Protecting
 

One of the advantages of a democracy is that it protects the minority Some are professing that an appointed person(s) is better who may not care about the minority. That is the opposite of a democracy and a formula for a number of countries that few would want to live in. As I mentioned before: Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Although a few continue to be surprised that it is astonishing that some prefer a dictator form of government as opposed to a democracy I am sure that when they understand the scope of possible abuse they will come to their senses. How many today understand abuses that may be going on? Just as a simple test: Who is paying the most for the improvements to property that mainly provides advantages to the business's? What program was taken from the Amenity funding controls and was placed in a program with no ceiling to protect the residents? To get the answers it would take research !! :shrug:

In the early 2000's, residents were asked to vote on becoming a city and they voted it down because of the expense involved. This was when the population was less than 30,000. Today that expense would be much higher.

Think of all the things that a city provides that would have to be put in place: policemen and firemen, garbage pick-up, water and sewer, a city hall, all the various inspection offices, all the elected officials, etc etc etc.

The developer would probably be happy to sell the new "city" his facilities, but at what price?

This is really off the subject of the IRS investigation. Majority rules works well in probably 99% of the country, but not on Indian reservations, military bases, college campus, prisons, or The Villages. It's never going to happen here.

When you get unlimited access to 32 golf courses 100 pickle ball courts 90 tennis courts 65 swimming pools a multitude of rec centers in a safe community with some of
the nicest folks in the world for $145 a month what is it you need to be protected from?

Can't think of many cities being run by government workers that is successful. Too much waste and whining and not enough hard work. TV is the most efficient "city" I have ever had the opportunity to live in. Things just happen on schedule and seem to work without a hitch. If private enterprise was involved in running more parts of a city I believe we would start to see things turn around. They have to make a profit - they can't just raise taxes.

Upcoming POA meeting
 

To get back to the topic at hand:

The POA has a General Membership Meeting on Tuesday June 18th, 7:00 p.m. at the Laurel Manor Recreation Center.

This will be a chance to get the POA's take on the latest IRS development. It should be interesting to compare that with what the Orlando Sentinel says in its next article on the subject, which I understand is slated to appear tomorrow.

Hopefully, the latest setback in the IRS investigation is going to wake some people up as to the necessity of supporting the POA. If things end up badly for residents in the IRS investigation (and they may or may not), the POA will be the only organization that we have to protect our interests. Certainly, the VHA will do nothing to help.

Thanks for the heads up. I agree, certainly a good time to be a member of the POA.

[QUOTE TV is the most efficient "city" I have ever had the opportunity to live in. Things just happen on schedule and seem to work without a hitch. If private enterprise was involved in running more parts of a city I believe we would start to see things turn around. They have to make a profit - they can't just raise taxes.[/QUOTE]

"Profound" I think!:ho:

Potential impact of IRS decision on The Villages' tax-exempt bonds causing worries - OrlandoSentinel.com



Here's the article from today's Orlando Sentinel.

Questioning IRS Motivation
 

I haven't read all 22 pages in this thread so forgive me if this question is a repeat; In light of the recent IRS scandal, do you think that both the developer and the general population of The Villages leaning on the conservative side could have influenced the IRS's decision?

john - goes back further than that. you can read about it here: Village Community Development Districts updates go back to 2009!

Appears to be a fair representation of events presented without sensationalism and hysteria. It does make one wonder why Our Villages was singled out by the IRS. I know what they say but I firmly believe that the present structure of the Center Districts permits delivery of services on an equal and unfettered basis to all residents and is why Our Villages sells as many homes as they do and why market values of homes have not declined as much as other similar developments. The number of snowbirds, who did not have to sell their homes to buy in The Villages, is amazing and likely the primary reason for the smaller decline in home prices during the downturn, which now has returned to more normal levels. I believe the reason for the large number of snowbird sales is attributed to the fact that under this unelected structure Snowbirds could be 100% confident that when they came for the winter, they would have access to all facilities on the same basis as full time residents. This is nit the case in other venues. Attracting Snowbirds has an added benefit........wear and tear on the amenity structures helps keep expenses and Amenity Fees at reasonable (bargain, really) levels as Snowbirds are here for only one third of the year. This was a brilliant move by the Morse Family....a win win for all, except perhaps the IRS.

If it is the IRS thesis for attemting to tax the bonds is that the Residents in The Villages did not benefit from a more stabilized structure of the CDD's, albeit controlled by Morse, I would suggest they compare similar venues where there is an elective board and see what has happrned over the last seven years in terms of cost and delivery of services ability to access amenities, ability to sell your home as well as market values of homes during this recent downturn and they will find that this structure has indeed benefited Village Residents.

FINALLY I got my answer to who issued and who is holding these bonds. Thank you Orlando Sentinel. As I understand this now, these bondholders may come back to the district for selling tax-free bonds that were not actually tax-free. Well that will be another lengthy court battle so I'm thinking we won't really know much for a long, long time.

Perhaps, but if the legal opinion attached to the bonds highlighted the risk, and I do not know what it said, then it should be at the risk of the purchaser. In addition, those bondholders who bought years ago and held would probably have little or no loss since interest rates declined substantially. But you are likely correct. This will not be over for quite a while.

Why the acerbic response?

You posted the following: “If the bondholder chose to proceed anyway, it should be his loss and not anyone else’s provided all risks were adequately disclosed”

I was simply pointing out that if you or any other member of TOTV had at any time over the past ten years invested in a tax free muni bond fund, that you could be one of those bondholders that invested in the VCCDD bonds being challenged by the IRS. In a bond fund, you don’t choose the bonds, the fund’s analysts do and the average fund investor never bothers to scrutinize those trades.