[Joe V.]

Originally Posted by Advogado

So, please point out the errors in the article.

I would not read any of the blather from your clearly unbalanced source. And stop blowing smoke up clear thinking Americans's arses.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by Joe V.

I would not read any of the blather from your clearly unbalanced source. And stop blowing smoke up clear thinking Americans's arses.

I am always glad to be educated, but I didn't see any misstatements of fact in the article. I would suggest you read it before attacking it. By the way, true conservatives should be in favor of local self-rule and against crony capitalism.

[Dond1959]

Originally Posted by Advogado

I am always glad to be educated, but I didn't see any misstatements of fact in the article. I would suggest you read it before attacking it. By the way, true conservatives should be in favor of local self-rule and against crony capitalism.

Your article obviously has its own slant and doesn’t discuss the cons of impact fees. I prefer a more balanced academic approach to the subject. There are some disadvantages to impact fees. The complexity of implementation of impact fees and the impact on low to moderate housing are two of the most prominent. He is an academic paper that gives a more balanced view.

http://impactfees.com/publications%20pdf/dif.pdf

[eyc234]

Originally Posted by RuthA

That is where you are wrong. The 25% increase in the real estate rate was necessitated by the Developer refusing to pay for the new roads down South of 44 and the then Commissioners voting to raise taxes on all the residents in Sumter County in order to benefit the Developer. The current Commissioners voted to raise the Impact Fees in order to force the Developer to pay for this development and thus be able to roll back this huge increase.

So where is the roll back??

[Two Bills]

The Taxman taketh, and thou seeist no more!

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

I am waiting for my refund………..

Thanks to the Developer's employee-legislator Brett Hage's co-sponsored legislation restricting impact-fee increases, you can, at least for now, forget about a tax rollback. In a nutshell: The Developer's sweetheart impact fee continues, as does our huge property-tax hike.

Big-money wins; the rest of us lose.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

Oversimp...............that's me.

Why doesn't the purchaser pay property taxes??????????????????????????????

Of course he does, but the current residents are paying for the county infrastructure that the new purchaser necessitates. In other words, we are subsidizing the Developer's expansion of The Villages.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by eyc234

So where is the roll back??

Thanks to the Developer's employee-legislator Brett Hage's co-sponsored legislation restricting impact-fee increases, you can, at least for now, forget about a tax rollback. In a nutshell: The Developer's sweetheart impact fee continues, as does our huge property-tax hike.

[Bogie Shooter]

Excuses, excuses….we don’t need no d#&% excuses.

[Dond1959]

Originally Posted by Advogado

Thanks to the Developer's employee-legislator Brett Hage's co-sponsored legislation restricting impact-fee increases, you can, at least for now, forget about a tax rollback. In a nutshell: The Developer's sweetheart impact fee continues, as does our huge property-tax hike.

Why are new fees or taxes needed for a roll back? How about looking at cutting expenditures first and see how far that will get?

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by Advogado

Of course he does, but the current residents are paying for the county infrastructure that the new purchaser necessitates. In other words, we are subsidizing the Developer's expansion of The Villages.

Unrelated to the post/topic, enjoy hearing yourself.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by Dond1959

Why are new fees or taxes needed for a roll back? How about looking at cutting expenditures first and see how far that will get?

Current spending programs were enacted while the Developer's Commissioners were in control of the County Commission. In fairness to those Commissioners, I am not aware of their being guilty of wasteful spending. Which County services do you want to cut back?

I think that you will find that the problem is not wasteful spending by the County government. We do, in fact, do need a lot of new County infrastructure because of the massive expansion of The Villages. That costs money.

The inequity here is the fact that we current residents are paying, through the massive property-tax hike, for county infrastructure that should be paid for by the Developer through reasonable impact fees. Estep, Miller, and Search were overwhelmingly elected to the County Commission to rectify that unfairness. However, it looks like the Developer has been successful in thwarting the will of the voters.

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

Unrelated to the post/topic, enjoy hearing yourself.

My post is completely related to the post/topic, but feel free to ignore it or refute it.