[redwitch]

Like all men, Mark Morse has his good and bad side. I can't imagine a single person who lives here or who wants to live here that doesn't appreciate what has been conceived by Harold Schwartz, basically created by Gary Morse and expanded upon by Mark Morse. It would be hard to deny Mark Morse's business acumen.

However, there is no question that Villagers were treated shoddily in having to purchase rec centers way over their value; in Paradise Rec Center being allowed to fall into disrepair while paths were built and improved to Spanish Springs; in the way amenity fees have at times been handled; in the nickle and diming of Villagers in general.

There is no question that Mark Morse did settle a lawsuit filed against the developer (meaning MM) by the homeowners north of 466. There is no question that there are some legitimate issues involved with the IRS and that the IRS originally said they would let them slide the first go-round and that rather than fix the issues, Morse, et al. continued with the same tax deductions. There is no question that his wife and daughter have pled guilty to misdemeanor hunting charges in Montana -- charges which Mark Morse has been accused of actively participating in. There is no question Mark Morse has been charged with some pretty serious crimes in Montana that could put him in prison for many years to come (although the odds are he will simply be fined, which is what has happened in previous cases like this). There is no question that he was once quoted as saying that the land for Moffett Center was a donation and then it was discovered that it was anything but. If you look at some of the fees Villagers have been charged for services (such as $3.50/day for their Empty Nest program), it should be difficult to justify these fees and they do smack of greed.

Personally, I do believe Mark Morse is lacking in ethics and morals, at least to some extent. I do believe that if he could get away with it, he would take every dime in the amenity fees and use them for his personal gain, pretty much as he tried to do prior to the 466-north lawsuit.

Again, none of this stops me from appreciating what he has accomplished in The Villages. It does, however, make me want to keep a very wary eye on Mr. Morse and hope that we have enough controls in place to prevent him from taking more than his share.

[Tbugs]

I had never heard of the "Empty Nest Program" so I looked it up. It is a service available through the Villages Rental Property Management division. It ensures your home will be looked at inside and outside weekly to always be in prime condition. Like some posters noted, it is a higher price to pay but most felt it was well worth the cost. Again, it is only for houses in the rental programs - not all property owners like Redwitch suggested.

I suggest closing this thread until the time of Morse's trial in Montana and he is found either guilty or not guilty.

If you want to focus on a trial, there is the ongoing Casey Anthony trial. After all, what is worse - killing an elk on your own property or killing your child?

[cabo35]

Red........I have uncharacteristically omitted copious, detailed response to your assertions in the interest of saving key strokes. Accordingly, you said,

However, there is no question that Villagers were treated shoddily in having to purchase rec centers way over their value; I don't recall a finding against Morse. Was he guilty legally of something. Do those rec centers provide an income stream that was factored into the price?

in Paradise Rec Center being allowed to fall into disrepair while paths were built and improved to Spanish Springs; Has Paradise been repaired? ..... the cartpath improvements are a bad thing....why?

in the way amenity fees have at times been handled; in the nickle and diming of Villagers in general. Who handles the amenity fees? How were they mishandled and how were Villagers nickeled and dimed?

There is no question that Mark Morse did settle a lawsuit filed against the developer (meaning MM) by the homeowners north of 466. Once again, was there a court finding against him? Did everyone walk away from the table happy? I know those that brought the action were happy with their piece of the pie.

There is no question that there are some legitimate issues involved with the IRS and that the IRS originally said they would let them slide the first go-round and that rather than fix the issues, Morse, et al. continued with the same tax deductions. Tax deductions? I thought the matter was over the issue of tax free bonds. The whole subject of taxation, bonding and Community Development Districts nationwide is going through a metamorphosis because there is little precedent to refer to. Ergo..your suggestion of clarity ('no question') seems extreme. .

There is no question that his wife and daughter have pled guilty to misdemeanor hunting charges in Montana. ...you find this "improper and abusive" to Villagers how?

-- charges which Mark Morse has been accused of actively participating in. There is no question Mark Morse has been charged with some pretty serious crimes in Montana that could put him in prison for many years to come (although the odds are he will simply be fined, which is what has happened in previous cases like this). "Accused" would be the working word. Your embellishment about "prison sentencing" is meant to inflame even though you hedge your bet and provide a caveat....just in case .

There is no question that he was once quoted as saying that the land for Moffett Center was a donation and then it was discovered that it was anything but. Have you been made privy to all the contractual agreements between Morse and the medical providers in issue? It seems like everyone is happy and the Villages will be the winner. If I recall, you have some experience in legal matters. Aren't these situations dynamic and changing until the contracts are signed?

If you look at some of the fees Villagers have been charged for services (such as $3.50/day for their Empty Nest program), it should be difficult to justify these fees and they do smack of greed. Are those mandatory fees or options a homeowner can secure if he is willing to pay?

I do believe that if he could get away with it, he would take every dime in the amenity fees and use them for his personal gain, pretty much as he tried to do prior to the 466-north lawsuit. Once again, I assume you are referring to the lawsuit where everyone walked away happy, some happier then others, and there was no finding against the developer.

My point is not to categorically defend the developer. In a word, it is balance. Given the motivation, one can take either side of the issue and "make a case". The true axe grinders and bashers are self evident and you are clearly above that pay grade.

Have a good day Red.

[Xavier]

Originally Posted by cabo35

Red........I have uncharacteristically omitted copious, detailed response to your assertions in the interest of saving key strokes. Accordingly, you said,

However, there is no question that Villagers were treated shoddily in having to purchase rec centers way over their value; I don't recall a finding against Morse. Was he guilty legally of something. Do those rec centers provide an income stream that was factored into the price?

in Paradise Rec Center being allowed to fall into disrepair while paths were built and improved to Spanish Springs; Has Paradise been repaired? ..... the cartpath improvements are a bad thing....why?

in the way amenity fees have at times been handled; in the nickle and diming of Villagers in general. Who handles the amenity fees? How were they mishandled and how were Villagers nickeled and dimed?

There is no question that Mark Morse did settle a lawsuit filed against the developer (meaning MM) by the homeowners north of 466. Once again, was there a court finding against him? Did everyone walk away from the table happy? I know those that brought the action were happy with their piece of the pie.

There is no question that there are some legitimate issues involved with the IRS and that the IRS originally said they would let them slide the first go-round and that rather than fix the issues, Morse, et al. continued with the same tax deductions. Tax deductions? I thought the matter was over the issue of tax free bonds. The whole subject of taxation, bonding and Community Development Districts nationwide is going through a metamorphosis because there is little precedent to refer to. Ergo..your suggestion of clarity ('no question') seems extreme. .

There is no question that his wife and daughter have pled guilty to misdemeanor hunting charges in Montana. ...you find this "improper and abusive" to Villagers how?

-- charges which Mark Morse has been accused of actively participating in. There is no question Mark Morse has been charged with some pretty serious crimes in Montana that could put him in prison for many years to come (although the odds are he will simply be fined, which is what has happened in previous cases like this). "Accused" would be the working word. Your embellishment about "prison sentencing" is meant to inflame even though you hedge your bet and provide a caveat....just in case .

There is no question that he was once quoted as saying that the land for Moffett Center was a donation and then it was discovered that it was anything but. Have you been made privy to all the contractual agreements between Morse and the medical providers in issue? It seems like everyone is happy and the Villages will be the winner. If I recall, you have some experience in legal matters. Aren't these situations dynamic and changing until the contracts are signed?

If you look at some of the fees Villagers have been charged for services (such as $3.50/day for their Empty Nest program), it should be difficult to justify these fees and they do smack of greed. Are those mandatory fees or options a homeowner can secure if he is willing to pay?

I do believe that if he could get away with it, he would take every dime in the amenity fees and use them for his personal gain, pretty much as he tried to do prior to the 466-north lawsuit. Once again, I assume you are referring to the lawsuit where everyone walked away happy, some happier then others, and there was no finding against the developer.

My point is not to categorically defend the developer. In a word, it is balance. Given the motivation, one can take either side of the issue and "make a case". The true axe grinders and bashers are self evident and you are clearly above that pay grade.

Have a good day Red.

cabo35,

We almost never agree on political things, but I couldn't agree more with you on the protection of individual rights. Your response is outstanding and dead on. Thank you for your excellent contribution to this discussion.

Xavier

[Challenger]

Half truths, gossip, conspiracy theories, lack of understanding of the business process, and legal principals are all part of jumping to conclusions and ruining reputations. Thanks to those who have taken the time to point out the weakness in many of the posts expressed here.

I believe that Mark Morse is a flawed human being (as we all are) and should be appropriately dealt with when found responsible by competent authority.I also believe that there are posters who can find a snake under any rock and attribute bad motives to almost any act by Morse. MHO

[bimmertl]

Interesting to allege "everyone walked away happy" from the lawsuit against the developer. Morse settled the case for $47 million. Doubt he was grinning his way to the bank to get the funds.

There was no finding against Morse as he bought his way out of the lawsuit. What he got was a confidentiality agreement from the plaintiffs which kept them silent as to what they discovered during the litigation process.

Most confidentiality agreements cover the settlement amount, which this one didn't. Morse buying his way out ended the discovery process which would have included him producing all his financial records and depositions of he and his management staff.

In order to avoid that becoming public he coughed up the money and bought the confidentiality agreement.

[Xavier]

Originally Posted by bimmertl

Interesting to allege "everyone walked away happy" from the lawsuit against the developer. Morse settled the case for $47 million. Doubt he was grinning his way to the bank to get the funds.

There was no finding against Morse as he bought his way out of the lawsuit. What he got was a confidentiality agreement from the plaintiffs which kept them silent as to what they discovered during the litigation process.

Most confidentiality agreements cover the settlement amount, which this one didn't. Morse buying his way out ended the discovery process which would have included him producing all his financial records and depositions of he and his management staff.

In order to avoid that becoming public he coughed up the money and bought the confidentiality agreement.

... and the problem is? Is there a legal point you are trying to make? Everyone walked away satisfied or they wouldn't have signed off. Happens everyday and everywhere. Frees up the court system.

Xavier

[cabo35]

Originally Posted by bimmertl

Interesting to allege "everyone walked away happy" from the lawsuit against the developer. Morse settled the case for $47 million. Doubt he was grinning his way to the bank to get the funds.

There was no finding against Morse as he bought his way out of the lawsuit. What he got was a confidentiality agreement from the plaintiffs which kept them silent as to what they discovered during the litigation process.

Most confidentiality agreements cover the settlement amount, which this one didn't. Morse buying his way out ended the discovery process which would have included him producing all his financial records and depositions of he and his management staff.

In order to avoid that becoming public he coughed up the money and bought the confidentiality agreement.

My recollection is that $6,700,000 of the settlement went to the lawyers, $300,000 went to Villages class representatives who filed the suit and the balance was to be paid over 13 years. That would seem to dilute the large numbers you use in your argument. Please feel free to correct any fuzzy math or assumptions I make. Sometimes I can't remember what I had for breakfast.

Notwithstanding your point to the contrary, my concern is that he may well have been "grinning" on the way to the bank. A haunting concern is what motivated the rather quick settlement by the plaintiffs and there attornies.....was it settled in the interest of The Villages or the prospect of a big pay day?

What incentive is there to holdout for a bigger award if the opposition put a $7,000,000 bone on the table for the litigants. If the potential in the discovery process was as great as you suggest.......why wouldn't you be suspicious of the "settlement" as well? A thirteen year payout seems to dilute the large settlement numbers you and others bandy about and suggest was a good deal for Villagers and a stigma to the developer. The 13 year spread factor never seems to be included in your equation. Perhaps because it dilutes the impact of the "big number" and just possibly......Villagers may have been shortchanged at the table. I guess we will never know. Just my opinion.

My apologies for hijacking the Morse/Moose thread.

[NJblue]

Red,

I have seen you complain about what the developer charges for the home watch service. I agree that it is more than I would be willing to pay, but others see value in a more "corporate" presence in their homes and they are willing to pay extra for it. Of course this leaves a high ceiling for entrepreneurs like yourself to under cut them and provide a service. As I see it, it is the free market system at work and all is good. I would think your biggest complaint would be if the developer under-priced his services thus forcing people like yourself out of business.

[Xavier]

Originally Posted by NJblue

Red,

I have seen you complain about what the developer charges for the home watch service. I agree that it is more than I would be willing to pay, but others see value in a more "corporate" presence in their homes and they are willing to pay extra for it. Of course this leaves a high ceiling for entrepreneurs like yourself to under cut them and provide a service. As I see it, it is the free market system at work and all is good. I would think your biggest complaint would be if the developer under-priced his services thus forcing people like yourself out of business.

Am I dreaming or what? Didn't the developer sell the Empty Nest business about a year and a half or two years ago? I swear I saw that someplace.

Ah ha - found it right here: Who Bought "Empty Nests"?

Xavier

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by cabo35

My recollection is that $6,700,000 of the settlement went to the lawyers, $300,000 went to Villages class representatives who filed the suit and the balance was to be paid over 13 years. That would seem to dilute the large numbers you use in your argument. Please feel free to correct any fuzzy math or assumptions I make. Sometimes I can't remember what I had for breakfast.

Notwithstanding your point to the contrary, my concern is that he may well have been "grinning" on the way to the bank. A haunting concern is what motivated the rather quick settlement by the plaintiffs and there attornies.....was it settled in the interest of The Villages or the prospect of a big pay day?

What incentive is there to holdout for a bigger award if the opposition put a $7,000,000 bone on the table for the litigants. If the potential in the discovery process was as great as you suggest.......why wouldn't you be suspicious of the "settlement" as well? A thirteen year payout seems to dilute the large settlement numbers you and others bandy about and suggest was a good deal for Villagers and a stigma to the developer. The 13 year spread factor never seems to be included in your equation. Perhaps because it dilutes the impact of the "big number" and just possibly......Villagers may have been shortchanged at the table. I guess we will never know. Just my opinion.

My apologies for hijacking the Morse/Moose thread.

Cabo35,

(As you note in your apology, I guess we have swerved from the original topic of this thread, but everything is kind of connected.)

As I recall, your numbers are basically correct. Furthermore, I share your basic concern that the settlement amount might turn out not to be big enough to continue the amenities system. It certainly will NOT be if the IRS investigation goes totally south. (It is my understanding that the Developer did not disclose the existence of that investigation during the settlement negotiations, and as you know, the Daily Sun, for some reason, did not report on it.)

As I have said in earlier posts, only time will tell if the $40 million settlement received from the Developer, payable over 13 years, is in fact, sufficient to maintain the amenities to which we are contractually entitled. If not, it may, in the future, be necessary to either reopen the matter or initiate another lawsuit-- although the settlement did result in the Developer obtaining a release, which will complicate things. It is just too bad that the Developer's actions necessitated the class action in the first place.

In any event, in my view, we are all better off as a result of the class-action lawsuit than we would have been without it. Our amenities have, in fact, continued, facilities that were falling into disrepair have been repaired, and the cart path has been rebuilt north of 466. In other words, SO FAR the settlement has apparently worked out as intended. We will see what happens in the future-- but SO FAR, life is good.

I personally know most of the lead plaintiffs in the class action suit, and my feeling is that we all owe them a vote of thanks for taking the time and initiative to act on our behalf. I don't think that any of them was motivated by anything other than what they perceived to be in the best interests of the residents.

In regard to the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees, they don't strike me as being outrageously high-- considering the amount recovered, the complexity and difficulty of the case and the possibility that the attorneys would have gotten nothing had they not won. (It is my understanding that this was not a situation in which the Developer simply had an epiphany, rolled over, and voluntarily coughed up the money to continue the amenities at the promised level.) Put in simple terms, if you get me $47 million (even spread over 13 years) to which I am entitled and otherwise am not going to get, I'll give you $6.7 million without batting an eye.

In essence, as a result of the efforts of the plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit, we residents recovered, from the Developer, $40 million payable over 13 years. Both you and I hope that it is enough to continue the amenities' system. If not, we will all have problems that will have to be addressed.

[tonyafd]

This will probably result in a heavy fine if there is a conviction. The rich don't go to prison in this country.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by tonyafd

This will probably result in a heavy fine if there is a conviction. The rich don't go to prison in this country.

I keep saying this. If you get up early and work hard and if you do things better than the next person, than in this country it is likely that you will have more money than you need for basic things. If you keep doing it, and don't take much time off and work long hours and cover your squares, it won't be a surprise if you become rich.

There is no shame in being rich. There is shame in breaking laws. But NO shame in being rich.

[downeaster]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I keep saying this. If you get up early and work hard and if you do things better than the next person, than in this country it is likely that you will have more money than you need for basic things. If you keep doing it, and don't take much time off and work long hours and cover your squares, it won't be a surprise if you become rich.

There is no shame in being rich. There is shame in breaking laws. But NO shame in being rich.

I think it was Ella Fitzgerald who said, "I have been poor and I have been rich. Rich is better".

[collie1228]

I have a couple money quotes I like - no idea who originated them, and I certainly don't have them perfect:

Money may not make you happy, but it will at least you'll be miserable in comfort. And money doesn't make you happy, I have 50 million, and I was just as happy when I had 40 million.