[rubicon]

Originally Posted by cabo35

Here we go again with Lauren Ritchie. To her credit, she has stated that she is not a reporter.....she is a columnist unencumbered by the constraints of balance and objectivity. The "usual suspects" frequently cite her as a credible source for all things related to The Villages. Therein lies the rub. I respectfully disagree, especially in matters where important decisions are at stake. For balance, you should read the attached link that offers another perspective. The context has nothing to do with The Villages, but, stunningly, suggests a pattern and agenda based on anti-development and anti-big business advocacy. It is a sometimes tedious, long read, but offers eye-opening details you have not and will never see posted here by the usual suspects. With your indulgence, I will attempt to connect what may seem like abstract forays, to the dynamics of the IRS issue. Of course I am an amateur and it's just my opinion.

http://lakecountygov.info/2010/03/31...e-hypocrite-4/

For starters, the Lake County Government blog cited, attributes this revealing gem to Ritchie, "Amendment 4 would stop companies from swooping down in Lake County just to make a profit and it would encourage only local people to do business here."

Stop companies from swooping down? Only locals?

In an earlier post, I said, "For balance, I guess if I was born and raised here, I may have some resentment about what progress has taken away. A quiet, idyllic countryside dotted with watermelon patches, horse farms, cattle grazing peacefully and fishing holes that never heard the whine of an outboard motor. A lifestyle that insulates you from car, truck and traffic noises. A lifestyle that keeps you from the pollution of progress. Damn Walt Disney and Gary Morse."

Another interesting assertion in the story is as follows:

Finally, Lauren Ritchie’s actual bark doesn’t match her pen’s bite. Her presentation at the Chamber Alliance meeting was that of a mealy mouthed scriber who couldn’t put two reasonable arguments together. After the meeting, Alliance Members said that when Ritchie was asked to speak to the group, she asked if there was going to be a debate on Amendment #4. Ritchie was okay with a debate format, as long as she wasn’t debating Don Magruder, Chairman of Citizens for Better Government, L.L.C. After hearing the comment, Magruder said, “Lauren Ritchie hides behind innuendo and lies on most of her arguments. The reason she is scared of an honest debate with me is because her ideas are devoid of reason – but any place, any time she would like to debate – I welcome the opportunity.”

The author in some detail, describes Ritchie as an anti-development and anti-growth "zealot", a hypocrite and links her to political interests. You will have to read the details and draw your own conclusions. In fairness to Lauren, keep in mind both sides are driving agendas. This is hardball stuff.

The writer, no shrinking violet, says "Lauren Ritchie is so far out in the black hole of the universe that it's really hard to understand how she can write such nonsense. If you've ever questioned whether Ritchie tells the truth, then this confirms one real important fact - she's a liar."

Permit me to digress briefly as I recall a Ritchie hatchet headline. We Villagers are such a "greedy" lot.......according to our new best friend...Lauren Ritchie.

The headline story screamed, Greedy Villages fires first salvo in water war .....Commentary- LakefrontMarch 11, 2007|By Lauren Ritchie, Sentinel Columnist

Starting to see a pattern?

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...water-villages

Where is the balance in Ritchie's commentary? Where are the articles on the positive economical impacts The Villages have had on the region, the new schools, commerce, hospitals, jobs, and medical facilities that came with Villages development? Where are the articles about the wonderful volunteerism and charitable contributions Villagers, including so many of my friends and neighbors, have made to the benefit of Ritchie's "locals"? Have Ritchie's "locals" enjoyed the shopping and entertainment that is available to them? Where is the balance in her commentary?

I noted in an earlier post that "She (Ritchie) lost significant credibility with many when in an early article, she admonished with cavalier arrogance and unbridled presumptuousness, "And it is time for homeowners to worry less about their tee time and marvelous activities and more about their future property values and financial liability."

Give special attention to the headline below. Is it accurate and truthful or wishful thinking? Her admonishment is at the end.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...www.google.com

Like many others, I didn't work for fifty years, raise a family and serve my country to have Lauren Ritchie tell me what I should or should not worry about.

Back to the Lake County blog. Before I comment further, let me say that while professionally presented, this blog is just that, a blog of someone's opinion. Like Lauren's blog, it will never win a Pulitzer Prize for journalistic integrity and objectivity. As I previously stated, it should be viewed through the prism of skepticism. Objectivity needs to be factored into the equation and agendas need to recognized. However, what is noteworthy to me is the similarity in attack styles by the paper and its columnist. If you suspend belief briefly, replace the Lake County targets with the Villages and Morse, after a full careful read of the link, you may realize the attack tactics are eerily similar if not clones. Striking at least. The same anti-development and anti-growth disposition is evident. A thorough, patient read of the article with a little follow-up research reveals a lot.

Once again, "I cannot attest to the claims made by the article." What I do see are stunning similarities in attack styles that suggest and anti-business, anti-growth and anti-development agenda by a columnist who could have a biased interest on issues related to The Villages. Those agendas are arguable and stand or fall on their own merits.

I agree with those who hold that the IRS issue should be monitored. It would be helpful if there was more professional reporting and less agenda driven speculation on the subject......especially speculation that relies on commentary instead of facts.....and finally........that is the point of my excursion into what some may consider a hijack of the thread.

I respectfully request that before commenting, you read the articles in their entirety and make your own evaluations.

That said.....I have retreated to the bunker to brace for incoming. Yes...I have a rich, full life beyond the keyboard. This is what happens when your waiting for a contractor and your wife is out of town. I hope the new admin doesn't count keystrokes.

I also hope the links open properly.....I had a little trouble at first.

Have a great day in The Villages.

Based on the above you seem to have a great dislike for Lauren Ritchie. Why? However when the POA settled the amenities lawsuit no one but Lauren Ritchie reported that the 5 plaintiffs settled separately and that the plaintiff attorney (POA Atty) made over $6million dollars for 15 months work. this information forced a special meeting by the POA in the middle of march 2008. Why did the POA Village Voice, Daily sun neglect to explain these settlements? That was the basis for the special meeting. Had Ritchie not reported this residents would have never known about those settlements. However after the fact they would deny this

When the IRS filed its petitions in January 2009 again it was Lauren Ritchie who reported the details of Proposed Notice of Issues. Again forcing the POA, Village Voice and Daily Sun to make mention which was all that they did by the way.

So say what you will or will what you say but it appears Lauren Ritchie is doing a better job of watch dog for the residents of The villages then the POA, Village voice or Daily Sun

I could cite other issues of concern to residents that she advanced way ahead of watch dog but to what point.

Bottome line I don't care what Lauren Ritchie's motives every report in her columns have been accurate as to the facts. so I view her as a blessing for residents and one reason why I subscribe to the Orlando Sentinel

[Harry Gilbert]

As a potential buyer this issue is a consideration. A deal breaker? only time will tell.

But I'm curious. Is there a list of the buyers of the bonds?

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by Annabelle

I will not even consider buying a home in TV until this issue has been resolved.

That's your choice but I just felt, for us, the possible $ imposition on the basic resident, if any, would be small and not worth the risk of waiting for the IRS to rule.

But again, your choice.

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by Harry Gilbert

The 2010 census shows 35,587 housing units in the villages.
http://www.ledgerdata.com/census/flo...ges-cdp/71625/
anyone know what the total buildout number is expected to be?

I saw somewhere that the average per houshold is 1.87 people. SO if they say eventual 110,000 residents that would be 58,500 homes give or take.

[Mikeod]

So the belief is, if the IRS successfully rules against the district with the resulting fines and expenses related to the recalling and reissuing of the bonds, that the Morse's will sit back, let the district take the hit, watch the community amenities be sold or scaled back, watch their reputation take a big hit, watch sales of new homes plummet, watch the value of the championship courses and retail buildings disappear, accept the inevitable lawsuits from residents, and do nothing. Really?

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by JimJoe

Are you serious? The IRS issue affects every villager because their amenities fees and the amenities themselves are at issue and could be affected by a negative outcome. I am saying they should be informed, not that I am convinced YET they must be informed legally. All I know is that if I bought a house in TV and found out about the IRS issue afterwards, I would be upset that no one told me, especially if an adverse ruling significantly affected the amenities.
One simple question for you. After you first heard about it, did you take the time to become informed before you bought in TV. I think I know the answer and you know the reason you did.
JJ

Yes I was serious. Remember I'm talking about legal reasoning, not being nice. I wouldn't disclose if I didn't have to. You might be upset but they are under no obligation.

Yes, I knew about the IRS thing and as I said ealier I don't feel it will impact us greatly. But that's just my read on the situation, I may be wrong. It didn't rise high enough on my concerns list to be a deal breaker.

[JimJoe]

Originally Posted by Russ_Boston

Yes I was serious. Remember I'm talking about legal reasoning, not being nice. I wouldn't disclose if I didn't have to. You might be upset but they are under no obligation.

Yes, I knew about the IRS thing and as I said ealier I don't feel it will impact us greatly. But that's just my read on the situation, I may be wrong. It didn't rise high enough on my concerns list to be a deal breaker.

My point was that when you found out about the IRS issue you had a chance to research the issue AND YOU DID before you decided to buy in TV. I think everyone should have that opportunity. Don't you agree?

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by JimJoe

My point was that when you found out about the IRS issue you had a chance to research the issue AND YOU DID before you decided to buy in TV. I think everyone should have that opportunity. Don't you agree?

Yes they should. But don't expect TV development to tell them was my point. That's why TOTV was (and is) so valuable to me.

[nitehawk]

Originally Posted by rubicon

Based on the above you seem to have a great dislike for Lauren Ritchie. Why? However when the POA settled the amenities lawsuit no one but Lauren Ritchie reported that the 5 plaintiffs settled separately and that the plaintiff attorney (POA Atty) made over $6million dollars for 15 months work. this information forced a special meeting by the POA in the middle of march 2008. Why did the POA Village Voice, Daily sun neglect to explain these settlements? That was the basis for the special meeting. Had Ritchie not reported this residents would have never known about those settlements. However after the fact they would deny this

When the IRS filed its petitions in January 2009 again it was Lauren Ritchie who reported the details of Proposed Notice of Issues. Again forcing the POA, Village Voice and Daily Sun to make mention which was all that they did by the way.

So say what you will or will what you say but it appears Lauren Ritchie is doing a better job of watch dog for the residents of The villages then the POA, Village voice or Daily Sun

I could cite other issues of concern to residents that she advanced way ahead of watch dog but to what point.

Bottome line I don't care what Lauren Ritchie's motives every report in her columns have been accurate as to the facts. so I view her as a blessing for residents and one reason why I subscribe to the Orlando Sentinel

Thank You

[Advogado]

FYI: The "engineer's report" alluded to (but not described) in the Daily Sun article that provoked this thread is now publicly available: http://districtgov.org/images/IRSupd...-IRSUpdate.pdf

The conclusion of the report is that the value of the amenity income stream that was used in the Developer's sale of assets to the Village Center Community Development District "is overestimated and not credible".

[Taj44]

Thanks for posting the link to the report. The IRS has been known to make mistakes. With any luck, they've made mistakes in this matter, and The Villages will prevail. If not, we'll just have to see what happens and how it impacts the residents. My gut feeling is, the IRS has put so much time and money into this investigation, that they're not going to let The Villages escape without some sort of penalty.

[EdV]

Originally Posted by RVRoadie

.... First, what scandal. It is clear that the Florida Legislature passed laws to allow CDDs to qualify to sell tax free municiple bonds....

Oh really? Well here’s a link to a searchable copy of that law. http://www.ccfj.net/FS190CDD.html

Perhaps you can tell us which paragraph mentions “tax free” bonds.

No state has the authority to dictate what is or is not federally taxable.

[RVRoadie]

Originally Posted by EdVinMass

No state has the authority to dictate what is or is not federally taxable.

True, but States decide what is and isn't a municipality. Florida has decided that CCDs are municipalities for tax purposes. This was done in the 80s.

[EdV]

They can only dictate what is free from their own state tax. The fact that a bond is a municipal bond does not automatically qualify it as federally tax free. If a city wants to build a new NFL stadium, it can issue a municipal bond to pay for it but it would be a taxable municipal bond.

[JimJoe]

Here is why TV might lose the IRS issue.. and its not TV's fault.
I think the IRS issue is part of the bigger HOT political issue of our time.. Getting rid of loopholes.
I am not arguing either side of this issue... I just want to point out where I think this issue may be heading...
When TV or any other "municipality" uses tax free bonds to finance projects, they are effectively shifting part of the cost of financing the project to every other federal taxpayer. "Municipalities" are allowed to do this because they are for the general welfare and theoretically anyone in the nation could use the public project or promote some general welfare issue. The problem with TV is that the projects are arguably not for the general welfare. They are only available for TV residents or their guests.
I love TV and think it is fantastic... but...
Is it "fair" for people who live outside TV and pay federal taxes to help finances the amenities of "rich" people who bar others from the enjoying the amenities the outsiders helped to finance, including pools, rec centers, golf courses, etc.
If Ocala sells tax free bonds, should they bar villagers from using their pool, attending sporting events, playing on their golf courses, or attending meetings in their public buildings?
I know others get federal subsidies, but can TV really claim it is "poor" or "religion", or providing a "public service".
Don't shoot the messenger. I think if this issue went nation wide, TV would be the new "corporate jet" loophole.

I understand this message involves some politics but everything does to some degree. I think it is important for those interested in the IRS issue to understand what really may be underlying the issue.. not just the legal arguments for or against the IRS.
If this message belongs in Political, I invite the Admins to move it and if so, I apologize in advance.
JJ