I was thinking the poster was asking about the original "$20mil" spent, which was divided by the lots. Seems like my Broker gave me a list of the original expenditures and related math to get to my bond amount.

Please do not mistake objectivity for negativity.

Seriously? I'm just trying to understand impact fees and what's going on. So I read the POA bulletin to learn about the tax increase. Here are phrases in that bulletin about The Commissioners: "Poor planning or Poor management". "Smugness and arrogance". "Clearly the Commissioners and County Administrator have only paid lip service.."

So...that's objective? there is no bias in those statements? As someone who honestly wants to learn what is going on, do I read that and say "this is a news source that is reporting the facts and I should read to learn more about this situation?" Or do I read those statements and conclude "this is a very biased source and I'm only going to hear a one-sided viewpoint of this matter".
I picked up the POA bulletin to get a factual accounting of what is happening with this situation. I read it. Based on the POA's descriptive adjectives, I have a very hard time viewing the POA as an objective source.
And I'm dissapointed in that... because I was looking for factual reporting.

If, after reading the facts in the case, it is clear they point to poor planning and management, I would expect a news source to connect the dots and spell it out for the reader. Sorry you don't like the message, but don't take it out on the messenger.

Jim Double9, Double2




I spent some time looking..............could not find the detail from years ago. I was going to post as an example. I would assume you are entitled to see for your section.


Good Luck.

A call to his district rep would get the answer.

I was looking for facts. Please understand I have no bias in this situation. My guess is The Developer is taking advantage of residents. But I felt the POA's explanation was very bias. So... I had a hard time believing the POA's explanation was factual and objective. They had such an opportunity to explain the situation and present their case without incendiary comments.
So... I guess I am taking it out on the messenger. I think they missed an opportunity.

Billionaires don’t become billionaires by spending their own money. Most business practices are covert operation of getting out of paying taxes and getting someone else to pay for their investment. This all happen through the career politicians that feed off the lobbyist and under the table money. Been going on since the Roman Empire. As we know Roman Empire fell and so will free nations, matter of time.:faint:

"Please do not mistake objectivity for negativity.

Seriously? I'm just trying to understand impact fees and what's going on. So I read the POA bulletin to learn about the tax increase. Here are phrases in that bulletin about The Commissioners: "Poor planning or Poor management". "Smugness and arrogance". "Clearly the Commissioners and County Administrator have only paid lip service.."

So...that's objective? there is no bias in those statements? As someone who honestly wants to learn what is going on, do I read that and say "this is a news source that is reporting the facts and I should read to learn more about this situation?" Or do I read those statements and conclude "this is a very biased source and I'm only going to hear a one-sided viewpoint of this matter".
I picked up the POA bulletin to get a factual accounting of what is happening with this situation. I read it. Based on the POA's descriptive adjectives, I have a very hard time viewing the POA as an objective source.
And I'm dissapointed in that... because I was looking for factual reporting."




I think I agree with your basic point: The POA could have done a better job explaining the unprecedented 25% tax increase. I tried to do so in my original post in this thread. If you find any errors in it, please let me know.

It appears that the POA writers got a little carried away in their anger and and didn't lay out the facts as clearly as they could have. But such anger is justified. What the Developer and his toadies on the Sumter County Board of Commissioners did to the taxpayers of Sumter County should infuriate anyone who understands what happened.

My criticism of the October POA Bulletin is the following: It asks the question: Is the tax increase due to “Poor Planning” or “Poor Management” and then answers it as “both”. The correct answer is that the tax increase is due to a conscious decision on the part of the Sumter County Commissioners, all of whom are supported by the Developer. The Commissioners decided to to load the infrastructure costs of The Villages massive expansion on the taxpayers of Sumter County, via a 25% tax hike, instead of on the Developer, via an appropriate increase in the impact fee paid by the Developer each time he builds a house.

Right now, the Developer pays an impact fee of only $901 per house, versus a $2,600 per-house fee paid by a builder of a single-family house in Sumter County, and versus a $20,000 per-house fee paid by a builder of a house in a 55-and-older community in Collier County.

In my opinion the POA has always seemed negative toward The Villages. I have always wondered who and what is the driving force.

Reality Check
 

The driving force is a sense of reality.

I cannot honestly see how you can defend what the Developer is doing here. Do you really understand it? Take a drive outside The Villages and look at some of the poverty there. You think these people won't feel the impact of the tax increase????

I can afford to pay a few hundred dollars a year extra in taxes. I gather that you can as well, but there are plenty of people inside and outside The Villages who cannot. Have you no compassion for them?

In fact, I personally wouldn't mind paying a few hundred dollars extra if the money went to teachers, firefighters, and cops. But that is not where it is going. It is going into the Developer's pocket, thanks to his toadies on the County Commission.

OK, here are the facts.

You can see what The Villages offers to its residents. You can also see what it costs you to live here.

If you don't like what you see, there are plenty of other nice places to live in Florida. For example:

Florida Oceanfront Property :: Sailfish Point

It’s not about whether or not The Villages is a good place to live at a good price. It is that this tax increase does not seem to be fair and equitable to all residents of Sumter County. It also seems we are being asked to pay for something that should be paid for by the developer. I love TV. I am not anti developer but I am for what is fair and equitable for all of our county residents. Yes, TV has helped with the poverty in Sumter County but by mostly providing low wage jobs to those wanting to work. Many in our county would like to work here but cannot afford the expense of transportation to TV. It’s not just always about us but it always about what is fair and just.

That's a really myopic perception of the situation there. This isn't about what Villagers have to pay, or don't have to pay. It's about what ALL residents of the entire county, within and without the Villages, have to pay. And what the developer doesn't have to pay, even though other builders in the county have to pay.

As mentioned above: the going rate for "a builder" (generic) to build "a house" (generic) in Sumter County is $2600.

The going rate for THE Developer (specific) of The Villages (specific) is only $901.

As a result, THE Developer is getting around a 65% discount on building in the Villages, which makes it very easy to build in mass quantities. Meanwhile, Joe Builder elsewhere in the County has to shell out $2600 each time he builds a single-family house, so he has less ability to build as much or as quickly as THE Developer.

Basically - THE Developer has a monopoly and is pushing the generic developers, and homeowners, of "non-Villages" Sumter County, out of the county. Their prices continue to go up, but their services don't change. Villages prices remain steady, while the Developer profits because his initial costs are significantly lower.

How is this possible? Because he has strategic placement of "his" pet officials on the County Commissions.

Sounds more like a Oligarchy rather then a monopoly. It is Florida tho and sux for the average Joe.

Cheers

I used to think of The Villages as a semi-benevolent dictatorship, but after seeing the Developer pull off the tax-hike / no-impact-fee-increase shenanigan, I am not so sure about the "semi-benevolent" part. :icon_wink: