[GoodLife]

see article at online news site

Steep increases in the Project Wide Advisory Committee funding are being attributed to Community Development District 12.
Community Development District 6 and 8 supervisors on Friday asked some pointed questions about increases to be paid for PWAC, which is made up of CDDs 5 through 12.
CDD 6 could see a 15 percent increase in its funding for PWAC. The CDD 6 PWAC budget for this year was $1.8 million and is projected to swell to $2.1 million next year.
There have been suspicions that the PWAC increases were for the Morse Boulevard bridge embankment project, but $2.1 million already has been tucked away for the possibility of that work.
Budget Director Barbara Kays on Friday said the PWAC increases are largely attributable to CDD 12, which includes the Village of Fenney, becoming a part of PWAC.
“I am confused as to how we are getting to this number,” said CDD 6 Supervisor John Calandro.
He indicated it appeared that existing CDD 6 residents would be paying for the upkeep of the multi-modal paths, landscaping and stormwater basins in CDD 12.
CDD 6 last month voted to keep its maintenance assessment at the same level for the coming fiscal year. Instead of raising the assessment, CDD 6 will dip into its reserves to make up the difference, something about which a CDD 6 supervisor expressed concern.
CDD 8 Supervisor Sal Torname said he is “troubled” by his district’s rising costs for PWAC.
He pointed out that 53 percent of the money CDD 8 residents are paying in maintenance assessment fees is going to PWAC. CDD 8 residents will not see an increase in the maintenance assessment rate for next year, even though the budget is increasing by $247,923. The difference is being made up by tapping into working capital.
“It is inevitable we will be forced to look at our assessment rate,” he said.
Torname called for tougher scrutiny of the PWAC budget.
It was pointed out that new golf cart bridges are going up over State Road 44 and the Florida Turnpike to connect the newer areas to The Villages.
“That infrastructure is ultimately going to come under our jurisdiction for maintenance,” noted CDD 8 Supervisor Duane Johnson.

[vintageogauge]

And?

[Kannon451]

Good life,
Thank you for your time and effort to keep us informed.

[Goldwingnut]

Once again that other web site had demonstrated its ability to selectively edit facts in an attempt to create outrage amongst the residents of The Villages.

It’s time to look at the numbers that are being discussed. Let’s start with District 12 as it appears to be the target of most of the badmouthing.

District 12 last year consisted mainly of the Village of Fenney last year and had a contribution to the project wide fund of $604,084, this year Phase 2 of District 12 was included in the budget doubling the size of the district and increasing their contribution to $1,744,088, an increase of $1,140,002. While this is a substantial increase (189%) it also makes since as there is more property going to be maintained, as they have more property they have more costs and will pay more.

The Project Wide budget for next fiscal year went up $1,937,808 over the current fiscal year of this District 12’s increased costs and contribution was $1,140,002 or a net increase of $797,806 to be distributed among districts 5 through 11, Brownwood, and Lake Sumter Landing.

This other $800K of increase is what is having to be absorbed by the other districts as an increase, well, almost. There is an additional $754,581 that needs to be added to this $797,806 bringing the total to $1,552,387. The $754,581 was Project Wide Working Capital funds that were used this fiscal year to fund the budget as the working capital budget was over funded. It was determined to be better to not to increase assessments to the districts (and residents) last year with this fund being over funded and instead draw the fund down by supplementing the budget. So, we all dodged the bullet last year for maintenance assessment increase because the working capital budget had been building up over the last few years. The excesses are now back in line and it’s time to pay bills.

This $1.55M in increases is with needs to be understood. There are two major sources of this increase: 1) contracted services increases and 2) increased maintenance costs.

The contracted services are the biggest increase and includes all the services that are not self-executed by the District staff – landscaping maintenance, villa road maintenance, irrigation system maintenance, pond maintenance, tree maintenance, the list is many and numerous – all of these services have had substantial increases. All of these services are competitively bid and, in most cases, contracts are awarded based on lowest price. There are many reasons why these costs have gone up but the bottom line is that the businesses that perform this work are not charities and must make a profit to survive, if their costs go up, their prices go up, we have to pay the increases.

The increased maintenance cost is, while it seems redundant of above is a different issue, the result of the districts aging and infrastructures needing higher levels of maintenance and replacement due to age. The Capital Improvement Plan covers these items and is project to be $280K. This cost will continue to increase annually as the areas south of CR466 continue to age.

District 12 is also paying a part of these increases, of the $1,140K increase they are paying next fiscal year, about $236K of this increase is their portion of these cost increases.

Yes, the District 12 budget increased significantly but it is not the cause of the increases that the individual districts are seeing. In fact, the additional acreage added to District 12 results in a lower cost to each of the districts because of the way these costs are distributed. Each district has a fixed acreage that represents a percentage of the total acreage, District 12’s additional acreage increases the total and decreases the other district’s percentage of the whole. This happened previously when District 11 (Fruitland Park area) was added.

As for the comment of the money set aside for the island revetment work, the other web site’s statement makes this sound a nefarious undertaking by PWAC, it is far from that. PWAC has been anticipating this cost and has been setting aside funds to cover the work. Until the true costs are known – the $1.7M frequently mentioned is an engineering estimate not a firm price – these funds will continue to be held in reserve. I don’t want to delve further into this topic now as it is complex and lots of misinformation is flying about.

The budgeting process and operation of The Villages as a community is extremely complex and each budget and entity is different from the others. For those residents and Supervisors that are “concerned” or “troubled” or that may want “tougher scrutiny” of the Project Wide and Amenities budgets I would suggest educating yourselves by attending the monthly meetings and annual budget workshops that occur and are open to the public for examination, comments, and input. All the information is there for the asking.

And for those that love to get on the “the developer needs to pay more” bandwagon, they are. Almost the entire increase in the District 12 budget and project wide assessment associated with Phase 2 of District 12 (about $1.6M) is paid by the developer. Phase 2 of District 12 includes the Villages of McClure, Marsh Bend, De Luna, Linden, and Monarch Grove, which if you have been watching my drone videos, are still very much under construction. They will continue to pay the annual maintenance assessment on each home until it is sold, built or not.

Just for informational purposes, Districts 9 and 12 are nearly identical in size and have similar project wide assessments. Last year Districts 12 was about the same size as 11 and paid a similar assessment to the project wide funding. All of the numbers and information I have given here are available for everyone to review on the districtgov.org web site.

As for that other site, its articles are frequently yellow journalism at its lowest level with sensualism being an obvious part of their business model in order to drive web traffic and their profits. It is sad that they have chosen to take the route of maligning the community, developer, and the residents that they so often do when a much better service would be to educate and inform, but then I guess there is little to be made that way.

My fellow residents I urge you all to educate yourselves and try to understand how this unique and incredible community we all live in works and functions, this is the purpose of many of my posts. If we leave it up to those that shout the loudest about every little thing, then that mob rule mentality will surely ruin both this community and our retirements.

[jdguscinski]

Goldwing - there is NO way that district 9 and 12 are the same size!!!

[graciegirl]

There will be no upcharge to any of us personally. This is internal savings and disbursements. Monies have been targeted for these things, including the bridge repair. There have been monies every year to paint and keep this place in good repair. Deep breaths.


Relax. Nothing is changing. There has never been one of those horrible assessments like golf course communities have suffered elsewhere. PLEASE read what Goldwing said above again. And then read it again.

NO. I don't work for the developer. I don't know any of them.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Goldwingnut

Once again that other web site had demonstrated its ability to selectively edit facts in an attempt to create outrage amongst the residents of The Villages.

It’s time to look at the numbers that are being discussed. Let’s start with District 12 as it appears to be the target of most of the badmouthing.

District 12 last year consisted mainly of the Village of Fenney last year and had a contribution to the project wide fund of $604,084, this year Phase 2 of District 12 was included in the budget doubling the size of the district and increasing their contribution to $1,744,088, an increase of $1,140,002. While this is a substantial increase (189%) it also makes since as there is more property going to be maintained, as they have more property they have more costs and will pay more.

The Project Wide budget for next fiscal year went up $1,937,808 over the current fiscal year of this District 12’s increased costs and contribution was $1,140,002 or a net increase of $797,806 to be distributed among districts 5 through 11, Brownwood, and Lake Sumter Landing.

This other $800K of increase is what is having to be absorbed by the other districts as an increase, well, almost. There is an additional $754,581 that needs to be added to this $797,806 bringing the total to $1,552,387. The $754,581 was Project Wide Working Capital funds that were used this fiscal year to fund the budget as the working capital budget was over funded. It was determined to be better to not to increase assessments to the districts (and residents) last year with this fund being over funded and instead draw the fund down by supplementing the budget. So, we all dodged the bullet last year for maintenance assessment increase because the working capital budget had been building up over the last few years. The excesses are now back in line and it’s time to pay bills.

This $1.55M in increases is with needs to be understood. There are two major sources of this increase: 1) contracted services increases and 2) increased maintenance costs.

The contracted services are the biggest increase and includes all the services that are not self-executed by the District staff – landscaping maintenance, villa road maintenance, irrigation system maintenance, pond maintenance, tree maintenance, the list is many and numerous – all of these services have had substantial increases. All of these services are competitively bid and, in most cases, contracts are awarded based on lowest price. There are many reasons why these costs have gone up but the bottom line is that the businesses that perform this work are not charities and must make a profit to survive, if their costs go up, their prices go up, we have to pay the increases.

The increased maintenance cost is, while it seems redundant of above is a different issue, the result of the districts aging and infrastructures needing higher levels of maintenance and replacement due to age. The Capital Improvement Plan covers these items and is project to be $280K. This cost will continue to increase annually as the areas south of CR466 continue to age.

District 12 is also paying a part of these increases, of the $1,140K increase they are paying next fiscal year, about $236K of this increase is their portion of these cost increases.

Yes, the District 12 budget increased significantly but it is not the cause of the increases that the individual districts are seeing. In fact, the additional acreage added to District 12 results in a lower cost to each of the districts because of the way these costs are distributed. Each district has a fixed acreage that represents a percentage of the total acreage, District 12’s additional acreage increases the total and decreases the other district’s percentage of the whole. This happened previously when District 11 (Fruitland Park area) was added.

As for the comment of the money set aside for the island revetment work, the other web site’s statement makes this sound a nefarious undertaking by PWAC, it is far from that. PWAC has been anticipating this cost and has been setting aside funds to cover the work. Until the true costs are known – the $1.7M frequently mentioned is an engineering estimate not a firm price – these funds will continue to be held in reserve. I don’t want to delve further into this topic now as it is complex and lots of misinformation is flying about.

The budgeting process and operation of The Villages as a community is extremely complex and each budget and entity is different from the others. For those residents and Supervisors that are “concerned” or “troubled” or that may want “tougher scrutiny” of the Project Wide and Amenities budgets I would suggest educating yourselves by attending the monthly meetings and annual budget workshops that occur and are open to the public for examination, comments, and input. All the information is there for the asking.

And for those that love to get on the “the developer needs to pay more” bandwagon, they are. Almost the entire increase in the District 12 budget and project wide assessment associated with Phase 2 of District 12 (about $1.6M) is paid by the developer. Phase 2 of District 12 includes the Villages of McClure, Marsh Bend, De Luna, Linden, and Monarch Grove, which if you have been watching my drone videos, are still very much under construction. They will continue to pay the annual maintenance assessment on each home until it is sold, built or not.

Just for informational purposes, Districts 9 and 12 are nearly identical in size and have similar project wide assessments. Last year Districts 12 was about the same size as 11 and paid a similar assessment to the project wide funding. All of the numbers and information I have given here are available for everyone to review on the districtgov.org web site.

As for that other site, its articles are frequently yellow journalism at its lowest level with sensualism being an obvious part of their business model in order to drive web traffic and their profits. It is sad that they have chosen to take the route of maligning the community, developer, and the residents that they so often do when a much better service would be to educate and inform, but then I guess there is little to be made that way.

My fellow residents I urge you all to educate yourselves and try to understand how this unique and incredible community we all live in works and functions, this is the purpose of many of my posts. If we leave it up to those that shout the loudest about every little thing, then that mob rule mentality will surely ruin both this community and our retirements.

Thank you again Goldwing.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by jdguscinski

Goldwing - there is NO way that district 9 and 12 are the same size!!!

Please define size. Acreage, residents, roof tops??

[twoplanekid]

While I can understand the reasons for the Project Wide fees, District 10 Project Wide fees account for some 64% of the projected District 10 spending for 18-19. That’s taking $2,195,000 out of the budget. I also am aware that District 10 has one representative on the Project wide committee. So, we have a little say as to how the Project Wide fees are spent.

Still, the maintenance fees we pay in our District should be spent in our District. That’s what the State of Florida originally intended when they established CDDs. It’s hard for me to get over that feeling.

[Topspinmo]

Aaaaaaaa, relax and drink some koolaid amenities are going up. Follow the yellow brick road!

[VApeople]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

There has never been one of those horrible assessments like golf course communities have suffered elsewhere.

That is what we saw happen in Virginia.

A developer would build a golf course so he could sell house lots for more money. After he had made all the money he could, he would turn the course over to the home owners, who would then have to find a way to pay for the maintenance.

We saw quite a few nice courses, like Beacon Hill in Leesburg VA, close down because the home owners could not support it.

[VApeople]

Originally Posted by twoplanekid

Still, the maintenance fees we pay in our District should be spent in our District.

I disagree.

I am not a Socialist by any means, but I do think we need to look out for each other. If one area of TV starts to deteriorate, we are all going to see our home values and quality of lifestyle decrease.

If I have a skin cancer on my left arm, my right arm has to work harder to make enough money to treat the cancer. If my right arm refuses and the cancer spreads, the right arm will eventually suffer as well.

[Bjeanj]

Goldwingnut, yours is the most cogent of all the comments regarding this issue. Well-articulated, fact-driven, and I appreciate your comments.

In addition, I agree with you regarding the other news site. Anyone can set up a website and call it a news site, despite poor language usage, multiple spelling errors and typos, and poor reporting (who, what where, when and why). If supported solely by advertising, one must be cautious about whose advertising dollars it attracts.

[twoplanekid]

Originally Posted by VApeople

I disagree.

I am not a Socialist by any means, but I do think we need to look out for each other. If one area of TV starts to deteriorate, we are all going to see our home values and quality of lifestyle decrease.

If I have a skin cancer on my left arm, my right arm has to work harder to make enough money to treat the cancer. If my right arm refuses and the cancer spreads, the right arm will eventually suffer as well.

in my post ->

While I can understand the reasons for the Project Wide fees,

It’s hard for me to get over that feeling.


I understand your point yet hate to see larger amounts taken out of the local CDD every year going to the Project Wide fund where our local control is minimal.

64% of CDD 10 funds are now going to the Project Wide fees. Some might say that we should do away with CDDs and dump all of the monies into a city wide The Villages fund. However, that would take an act of the Florida State Legislature which will never happen.

[Goldwingnut]

Originally Posted by jdguscinski

Goldwing - there is NO way that district 9 and 12 are the same size!!!

You have to look at the numbers that are used for budgeting purposes, in this case Assessable Acres, the residential areas. In CDD9 that number is 1170 acres and CDD12 it is 1185 acres, so very close is size and therefore their portion of the Project Wide is nearly equal.

Home count is greatly different in the two districts, CDD9 has 5409 homes and CDD12 will have approximately 3637 homes according to the CDD12 documents. This works out to 4.62 homes/acre for CDD9 and 3.15 h/a for CDD12.

Actual acreage for the two districts also vary significantly with CDD9 being 1286 acres and CDD12 at 1490 acres. This 200 acre difference is basically amenity and common areas, with CDD12 having a lot more of the district properties being dedicated to amenities and open spaces that any other district. Amenities are funded from a different budget and not a part of the Project Wide Fund budget.

What this translates to is that CDD12 has more assessable acreage per home and will have higher maintenance assessments.

The budgeting process in this case doesn't look at the actual number of homes but the number of acres that fall under the Project Wide Fund responsibility. In this respect they are nearly the same size.