[villagetinker]

I would hope that maybe the VOA and POA organizations, as well as the developer would all get together and discuss this with the plaintiffs to see if there is any common ground. From what I can see the developer has a lot of skin in this as they can no longer reference the LLLC in their ads. which I am sure is going to affect sales ($$$$$$).
If this continues (the squares and other amenities), The Villages will be reduced to nothing more than suburban communities with golf courses and pools, this would be a very sad future for this wonderful location.

Has anyone thought about the possible effect on resale values? I suspect the consequences of this decision will have far ranging impacts that we have not seen yet.

[Emmakrock@yahoo.com]

No way! You just get held hostage every time someone wants money

[jgm3279]

I have NOT read all of your posts (yet), but I find this VERY disturbing, even if I have not taken advantage of these classes!.

[Villageswimmer]

Originally Posted by kstew43

Peace on earth...Good will towards men......

doesn't apply in the villages?.....

I still think that the majority of people hear are blaming the wrong party. a little money would of solved everything.

Everyone clearly has a right to his/her opinion. But, unless you are privy to information that none of the rest of us are, it seems you may be jumping to conclusions with "a little money would of (sic) solved everything." This is provocative. How do you know this? What is "a little money"? Please enlighten us if you can.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I just saw this thread, and then read the DS, and I'm just about speechless. I probably have more questions than answers but I think we do not have the whole story.

My main question----did the LLC offer to provide ASL interpreters or was that the cost prohibitive issue? To my understanding, the ADA does require ASL interpreters if requested, and not at the expense of the hearing impaired, regardless of cost factor. If they did not, then this "dirty thirty" has a valid point, under the law.

That being said, I'm sorry you don't hear well, or at all. I'm sorry if hearing aids, or speech to text, or cochlear implants don't work for you. But to initiate litigation that now deprives 18,000+ of a valuable resource is NOT the spirit of the law, even if it is the letter of it. Anyone with a disability needs to adjust to certain limitations. The unfortunate person with no arms or legs cannot expect to be included in a basketball league. Likewise the hearing impaired cannot expect to appreciate the subtle woodwind tones of a Mozart concerto. Those that have posted that EVERY American should be able to participate in EVERY activity are deluding themselves. Reasonable accommodations should be made, and ASL interpreters are probably reasonable. If 30 individuals take 2 classes of 8 weeks, that's 480 sessions for that semester and would cost maybe $48,000 for interpreters. That's an add on fee of $2.50 for everyone else. So I suspect there is much more to this.

I had a totally deaf patient in NY. The law required that I provide an ASL interpreter for every visit at my expense. Net effect, it cost ME about $150 every time she had an appointment. Multiply that by 5-6 visits/year for 30 years. But that's the law.

So, with the limited info we have, it looks like 30 individuals were intent on cramming the letter of the ADA down 120,000 Villager's throats and the LLC may not have provided all the reasonable accommodations that the law requires. Who do I fault---THE LAW. It may do a lot of good, but like many other new and progressive ideas, it elevates the needs and wants of a small minority above that of the overwhelming majority. Mr. Trump---how about an executive order!!

Trump is irrelevant here.

My ramblings on a tragic situation for us all:

1. The plaintiffs ought to be run out of town on a rail and then burn in hell for what they have done to their neighbors--the residents of The Villages. Remember, the plaintiffs not only sued the LLLC and the Developer, but by including the clubs as defendants, they sued all of us. And without the courtesy of talking to us first!

By resorting to litigation, the plaintiffs have ruined one of the great aspects of living here. Had the plaintiffs publicly explained their difficulties and concerns, before starting a lawsuit, their problems probably would have been handled without the court battle and its resulting consequences-- which now appear irreversible. (As a retired attorney, I would stress that litigation should be the last, not the first, way to resolve problems.) If Villagers had known about the plaintiffs' situation, I am sure that (through volunteer signers or contributions to buy appropriate equipment) something could have been worked out so that the plaintiffs could have been accommodated and the LLLC continued.

2. But not only are the plaintiffs to blame here. Where in the heck was our newspaper, The Daily Sun, which is little more than a marketing tool for the Developer, while this lawsuit was festering for years? Once again, the Daily Sun (as it did when the IRS investigation, which presented an existential threat to our lifestyle, and other events prejudicial to home sales in The Villages occurred) either suppressed the news or obscured it or both. Today's article on the subject, the first that has been published, borders on the incomprehensible. Why are we, the Villagers, only learning about this lawsuit now and why doesn't the article explain the details of what is happened? Shame on you, Daily Sun, for misrepresenting yourself as a newspaper.

3. The Villages Charter School is a for-profit operation run by the Developer. Why did the Developer set it up, since it is probably not very profitable, in and of itself? He obviously did it to encourage businesses to rent from him so their kids could go to school there. Yeah, the LLLC is probably a "break-even" adjunct to the Charter School. But it is "break-even" only because there is not a lot of money to be made in continuing education. The benefit of the LLLC to the Developer: a marketing tool to sell more houses. Apparently the lawsuit was enough of an irritant to the Developer to cause him to walk away from the LLLC now that The Villages is just about built out.

I would have hoped that the Developer would have felt a greater responsibility to his customers so that he could have worked out some kind of accommodation with the plaintiffs, but maybe the plaintiffs were being unreasonable. You really cannot tell what happened from the Daily Sun article

The bottom line, as I see it: What we, as Villagers, should be doing, rather than looking for someone to blame, is hoping that the Developer's decision to close the LLLC will be reversed. However, the LLLC's closing now appears to be a fait accompli. Since we lack a real homeowner's association, with the power to raise funds by assessing homeowners, and since the Villages Homeowners Association is nothing more than a front for the Developer, maybe the Property Owners' Association can do something to persuade the Developer to change his mind. The sad thing is: I am not sure what, if anything, the POA or anybody else, can do at this point to cause a reversal of the Developer's decision. And furthermore, nothing that any of us say in this forum is going to make the slightest difference.

[trichard]

Originally Posted by kstew43

peace on earth...good will towards men......

Doesn't apply in the villages?.....

I still think that the majority of people hear are blaming the wrong party. A little money would of solved everything.

blackmail!

[PennBF]

Where is Janet Tutt, the General Manager in The Villages and responsible for it's Management. She is quoted throughout the Legal Documents but has not provided any statement regarding one of the most serious failures of the Villages. According to the Court Documents she has been involved since the inception 8 years ago and kept the residents in the dark. It would appear to be appropriate for her to step forward and give some input to the residents.

[Villageswimmer]

Originally Posted by Advogado

Trump is irrelevant here.

My ramblings on a tragic situation for us all:

1. The plaintiffs ought to be run out of town on a rail and then burn in hell for what they have done to their neighbors--the residents of The Villages. Remember, the plaintiffs not only sued the LLLC and the Developer, but by including the clubs as defendants, they sued all of us. And without the courtesy of talking to us first!

By resorting to litigation, the plaintiffs have ruined one of the great aspects of living here. Had the plaintiffs publicly explained their difficulties and concerns, before starting a lawsuit, their problems probably would have been handled without the court battle and its resulting consequences-- which now appear irreversible. (As a retired attorney, I would stress that litigation should be the last, not the first, way to resolve problems.) If Villagers had known about the plaintiffs' situation, I am sure that (through volunteer signers or contributions to buy appropriate equipment) something could have been worked out so that the plaintiffs could have been accommodated and the LLLC continued.

2. But not only are the plaintiffs to blame here. Where in the heck was our newspaper, The Daily Sun, which is little more than a marketing tool for the Developer, while this lawsuit was festering for years? Once again, the Daily Sun (as it did when the IRS investigation, which presented an existential threat to our lifestyle, and other events prejudicial to home sales in The Villages occurred) either suppressed the news or obscured it or both. Today's article on the subject, the first that has been published, borders on the incomprehensible. Why are we, the Villagers, only learning about this lawsuit now and why doesn't the article explain the details of what is happened? Shame on you, Daily Sun, for misrepresenting yourself as a newspaper.

3. The Villages Charter School is a for-profit operation run by the Developer. Why did the Developer set it up, since it is probably not very profitable, in and of itself? He obviously did it to encourage businesses to rent from him so their kids could go to school there. Yeah, the LLLC is probably a "break-even" adjunct to the Charter School. But it is "break-even" only because there is not a lot of money to be made in continuing education. The benefit of the LLLC to the Developer: a marketing tool to sell more houses. Apparently the lawsuit was enough of an irritant to the Developer to cause him to walk away from the LLLC now that The Villages is just about built out.

I would have hoped that the Developer would have felt a greater responsibility to his customers so that he could have worked out some kind of accommodation with the plaintiffs, but maybe the plaintiffs were being unreasonable. You really cannot tell what happened from the Daily Sun article

The bottom line, as I see it: What we, as Villagers, should be doing, rather than looking for someone to blame, is hoping that the Developer's decision to close the LLLC will be reversed. However, the LLLC's closing now appears to be a fait accompli. Since we lack a real homeowner's association, with the power to raise funds by assessing homeowners, and since the Villages Homeowners Association is nothing more than a front for the Developer, maybe the Property Owners' Association can do something to persuade the Developer to change his mind. The sad thing is: I am not sure what, if anything, the POA or anybody else, can do at this point to cause a reversal of the Developer's decision. And furthermore, nothing that any of us say in this forum is going to make the slightest difference.

Excellent analysis. Your point #3 is particularly well taken.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Of course not, they wanted $$$$$$$$

I would have to get more details of the case to see if money was the main motivator in this tragic matter.

Often it is the least of the concerns with public interest law groups like the one the seems to be the chief lawyers of the 30 or so plaintiffs.

The lawyers probably lost a lot of money and reputation for this case especially its outcome which helps no one.

I do believe that one poster is right that this should never have gone to the courts. This is something that should have been dealt with long before it got on the Federal Docket.

As far as this being a fait accompli people who know me know that I never ever give up on a cause and I will do everything I can to try to fix this for the Villagers. Get involved with trying to change this result. Contact your Villages' representatives and start bugging the powers that be to do something to get our Lifelong Learning College back. And use Facebook in this. It is a lot more effective a tool for changing people's minds and getting things done.

[trichard]

Originally Posted by Advogado

Trump is irrelevant here.

My ramblings on a tragic situation for us all:

1. The plaintiffs ought to be run out of town on a rail and then burn in hell for what they have done to their neighbors--the residents of The Villages. Remember, the plaintiffs not only sued the LLLC and the Developer, but by including the clubs as defendants, they sued all of us. And without the courtesy of talking to us first!

By resorting to litigation, the plaintiffs have ruined one of the great aspects of living here. Had the plaintiffs publicly explained their difficulties and concerns, before starting a lawsuit, their problems probably would have been handled without the court battle and its resulting consequences-- which now appear irreversible. (As a retired attorney, I would stress that litigation should be the last, not the first, way to resolve problems.) If Villagers had known about the plaintiffs' situation, I am sure that (through volunteer signers or contributions to buy appropriate equipment) something could have been worked out so that the plaintiffs could have been accommodated and the LLLC continued.

2. But not only are the plaintiffs to blame here. Where in the heck was our newspaper, The Daily Sun, which is little more than a marketing tool for the Developer, while this lawsuit was festering for years? Once again, the Daily Sun (as it did when the IRS investigation, which presented an existential threat to our lifestyle, and other events prejudicial to home sales in The Villages occurred) either suppressed the news or obscured it or both. Today's article on the subject, the first that has been published, borders on the incomprehensible. Why are we, the Villagers, only learning about this lawsuit now and why doesn't the article explain the details of what is happened? Shame on you, Daily Sun, for misrepresenting yourself as a newspaper.

3. The Villages Charter School is a for-profit operation run by the Developer. Why did the Developer set it up, since it is probably not very profitable, in and of itself? He obviously did it to encourage businesses to rent from him so their kids could go to school there. Yeah, the LLLC is probably a "break-even" adjunct to the Charter School. But it is "break-even" only because there is not a lot of money to be made in continuing education. The benefit of the LLLC to the Developer: a marketing tool to sell more houses. Apparently the lawsuit was enough of an irritant to the Developer to cause him to walk away from the LLLC now that The Villages is just about built out.

I would have hoped that the Developer would have felt a greater responsibility to his customers so that he could have worked out some kind of accommodation with the plaintiffs, but maybe the plaintiffs were being unreasonable. You really cannot tell what happened from the Daily Sun article

The bottom line, as I see it: What we, as Villagers, should be doing, rather than looking for someone to blame, is hoping that the Developer's decision to close the LLLC will be reversed. However, the LLLC's closing now appears to be a fait accompli. Since we lack a real homeowner's association, with the power to raise funds by assessing homeowners, and since the Villages Homeowners Association is nothing more than a front for the Developer, maybe the Property Owners' Association can do something to persuade the Developer to change his mind. The sad thing is: I am not sure what, if anything, the POA or anybody else, can do at this point to cause a reversal of the Developer's decision. And furthermore, nothing that any of us say in this forum is going to make the slightest difference.

In April, the HOA & POA were both advised that The Villages Health made a decision to only accept Medicare Advantage insurance and not honor their "grandfathering" of original Medicare patients. Nothing was made public by either organizations or The Villages Daily Sun until June. I believe that the instructors will need to look for its own private arrangements and reserve or rent space from the rec centers like many of the state or other clubs.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Advogado

Trump is irrelevant here.

My ramblings on a tragic situation for us all:

1. The plaintiffs ought to be run out of town on a rail and then burn in hell for what they have done to their neighbors--the residents of The Villages. Remember, the plaintiffs not only sued the LLLC and the Developer, but by including the clubs as defendants, they sued all of us. And without the courtesy of talking to us first!

By resorting to litigation, the plaintiffs have ruined one of the great aspects of living here. Had the plaintiffs publicly explained their difficulties and concerns, before starting a lawsuit, their problems probably would have been handled without the court battle and its resulting consequences-- which now appear irreversible. (As a retired attorney, I would stress that litigation should be the last, not the first, way to resolve problems.) If Villagers had known about the plaintiffs' situation, I am sure that (through volunteer signers or contributions to buy appropriate equipment) something could have been worked out so that the plaintiffs could have been accommodated and the LLLC continued.

2. But not only are the plaintiffs to blame here. Where in the heck was our newspaper, The Daily Sun, which is little more than a marketing tool for the Developer, while this lawsuit was festering for years? Once again, the Daily Sun (as it did when the IRS investigation, which presented an existential threat to our lifestyle, and other events prejudicial to home sales in The Villages occurred) either suppressed the news or obscured it or both. Today's article on the subject, the first that has been published, borders on the incomprehensible. Why are we, the Villagers, only learning about this lawsuit now and why doesn't the article explain the details of what is happened? Shame on you, Daily Sun, for misrepresenting yourself as a newspaper.

3. The Villages Charter School is a for-profit operation run by the Developer. Why did the Developer set it up, since it is probably not very profitable, in and of itself? He obviously did it to encourage businesses to rent from him so their kids could go to school there. Yeah, the LLLC is probably a "break-even" adjunct to the Charter School. But it is "break-even" only because there is not a lot of money to be made in continuing education. The benefit of the LLLC to the Developer: a marketing tool to sell more houses. Apparently the lawsuit was enough of an irritant to the Developer to cause him to walk away from the LLLC now that The Villages is just about built out.

I would have hoped that the Developer would have felt a greater responsibility to his customers so that he could have worked out some kind of accommodation with the plaintiffs, but maybe the plaintiffs were being unreasonable. You really cannot tell what happened from the Daily Sun article

The bottom line, as I see it: What we, as Villagers, should be doing, rather than looking for someone to blame, is hoping that the Developer's decision to close the LLLC will be reversed. However, the LLLC's closing now appears to be a fait accompli. Since we lack a real homeowner's association, with the power to raise funds by assessing homeowners, and since the Villages Homeowners Association is nothing more than a front for the Developer, maybe the Property Owners' Association can do something to persuade the Developer to change his mind. The sad thing is: I am not sure what, if anything, the POA or anybody else, can do at this point to cause a reversal of the Developer's decision. And furthermore, nothing that any of us say in this forum is going to make the slightest difference.

You make some good points, but I think it boils down to this: What reasonable accommodations was the LLC required to provide. This is a small group of presumably severely hearing impaired residents. What helps them?
a) speech to text
b) ASL interpreters
c) powerpoint slideshow concurrent with the class lecture
d) amplification to the extent possible

All this could have been provided, and in fact, ADA probably requires it. Hence the lawsuit.

Beyond these accommodations, I don't see what else could be done, or even requested. Yes, it would require money in higher course fees or higher amenity fees. But it is not unusual for the cost of various programs to be spread among the general population, even to those that don't want to. The childless 90 year old still pays school taxes. We all pay for food stamps for those that need them. Even the ultra-liberal wussie pacifists who would rather bow to Mecca 6x/day and live under sharia law than put a bullet in the head of a jihadist has to pay for our military.

It sounds to me like this was not handled well from the beginning, like a line was drawn in the sand on both sides. But ultimately , we just don't know, since a 700 word article in the DS was just dumped on us today

[blueash]

Originally Posted by 2BNTV

According to the DS, the lawsuit was filed 8 years ago. The person mentioned in the article was Louis Schwarz.

The LLC tried to resolve this lawsuit with many accomodations towards the plaintiff's but the plaintiffs rejected all overtures. The DS indicated the plaintiff's were looking at LLC, as a cash cow. The article also stated that was not the case and it will be closed.

I hope these plantiffs are proud they denied many others the joy of learning and denying other of there jobs. What mean spirited people. IMHO

Shame, shame, shame, on them.

This and so many others are completely absolutely false. Repeating a lie over and over does not make it the truth. There was exactly one attempt made to help the hearing impaired not many accommodations and it was useless. Read the court document. The judge said the result produced by the speech to text program was not useful. There was no other accommodation attempted in the eight years this has been going on.
Don't trust the Daily Sun to give you information on the case, read the case file. Read the pleadings of the plaintiffs and the defense and the careful analysis of the Federal judge.

And some of you seem not to understand despite repetitions that the judge did not, repeat did NOT, use the ADA to make any determination against the Villages in fact he specifically ruled that the ADA did not apply in this case.
The plaintiffs did not reject any overtures. They agreed to try to use the Dragon speech to text system and it was inadequate, not just according to the plaintiff but also to the judge. No other overtures were offered per the court record.

There are so many posts containing outrageous statements.
Chatbrat

:--guess I'm the only person who cares about the 200 full time employees who are soon to be unemployed,this means they lose health insurance & their children can't TV charter schools

The LLC does not have 200 full time employees. In fact the court documents indicate that there are only FOUR employees of the LLC according to the defense. How you all get from four to 200 is amazing.

Although the Charter School Corporation notes that the LLC "has a staff of only four full-time employees", see Defendant's Supplement at 5 n.11

Is there any possibility that this will affect the free clubs and exercise classes offered at the rec centers?

No, read the document

Graciegirl: MANY of the classes of The Lifelong Learning College are/were held in The Villages High School after hours. I guess it was the BUILDING that was deemed unusable for handicapped people.

Wrong, read the document

In my opinion, this is an example of an agency that has overstepped it's goals

No agency was involved in any way in this litigation. It involves the interpretation by the court of federal law. The government did not file this suit. No agency became involved in any way.

Villagetinker

It is too bad that there was no middle ground on this, for example, having a few sign language personnel available for classes IF REQUESTED, or something similar

This is exactly what the plaintiffs requested and it was refused

Bonnievie

from my reading of the legal document. they initially went after the Resident Lifestyle Groups....but it appears the case was not as strong, so then they went after the LLC

You are misunderstanding the process. They never "went after" the RLG's. The entire first part of the document explains how the programs work. There was not any ever any attempt to go after the RLG nor did they change targets. The plaintiff's lawyers did what all good attorneys do, they named all possible entities to be sure that they didn't miss one that all the others could then say was the one in charge.

Henryk

Speech-to-text is often garbled on television, too. Maybe the jerks can sue the networks, too.

Here is what the court said about the product

The Court's independent review of the Lecture Transcript reveals that it is, indeed, difficult to follow

I have a question so if you lost your legs would you sue the villages because you can't golf?

I have a question for you. Did you know that the golf course in fact provides a special golf cart for those with profound physical handicaps so they can golf?

It is obviously about this guy and those behind him wanting to make big money in a lawsuit

No, it is about some of our neighbors wanting to have help with being able to participate in the classes at the LLC. Had they been accommodated there never would have been a lawsuit.

Lesdavnator

I haven't seen the lawsuit but it seemed as if they sued for money not reform

Amazing that you have not seen the lawsuit but know the motivation of the plaintiffs.

And I am a huge supporter of the ADA. I won awards for the work I did hiring handicap employees and providing them with the equipment and tools to be able to work. And to a person they were excellent employees. And I had a sign person in front of every meeting I held with more then 10 people.

And if the LLC had done that there would be no lawsuit and no closure. And they did not ask for a sign person at every class, just those where help was needed.

And gracie gets the last word:

Someone wants to make a big deal out of something that really didn't need fixing

Somehow I don't think she thought that about the huge costs of special education for children with learning disabilities because that change in the law benefitted her and her child. And in spending that extra money, lots of extra money, to help to teach Gracie's child and thousands like her, we are all better off, as a community and a country.

[BeachGalMarti]

I am a new resident (8 days) and was so looking forward to the many opportunities presented by The Lifelong Learning College. What a sad start to our new life here. It sounds like numerous options were presented to those with this challenge, yet the lawsuit persisted. Hopefully we will hear more about what their demands were (besides $$$)

[Tweety Bird]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I am so angry about this. Someone wanted to show their superior Washington lobbying skills is MY opinion. Are you happy now????

P.S. I am legally deaf in one ear and have a handicapped child but see NOTHING meritorious in this action.

Yes, I'm disgusted with this lawsuit. How many lives has this now affected? A few people who can't hear, can't think either!

[llaran]

Why do the sign language interpreter have to be certified? I don't think the other instructors have to have a degree in their subject.

What I gleaned from The law suit is the cost of providing a certified sign language person would prohibited.