I have read every post and every article in this thread, and I still don't understand all the ramifications of the issue. I am a big picture person, not a detail person, so my big picture mentality leads me to believe that this will all get resolved with little collateral damage. There are too many people with too much at stake (the Morse's and the 80k villagers, not to mention the various business owners, and franchisees) for this to destroy the basic concept of TV. I am also one that believes that everyone is entitled to an opinion, and as long as they don't distort facts or get personal in their attacks, I say let them express away.

The Morse's are running a family business, and their intent is to enrich themselves, and their is nothing wrong with that as long as it is done ethically and legally. They also have a family business that has enriched many other peoples lives, and I beleive they are heavily invested in providing a quality product and environment for their customers. That being said I am considering purchasing a home in TV within the next year or two, and this issue would not cause me to hesitate for a second. Thanks to everyone for the insights on this, I shall rest easy.

P.S. The $209,000 spent on legal fees is less than $3.00 per resident - just sayin'.

We share different perspectives and context on the issue of balance and that is OK. My contention speaks directly to the disservice Lauren Ritchie does to Villages residents and those considering a move to the Villages by the admitted "one sided, anti-developer" ramblings expressed in her column. Many readers do not distinguish between an opinionated columnist who avoids any input that does not support her position and a real reporter who fairly presents both sides so readers can draw their own conclusions.

She lost all credibility with many when in an early article she, with cavalier arrogance and presumptuousness stated, "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."

This from a non-resident, for hire, opinion vendor with an axe to grind. No one, except Lauren Ritchie and the IRS is happy about the controversy. Why does Lauren Ritchie play on the distress and tell us how much to worry about circumstance the outcome of which we have little control over. That is not to say that after the case is decided we collectively may not have legal options or in the alternative survived a tempest in a teapot. What is her purpose in admonishing Villagers to worry about their "property values and financial liability"?

Copyright © 2009, Orlando Sentinel

That calculated statement created angst with many Villagers and potential Villagers. It did what Laura Ritchie wanted. In the August 29 Orlando Sentinel, Ritchie further tweaks Villagers with her recent statement, "Ritchie: It's got to be unsettling and frightening to wonder what's in store. Not to mention expensive. The district already has spent more than $209,000 of residents' money so far, nearly all on high-powered lawyers on both coasts." The most frightening and unsettling circumstance is Lauren Ritchie's selectively alarming language created to further distress those who view them. In my opinion and notwithstanding opinions to the contrary, it is desperate, insidiously sinister and ethically challenged. Ask yourself, do you get the impression Ritchie is rooting for the IRS and would love to be able to say to Villagers....I told you so? .........and that is why balance, or lack thereof is significant.

I stated in a much earlier post on this topic, that I spoke with a knowledgeable attorney on this issue. As an admitted amateur in such matters, I concluded that the whole issue of CDD's and bonding mechanisms is new, dynamic and evolving in the courts and Florida State administrative processes. Related issues are going through a legal metamorphosis that is distinguished by a lack of precedent. The entire fact pattern is complex and cannot be catalogued as legally black or white. The fact is the whole bonding issue is clouded by murky shades of grey subject to the perspective and interpretation of those with a vested interest in outcomes. Should we be paying attention.....absolutely. Should we be distressed by the rantings of a columnist with a self serving agenda and bias....no.

Like others who purchased the Villages lifestyle, I wasn't thrilled with the bonding nuances that came with the purchase of our home, but, I was aware of them.

Willy.....the Sentinel may not have started it as you state, but, once the game was on, they should have given readers objective reporting to balance their anti-Villages crusade.........just my thoughts.

Have another great day in the Villages.

Well said! Thanks

hello willy,

the villages did have two appraisals. there is a great deal of discussion in the documents as to the methods used and whether they were accurate or valid. the districts have changed the way they do it. years ago, they used to put very high appraisals on stuff like mailboxes and guardhouses -- hundreds of thousands for each. in the bonds under examination by the IRS, the method switched. they now value the blue sky portion extremely high and the tangible items at believable prices. the IRS contends that the appraisals were done by people with conflicts of interest and as such aren't valid. there's more to it than that, but that's the short version.

hey ed,
i'm in agreement with you on most points. but ask yourself this: why do you want $209,000 of money that is supposed to be going to ammenities for YOU to be paid to lawyers to defend a decision that benefited no one but the developer? if the district wasn't spending "ammenity" money on this, it is just another chunk that would be spent on residents. just something to ponder.
lauren

Lauren.

You can't believe this place. The developers have thought of everything and it is top drawer. You need to come here and see this place for yourself. It FEELS like the developer is in no way greedy, when you see how we have so much for $135 a month.

hey mike, i can offer at least a little bit of infomation on that front. nothing has changed substantially, to my knowledge, between 2003 and now regarding the IRS rules governing these types of bonds. the villages, however, has slightly changed how it values properties.

the villages will tell you (as they've told me) that everything was just fine when the first agent reviewed what i recall was the 2003 bonds. however, that is not entirely true. the letter back to the district stated that the IRS was extremely concerned about the way the district operated and stated the problem areas. the districts ignored that letter, and the agent on the case mentioned that repeatedly in this investigation. i have seen that letter, and i'm sure i have it in a file somewhere, but i know for sure that it can be obtained through janet.tutt@districtgov.org

hope that helps.
lauren

hey gracie,

i've been to the villages many, many times. i know what it's like. it's incredible. you have to realize that i'm not writing about your lifestyle. you will get no argument from me in that quarter. i do not think there is a retirement community on the planet that rivals this one.

what i'm writing about are the financial underpinnings of how this was created. interestingly enough, for those who want to make the comparison, similar districts were used to create walt disney world back in the 1970s. (but NOT the way the developer has misused these.)

hey, enjoy. i wish you the best. i'm 53, and retirement is looming on my horizon, too.

hey collie,
you are exactly right. what the agent proposed is certainly nothing that the villages ever would agree to. i think that was proposed as a starting point.

in any event, regarding the impacts. i have long wanted to write about the impacts. i have been able to get a few experts to talk with me about other situations and to outline possible ultimate implications for village homeowers -- but never on the record. well, at least the ones with the expertise in this sort of special district issue haven't been willing to discuss it on the record. experts in this field are a very small community, and i'd rather leave it hanging than use folks who aren't qualified. i have heard enough to believe that there could be impacts on the residents but many bond experts believe this is breaking new ground because of the way the developer has used the districts as his own private printing press for cash.

hope that helps. sorry i don't know more.
lauren

At last, a rare point of agreement.....I think.

Lauren, my friends and I want to publicly thank you for bringing these issues to light. We had no idea this type of thing was going on when we purchased, nor did most people I suspect. It remains to be seen how things turn out, but you are doing a great public service with your column. We know you are not slamming the lifestyle or the community - you are just keeping folks up to speed on the slippery slope the developer took when issuing the bonds and creating the CDD's. Thank you!!!

-Where is the agent ?????
 

Where is the agent ????? Someone stated that the agent who started all this mess has been reassigned ,,,,,Never to be heard from again , He must have ticked off someone higher up .......
Sent to Upper Mongolia I think !!!! I wonder why ???
INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW !!!

FUMAR

agent
 

this is typical IRS format, they do it all the time so disputes do not get resolved, brother is an agent now retired

Whats your brother think of this mess?

Willy

brother
 

the IRS doesn't back down, he is the one who told me about it, I am now looking in New Smyrna, Bethune Beach, I am still going to come for an LSV but who knows what will happen in the future

someone stated it correctly this cannot be the precedent for other communities the Morses' have their money it is obvious from the posts they are slowly turning over their business concerns (restaurants is the prime example) and have plans to move elsewhere, yes they live in The Villages now but where else do they own property, I am sure other places

IRS usually completes their mission within a 7 year time frame not sure how many years this has been going on :wave: