Exactly, but in a nutshell, as explained in the POA article that I cited above, the following is the RISK to Villagers: If an IRS victory imposes huge costs on the Center Districts, the Center Districts. (which own the amenity facilities not still owned by the Developer) will not have sufficient funds to continue to provide the amenities promised us by the Developer.

To be fair, Counselor, the will SHOULD be changed to a WOULD.

And please don't forget the IF, those who read the above.

The current IRS issue stared 3 years ago and I think one started earlier than that. What puzzles me is the IRS rules/laws are a given The Village criteria has not changed and 2+2 is still 4, I see nothing that looks like a shell game, the facts being the facts the answer I would think would be a given.

But what do I know, I am the one that thinks a marriage is a couple consisting of a man and a woman.

Because of the complexity of the situation, I don't think that you can get much more specific at this point. You can calculate the potential cost to the Center Districts if you want, but you would have to make assumptions regarding the amount of existing bonds that would have to be refinanced with taxable bonds, interest rates at the time of refinancing, the credit rating given to taxable bonds then issued (which would be tainted by the circumstances underlying their issuance), etc. If you want to do the calculations, let us know what assumptions you make and what the resulting cost is, but the cost will be a big.

The one negative impact on us that is certain is that our amenity fees are, in effect, now paying for the Center District's attorney to defend transactions that were structured to benefit the Developer.

I won't get into the marriage issue.