Done with the POA
 

Some years ago didn't the POA win a $40 million settlement for the historical side. The developer showed grace by saying we were lucky to have such an organization.

I have to laugh, Charlie and others say they are done with the POA. They don't tell you that they are life-long Democrats and were never in favor of the POA in the first place. Me? I'm in favor of anyone who will help me fight corruption.

How do you know life long dems?

Sorry but I am a Republican! I have served on POA's in different developments and NEVER have I seen a POA take a role in local politics nor have I seen a POA take such an adversarial role against the developer. I have no problem with what they have done in the past but I really feel our POA has lost its direction. What have they done recently? Looking at the comments on this forum, do we really expect the developer to warrant a 30+ year old bridge? Heck, we tear down sports stadiums and rebuild them when they get that old! And who funds those - taxes? - but that is OK because it's sports, right? Never heard of anyone going back to the developers and telling them they have to build a new stadium because the old one wasn't good enough. Do we really expect the developer to warrant sink holes after many years when they are naturally occurring in Florida? If the warranty period is not long enough, the emphasis should be on the district to negotiate when new districts are added. Unfortunately, the district that have already been handed (districts 1-12) over to the district management have legal agreements already signed.

Agree with you 100%. When one side is in it for profit, it is absolutely necessary to keep a watchful eye. The developer has done a wonderful job building this community, and we very much enjoy living here. But seeing that part of their business model was to tax us all for the infrastrure of an area in which we do not live, then affect State law to persue it was a wake up call. Glad to have a voice helping protect my pocketbook.

The POA has a binary choice:

A. Represent an issue and agree with the developer
B. Represent an issue and disagree with the developer.

From a political point of view, Issue A may happen 80-90% of the time, and in that case there is nothing to change/do/no reason for being. Issue B may happen 10-20% of the time, and that is the goal to change the developer to see the point of the homeowners.

Now, for the POA to make an impact, 100% of their time must be spent on B issues, so the illusion of effort is that 100% is spent on 20% of the potential issues, and so the question for the home owner is:

Do you agree with the issues being represented? If yes, then continue to support. If no, then don't continue to support. But to disagree with the POA because they are 100% against the developer means you can't distinguish between all issues and POA issues.

There is no reality, there is only perception, and that perception is usually 100% yours, but yours is not 100% everybody else's.

Professional golfers present an illusion of effort as well. You watch pros on TV and only see the best shots, but that narrows as you get closer to the end where not everyone is playing. They make golf look incredibly easy. What you don't see or haven't seen is the hours, days and years of dedicated effort to reach the point of making golf look easy.

you are only judging on what you are seeing, without referencing what you haven't seen or can't see

I do not believe this is an accurate statement or presentation of the facts. Learn how OUR local government works! Then maybe we’d have less bickering, second guessing, and backstabbing

Indigenous Peoples Day is now on calendars all across the United States. It recognizes the contribution of Native Alaskan Nations and the original Indian Tribes in North America.
Sometimes when we live in The Bubble we don’t see what is happening in all 50 states.

Yes, everything boils down to the contract which is heavily slanted in the developer's favor. District 7 tried to get that contract changed but apparently is losing that battle.

As I understand it:

District 7 feels the contract is not slanted enough towards the residents and unilaterally blocked a follow-on contract that would have created a second PWAC to handle the expenses in the southern area. As a result of District 7 actions it appears there will be no second PWAC.

It is believed that this has resulted in a significant additional cost to the northern districts. District 7 disputes that but has not provided any information to back their claim.

Or that’s why we choose to be in the bubble, because we don’t like what’s happening and are holding out hope it won’t penetrate the bubble during our lifetime.

They need some new faces.

Did not the Sumter County Board raise impact fees only to see a state representative who was on the developer's payroll get a law passed to severely limit said increase ?

The law places a cap on yearly increases in impact fees and requires impact fees increases over the cap be backed by a study justifying the increase before they can be implemented. The fees passed in Sumter County did not have a study justifying the substantial need and to my knowledge there was never even an attempt by the previous commissioners to do a study or even raise them to the allowable cap. I know I personally am glad that there is an annual cap on my property appraisal (which is used to calculate my property tax!) I am also glad there is a cap on the annual increase of the amenity fee. Why does it seem out of line that the state does the same for impact fees! If they were soooooo needed, why didn't the previous commissioners (prior to their
suspension) immediately pass an increase based on the annual cap? To me, this was just a way to work up people with half truths.

The rates that were passed were tied to an existing study.

Your property tax rate is NOT capped which is why the commissioners prior to the suspended commissioners were able to raise the rate by 25%, an amount you and I are still paying.