[Muncle]

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.




`

[djl8412]

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.

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by Muncle

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.




`

Thank you Muncie - well said.

[rsetterlund]

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

[SteveZ]

Originally Posted by djl8412

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.

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.

[downeaster]

Originally Posted by Muncle

I
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.
`

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.

[JimJoe]

Originally Posted by Muncle

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.




`

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.

[bimmertl]

Originally Posted by SteveZ

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.

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.

.

[surfangel]

Originally Posted by Mallory

Typical, overblown, anti-Villages story from the Orlando Sentinel. I'm not "outraged" by this single investigators report.

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.

[SteveZ]

Originally Posted by bimmertl

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.

.

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.

[djl8412]

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.

[schotzyb]

Originally Posted by bimmertl

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.

.

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.

[katezbox]

Originally Posted by surfangel

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.

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."

[Advogado]

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.

[Stantheman]

Originally Posted by Lauren Ritchie

Stantheman,

there's no "conflict" between florida law and federal law because they address different things.

florida law creates a community development district and gives it power to issue bonds. i do not believe the law says does not say "tax exempt bonds."

the federal tax codes specify what makes a bond issue meet the test of "tax exempt." the IRS is applying the code to this issue and saying that it doesn't meet the test.

the district's defense is that it is a government under florida law and as such, it should be able to issue tax-exempt bonds.

the IRS says that argument is specious. its response: 'well, you might be a government under florida law, but state law doesn't matter to us when determining whether bonds are tax exempt. the two do NOT necessarily go together.'

that is what the agent meant when when he declared that the district's attorney archie lowry had made an "irrelevant" argument.

the IRS has a set of tests that it applies to any bond issue anywhere in the united states. pass, and it's tax-exempt. fail and it's not.

so, at the end of the day, these bonds could be declared formally as taxable and the district is still just as much a valid government under florida law as it was yesterday.

hope that helps.

--lauren

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