[PennBF]

At the last POA meeting there was a summary of the IRS problems and in the POA August on line web site there is to be a factual summary as to how The Villages got to where it is and the various options. It was an excellant presentation by the POA along with a number of Q & A's. It is a shame more could not have attended the meeting to get some factual insight into the conditions.

[The Shadow]

Thank you so much for posting this information. As a want to be buyer I look for information like this daily. Can you tell me if a timetable for a resolution to the problem was discussed?

[PennBF]

The POA summary and details will be posted on their web site in August. The website is WWW.poa4us.org. The time tables are really very fluid depending upon a number of considerations. I think that if you read the POA posting you will have a a very good idea as to the background, the current complexities, and the problem in predicting an outcome.

[The Shadow]

Thanks again.

[The Shadow]

Originally Posted by PennBF

The POA summary and details will be posted on their web site in August. The website is WWW.poa4us.org. The time tables are really very fluid depending upon a number of considerations. I think that if you read the POA posting you will have a a very good idea as to the background, the current complexities, and the problem in predicting an outcome.

It’s Aug 3. When is this scheduled to be posted.

[PennBF]

I understand it will be on the POA web site in August so it should be posted pretty soon. It is a shame that more residents don't join and attend the POA meetings. They gave a very indepth explanation of the IRS conditions as it relates to the Villages. The POA is truly an advocate for the residents.

[Advogado]

I believe that the POA August Bulletin was e-mailed today to all POA members who had given the POA an e-mail address.

It contains a synopsis and analysis of the IRS controversy and explains its potential impact on Villagers. I would assume that it will be posted on the POA website within the next couple of days: http://www.poa4us.org/

Because of budgetary constraints, the August Bulletin is not being published in hard copy. That is too bad, given the importance of the IRS issue to residents and the lack of coverage by The Daily Sun.

[The Shadow]

It is now on line.

[Muncle]

A decent issue in that there are a couple columns which lay out policies, procedures, and histories that are readily available elsewhere but can be confusing. The explanation of acronyms and terms is helpful to the uninformed. However, the exceedingly long column on the IRS issue revealed absolutely nothing that has not been hashed and rehashed to nausea in this forum. And, like a Lauren Ritchie column, much of it was pure supposition, a series of "what ifs" with no basis or proof for the conclusions. On the purely positive side, no trees died.

One bit of news was included, the the POA was engaging a lawyer. The author bemoaned the fact that these legal costs would hurt the POA. That somewhat surprised me because I thought the modus operandi was for a klatch of POA VIPs to hire the lawyer so they could split the profit.

But other than that, and a few other things, typically good job, POA.




`

[The Shadow]

What I gleaned from the article is that the CDD has not responded to the May 18, 2009 offer to settle the investigation by (a) repurchasing $355M in bonds (b) pay 3M in back taxes (c) agree not to issue tax exempt bonds in the future.

As a result of not settling the IRS is expanding its investigation.

The POA is concerned that an IRS victory could result in cost being passed on to the residents.

Given that, I would think it safe to say the CDD does not have $355M and the POA is spending the money it uses to publish the “The POA Bulletin” to pay for legal counsel.

When a big bully/brother takes your lunch what chance do you have of negotiating the return of you lunch?

If I was authoring this as a movie it would go like this. The 5 people in the CDD would quit and retire to Belize, the IRS would take over the CDD property and liquidate it to settle the tax debt and the home owners would no longer pay amenity fees.

[PennBF]

It is clear some do not know the facts and have some anger at the POA. 1. As I understand it the POA took the risk of 2 lawsuits to protect the property owners and in both cases they prevailed and the court ruled in the POA favor and the property owners benifited. 2. There were 3 or 4 on the POA that actually risked their own money to fight the suits as if they lost they potentially would have big legal fees to personally pay. It was so unfair to accuse them of profiting. Who else in the community put their personal dollars at risk for the residents for the little personal funds they received in return. End result was $40M+ awared for the Residents which did exist before the suit. 3. What other agency is hiring an attorney for the sole purpoase of protecting the property owners? It may be worthwhile for those that are critical to attend the monthly member meetings of the POA to understand what is really going on. As I understand it the POA was established in 1975 and is the oldest organization working only for the property owners. Please remember that in both lawsuits the POA prevailed. In the first the original contracts made was restored after they were to be cancelled and those property owners continue to benifit from that suit and in the second $40M+ was brought back to the Villages for improvements. Sounds pretty good to me..!!! I guess it is fair to ask what would some of you do to protect the property owners. Critics are easy to find they are everywhere as its easy to be critical.. It is more difficult to find creative people who are willing to work and stick their necks out.

[The Shadow]

The 2 lawsuits you refer to did not involve the IRS, correct? It’s hard to fight the guy that makes the rules.

I am curious why a homeowner would not belong to the POA?

[PennBF]

I understand the IRS was not involved in either of the suits that were brought by the POA. Allegedly the first suit was to restore the contracts which were agreed to when the original property owners bought and which there was an attempt to cancel them and the second involved the lack of maintenance dollars set aside, (e.g.the Paradise CC, etc.). Not sure of the details on this. In both cases the POA prevailed in the courts and the property owners were the real winners. I agree with you, I do know understand why everyone does not belong to the POA since it is a basic organization without conflicts which represent the owners.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by PennBF

I understand the IRS was not involved in either of the suits that were brought by the POA. Allegedly the first suit was to restore the contracts which were agreed to when the original property owners bought and which there was an attempt to cancel them and the second involved the lack of maintenance dollars set aside, (e.g.the Paradise CC, etc.). Not sure of the details on this. In both cases the POA prevailed in the courts and the property owners were the real winners. I agree with you, I do know understand why everyone does not belong to the POA since it is a basic organization without conflicts which represent the owners.

The major class-action lawsuit ($40 million payment by the Developer) is summarized at http://www.poa4us.org/ Click on the Lawsuit Settlement link.
The IRS was not involved, but it appears that there is one common issue in both that lawsuit and the IRS investigation-- the pricing by the Developer in selling amenity facilities and amenity contracts to the Villages Center District.

As to the question of why every doesn't belong to the POA, I think that there are four reasons:

While, in my view, everyone, as a matter of civic responsibility, should belong to and support the POA, the main reason that they don't is apathy. Public apathy exists in The Villages, like it does everywhere else. In fact there may be a bit more of it in The Villages since we all bought our houses there in hopes of a worry-free, fun-filled retirement. It is certainly a lot more pleasant to free-ride off the work of the POA--like the $40 million lawsuit settlement, which involved a tremendous amount of work by POA members, than it is to get involved. Most Villagers don't realize that without the $3 million/year being repaid to the Center District by the Developer under that settlement, the present level of amenities would not exist.

A second reason is that the traditionally acerbic tone of past articles in the POA Bulletin has turned some people off. A problem is that only people who are really passionate about an issue will take the time to investigate it (most of the issues are not simple ones) and write about it. I do think, however, that in recent issues, an effort has been made to use more measured language.

A third reason is that the local so-called newspaper is controlled by the Developer and buries, downplays, or spins stories (such as the IRS investigation) that could reflect unfavorably on the Developer or on The Villages itself. Villagers not reading the POA Bulletin or writing it off as the views of a bunch of malcontents generally aren't fully aware of those actions taken by the Developer that negatively impact, or could negatively impact, the residents. For example, there has been better coverage of the IRS investigation in the Orlando Sentinel (although sensationalized and containing inaccuracies) and NY Times than in the Daily Sun.

THE fourth reason why everyone does not join the POA is that the Developer supports a rival organization, the Villages Homeowner Association. The VHA which does perform some useful civic activities, in no way represents the interests of the Homeowners when they conflict with those of the Developer. In fact, its very existence is a patent attempt by the Developer to weaken the POA. In my view, the VHA ought to rethink its objectives, break with the Developer, and merge with the POA so that we would have one unified, independent, homeowners' organization representing our interests.

[PennBF]

I have just a simple question. On Page 4 of the VHA Voice Newspaper in the circle it indicates that the VHA and the Deveoper are Partners. The question is if there is a conflict between the Developer and the Property Owners who will represent the Property Owners if the VHA Partner is the Developer? As I understand it that is the role of the POA. Thus it makes sense for Property Owners to join the POA in order to ensure their interests are also represented.