Who then paid for the Morse and Buena Vista extensions south of 466A?

The county.


Added:
What is the Bond Debt Assessment for?

The bond debt assessment reflects each lot’s proportionate share of the cost of building the infrastructure within its District or for which its District has responsibility. It is the most equitable method of distributing costs between the properties that benefit from the infrastructure. Infrastructure includes storm water systems, underground pump stations, water retention areas, curbs, gutters, streetlights, transportation trails, underground piping, etc.

I understood Morse built the Morse & BV extensions then turned them over to the county for maintenance. A win-win. I don't think I'm wrong.

If the bond debt on an individual house provides for system-wide infrastructure then why are the bonds on Patio Villas and Premier homes not the same? The bonds on Premiers are much higher. The bond on an individual house must somehow relate to the cost of infrastructure related to that particular house within its part of the overall development.

The bond debt is directly proportional to the number of lots within the development. The more(smaller) lots the lower the bond and vice versa.

How does the District arrive at the amount? Does everyone pay the same amount?
The Bond Debt Assessment was set at the time the bond used to build the infrastructure was issued. The formula for calculating each lot’s proportionate share starts with the total cost of the bond (including interest) issued to pay for the infrastructure. That cost is divided equally among each assessable acre in the “phase” of the District for which the bond was issued. That gives you a cost per acre. The cost per acre is then multiplied by the number of acres in the unit in which you live. That gives you the obligation for the unit as a whole. The unit total cost is then divided by the number of lots or parcels in the unit, and that computation gives you the amount of the assessment levied against each property. Therefore, each lot within a unit pays the same amount. Amortization schedules for each unit are located on the Districts' website; www.districtgov.org under the Finance Department link.

Like the inequity of RE Taxes, a million dollar home owner doesn't use ~3 times the County's services as a $300k home owner.


Now there is something to whine about.


Wait, Wait..........here's another one.....what about income taxes??



Poor me can happen with all types of taxes.


AND TO CLARIFY...........................Mana, I don't think you are whining.

Has anyone ever seen an itemized report listing how exactly a bond funding was actually spent? Is such a report publicly available?
It would be interesting to see how much actually went to specific infrastructure categories such as electric, water, sewers, major and minor roads, signage, etc. and what was disbursed for design, fees, brokerage, "management" services and other soft costs and whether the "funding" was fully spent. And furthermore, what happened to overruns or
undercosts?
Hopefully none of the bond costs were spent constructing or enhancing our recreational facilities which "we" thru the CDD system bought (financed by more bonds collateralized by the facilities) at a later date, or will be bought eventually in the new areas.

I did.


Seems like our Broker gave it to me.


I just looked on the website and did not see a link.


Now you got me thinking.

Isn’t that a part of each District budget?

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:

I believe it used to be under Mr Schwartz. Now it looks like pure business.

I guess the technical term is really "plutocracy."

No, it is about what WE have to pay.

When we think we are asked to pay more than our lifestyle is worth, we will be off to Sailfish Point.

:ohdear: Okay this is one of those half truths, generalities and let me bend the facts to fit what I want to say. There is no "generic" classification for an impact fee in Sumter county. If a builder builds homes in a Retirement Community/Age Restricted Single Family development they would pay a fee of $901. If the developer of The Villages builds homes in a Single Family development they will pay $2600. If you build an Assisted Living Facility you will pay a whopping $544. You can not in this country, state or county make discriminatory business practices on one company over another.

I would still ask if anything illegal has been done then the courts should be contacted and individuals indicted, charged, tried, removed from office if guilty and put in jail. If you do not like the laws that are set in place change them, change the representatives and be involved up front not after the fact and then gripe.

The Developer would not have paid regardless of whether the county tax was raised or impact fees on new construction were higher. In the case of the latter, that cost would ultimately be paid by the people who bought the new homes via a higher price. The Villages doesn't have any problem selling houses - people would buy them at a higher cost due to more realistic impact fees. The real issue is do the new home buyers pay the cost of the new roads to support the new southern Villages or do the current county residents pay via higher taxes? That has been answered.

Doesn’t this argument simply imply that every builder benefits from low impact fees? Ie. if one builder muscles it down all builders benefit.

Obviously the Schwartz/Gary Morse leadership had a different vision and business model than the current generation. Change is inevitable, and sometimes change is good and other times it's bad. I guess time will tell, but the initial impression clearly appears that the changes happing in leadership are not so good.

If this is our current leadership then .... Someone has to represent the homeowners’ interest too. Someone with integrity and backbone.

There are many people who don't want to live here or even in Florida. After reading some of your comments, what exactly is your problem with the POA and why does it matter where any of the governing bodies live?

No Wonder Homeowners Are Angry!
 

It's interesting to note that if a homeowner does NOT have Homestead in Florida, their property taxes for the coming year cannot be raised more than 3%.

And here homeowners are slammed with a 25% increase? Under any circumstances, can anyone really make sense out of this?

That being the case and since you think all of these comments are negativity as opposed to some hard-core factual information, then why are you spending a lot more than one minute reading all of this?

Since a 25% tax increase doesn't seem to bother you, perhaps you would pay my new tax bill.

What do you consider as "affordable housing?"
$10.00 an hour doesn't go very far when you are one of the worker-bees, especially if there is a family in the picture.

Even if a husband and wife both work and have to pay childcare their combined income still doesn't give them a chance for much of anything.

I'm with you 100%.

If you drive south of 301 from say, 466, there is a brand new right turn lane at an intersection. That turn lane was put in to benefit a business. If you think the county paid for it, you're dreaming.

Yep.

The POA is trying to protect and inform residents, while the VHA is simply...a mouthpiece/echo chamber for the Da Family.

It's hard to even imagine, why anyone would take such umbrage with them...trying to look after resident's rights/best interests.

On second thought...I guess I can imagine. :ohdear:

Waiters in the Villages restaurants don't earn $10.00/hour. Some of them don't even earn $5/hour before tips. Some, who work mid-shift (not breakfast or lunch, but inbetween) get a total of $7.60/hour AFTER tips.

It's not a liveable wage and using this segment of the population to justify developers not having to pay a greater impact fee "because they bring in workers" is laughable, at best.