[OldDave]

I'm not trying to start yet another argument about the developer, but I would like to ask anyone who ACTUALLY KNOWS a question.

Do I understand the IRS complaint correctly? The CDD model has been used for each of the districts made up of homes. Those are not in question by the IRS because the bond money was deemed to have been used for the public good. The two districts that are in question are Spanish Springs and Lake Sumter because they do not contain homes, and are therefore not using the bond money for the public good.

Do I have this right? If so, and the IRS rules against the developer, who gets in trouble? I think someone earlier stated that it would not be the developer, but he would be banned from applying for this kind of bonds in the future, for any purpose including more houses. Does anyone actually know?

Please do me a favor and don't respond with any emotional outcries for or against the developer. I think we had enough of that earlier. I really want to know if there are some lawyers on here or someone else who actually understands the merits of the complaint.

I do want to point one other thing out. Everyone who has had something negative to say about the developer keeps talking about him running out on the community after the build out. Again, if I understand this correctly, after the build out there won't be much to run out on.

The homes are sold to a CDD after they are completed. And while the developer controls the board with his people, he has no legal obligation to the district because he no longer owns it. He would, in the end, only own common things like the three squares, the golf courses, and any commercial land being leased to stores he doesn't own. Naturally I think the golf courses could be sold pretty easily, at least the country clubs. We were just reading that had been done across the street. I don't know about the executive courses. I suppose those could be sold to the CDDs. Since he controls the boards, they would likely approve it. And I think most of the landscaping falls to the CDDs other than the most central areas. Is that correct?

So again, if you have some pretty good knowledge of what is actually at risk and for whom, I'd really like to hear from you.

Thanks.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by OldDave

I'm not trying to start yet another argument about the developer, but I would like to ask anyone who ACTUALLY KNOWS a question.

Do I understand the IRS complaint correctly? The CDD model has been used for each of the districts made up of homes. Those are not in question by the IRS because the bond money was deemed to have been used for the public good. The two districts that are in question are Spanish Springs and Lake Sumter because they do not contain homes, and are therefore not using the bond money for the public good.

Do I have this right? If so, and the IRS rules against the developer, who gets in trouble? I think someone earlier stated that it would not be the developer, but he would be banned from applying for this kind of bonds in the future, for any purpose including more houses. Does anyone actually know?

Please do me a favor and don't respond with any emotional outcries for or against the developer. I think we had enough of that earlier. I really want to know if there are some lawyers on here or someone else who actually understands the merits of the complaint.

I do want to point one other thing out. Everyone who has had something negative to say about the developer keeps talking about him running out on the community after the build out. Again, if I understand this correctly, after the build out there won't be much to run out on.

The homes are sold to a CDD after they are completed. And while the developer controls the board with his people, he has no legal obligation to the district because he no longer owns it. He would, in the end, only own common things like the three squares, the golf courses, and any commercial land being leased to stores he doesn't own. Naturally I think the golf courses could be sold pretty easily, at least the country clubs. We were just reading that had been done across the street. I don't know about the executive courses. I suppose those could be sold to the CDDs. Since he controls the boards, they would likely approve it. And I think most of the landscaping falls to the CDDs other than the most central areas. Is that correct?

So again, if you have some pretty good knowledge of what is actually at risk and for whom, I'd really like to hear from you.
Thanks.

Wouldn't we all like know! Your best bet is to go to districtgov.org and read the legal papers. Village Community Development Districts
BTW, where did you hear that the homes are sold to the CDD after they are completed......this is totally false.

[OldDave]

You're correct. I misspoke. The infrastructure of the village is sold to the CDD: pools, landscaping, rec centers, etc. Again, if I understand it correctly. The homes belong to you, and are still out of the developers hands, which was the point I was trying to make.

[perrjojo]

Old Dave, if we only commented on what we actually know as fact, there wouldn't be much to say on this board. :-)

[golf2140]

Thde folks who bought the bonds.

[rubicon]

The issue is very complex and involves the issuing of Recreational Revenue
Bonds Series 2003A and Subordinated Recreational Revenue Bonds Series 2003B on 3/31/2003 for facilties and the stream of amenity income. The basic question: Is the VCCDD a qualified issuer of tax-exempt bonds?

The IRS is exploring that fact and also the valuations used to complete the various transactions between the VCCDD and The Villages of Lake Sumter, Inc. The Villages of Lake Sumter, Inc and the VCCDD claim what they did was legal under Chapter 190 and that the valuation methods utlized are standard and mathematically correct.

given the complexity it may take a number of years for this action to be decided.

The POA is following this case closely

[ilovetv]

There's good information in this article:

http://www.districtgov.org/images/IR...S%20Update.pdf

[seeking truth]

Short version is, the developer has by Fl. law passed control of the CDD Bd. on to residents. Google Florida CDD Laws statute 190

[graciegirl]

Old Dave,

PM EDV previously called Edvin Mass, or go to search (above) for his name. He is very articulate on the subject. You will find his posts helpful and informative and not biased at all. He lives in Stonecrest.

[bonrich]

This topic has been hashed and rehashed for a long time, and the way I personally see it, the legalities and arguments are way beyond my comprehension, and it looks that is the way it is for our learned officials, since they cannot come up with a solid resolve. Legal, or just when two sides can agree to a solution to all sides involved and gives them the satisfaction of having a "win". Either way it is out of our hands and it doesn't help to chew it to death.
Enjoy and live with gusto with what we have, every day, and when the hammer falls, that is when we will have to deal with it, whatever it will be, but at least at that time it will have a name.

[mulligan]

As I have stated previously, the bonds have become a political football. Every time an IRS agent gets close to a conclusion, he/she gets promoted, and a new agent must take a year or two to get up to speed. There has not been one person with the confidence, integrity, or balls to make the call, and resolve the issue. I predict we will never see the end game.The other part of the problem is the interplay between state law, and the tax code. Do you expect a swift resolution to that sort of issue ?

[2BNTV]

The fact is, no one knows how the IRS issue is going to pan out. EdV is the most knowledgable on this subject and I agree with Gracie that you should PM him to see if he has more insight.

I personally think we will have one foot on the banana peel and one foot in the coffin befrore we even get close to a resolution. When the lawyers get though fightiing this issue, they will be the only winners. IMHO

It is far beyond me, to understand this issue.

[Mikeod]

Originally Posted by 2BNTV

I personally think we will have one foot on the banana peel and one foot in the coffin befrore we even get close to a resolution. When the lawyers get though fightiing this issue, they will be the only winners. IMHO

It is far beyond me, to understand this issue.

Not to mention that whenever the IRS issues a ruling there will be an appeal process that may take even longer.

[2BNTV]

Originally Posted by mikeod

Not to mention that whenever the IRS issues a ruling there will be an appeal process that may take even longer.

Appeals???? I was worried about banana peels.

[rubicon]

Perhaps I am the only one but honestly I find it very disturbing that village residents on TOTV believe the person having the best understanding of this action doesn't even live here and hence has no, and will never have any potential exposure. What does that say about the rest of us?