[Moderator]

The topic is the POA. Let's not turn this into another POA vs VHA argument with warring factions.

Moderator

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by Jazuela

Yeah it befuddles me that anyone would begrudge someone from being paid after spending countless hours grinding and sweating and toiling and researching to help support a cause they believe in. Where would the American Cancer Society be, if none of its employees or board members or department heads got paid? Why should the Developers get paid, when "all they did" was tell the towns and cities they planned on building there and showed up at meetings and drew pictures on paper to show the city managers their plans?

Being paid for work performed should be expected, when someone works their butt off on behalf of an entire community. It's time they're not spending earning money elsewhere, and they have bills to pay too.

As for the specific situation mentioned, Paradise Rec Center had to be rebuilt, and funding had to be set aside to benefit ALL of the Villages at the time, as a direct result of the suit. Without that lawsuit, without the POA, Paradise would eventually have gotten someone sick, or injured, the center would have been condemned, and the lawsuits would have been far more significant.

One doesn't need to live in a community to know how to read about it from all available public sources.

I LOVE that the POA, even while being the consummate underdog, is still right in there...fighting for us homeowners.

[PennBF]

What a good strategy by some writing in and digressing from subject to get this line of discussion to be forced off. The win for the Paradise CC was NOT for mold but rather rats in the building, rotting wood, mold etc. The POA fight was to force these to be fixed and to force a Reserve Fund to be established for all of the Villages. If you read Florida Statue 718 for Condo's you will see this has always been a law for a builder and Condo Management. In order to win this for the Residents there were about 4 POA Board members who put up their own money to proceed to protect the residents. How many of you would risk your own money to fight for the residents which did not live in your Village. I bet very few. Did the court recognize their devotion to helping their neighbors. You bet. Is the HOA evil. Of course not. It is an arm of the Developer to help him and her optimize their return on their investment. As an example, is the Developer responsible to pay the Amity Fees for homes built but not sold? Is the Developer responsible to pay the maintenance fees for Apt's built and not occupied, I think not. These are the kinds of issues the POA can review and help resolve. If the Developer does not pay for these then the Residents are paying for his normal building expenses.
The POA is essentially comparing some Condo laws as to how they relate to the CDD Statutes and what is fair. You will not read about these in the HOA since they may not be favorable to the Developer? As an exercise pull Florida Statue 718 and the statues relating to CDD and compare them. You will see in some abstract why the POA needs to exist.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by PennBF

What a good strategy by some writing in and digressing from subject to get this line of discussion to be forced off. The win for the Paradise CC was NOT for mold but rather rats in the building, rotting wood, mold etc. The POA fight was to force these to be fixed and to force a Reserve Fund to be established for all of the Villages. If you read Florida Statue 718 for Condo's you will see this has always been a law for a builder and Condo Management. In order to win this for the Residents there were about 4 POA Board members who put up their own money to proceed to protect the residents. How many of you would risk your own money to fight for the residents which did not live in your Village. I bet very few. Did the court recognize their devotion to helping their neighbors. You bet. Is the HOA evil. Of course not. It is an arm of the Developer to help him and her optimize their return on their investment. As an example, is the Developer responsible to pay the Amity Fees for homes built but not sold? Is the Developer responsible to pay the maintenance fees for Apt's built and not occupied, I think not. These are the kinds of issues the POA can review and help resolve. If the Developer does not pay for these then the Residents are paying for his normal building expenses.
The POA is essentially comparing some Condo laws as to how they relate to the CDD Statutes and what is fair. You will not read about these in the HOA since they may not be favorable to the Developer? As an exercise pull Florida Statue 718 and the statues relating to CDD and compare them. You will see in some abstract why the POA needs to exist.

Many of us lived here then too, and did not see things the way you do. I saw something completely different, watching personally the constant care and update of the Odell Center which we lived next to at the time. I saw them paint the center every year, weed and replace trees that died. I saw them powerwash the stone wall, every year. I saw them repair minor damage to the pool. The Odell Center was well taken care of. We lived on Havana Trail and that rec center was right behind us. I saw fences repaired along cart paths. I saw the green spaces kept immaculately. I saw no reason to have anyone hold feet to the fire at that time.

I think it wise to have a watchdog organization not related to The Developer, but I wish the one we have would represent ALL Villagers better. That is my opinion.

[justjim]

Obviously both the leadership and members of the POA and VHA are passionate regarding their organizations. One wouldn’t have it any other way. It is unfortunate that the two seem to not be able to work together on certain projects for the good of the residents of The Villages. The Moderator is correct that this thread or any thread shouldn’t be a forum for “warring factions” between the two organizations. It may be time for all of us to live for now and not the past. As someone once said, “As you get older, the questions come down to about two. How long? And what do I do with the time I have left”?

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by justjim

Obviously both the leadership and members of the POA and VHA are passionate regarding their organizations. One wouldn’t have it any other way. It is unfortunate that the two seem to not be able to work together on certain projects for the good of the residents of The Villages. The Moderator is correct that this thread or any thread shouldn’t be a forum for “warring factions” between the two organizations. It may be time for all of us to live for now and not the past. As someone once said, “As you get older, the questions come down to about two. How long? And what do I do with the time I have left”?

IOW - "Can't we all just get along?"

[Boomer]

Originally Posted by PennBF

What a good strategy by some writing in and digressing from subject to get this line of discussion to be forced off. The win for the Paradise CC was NOT for mold but rather rats in the building, rotting wood, mold etc. The POA fight was to force these to be fixed and to force a Reserve Fund to be established for all of the Villages. If you read Florida Statue 718 for Condo's you will see this has always been a law for a builder and Condo Management. In order to win this for the Residents there were about 4 POA Board members who put up their own money to proceed to protect the residents. How many of you would risk your own money to fight for the residents which did not live in your Village. I bet very few. Did the court recognize their devotion to helping their neighbors. You bet. Is the HOA evil. Of course not. It is an arm of the Developer to help him and her optimize their return on their investment. As an example, is the Developer responsible to pay the Amity Fees for homes built but not sold? Is the Developer responsible to pay the maintenance fees for Apt's built and not occupied, I think not. These are the kinds of issues the POA can review and help resolve. If the Developer does not pay for these then the Residents are paying for his normal building expenses.
The POA is essentially comparing some Condo laws as to how they relate to the CDD Statutes and what is fair. You will not read about these in the HOA since they may not be favorable to the Developer? As an exercise pull Florida Statue 718 and the statues relating to CDD and compare them. You will see in some abstract why the POA needs to exist.

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Many of us lived here then too, and did not see things the way you do. I saw something completely different, watching personally the constant care and update of the Odell Center which we lived next to at the time. I saw them paint the center every year, weed and replace trees that died. I saw them powerwash the stone wall, every year. I saw them repair minor damage to the pool. The Odell Center was well taken care of. We lived on Havana Trail and that rec center was right behind us. I saw fences repaired along cart paths. I saw the green spaces kept immaculately. I saw no reason to have anyone hold feet to the fire at that time.

I think it wise to have a watchdog organization not related to The Developer, but I wish the one we have would represent ALL Villagers better. That is my opinion.

Uh, oh, I was not going to get into this thread. I was in the one that got closed. I need to remember more often what one of my favorite writers said: "It is easier to stay out than to get out." -- Mark Twain

Oh well, here I go again: (sigh)

This lawsuit thing that is rearing its head has to be looked at on a timeline:

What gracie says here about the good maintenance of the area to which she refers is absolutely true. That is the area of LSL that was built in 2007-2008.

(The LSL section of TV started building during the height of the real estate market and was finishing up as things were slowing down. We first saw TV in 2007 but did not buy until a few years later. By then I knew the territory well and particularly wanted the LSL section where we found a pre-owned that had been beautifully maintained.)

Now, back to what I said about the timeline, the chronology of the POA lawsuit. It was settled in 2008, but I think things started in 2004.

The lawsuit was started to protect the historic side of TV which is lovely but was getting left behind when it came to the maintenance of Paradise. (Please see PennBF’s post quoted here above gracie's.)

I was glad to see the POA had watched out for the historic side, standing up for that area, the original part of TV which could have been left behind in the dust of all the new construction. Now, not only has Paradise had its dignity restored, but the historic side is enjoying some new building.

I shudder to think what could have happened to the historic section had it not been for the POA pursuing and eventually having to sue over what was happening to the Paradise Center.

Of course, now our maintenance throughout looks pretty darned good. (I am one who really likes all those flowers, too.)

And I am not saying that is happening because of that lawsuit. The maintenance is good because TV is a well-marketed operation growing like crazy.

The rec centers that were built later, like Eisenhower are absolutely beautiful. The military displays in Eisenhower are presented in museum quality.

But over on the historic side, with those lovely wide streets, and that welcoming Florida feel of where things started, there sits Paradise -- back to looking purdy -- thanks to the POA.

(I am seeing now that people here are beginning to talk about some of the LSL section CCs beginning to look a little long in the tooth. Let's hope the spiffing up is soon to come, where it is needed.)

poa4us.org is the website. If you scroll down on the left side, you will find a well organized listing of links to all their information. One of those links is "POA Accomplishments" and another has all the details on the lawsuit.

I cannot understand why the "Us vs.Them" attitude continues. The POA is watching out for all of us and does try to work "with" the developer. (We got a new roof from that working together. I wrote about that part in the thread that got closed.)

I feel good about the POA being in place -- with some very capable people willing to advocate for all of us.

Boomer
poa4us.org

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by Boomer

Uh, oh, I was not going to get into this thread. I was in the one that got closed. I need to remember more often what one of my favorite writers said: "It is easier to stay out than to get out." -- Mark Twain

Oh well, here I go again: (sigh)

This lawsuit thing that is rearing its head has to be looked at on a timeline:

What gracie says here about the good maintenance of the area to which she refers is absolutely true. That is the area of LSL that was built in 2007-2008.

(The LSL section of TV started building during the height of the real estate market and was finishing up as things were slowing down. We first saw TV in 2007 but did not buy until a few years later. By then I knew the territory well and particularly wanted the LSL section where we found a pre-owned that had been beautifully maintained.)

Now, back to what I said about the timeline, the chronology of the POA lawsuit. It was settled in 2008, but I think things started in 2004.

The lawsuit was started to protect the historic side of TV which is lovely but was getting left behind when it came to the maintenance of Paradise. (Please see BFPenn's post quoted here above gracie's.)

I was glad to see the POA had watched out for the historic side, standing up for that area, the original part of TV which could have been left behind in the dust of all the new construction. Now, not only has Paradise had its dignity restored, but the historic side is enjoying some new building.

I shudder to think what could have happened to the historic section had it not been for the POA pursuing and eventually having to sue over what was happening to the Paradise Center.

Of course, now our maintenance throughout looks pretty darned good. (I am one who really likes all those flowers, too.)

And I am not saying that is happening because of that lawsuit. The maintenance is good because TV is a well-marketed operation growing like crazy.

The rec centers that were built later, like Eisenhower are absolutely beautiful. The military displays in Eisenhower are presented in museum quality.

But over on the historic side, with those lovely wide streets, and that welcoming Florida feel of where things started, there sits Paradise -- back to looking purdy -- thanks to the POA.

(I am seeing now that people here are beginning to talk about some of the LSL section CCs beginning to look a little long in the tooth. Let's hope the spiffing up is soon to come, where it is needed.)

poa4us.org is the website. If you scroll down on the left side, you will find a well organized listing of links to all their information. One of those links is "POA Accomplishments" and another has all the details on the lawsuit.

I cannot understand why the "Us vs.Them" attitude continues. The POA is watching out for all of us and does try to work "with" the developer. (We got a new roof from that working together. I wrote about that part in the thread that got closed.)

I feel good about the POA being in place -- with some very capable people willing to advocate for all of us.

Boomer
poa4us.org

...COMPLETELY!


And you bring up a great point, of what the historical side might look like now...without the successful $40M lawsuit.

Hard to even fathom, anyone living there now and knowing the true history of the lawsuit...who could possibly be against it.

[bilcon]

It appears to me, that both organizations are doing a good job to keep TV on track. I agree with Jazuela's post that a balance is needed. Recently my wife and I looked at some other new retirement communities in Florida, but every time we come back here and see what we have, we feel confident that we picked the right place. It is not perfect, but we feel comfortable and safe here.


"I have never made a mistake in my life. I thought I did once, but I was wrong."

[PennBF]

A key to the behavior of the Villages was the absence of a part of the governing law which was "Reserve Funds". The Villages at the time did not put funds away in Reserve which was and is a law. It protects the property from being neglected with no funding in reserves for depreciation. Thus the $40M which was the result of the law suit and which the POA pursued to protect for future depreciation of property. As mentioned in a prior note this is mandatory in Condo Management in Florida. It is prudent to point out the result of the law suit did not only get Paradise CC back in shape but protected the residents in "The Villages" from future unfunded neglect. It is unfortunate the Developer considered this as punishment rather than a fair resolution to a very serious problem for residents. Not just at the time but in the future. There is great unselfish broad talent on the POA Board and it works hard as volunteers for you the residents and I am grateful they are there and willing to devote time for us. We owe them our gratitude.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by PennBF

A key to the behavior of the Villages was the absence of a part of the governing law which was "Reserve Funds". The Villages at the time did not put funds away in Reserve which was and is a law. It protects the property from being neglected with no funding in reserves for depreciation. Thus the $40M which was the result of the law suit and which the POA pursued to protect for future depreciation of property. As mentioned in a prior note this is mandatory in Condo Management in Florida. It is prudent to point out the result of the law suit did not only get Paradise CC back in shape but protected the residents in "The Villages" from future unfunded neglect. It is unfortunate the Developer considered this as punishment rather than a fair resolution to a very serious problem for residents. Not just at the time but in the future. There is great unselfish broad talent on the POA Board and it works hard as volunteers for you the residents and I am grateful they are there and willing to devote time for us. We owe them our gratitude.

I regularly use Laurel Manor Recreation center. For the last several months it has become obvious there is a leak in the roof that has damaged the ceiling in several areas (Possibly from Irma) Last week when we had a very bad rain, there were two big barrels catching the leaks. I stopped and asked the person in charge what was being done and she said that they are closing Laurel Manor for the month of July and doing a complete makeover. We recently were at Colony where they have done a major renovation of the interior including new flooring and reupholstering the furniture. repainting,etc. I don't know how these repairs are planned and scheduled but they are done very well when they are done.

I don't know how anyone can possibly know "the developer considered this punishment". I think that is calling for summary that is not available to anyone, is misleading and speculation.

[PennBF]

I was honestly going to ignore anything further on this thread BUT it appears some confuse the need to have funds available to make sure property is kept in workable shape to normal maintenance. I think Laurel Manor work to be done in July would fall under normal maintenance however if the Developer did not have the funds to repair and replace then "Reserved Funds" would be available for the depreciation To draw a comparison to home ownership. Most have funds set aside to cover unexpected damage and depreciation. If your normal funds would not cover some damages, etc. then you use some of the reserve funds set aside in case of under planned damages. Thus you now have the condition at the Paradise CC law suit. Terrible damages, rats in the walls, etc etc and the Developer did not set aside any funds to cover this asset in case of extraordinary problems. The Lawsuit was meant to force reserves in case of serious problems. The Court recognized this abandonment of protection by the Developer
and awarded monies to protect the property.
Think of as fund of money created to take care of maintenance, repairs or unexpected expenses of a business or a multi-unit housing development This was the underpinning of the Lawsuit. There is no relationship to the current Laurel Manor refurbishing.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by PennBF

I was honestly going to ignore anything further on this thread BUT it appears some confuse the need to have funds available to make sure property is kept in workable shape to normal maintenance. I think Laurel Manor work to be done in July would fall under normal maintenance however if the Developer did not have the funds to repair and replace then "Reserved Funds" would be available for the depreciation To draw a comparison to home ownership. Most have funds set aside to cover unexpected damage and depreciation. If your normal funds would not cover some damages, etc. then you use some of the reserve funds set aside in case of under planned damages. Thus you now have the condition at the Paradise CC law suit. Terrible damages, rats in the walls, etc etc and the Developer did not set aside any funds to cover this asset in case of extraordinary problems. The Lawsuit was meant to force reserves in case of serious problems. The Court recognized this abandonment of protection by the Developer
and awarded monies to protect the property.
Think of as fund of money created to take care of maintenance, repairs or unexpected expenses of a business or a multi-unit housing development This was the underpinning of the Lawsuit. There is no relationship to the current Laurel Manor refurbishing.

Thank you for the very clear and simple explanation...of the differences.


Hopefully, it's clear & simple enough...for everyone.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by PennBF

I was honestly going to ignore anything further on this thread BUT it appears some confuse the need to have funds available to make sure property is kept in workable shape to normal maintenance. I think Laurel Manor work to be done in July would fall under normal maintenance however if the Developer did not have the funds to repair and replace then "Reserved Funds" would be available for the depreciation To draw a comparison to home ownership. Most have funds set aside to cover unexpected damage and depreciation. If your normal funds would not cover some damages, etc. then you use some of the reserve funds set aside in case of under planned damages. Thus you now have the condition at the Paradise CC law suit. Terrible damages, rats in the walls, etc etc and the Developer did not set aside any funds to cover this asset in case of extraordinary problems. The Lawsuit was meant to force reserves in case of serious problems. The Court recognized this abandonment of protection by the Developer
and awarded monies to protect the property.
Think of as fund of money created to take care of maintenance, repairs or unexpected expenses of a business or a multi-unit housing development This was the underpinning of the Lawsuit. There is no relationship to the current Laurel Manor refurbishing.

No rats in walls. Here, this from Orlando Sentinel;

Villages settles lawsuit, will fund $40 million in recreation upgrades
Article Courtesy of The Orlando Sentinel
By Stephen Hudak
Published Match 9, 2008
"THE VILLAGES - The powerful developer and corporations behind The Villages have agreed in a civil court settlement to pay $40 million over 13 years to cover improvements and repairs to recreation centers, swimming pools and other facilities that make the retirement community alluring.

The class-action lawsuit contended monthly amenity fees paid by every homeowner in the sprawling community of 70,000 residents had been misused by The Villages of Lake-Sumter Inc., the Village Center Community Development District and developer H. Gary Morse.

Under the settlement, the money will replenish depleted accounts used to finance facility improvements and pay pool monitors, after-hours golf ambassadors and Neighborhood Watch staff.

The lawsuit was prompted by residents like Elaine Dreidame, 64, who complained about mildew and mold in the ceiling tiles of the Paradise Recreation Center, where she played bridge twice a week.

Dreidame, who moved to the retirement community in 1999, figured "Florida's Friendliest Hometown" had money set aside to improve its oldest recreational facility.

Well, not enough, she found out.

The retired university administrator from Dayton, Ohio, grew more concerned as she began noting similar, subtle drop-offs in other services throughout the community that she affectionately calls "year-round adult summer camp."

The money is supposed to be used to maintain the golf courses, swimming pools and other comforts that make The Villages a desirable home for active, older adults.

Long-shot lawsuit

The lawsuit seemed unlikely to succeed, according to court records showing that a retired judge and six major law firms from Tallahassee to Miami declined to take it.

But the case concluded last week in Lake County, where Circuit Judge Lawrence Semento approved a settlement agreement that requires the developer to pay about $40 million over the next 13 years to replenish maintenance accounts.

The settlement also requires the defendants to pay $50,000 each to Dreidame and four other named plaintiffs and $6.7 million to the plaintiffs' brother-sister legal team, Dougald McMillan and Carol McMillan Anderson.

Carol Anderson said she took the case because she lives in The Villages.

Her brother, a practicing lawyer for 50 years, was best known for prosecuting organized crime figure Meyer Lansky.

Through their defense lawyers, Stephen Johnson and Archie Lowery, Morse and the other defendants denied any wrongdoing or misappropriation.

"[The developer] has looked at the settlement as an issue of what's good for the community," Johnson said Wednesday in court.

The settlement includes confidentiality and nondisparagement clauses, which prevent the parties from discussing the case or criticizing Morse or The Villages.

'David and Goliath'

Donald Maciejewski, a Jacksonville lawyer who has handled mass-plaintiff air-disaster cases, called the lawsuit a "true David and Goliath" case, citing the defendants' financial strength.

In an affidavit submitted to the judge to justify attorney fees, Maciejewski said the novelty and complexity of the case suggested that the plaintiffs' chances for success were "virtually zero."

He also pointed out that McMillan and Anderson were "a last resort."

Dreidame had said that if the siblings wouldn't take their case, "she was going to drop the issue . . . and get back to enjoying retirement," Maciejewski said.

Anderson praised Morse and his lawyers, saying the settlement proves they have the community's best interest at heart.

Tee-time limits

The settlement also includes other provisions that can be classified as uniquely The Villages, including limits on the number of tee times that can be reserved by the developer's sales staff for prospective customers.

The developer also will provide money to widen six miles of golf-cart paths to better accommodate bicyclists, joggers and roller-skaters.

The agreement also creates a resident-controlled "Amenity Authority Committee" that will have a louder voice in the use of amenity fees."

[Northwoods]

Can I comment as someone who doesn't have all the animosity or "history" that seems to be going on in this thread? I don't belong to the POA or the VHA. I have NO skin in this game. This is my opinion...
I love it here. I moved here 5 years ago. Are there things that could be improved (golf courses to name one). Yes.
But is my goal to stick it to The Developer? No.
It is my PERCEPTION that the POA wants to "stick it" to the Developer. Why do I feel this way? I think you can read all the comments on this and many threads.
I would love to have an open dialogue with the Developer to fix issues. Any and all issues. But if it's an "us vs. them" mentality that's never going to happen.