[ejp52]

Originally Posted by cabo35

Count me in with SteveZ.

[GMONEY]

Originally Posted by ejp52

I agree


besdies I am reaching for the Flag on the I can not post unless it is approved GIMMIC!! That is a Personal Foul, I need to flag someone soon.. I even mad a comment on here that should of been banned and it went on soon as I hit the button. I heard about it later, but it was on there for everyone to see.

Money Out

[Russ_Boston]

G - Now I know what to buy you for your birthday - Virtual yellow flags!

Admin - we need some flag smiles!

[GMONEY]

Originally Posted by Russ_Boston

G - Now I know what to buy you for your birthday - Virtual yellow flags!

Admin - we need some flag smiles!

That would be thing. Wish I had them on here and could throw them at will.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by Advogado

Folks,
Read the book Lesiureville to learn about the deterioration of other senior communities and to get some insight into what goes on behind the scenes here (just ignore some of the book's minor inaccuracies, sensationalism, and depiction of The Villages as a site of senior sexual depravity).

The whole book should be ignored....all was written to sell books.
Why should the "behind the scenes" be any more sensational than the sex at Katie Bells?

[SteveZ]

All of the "outcry" and "commentary" has tried to insinuate the developer is shady, doing dastardly deeds, and out to snooker the elderly through legal loopholing. Balderdash!

From my readings, throughout this entire bond experience, the developer had acquired exceptional legal counsel from what is arguably one of the most (if not THE most) prestigious law firms in Florida (Akerman Senterffitt), highly experienced in CDDs. What goes on with the running of these CDDs is occurring statewide, so the battle is concerned with selected folk within the fed, many years downstream, looking at Florida state law from a different view than previously done, and seeing a possiblity of fed revenue acquisition through "redefinition." So, other CDDs, not just TV, have interest in this TV-fed matter, as Florida state law is what's on the challenge table.

So, as the discussions, negotiations, and other legal wranglings go on between TV and the fed, life still goes on for the rest of us. If the fed position is a reversal from earlier, then the potential for litigation, through Tax Court, There may even be a constitutional issue, impacting again which court(s) may be involved.

If there will be any impact to any TV resident, present or future, is total and utter speculation. And it's easy to get us "older folk" spooked by any accusation, implied or direct, that our security is being jeopardized and that our financial plans (pretty well fixed by this point) may be in some danger.

Ms. Ritchie is exercising her First Amendment right to state her opinions as she sees fit, and the Orlando Sentinel likewise is exercising its First Amendment right to publish her opinion (and make money at it as well). My First Amendment right to discount the insinuations is my choice, as I hate dealing in a whole lot of guessing games where sharp legal minds will be working on this in good faith for probably a very long time. And since no one can provide any scenario in which doom and gloom is prevalent, I'm back to LSL for a $1.75 Margarita at 5PM.

It's a beautiful day in The Villages.

[Bogie Shooter]

As always the voice of reason. Well done!

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by SteveZ

All of the "outcry" and "commentary" has tried to insinuate the developer is shady, doing dastardly deeds, and out to snooker the elderly through legal loopholing. Balderdash!

From my readings, throughout this entire bond experience, the developer had acquired exceptional legal counsel from what is arguably one of the most (if not THE most) prestigious law firms in Florida (Akerman Senterffitt), highly experienced in CDDs. What goes on with the running of these CDDs is occurring statewide, so the battle is concerned with selected folk within the fed, many years downstream, looking at Florida state law from a different view than previously done, and seeing a possiblity of fed revenue acquisition through "redefinition." So, other CDDs, not just TV, have interest in this TV-fed matter, as Florida state law is what's on the challenge table.

So, as the discussions, negotiations, and other legal wranglings go on between TV and the fed, life still goes on for the rest of us. If the fed position is a reversal from earlier, then the potential for litigation, through Tax Court, There may even be a constitutional issue, impacting again which court(s) may be involved.

If there will be any impact to any TV resident, present or future, is total and utter speculation. And it's easy to get us "older folk" spooked by any accusation, implied or direct, that our security is being jeopardized and that our financial plans (pretty well fixed by this point) may be in some danger.

Ms. Ritchie is exercising her First Amendment right to state her opinions as she sees fit, and the Orlando Sentinel likewise is exercising its First Amendment right to publish her opinion (and make money at it as well). My First Amendment right to discount the insinuations is my choice, as I hate dealing in a whole lot of guessing games where sharp legal minds will be working on this in good faith for probably a very long time. And since no one can provide any scenario in which doom and gloom is prevalent, I'm back to LSL for a $1.75 Margarita at 5PM.

It's a beautiful day in The Villages.

Steve!

Your mama didn't have any dumb kids!!!

[GMONEY]

Originally Posted by SteveZ

All of the "outcry" and "commentary" has tried to insinuate the developer is shady, doing dastardly deeds, and out to snooker the elderly through legal loopholing. Balderdash!

From my readings, throughout this entire bond experience, the developer had acquired exceptional legal counsel from what is arguably one of the most (if not THE most) prestigious law firms in Florida (Akerman Senterffitt), highly experienced in CDDs. What goes on with the running of these CDDs is occurring statewide, so the battle is concerned with selected folk within the fed, many years downstream, looking at Florida state law from a different view than previously done, and seeing a possiblity of fed revenue acquisition through "redefinition." So, other CDDs, not just TV, have interest in this TV-fed matter, as Florida state law is what's on the challenge table.

So, as the discussions, negotiations, and other legal wranglings go on between TV and the fed, life still goes on for the rest of us. If the fed position is a reversal from earlier, then the potential for litigation, through Tax Court, There may even be a constitutional issue, impacting again which court(s) may be involved.

If there will be any impact to any TV resident, present or future, is total and utter speculation. And it's easy to get us "older folk" spooked by any accusation, implied or direct, that our security is being jeopardized and that our financial plans (pretty well fixed by this point) may be in some danger.

Ms. Ritchie is exercising her First Amendment right to state her opinions as she sees fit, and the Orlando Sentinel likewise is exercising its First Amendment right to publish her opinion (and make money at it as well). My First Amendment right to discount the insinuations is my choice, as I hate dealing in a whole lot of guessing games where sharp legal minds will be working on this in good faith for probably a very long time. And since no one can provide any scenario in which doom and gloom is prevalent, I'm back to LSL for a $1.75 Margarita at 5PM.

It's a beautiful day in The Villages.

After this well put statement espcially the 1.75 part nothing else be said. If so, Russ B I hope you got my Flags ready!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Russ_Boston]

[GMONEY]

Originally Posted by Russ_Boston

Now were talking..

[Frangyomory]

I am glad I am hearing about all this "shenanigans" by the developer. I have been lured by the promise of "Utopia" too....BUT this IRS business has prompted me to delve a little deeper into the inner workings of TV.
I have worked for many developers and I know most of them to be very cost conscious. By developing so many homes, they have the costs pared down to the bare minimum. They have the materials, time and other factors involved down to a tee. This maximizes the profit they can attain. In business there are three things you can give your customers. Quality, quantity, and low cost ......BUT you cannot give all three at the same time. I have been hesitant to buy in TV due to several factors.

This is in regard to the lack of taxes paid by the developer on the earnings from amenities which is not yet resolved.

First off, the prices of homes being bought by everyone have been premium prices for Florida. The Villages is in the middle of a cow pasture.....not even near the coast where the prices are similar.

I do not agree with his comparison of our community and a cow pasture!!!

Second, The developer sold you your home based on "free Golf" and other amenities......The fees for these amenities were NOT included in the price of your home.....see amenities fees

Technically, if you can walk the course, you play golf on executive courses for free.

Third, The developer then charged you a "bond" fee not charged anywhere else in Florida. Most places in Florida you buy a home and the "fees" are included.....even with all these extra fees included, the price of a home in Florida is still inexpensive.

As you know, anytime you buy in a specified community such as condo, etc. you pay for the use of the recreation programs. I don't think $135 a month is that much to ask for all that we have.

Fourth, Let's look at comparable homes throughout Florida, You just do NOT get the same bang for your buck in TV as you would elsewhere. The value of The Villages is their amenities for which you pay a premium. My home is double the size of most in TV and is half the price.....with the savings, I can get a golf membership at an non-crowded course and play anywhere I would like.

If you are looking ONLY at the actual home, he is correct. However, when you buy in the Villages, you purchase lifestyle, not just a home.

Fifth, I had been concerned about build out. When a developer is still building in the development, he is concerned about keeping everything in excellent condition and "fees" very low to attract buyers. When build out occurs, the developer leaves and "fees" skyrocket. THIS IS THE NORM....not some dream I had, I have seen this repeatedly. Oh you own the amenities you say ! ....not quite
Someone (developer or cronies) owns not only the amenities, but the right to charge you more...... and they will exercise that right when able to.

As I understand it, the bond is for future infrastructure and we (The Community Development Districts) will ultimately "own" all the community buildings, etc. in the Villages.

The developer has found a way to sell homes on an old cow pasture for premium prices, get others to finance his amenities, which you all paid for but do not own, and build a "company store" in which you all live .

I believe that Mr. Schwartz (original developer) was a forward thinking person and good for him that he was able to buy land cheaply and turn it into a wonderful community for us to live in and enjoy. Making money was his original reason and that is the American Way so don't knock it. If you don't like it here, get involved in change or move.

It is the "company store" that none of you bought......just owe your sole to.

Couldn't disagree more!!!

[Halle]

We love TV and I know it has been said over and over again but we did buy in TV for the Lifestyle! Our TV home is the fourth we have owned in Florida so we have personal knowledge of the Florida housing market. I also sold real estate in Florida and yes we could have bought a bigger house somewhere else but always remember the mantra,

Location! Location! Location!

Originally Posted by GeorgeN

I It is the "company store" that none of you bought......just owe your sole to.

I don't have any Sole can I pay in Catfish?

[GatbTester]

All of us in TV have bought into the planned communities with all the amenities and activities we all enjoy. That being said, I am willing to bet not too many of us knew or gave much thought to the possible negatives such as the bond issue or what happens to price control when build out arrives. It would be only natural to expect our costs to go skyward upon being released from the developer's envolvement. How much depends on what each of us can stand, figured out most likely on the purchase price of our homes and the tied in issue of the bond. It would not surprise me to see our monthly costs to jump 20-25%. The bond issue will be settled in a court of law, where it should be. In my opinion, the bond contains items that should have been included in the price of the home, not used to allow the developer a distinct monetary advantage. Time will tell.

[Yoda]

Wow, this is serious!

Yoda