[Advogado]

Originally Posted by biker1

No, I never implied that. I did not go into the distinction between the commercial and residential CDDs. I did state that the amenities south of 44 have not been turned over yet. I was responding to the post regarding the Developer maintaining (essentially) the amenities. That, as I posted, is not correct as the Developer does not maintain the amenities, the CDDs do.

My point, in that regard, was that the reader should understand that the CDDs that own the amenities are the 3 Developer-controlled ones, not the resident-controlled one. I didn't think that that was clear from your post, which is why is used the word "seem".

[tvbound]

Having done quite a bit of research, but also admitting that the whole CDD thing is still confusing to us, I still can't help but wonder about the obvious conflict of interest when the entity valuing the infrastructure - is also connected or personally indebted to the developer. It's a pretty sweet deal if you can get someone to determine the selling price of an item, if they have an allegiance to yourself. I wish I could do that when selling something.

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by Advogado

The IRS incident is extremely complicated; so I won't get into further details, .

OLD, OLD news.
Sad how much time & effort is spent trying to trash.

Not complicated at all.................Bottomline, the developer and entities won!!

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by Advogado

You seem to imply that the resident-controlled CDDs own the amenities. That is not the case and never has been. The three Developer-controlled commercial CDDs own most of the amenities, having bought them from the Developer. The Developer has not yet sold his CDDs the amenities in the newest areas. Due to the class-action lawsuit settlement, residents have a degree of control over operation of the amenities.

Until the IRS cracked down on the Developer's abuse and ordered it stopped, the Developer had been having his CDDs issue purportedly tax-exempt bonds to raise cash to pay himself. This scam forced the US taxpayer to subsidize his business operations. Fortunately for the residents and for the Developer, the IRS did not impose its order retroactively and tax interest on the bonds already issued or our whole amenity system could have gone down the tubes.

(The Developer-controlled CDDs now have to issue taxable bonds to raise the cash, so we, as US taxpayers, are no longer subsidizing the Developer's business. However, we continue to subsidize it as Sumter County property-taxpayers as we pay for his county infrastructure though our 25% tax increase.)

During the multi-year IRS investigation of the Developer's abuse of tax-exempt bonds, the POA kept residents informed about what was going on. The VHA (a shill for the Developer) and the Daily Sun (owned by the Developer) downplayed the potential severity of the situation and spun the facts.

In addition, the POA wrote the IRS asking that any adverse ruling only be applied prospectively because of the disastrous impact that a retroactive ruling would have on our amenity system and life style. We will never know if the POA's letter affected final IRS non-retroactive ruling, but the episode is just one more example of the volunteers in the POA trying to look out for the interests of the residents.

The IRS incident is extremely complicated; so I won't get into further details, but if you didn't live here and follow the story as it was unfolding, you can read about it in archived POA Bulletins.

I agree. The Developer essentially controls the commercial property CDDs which have no residents and control the residential CDDs. The intent of my prior post was to provide a short hand version of the reality of the extent of the Developer's control as it is complex, and literally absolute in much of The Villages.

Anybody remember One Sumter which literally gave the Developer control of Sumter County? ONE SUMTER ONE HOT ISSUE - News - Ocala.com - Ocala, FL

As to the bonds: https://www.districtgov.org/images/I...%205-21-14.pdf

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by tvbound

Having done quite a bit of research, but also admitting that the whole CDD thing is still confusing to us, I still can't help but wonder about the obvious conflict of interest when the entity valuing the infrastructure - is also connected or personally indebted to the developer. It's a pretty sweet deal if you can get someone to determine the selling price of an item, if they have an allegiance to yourself. I wish I could do that when selling something.

That was one of the concerns of the IRS, and the overpricing also underlay the class-action lawsuit. But you are right, the "whole CDD thing" is confusing.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

OLD, OLD news.
Sad how much time & effort is spent trying to trash.

Not complicated at all.................Bottomline, the developer and entities won!!

It is complicated or you would understand that "the developer and entities" lost.

The commercial CDDs can no longer issue tax exempt bonds to raise cash to pay the Developer for the amenity facilities. They are extremely lucky that the IRS did not decide to tax the interest on the bonds already issued, or they would have faced enormous liability to the holders of the bonds who would have been hit with a tax bill for their interest. They never did thank the POA for its support in avoiding that problem for both them and the residents. As I said, it is complicated, but the subject here is the POA, not the details of the Developer's tax-exempt-bond scam.

[eweissenbach]

I think most, if not all, posters to this thread would agree that the developers have shown incredible vision in planning and building the largest, most successful retirement community in the world. The “developers” are actually dozens of interrelated corporations, and not a group of altruistic rulers. Those corporations are formed to protect the shareholders from liability and to produce profit for them. There is nothing wrong inherently, or in reality, with these corporations or their shareholder/officers. But, invariably, there will be times that the corporate interests and those of the residents are not in alignment. That is not an indictment, but simply a reality of the interests of each entity. That is the reason for the POA, as an influential representative for the resident’s interests. That is not anti-developer any more than the judicial branch of government is anti-legislative. I did not post the POA notes that I happened upon as a political statement. I simply found it to be a significant and interesting document of historical value.

Originally Posted by Advogado

That was one of the concerns of the IRS, and the overpricing . But you are right, the "whole CDD thing" is confusing.

Bernie Madoff would be proud. Maybe this financing CCD juggernaut will collapse some day also like the financial crisis several years ago.

Originally Posted by Advogado

It is complicated or you would understand that "the developer and entities" lost.

The commercial CDDs can no longer issue tax exempt bonds to raise cash to pay the Developer for the amenity facilities. They are extremely lucky that the IRS did not decide to tax the interest on the bonds already issued, or they would have faced enormous liability to the holders of the bonds who would have been hit with a tax bill for their interest. They never did thank the POA for its support in avoiding that problem for both them and the residents. As I said, it is complicated, but the subject here is the POA, not the details of the Developer's tax-exempt-bond scam.

Thanks for an accurate post and staying on topic.

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by Advogado

It is complicated or you would understand that "the developer and entities" lost. .

Completely wrong again.
IRS was trying to "invalid" old bonds............they didn't and walked away.


HUGE Victory for and by the developer & entities.

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

I think most, if not all, posters to this thread would agree that the developers have shown incredible vision in planning and building the largest, most successful retirement community in the world. The “developers” are actually dozens of interrelated corporations, and not a group of altruistic rulers. Those corporations are formed to protect the shareholders from liability and to produce profit for them. There is nothing wrong inherently, or in reality, with these corporations or their shareholder/officers. But, invariably, there will be times that the corporate interests and those of the residents are not in alignment. That is not an indictment, but simply a reality of the interests of each entity. That is the reason for the POA, as an influential representative for the resident’s interests. That is not anti-developer any more than the judicial branch of government is anti-legislative. I did not post the POA notes that I happened upon as a political statement. I simply found it to be a significant and interesting document of historical value.

Your original post was good.
Unfortunately The Village Haters started posting.
Thanks for the history.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

Your original post was good.
Unfortunately The Village Haters started posting.
Thanks for the history.

Don't confuse people who don't put unconditional trust in the developer's every action, and feel the need for adequate checks and balances, with Village Haters. If people truly hated the Villages, why would they not sell their Villages homes at a nice profit and move on from TOTV?

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Don't confuse people who don't put unconditional trust in the developer's every action, and feel the need for adequate checks and balances, with Village Haters. If people truly hated the Villages, why would they not sell their Villages homes at a nice profit and move on from TOTV?

I don't confuse them.
I have wondered (but I quit) why haters stay, but some do.
Plus there are haters who don't even live here........which is even more confusing.


Have a Great New Year!!!

Originally Posted by dewilson58

Your original post was good.
Unfortunately The Village Haters started posting.
Thanks for the history.

I went back and reviewed all the posts in this thread. Some question unconditional faith in the developer. Then there are a lot of POA haters who have sensitive toes and consider reporting the developers misdeeds or conflicts of interest as hating the developer.

[Velvet]

Personally, I differentiate between the generations of the Developers. Mr. Schwartz earned my unwavering respect, both my uncle and father knew him. The young ones, on the other hand, I don’t know them. Like everyone else they must earn respect, it doesn’t come free.