keep them from moving here. Sorry about that. There's a lot of nice places out there. Hope you find one.

I was a bit harsh there, but there are so many people who claim, even brag on ignorance of the CDD concept and the various bonds. Go to http://www.districtgov.org/ and read up on CDDs. Attend the Orientation course and ask about how bonds are used and the different types. Drop an email to Janet Tutt Janet.Tutt@districtgov.org and ask her all your questions. Or easiest of all, use the Search function at the top of this page. These issues have been hashed and rehashed on TOTV several times, and some comments are even factual.

And of course, this topic always brings out more than our share of the "antis" who love TV and wouldn't live anywhere else, but pass up no opportunity to criticize, especially the Morses. A common cry amongst many of these people is that we residents are disenfranchised, that we should control all things in TV. If only that would happen, that we could vote, we could have multiple dog parks in each villages (NIMBY, please). Well, I know the turnip truck just came through town and some may not know this, but we vote now. Depending on the age of your CDD, all or part of the officers in your CDD are elected, either by a landholder or eligible elector vote. Up north, all numbered CDD are elected by resident electors (eligible FL voters). Those CDDs then appoint members to the Amenity Authority Committee http://www.districtgov.org/vccdd/wn-aac.asp For Southerners, not to worry. We'll get the same situation down here as the development matures.

Oh, and for those who salivate at the thought of criticizing the Daily Sun, I though Janet Tutt's explanation of the IRS peccadillo that appeared a couple months ago was far superior to the opinion pieces or the straight news published in Orlando. She couldn't and didn't give a lot of details, since there were not a lot available and as SteveZ and others have said, you don't try a case like this in the media.




`

It's fine to take "exception" to my generalization to Ms. Ritchie as a "reporter." A mere technicality it a person's title does not preclude the fact that Ms. Ritchie DOES combine fact with an opinionated slant. She has written many articles as a columnist regarding other topics in central Fla. that she feels have potential impacts of people in all walks of life. I believe her goal is to let people know that you need to take a look around once in a while and pay attention to things that may have an effect on your life either now or in the future.

By the way, there was an article by a "reporter" about the bond issue in the Sentinel on the same day as Ms. Ritchie's column.

Thank you Muncie - well said.

Here is a link to the Bond Buyer Guide, the article was posted on www.bondbuyer.com/washington today.

http://www.bondbuyer.com/article.htm...090601HPCWB64J

And that's the reporter who referred to The Villages as "the playground for 77,000 retirees"

play·ground (plground) n. ((http://www.thefreedictionary.com/playground))
1. An outdoor area set aside for recreation and play, especially one containing equipment such as seesaws and swings.
2. A field or sphere of unrestricted pleasurable activity

It's interesting to know the Sentinel considers us retirees as being in a "playground" as opposed to having a residential community. Their selection of the term "playground" is highly disrespectful to all of us and gives the image of us retirees as second-childhood types. The negative slant of our community was unquestionably intentional, as words are the Sentinel's tools of the trade, so the selection of the term 'playground" was hardly accidental. Whatever their intent was regarding the bond matter, there was no need to insult TV residents.

I agree wholeheartedly. Especially your last paragraph quoted above.

I have seen an encouraging change in The Sun and Ms Tutt's comments confirmed this. It is still a cheer leader for the developer but we are getting more hard news.
Newspapers are struggling now and the Sentinel is no exception. They must see The Villages as a potential for increased subscribers and if they stir the pot enough they may win a few. However, if they portray us as a bunch of silly oldsters who don't know which end is up they may lose ground in a hurry. Also, if The Sun continues to publish a more professional paper there will be little need for The Sentinel.
BTW, I cancelled my subscription to The Sentinel months ago.

If you don't want to read about this subject, don't. Please, no name calling or put downs. Remember, this is Florida's friendliest hometown.

This has to be one of the funniest posts of all times. Stevez, one of the great pontificators and experts on just about everything, is emotionally upset TV was referred to as a "playground" for retirees, and is upset at such at reference. Then to make his point, he finds some simplistic definition which backs up his childish anger.

Amazingly, when I Googled "playground" the first thing that came up as a definition was "resort area: an area where many people go for recreation" (just Google "define playground) I guess Steveo missed that one. Try Googling "playground of the rich and famous" for a list of places like Monaco, French Riviera, Malibu etc.

So the next time Steveo is ranting away and pontificating on a broad range of subjects, remember this post and how he twisted a definition to match his indignation and create a bogus argument how the author of an article he didn't agree with insulted all the folks in TV. What a crock!

By the way, be sure, you never refer to TV as an adult Disneyworld around the Zman, or you will no doubt incur his wrath.

.

Morse
 

Yes ignorance is bliss. Hear no evil see no evil
Quote from Ms. Ritchie article<<Morse becomes almost unfathomably rich from the bond proceeds. And residents are saddled with 30 years of payments on $709 million worth of loans.....Without bonds, that $16 million annually could be going into building and operating even more fun stuff for Villages residents instead of paying off the loans that made Morse rich.>>

But apparently the little village people are quite happy playing with their golf balls. I for one worked very hard for my money, and don't like the idea of paying more than I should. Mr. Morse could do more for the Villages like include lawn service and bigger swimming pools with covers but he sleeps well at night knowing that nobody cares how rich he gets using our money.
As much as I hate the IRS, the are not going put a dent in Mr. Morse bank account he will simply take out the difference in amenity fees.
Solivata is looking very good right now. It maybe smaller than the Villages but it has better toys.

Take all the personal potshots you want at me. According to an old popular phrase where I once worked, 'It don't mean nuthin..."

If you google "playground definition," check the first three responses.

This "playground" as the Sentinel calls it provides more volunteer services hours and money to the tri-county than all any other region or population group by magnitudes. It's the major employer and still the economic driver for the area, continuing in spite of problems everywhere else. The retirees here have WORKED their collective butts off for decades to be in the position to have a measure of security for themselves and their families, and still contribute to society in a myriad of ways. Many still are employed, full- and part-time, due to the economy and crumbled retirement account.

Yes, we have a community with many amenities for which we have paid, and still pay, no different than any other city within this state. Then only difference between The Villages and any other city within Florida is the fact that the residents are, for the most part, in the 50-85 year old range. So, what we have here as amenities are what fits the age bracket.

We still are able to provide schooling K-12 for the children of TV employees, and that schooling ranks as within the best in the State. Residents here work darned hard to insure the children receive the best by investing their time in a myriad of support projects, and the scholastic records of those kids demonstrate the effort expended by the kids and the retiree volunteers.

TV residents spend incalculable hours working in regional soup kitchens, free clinics, prison ministries, veterans service facilities, and every church and civic charity imaginable.

The Sentinel's insinuation by the use of the term "playground" was demeaning, as it seems to have been intended to give the impression TV residents simply float from golf course to cabaret, in a constant state of recreational euphoria. If you consider any response to that as humorous or a pontification, that's your choice.

Steve Z:

It's surprising to see you your skin so thin when the reporter called TV a playground for retirees. With all the advertising TV does nationwide for all the activities and amenities here, it doesn't seem insulting when one uses that summary. I kind of think it's a playground even though I'm not retired yet and I like it here. It sure ain't no nursing home.

I have never read in any of Steve Z's post where he claims to be an expert on any subject. He states his opinion on a subject and from what I have been told, that is what a forum is for.I for one enjoy SteveZ's opinions on various subject and that is why I choose to read them. Nobody is forcing you to read his entries.

1. Do you know what a bond is and is not?

2. The Morse family are developers, not charitable foundations. People know what they were buying and it doesn't include "bigger swimming pools with covers."

3. Do you know who the amenity fees are paid to - hint, it is NOT the developer.

TV is not for everyone - but it is my home. I feel privileged to have earned a place to live here. It is not a resort or a playground - although many of our guests have a wonderful time here. It is a place where many people are happy to say "Life is Good."

Back on topic
 

We seem to have strayed here. The subject is not whether or not StevieZ is a pontificator, whether or not The Villages is a playground or merely a great place to live, or whether Lauren Ritchie is a columnist or a reporter or neither. The subject is the very serious question of the impact of an IRS victory on the future of The Villages.

Lauren,

Thanx for your response - very helpful. Again on a pure speculative point - facilities have not yet been sold for an area that we consider to be from RT 466, south to Route 466A an area larger than what the existing bond offerings had previously covered with alot more facilities (rec centers, golf courses, pools, etc.), and people.

Based upon what we know today would Mr. Morse be able to sell those facilities in the future to the VCDD on the same projected revenue basis as the previously contested facilities and prices?

My guess says Mr. Morse settles the issue, pays the penalty, reimburses the VCDD for the difference in interest rates between tax-free and taxable bonds for the 2003 facilities sales , and establishes a more defendable yet profitable evaluation process going forward for a considerable amount of future facilities sales.

Resulting Outcome:

- cost to settle is minimal compared to revenue that was generated from this 2003 offering and all previous facility sales

- residents are made whole as no increase in costs or increase in amenity fees resultng from change in tax status on new bond issue

-future facility sales are not put in jeopardy since the whole world will be watching closely for any unsubstantiated evaluation as well as requirement for arms length transaction

- future home sales not effected since whole issue has been resolved

your thoughts?

thanx

Of all of my many faults, "thin skin" isn't one of them.

I love it here, too. And I agree that it's no nursing home. But it isn't an amusement park, either.

In Post #62 there was notice that when the Sentinel columnist wrote on the bond topic, it was done with "fact with an opinionated slant." And at the end of the post was the notice that a "reporter" instead of a columnist also wrote an article on the topic, as if the fact that the "reporter's" writing was devoid of opinion.

"Playground" is hardly an objective description of The Villages, anymore than "Orlando Makes Me Smile" (the official slogan of Orlando Tourism) describes the true City of Orlando - which ranked #6 in Forbes' Top 15 most dangerous cities in the USA (April 2009). Which is true (both, either or neither?) Marketing slogans are subjective hype. To insinuate they represent and claim them as an "objective description" of the place is poor reporting and worse editing, unless there is indeed "columnist" intent versus journalistic objectivity.

Pontificator that I may be.....

Until the matter is settled between the Government (IRS) and TVCCD, it's all conjecture. "Impact" won't be known until quantification has been settled, and that seems very much a matter of negotiation.

It's rare that any party puts their "best and final" position as their first and public position. It's usually the starting point, and then the negotiators work from each's starting point, rarely meeting in the middle. So, until the negotiations are complete, or, if stale-mated, the matter is litigated through all the appropriate judicial levels, it's a guessing game for the rest of us.

Would I like to see conclusion of the matter? Yep! However, trying to guess the outcome based on the public record is trying to claim that some algorithm can be applied to everything (including unspoken negotiation positions and other factors which can come into play during private talks) which can spit out an answer. That algorithm doesn't exist.

So much for this pontification....

Don't let the door hit ya!



`

What is a Solivata?
One pool, one golf course, one rec center.
Hope you enjoy!

Me again. This is what I said yesterday. Todays taxed bond rates may be less then the tax-free bond rates from 03. Maybe because of the tanked economy it may be a wash if this is part of the outcome.

But why are people trying to figure an outcome when theres no way to have a clue what the outcome can be. Its almost like there are people like the Orlando paper who are deliberately stirring up things pretending to be reporting, and for some villagers they are suceeding. Maybe they are looking to sell more papers or maybe there own policies are showing in this negative so-called reporting.

I think there are people who resent Mr. Morse's great personal financial success even though he is building a quality product and from what I read there are people, even inside the Villages who enjoy living there, who will knock him down no matter what he does. If hes wrong on this IRS thing, thats between him and the IRS. Why are people getting so upset when theres no facts or outcome yet to be upset about.

Someone said something about a "IRS victory." This is a strange way to put it. This isnt a war, this is a matter of law. And the law will sort it all out, Im sure.