[charlie1]

Now that the election is over, I have to say that I am done supporting or being a member of the POA with its current leadership. I am done with them endorsing candidates with only one platform – “Blame the developer”. I am done with them accusing people of being “paid off” by the developer. The POA has become a political organization that is taking an adversarial role with the developer. They are in a war with the developer! Really not sure what else they do at this point! I do not agree with this approach. I believe that the POA should be working in conjunction and together with ANY organization regarding improvements wanted by the majority of the residents. They are not my voice anymore! I have found conversations gets results. I have found willingness to compromise and agreeing to smaller steps will open doors to continued discussions. This is how you help both parties feel good about change and get to mutual agreement. I also have found that demanding never works. It slams the door shut and nothing constructive ever gets accomplished!

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by charlie1

Now that the election is over, I have to say that I am done supporting or being a member of the POA with its current leadership. I am done with them endorsing candidates with only one platform – “Blame the developer”. I am done with them accusing people of being “paid off” by the developer. The POA has become a political organization that is taking an adversarial role with the developer. They are in a war with the developer! Really not sure what else they do at this point! I do not agree with this approach. I believe that the POA should be working in conjunction and together with ANY organization regarding improvements wanted by the majority of the residents. They are not my voice anymore! I have found conversations gets results. I have found willingness to compromise and agreeing to smaller steps will open doors to continued discussions. This is how you help both parties feel good about change and get to mutual agreement. I also have found that demanding never works. It slams the door shut and nothing constructive ever gets accomplished!

!!!!!

Agree completely.

The developer has a proven track record. This place didn't become the #1 retirement destination city on the planet by accident. I much prefer to go with the tried and true, as opposed to a bunch of disgruntled geezers of unknown backgrounds who may not have even the ghost of a clue as to how things run around here.

I am reminded of a line from the movie The Patriot, when Benjamin Martin asked the question "what is the difference between being ruled by one tyrant 3,000 miles away, or 3,000 tyrants one mile away"? In this case the answer is obvious, at least to me. I moved here with one "tyrant" in charge. That "tyrant" has created something unique in the world and it is growing by leaps and bounds. The "tyrant" as far as I am concerned has fulfilled his end of the bargain with me. I am happy with the status quo and have no desire at all for that to be changed even a little by a bunch of petty little tyrants who, according to some of the posts here and idle conversations here and there, seem to come up as pretty clueless.

[lisaschroder21@gmail.com]

Originally Posted by charlie1

Now that the election is over, I have to say that I am done supporting or being a member of the POA with its current leadership. I am done with them endorsing candidates with only one platform – “Blame the developer”. I am done with them accusing people of being “paid off” by the developer. The POA has become a political organization that is taking an adversarial role with the developer. They are in a war with the developer! Really not sure what else they do at this point! I do not agree with this approach. I believe that the POA should be working in conjunction and together with ANY organization regarding improvements wanted by the majority of the residents. They are not my voice anymore! I have found conversations gets results. I have found willingness to compromise and agreeing to smaller steps will open doors to continued discussions. This is how you help both parties feel good about change and get to mutual agreement. I also have found that demanding never works. It slams the door shut and nothing constructive ever gets accomplished!

I agree! I’m done supporting and following their advice!

[Kenswing]

///

[Altavia]

Agreement here with special thanks to all the employees and contractors who make it happen. Everyone I've delt with knows their aspect of the business and has been professional.

[blueash]

You have completely misstated the position of the POA endorsed candidates and I suspect you never accurately read their opinions. Those candidates are not anti-developer in any sense. What they are is pro-resident. In almost all situations what the developer wants and what is good for Villagers is not in any conflict.

But there are situations where the developer has made proposals or moved forward with plans which many do not see as in our best interests. There are many situations where he has refused to help with failures of infrastructure of his team's design. Several examples would include the defective Morse bridge, numerous sinkholes, failing sewer lines, building apartments, taxing by the roof not the square footage which save him millions, the windmill...

Did you ever hear of anyone get a response from the developer when they complain about children living next door, a violation of our covenants which only the Developer has the power to enforce? Contrary to your post, he does not negotiate, he does not enter into discussion to reach mutual understanding. His business model is secrecy and complete control. There are no "conversations that get results"

If there is no organization to represent us when these problems and others happen then we have a monarchy. Note that real local governments have said no to the Developer, Lady Lake and Wildwood included. We do not have any local elected government to say no other than the Sumter county commissioners. When the Developer has oversized influence in who runs and who wins those few positions, we then have no checks or balances.

The POA has taken a position that having commissioners who are not owned by the Developer is a good thing. They are not seeking anti-developer candidates, just looking for people who are not likely to be Morse puppets [see Brett Hage as an example of what the Morse dollars can buy]

[shut the front door]

Originally Posted by blueash

You have completely misstated the position of the POA endorsed candidates and I suspect you never accurately read their opinions. Those candidates are not anti-developer in any sense. What they are is pro-resident. In almost all situations what the developer wants and what is good for Villagers is not in any conflict.

But there are situations where the developer has made proposals or moved forward with plans which many do not see as in our best interests. There are many situations where he has refused to help with failures of infrastructure of his team's design. Several examples would include the defective Morse bridge, numerous sinkholes, failing sewer lines, building apartments, taxing by the roof not the square footage which save him millions, the windmill...

Did you ever hear of anyone get a response from the developer when they complain about children living next door, a violation of our covenants which only the Developer has the power to enforce? Contrary to your post, he does not negotiate, he does not enter into discussion to reach mutual understanding. His business model is secrecy and complete control. There are no "conversations that get results"

If there is no organization to represent us when these problems and others happen then we have a monarchy. Note that real local governments have said no to the Developer, Lady Lake and Wildwood included. We do not have any local elected government to say no other than the Sumter county commissioners. When the Developer has oversized influence in who runs and who wins those few positions, we then have no checks or balances.

The POA has taken a position that having commissioners who are not owned by the Developer is a good thing. They are not seeking anti-developer candidates, just looking for people who are not likely to be Morse puppets [see Brett Hage as an example of what the Morse dollars can buy]

Very well said.
The residents of Sumter county have sent a message, twice now.

[Happydaz]

///

[Aloha1]

Originally Posted by shut the front door

Very well said.
The residents of Sumter county have sent a message, twice now.

And what exactly was that message? Panos lost, Wiley won. Looks to me like the majority saw through the POA's attempt to influence. And what is this story that one of their picks actually does not live in the district he was elected to represent??

[kkingston57]

Take out a breath of fresh air and enjoy your retirement. There are problems here. We do live in a very well maintained area with very low maintenance costs compared to others. Communiites in S. Florida have same amenities and pay 2-4X more for same services.

Life is too short to get involved in the politics regarding developer vs POA's.

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by kkingston57

Take out a breath of fresh air and enjoy your retirement. There are problems here. We do live in a very well maintained area with very low maintenance costs compared to others. Communiites in S. Florida have same amenities and pay 2-4X more for same services.

Life is too short to get involved in the politics regarding developer vs POA's.

People are what they are. REALITY, for too many on too many issues.
It is far easier to complain then to investigate and suggest better solutions.

Imagine if the inmates were running this place. What plants to put in on common grounds. Could we get all to agree? Of course not. Who should pay for it? Anyone but me.

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by blueash

You have completely misstated the position of the POA endorsed candidates and I suspect you never accurately read their opinions. Those candidates are not anti-developer in any sense. What they are is pro-resident. In almost all situations what the developer wants and what is good for Villagers is not in any conflict.

But there are situations where the developer has made proposals or moved forward with plans which many do not see as in our best interests. There are many situations where he has refused to help with failures of infrastructure of his team's design. Several examples would include the defective Morse bridge, numerous sinkholes, failing sewer lines, building apartments, taxing by the roof not the square footage which save him millions, the windmill...

Did you ever hear of anyone get a response from the developer when they complain about children living next door, a violation of our covenants which only the Developer has the power to enforce? Contrary to your post, he does not negotiate, he does not enter into discussion to reach mutual understanding. His business model is secrecy and complete control. There are no "conversations that get results"

If there is no organization to represent us when these problems and others happen then we have a monarchy. Note that real local governments have said no to the Developer, Lady Lake and Wildwood included. We do not have any local elected government to say no other than the Sumter county commissioners. When the Developer has oversized influence in who runs and who wins those few positions, we then have no checks or balances.

The POA has taken a position that having commissioners who are not owned by the Developer is a good thing. They are not seeking anti-developer candidates, just looking for people who are not likely to be Morse puppets [see Brett Hage as an example of what the Morse dollars can buy]

Semantics? Looks like anti-developer position to me.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Aloha1

And what exactly was that message? Panos lost, Wiley won. Looks to me like the majority saw through the POA's attempt to influence. And what is this story that one of their picks actually does not live in the district he was elected to represent??

I don't recall reading anything in the POA newsletter disparaging Wiley. I do remember he was given space for his candidacy position and background, and his few inches of column space were expressed well. Wiley is also not a puppet of the Developer so no idea why you think that's an effective "gotcha" against the POA, if your position is that the POA is anti-Developer.

[Fredster]

Originally Posted by charlie1

Now that the election is over, I have to say that I am done supporting or being a member of the POA with its current leadership. I am done with them endorsing candidates with only one platform – “Blame the developer”. I am done with them accusing people of being “paid off” by the developer. The POA has become a political organization that is taking an adversarial role with the developer. They are in a war with the developer! Really not sure what else they do at this point! I do not agree with this approach. I believe that the POA should be working in conjunction and together with ANY organization regarding improvements wanted by the majority of the residents. They are not my voice anymore! I have found conversations gets results. I have found willingness to compromise and agreeing to smaller steps will open doors to continued discussions. This is how you help both parties feel good about change and get to mutual agreement. I also have found that demanding never works. It slams the door shut and nothing constructive ever gets accomplished!

Very well stated, and exactly my sentiments!

[Fredster]

Originally Posted by blueash

You have completely misstated the position of the POA endorsed candidates and I suspect you never accurately read their opinions. Those candidates are not anti-developer in any sense. What they are is pro-resident. In almost all situations what the developer wants and what is good for Villagers is not in any conflict.

But there are situations where the developer has made proposals or moved forward with plans which many do not see as in our best interests. There are many situations where he has refused to help with failures of infrastructure of his team's design. Several examples would include the defective Morse bridge, numerous sinkholes, failing sewer lines, building apartments, taxing by the roof not the square footage which save him millions, the windmill...

Did you ever hear of anyone get a response from the developer when they complain about children living next door, a violation of our covenants which only the Developer has the power to enforce? Contrary to your post, he does not negotiate, he does not enter into discussion to reach mutual understanding. His business model is secrecy and complete control. There are no "conversations that get results"

If there is no organization to represent us when these problems and others happen then we have a monarchy. Note that real local governments have said no to the Developer, Lady Lake and Wildwood included. We do not have any local elected government to say no other than the Sumter county commissioners. When the Developer has oversized influence in who runs and who wins those few positions, we then have no checks or balances.

The POA has taken a position that having commissioners who are not owned by the Developer is a good thing. They are not seeking anti-developer candidates, just looking for people who are not likely to be Morse puppets [see Brett Hage as an example of what the Morse dollars can buy]

Your whole post is anti-developer, not one positive item mentioned,
and that is the problem a lot of us see with the POA.
To me it is polarizing and not very constructive!