Originally Posted by Thnonne (Post 1082522)

Advogado, thank you for posting the accomplishments of the POA for people to see the good things they have done. But again why did you feel it necessary to belittle the VHA in your next post? The POA should feel they can stand on their merits which you listed, not by belittling their "rival" organization.

Originally Posted by Big O (Post 1082434)

There do not seem to be many absolute right and wrong issues for anything anymore, but degrees of right and wrong. I can sue anyone for anything and maybe get something out of it. Does that make me absolutely right? No it doesn't. It means my lawyer was a pain in the as* and someone paid him to go away. I beleive that because of political differences the POA has taken the obstructionist road. Was I here when most of this happened? No. I can only make my decision based on the monthly POA publication and the antagonistic rhetoric on this thread. I'm out.

Originally Posted by graciegirl (Post 1082598)

Don't be out.

I have to agree.



Avogado, does anyone actively involved in leadership of the POA live south of 466?

Please name them and their position.

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082607)

Offhand, I don't know. I guess you could determine that by checking the list of officers and directors against the phone book.

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082353)

And why don't the supporters of the VHA present any facts to demonstrate that it is really a true homeowners' association and not merely a front organization of the Developer?

In any event, in response to your request, here is just a partial list of the POA's accomplishments (copied verbatim from the poa4us.org website):

The Lawsuit Settlement - Villagers achieved a friendly class action lawsuit settlement with the developer in 2008 valued at $43 million. The key points of the settlement were: Provision for Reserve funds for eventual repair and replacement of our facilities north of Hwy. 466; provision for renovation of the recreation trails north of Hwy 446; creation of the AAC (Amenity Authority Committee) which allows residents elected by residents to make decisions about the expenditure of amenity funds north of Hwy. 466; and payoff of the Paradise Recreation Center renovation debt.

Defeat of the Sumter County Hospital Tax - We opposed the creation of this taxing district which would have taxed Sumter County residents about $200-$300 per home for use by our hospital and also given 20% of the tax off the top to the developer's foundation.

Expansion of the Hospital - After the defeat of the Sumter Hospital Tax, the owner of our hospital, the Leesburg Regional Medical Center, said it would delay construction of the expansion. We called this morally wrong to delay expansion of our life-saving hospital. After a series of hard-hitting stories in the Bulletin, LRMC finally relented and proceeded with the expansion.

Hospital Emergency Room - We noticed continuing poor service and performance in our hospital's ER over the years. We documented over 125 instances of serious problems in the ER. We publicized the problems. In response, LRMC brought in a new CEO of the hospital, a new director of the ER, dedicated more resources and staff to the ER, hired more nurses, established better training programs, and brought in three Villagers to sit on the Board of the hospital's parent organization.

Moffitt Cancer Center - We advocated bringing this cancer center to The Villages for what we believed would be one of the crown jewels in the medical facilities of The Villages. We organized a letter-writing program, researched the demographics, argued for bringing the center here, and voiced our hopes to the appropriate decision-makers.

Vinyl Siding - Sloppy work and installation procedures characterized the building effort of the contractors for homes in The Villages south of Hwy 466 in the 2005-2008 time period. Credit has to go to Ray Micucci and his wife Lori for spearheading the inspection of over 1,500 homes and prodding the work of the warranty department and various contractors to repair the problems.

Activity Policy Reversal - The Center Districts voted to restrict residents from gathering to protest anything. A liability insurance policy for $1 million was also required 30 days in advance of any protest gathering. The POA opposed this action, calling it a violation of our Constitutional Rights of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly, and argued against it in the Bulletin. The Center Districts backed down and rescinded the rule.

Paradise Center - The original recreation center on the east side of Hwy 441/27 was deteriorating and an absolute disgrace. We did a survey, organized residents, pleaded with the VCCDD to renovate the center, advocated renovation in the Bulletin, and were eventually successful in getting this $5 million project off the ground.

IRS/Bonds - We are waiting on this one. But, what we did do was caution restraint rather than wild speculation, and we identified the developer as the only one to benefit financially from the issuance of the bonds as tax exempt. If we get the negative outcome, we trust that the developer will do what is necessary to protect residents from any adverse impact.

Performing Arts Center - We began advocating for this center early in 2010 and gave this idea the publicity it needed which helped secure the support of many Villagers. We presented the facts on the undesirability of the Church on the Square as a performing arts center. We will continue our support until the dream becomes a reality.

Conflict of Interests by District Employees - We documented the fact that some Center District employees were in line to benefit financially from certain dealings with the developer. We viewed this as a conflict of interests. As a result, one Center District employee was re-assigned, and any dealing like this in the future will be scrutinized for any potential conflict of interests problems.

Forgotten $200,000 Billing - Somehow or another, a VCCDD bill to the developer for about $200,000 for expenses related to his use of the Savannah Center was never issued. A POA director, Irving Yedwab, noticed the problem and we publicized the situation in the Bulletin. The developer did pay up once the bill was issued.

Sexual Offended Database - We published the State of Florida Sexual Offender Database for our area in the Bulletin and brought it to our meetings for review. Some opposed this move; but, we felt it appropriate to publicize names and addresses so that residents could judge for themselves how best to react to any nearby offenders.

Purchase of Common Property - The then District Manager also thought it unnecessary to publish details explaining the various common property purchases by the Center Districts from the developer. We analyzed many of these deals and published detailed explanations in the Bulletin. Unfortunately, the District Manager's reluctance to publish details has caused huge misunderstandings on the part of residents which continue to confuse to this day.

Center District Financial Statements - We were the first organization to publish the financial statements of the two Center Districts. Prior to that the District Manager said that it was not important to provide that information for residents. Thankfully, the Center Districts now routinely publish this information and includes it on their website (Village Community Development Districts)..

Bob Evans Restaurant - The developer wanted to build a Bob Evans restaurant on the east side of Hwy. 441/27. He used a heavy-handed approach with near-by residents to try to force them to approve a zoning change from residential to commercial. We publicized the issue in the Bulletin and the local opposition to this plan. The developer finally relented and the restaurant was located on Hwy. 466.

Violence on the Squares - We reported in the Bulletin on several instances of violence on the Squares. As a result, Center District administration worked with local law enforcement to provide a heightened law enforcement presence on the Squares.

POA Surveys - We conducted five Surveys through the Bulletin over the years detailing attitudes about life in The Villages. Some of the actions were later addressed by the developer and the Center Districts.

Wind Mitigation - We publicized the details of this state program to save residents literally hundreds of dollars annually on their home insurance for older homes.

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082353)

And why don't the supporters of the VHA present any facts to demonstrate that it is really a true homeowners' association and not merely a front organization of the Developer?

In any event, in response to your request, here is just a partial list of the POA's accomplishments (copied verbatim from the poa4us.org website):

The Lawsuit Settlement - Villagers achieved a friendly class action lawsuit settlement with the developer in 2008 valued at $43 million. The key points of the settlement were: Provision for Reserve funds for eventual repair and replacement of our facilities north of Hwy. 466; provision for renovation of the recreation trails north of Hwy 446; creation of the AAC (Amenity Authority Committee) which allows residents elected by residents to make decisions about the expenditure of amenity funds north of Hwy. 466; and payoff of the Paradise Recreation Center renovation debt.

Defeat of the Sumter County Hospital Tax - We opposed the creation of this taxing district which would have taxed Sumter County residents about $200-$300 per home for use by our hospital and also given 20% of the tax off the top to the developer's foundation.

Expansion of the Hospital - After the defeat of the Sumter Hospital Tax, the owner of our hospital, the Leesburg Regional Medical Center, said it would delay construction of the expansion. We called this morally wrong to delay expansion of our life-saving hospital. After a series of hard-hitting stories in the Bulletin, LRMC finally relented and proceeded with the expansion.

Hospital Emergency Room - We noticed continuing poor service and performance in our hospital's ER over the years. We documented over 125 instances of serious problems in the ER. We publicized the problems. In response, LRMC brought in a new CEO of the hospital, a new director of the ER, dedicated more resources and staff to the ER, hired more nurses, established better training programs, and brought in three Villagers to sit on the Board of the hospital's parent organization.

Moffitt Cancer Center - We advocated bringing this cancer center to The Villages for what we believed would be one of the crown jewels in the medical facilities of The Villages. We organized a letter-writing program, researched the demographics, argued for bringing the center here, and voiced our hopes to the appropriate decision-makers.

Vinyl Siding - Sloppy work and installation procedures characterized the building effort of the contractors for homes in The Villages south of Hwy 466 in the 2005-2008 time period. Credit has to go to Ray Micucci and his wife Lori for spearheading the inspection of over 1,500 homes and prodding the work of the warranty department and various contractors to repair the problems.

Activity Policy Reversal - The Center Districts voted to restrict residents from gathering to protest anything. A liability insurance policy for $1 million was also required 30 days in advance of any protest gathering. The POA opposed this action, calling it a violation of our Constitutional Rights of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly, and argued against it in the Bulletin. The Center Districts backed down and rescinded the rule.

Paradise Center - The original recreation center on the east side of Hwy 441/27 was deteriorating and an absolute disgrace. We did a survey, organized residents, pleaded with the VCCDD to renovate the center, advocated renovation in the Bulletin, and were eventually successful in getting this $5 million project off the ground.

IRS/Bonds - We are waiting on this one. But, what we did do was caution restraint rather than wild speculation, and we identified the developer as the only one to benefit financially from the issuance of the bonds as tax exempt. If we get the negative outcome, we trust that the developer will do what is necessary to protect residents from any adverse impact.

Performing Arts Center - We began advocating for this center early in 2010 and gave this idea the publicity it needed which helped secure the support of many Villagers. We presented the facts on the undesirability of the Church on the Square as a performing arts center. We will continue our support until the dream becomes a reality.

Conflict of Interests by District Employees - We documented the fact that some Center District employees were in line to benefit financially from certain dealings with the developer. We viewed this as a conflict of interests. As a result, one Center District employee was re-assigned, and any dealing like this in the future will be scrutinized for any potential conflict of interests problems.

Forgotten $200,000 Billing - Somehow or another, a VCCDD bill to the developer for about $200,000 for expenses related to his use of the Savannah Center was never issued. A POA director, Irving Yedwab, noticed the problem and we publicized the situation in the Bulletin. The developer did pay up once the bill was issued.

Sexual Offended Database - We published the State of Florida Sexual Offender Database for our area in the Bulletin and brought it to our meetings for review. Some opposed this move; but, we felt it appropriate to publicize names and addresses so that residents could judge for themselves how best to react to any nearby offenders.

Purchase of Common Property - The then District Manager also thought it unnecessary to publish details explaining the various common property purchases by the Center Districts from the developer. We analyzed many of these deals and published detailed explanations in the Bulletin. Unfortunately, the District Manager's reluctance to publish details has caused huge misunderstandings on the part of residents which continue to confuse to this day.

Center District Financial Statements - We were the first organization to publish the financial statements of the two Center Districts. Prior to that the District Manager said that it was not important to provide that information for residents. Thankfully, the Center Districts now routinely publish this information and includes it on their website (Village Community Development Districts)..

Bob Evans Restaurant - The developer wanted to build a Bob Evans restaurant on the east side of Hwy. 441/27. He used a heavy-handed approach with near-by residents to try to force them to approve a zoning change from residential to commercial. We publicized the issue in the Bulletin and the local opposition to this plan. The developer finally relented and the restaurant was located on Hwy. 466.

Violence on the Squares - We reported in the Bulletin on several instances of violence on the Squares. As a result, Center District administration worked with local law enforcement to provide a heightened law enforcement presence on the Squares.

POA Surveys - We conducted five Surveys through the Bulletin over the years detailing attitudes about life in The Villages. Some of the actions were later addressed by the developer and the Center Districts.

Wind Mitigation - We publicized the details of this state program to save residents literally hundreds of dollars annually on their home insurance for older homes.

Originally Posted by graciegirl (Post 1082621)

Originally Posted by graciegirl (Post 1082621)

;;;[/list]

Originally Posted by Big O (Post 1082417)

I am not a supporter of the VHA. I don't know what they do. However, I am definitely against the POA. They seem to me to be nothing but whiners and obstructionists. If The Developer says up they say down. If there is an anti Developer view they take it. As I said before, I beleive it is political and I haven't seen anything to change my mind.

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082421)

What is the story there? As I said, I don't claim any special knowledge of the intricacies of the relationship between the VHA and the Developer. I just know that it smells.

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082424)

As Daniel Moynihan said, "You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts."

Would you please point out at least one specific instance in which POA opposition to an action by the Developer has been wrong.

Originally Posted by ureout (Post 1082597)

Thnonne.....I understand that you fully support the VHA and you definitely have the right to do so.....Please explain to us that don't understand... why? It seems from reading your posts it's because you feel POA backers attack the VHA ? Please give me a reason why I should change my mind....as in what have they done for the HOMEOWNERS that have had problems???

Originally Posted by Thnonne (Post 1082768)

I am a member of the VHA, I do not support them because the POA backers attack them. I just am wary of any person or group who feels they have to bash their opponent to make themselves look better. I am not trying to change your mind about being a POA member, I just wish you [the POA] would stand on your merits alone. I feel the same way about mudslinging politicians, tell me to vote for you because of what you have done or will do, not because you say your opponent is unworthy.

Originally Posted by janmcn (Post 1082801)

Residents in districts five through eleven will soon get a chance to see which organization has their back when they are handed a million dollar bill to shore up the land under the Morse Blvd bridge. The contractor doing the work has already said his plan may not solve the problem.

Which one would you want in your corner? Good times ahead.

Originally Posted by Warren Kiefer (Post 1082751)

Do you live in the Villages, the one in Florida ??? Everyday I see the beautiful Paradise Park area, the new Rec Center for Tierra Del Sol and the soon to be Santiago Rec Center reminds me that none of this would exist if not for the POA fighting the legal battle. And for those of you who care, check out to see who provided the out of their pocket legal funding for this case.

Originally Posted by Big O (Post 1082836)

I live in Fernandina. I look out every day and see Bonifay and Evans Prarie golf courses and that reminds me that the Developer is doing a wonderful job. It reminds me of what can be done with a positive attitude and that it exists in spite of the POA and the people who disagree with everythig the Developer does because of his politics. I will say this: They used crappy white carpet in my Gardenia. Do you think the POA would file a class action law suit for me if I said I was a Democrat?

Originally Posted by CFrance (Post 1082838)

Um... I'm a Democrat, and they used crappy carpet in my Begonia. What the heck are you saying, anyway? "Facts" not in evidence.

Originally Posted by Big O (Post 1082836)

I live in Fernandina. I look out every day and see Bonifay and Evans Prarie golf courses and that reminds me that the Developer is doing a wonderful job. It reminds me of what can be done with a positive attitude and that it exists in spite of the POA and the people who disagree with everythig the Developer does because of his politics. I will say this: They used crappy white carpet in my Gardenia. Do you think the POA would file a class action law suit for me if I said I was a Democrat?

Originally Posted by graciegirl (Post 1082598)

Don't be out.

I have to agree.



Avogado, does anyone actively involved in leadership of the POA live south of 466?

Please name them and their position.

Originally Posted by rustyp (Post 1082856)

I need help understanding the significance of the importance of living north or south of 466 neighbor.

Originally Posted by ureout (Post 1082858)

many of the problems that the property owners went thru on the N side of 466 have yet to happen on the S/side.....that is because the developer still owns everything....wait until the IRS issue is FINALLY complete and then the developer will start selling rec. centers and softball complexes back to the residents of the district they live in

Originally Posted by ureout (Post 1082858)

many of the problems that the property owners went thru on the N side of 466 have yet to happen on the S/side.....that is because the developer still owns everything....wait until the IRS issue is FINALLY complete and then the developer will start selling rec. centers and softball complexes back to the residents of the district they live in

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082879)

An important factual correction: The Developer will not be selling those assets to the residents. If that were the case, the pricing and terms of sale would, by definition, be arm's length since it would be a transaction between unrelated parties.

Instead, the Developer will be selling those assets (and the right to receive the related amenity fees) to Center Community Development Districts that he controls. Thus, he will, in essence, be selling them to himself, and he will be setting the price and terms of sale.

It is this self dealing that underlay both the POA-backed class-action lawsuit and the IRS investigation. It is important that somebody keep a close eye on the pricing and terms of these future sales to ensure that they are arm's length and do not place the viability of our amenities system at risk by unduly burdening the Center Districts. That somebody will certainly not be the VHA.

Originally Posted by graciegirl (Post 1082804)

Road repairs happen everywhere. Are we going to blame the developer for the geological problems underlying the whole area of central west Florida????

It is these kinds of jabs and half truths and innuendos and rumors that make my blood boil.

Originally Posted by advogado (Post 1082855)

as i said in an earlier post: You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts. Can you produce any facts whatsoever to substantiate your allegation that poa actions vis-a-vis the developer are politically motivated?

To get my politics and animus toward the developer out of the way, as i have said in earlier posts: I am a registered republican, like the developer. The developer has done many things to be proud of in making the villages the wonderful place it is today.

However, the developer's relationship with the vha (a vha president on his payroll and upon their leaving office, ex-vha presidents rewarded with county commissioner positions, and maybe other favors extended to vha officers that i no way of knowing about) is absolutely disgraceful.

Originally Posted by Warren Kiefer (Post 1082899)

You are mostly correct, you failed to make it clear that when sold to the CCDD, it is the Residents who pay the bill.

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082782)

First, I am not trying to recruit members for the POA, and I don't care whether you join or don't join the POA. And, if knowing the relationship between the VHA and the Developer, you still want to join the VHA, that is certainly up to you.

However, I want to make it clear that when others and myself point out facts demonstrating the corrupt relationship between the Developer and the VHA (and, in particular, between the Developer and certain VHA presidents), we are not "bashing" the VHA. Instead, we are exposing the VHA for what it is-- a phony homeowners' association, supported by the Developer for the purpose of weakening or destroying the POA.

Originally Posted by Warren Kiefer (Post 1082902)

I am a Highway Engineer and it concerns me that that bridge not being very old is already failing. Bridges are built on pilings usually driven to bed rock. This is not simple road repairs this is a bridge having serious failures. Every day almost everyone drives across interstate bridges that are still functional even though most are more than fifty years old.

Originally Posted by Thnonne (Post 1082917)

Wow, you don't consider it bashing to describe another as a "corrupt" "phony homeowners association," in print. I have never seen any such claims in the VHA publications about the POA. It must be horrible to live in such fear of your rival organization. Remember if you can't say something good about someone don't say anything, especially in Florida's friendliest hometown.

Originally Posted by outlaw (Post 1082615)

Very informative! I always felt the POA was the true resident advocate, mainly because of the multimillion dollar settlement. But I had not realized all the important things the POA has done in the interest of the residents. WOW! I heard about the cozy relationship between the developer and the VHA, with the developer even funding the VHA. I am amazed at the number of otherwise intelligent and rational people that blindly and continuously ignore the transgressions of the developer; always attacking the messengers as "complainers" and "whiners", but never providing any facts refuting the message.
Another recent example of the POA watching out for the residents is the issue of the offer by the developer to fund a pool at a new recreation center on the proposed Baptist church property if purchased by the AAC. The recent POA monthly pointed out that the developer is offering nothing, because the offer to fund the pool is in lieu of the developer building a neighborhood pool in one of the new 300 home developments in the north end. For this, the developer wants the AAC to allow an additional 300 homes to be built in the north end of TV.

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082919)

Warren, in the post that you quote, Graciegirl said her blood was boiling at the suggestion that the Developer might be responsible since bridges fail all the time due to natural causes. I know nothing about the matter, but I suppose that she might be right. In any case, somebody ought to look at whether the bridge was properly constructed in the first place. With the Developer's having put his ex-VHA presidents on the County Commission, I don't know who that somebody will be.

Originally Posted by Moderator (Post 1082999)

Please keep the replies on topic or the thread will be closed.

A number of empty/nonsense and personally-directed posts have been removed.

Thanks.

Moderator

Originally Posted by Advogado (Post 1082912)

Only in the sense that we, after the sale to the CCDD, pay our amenity fees to the CCDD, instead of to the Developer. In other words, if things work as planned after the sale, everything is fine from the residents' perspective. We keep paying the same amenity fees, but they go to the CCDD instead of to the Developer.

The only problem for residents would arise if the CCDD were, for some reason (like the CCDD's overpaying the Developer for the assets-- the allegation in the class-action lawsuit), financially unable to continue to furnish the amenities at the promised level. In fact, thanks to the recovery in the class-action lawsuit, things now seem to be working out okay. Of course, an adverse outcome in the IRS investigation or other factors (e.g., a huge increase in the minimum wage) increasing costs to the CCDDs at a rate faster than the CPI cap on amenity-fee increases could change that.

Originally Posted by Warren Kiefer (Post 1083139)

The developer has total control over the CCDD's. The CCDD boards are elected by landowner elections, the only landowner in the Districts is the Developer. Get the picture ??? One could conclude that the CCDD boards would do exactly what the Developer wanted them to do. Most of the board members are employees of the Developer. I recall that at one time one of the board members of the VCCDD was the caretaker of the buffalo herd.