THE POA BULLETIN JULY 2006

I live south of highway 466, why should I care? Residents south of highway 466 will not be given the vote in the SLCDD at this time. However, the POA thinks that they should be given the vote now. These residents are not second-class citizens and should have the same voting control of their center district. We appreciate that in the early days of a CDD many decisions need to be made by experienced construction people loyal to the developer. Because of this, we think that an exception for these construction-related decisions could be incorporated into the voting approval plan for residents south of highway 466. These residents should have the same voting and control authority as the residents north of 466. We should not have second-class citizens in The Villages!

There is a key point lost in the debate over who should be responsible for maintenance of the recreation trails.

The POA believes that the District Administrator of The Villages, Mr. Pete Wahl, should have noticed the deterioration of the trails and pressed a claim for repair or revisions against the developer and/or the contractors who did the work.

It was the developer’s construction plan that was followed for specifications, materials, and layout when the trails were built. And, construction companies are responsible when their substandard work deteriorates prematurely.

The POA believes that Mr. Wahl was derelict in his duties and should be held accountable for not blowing the whistle.

The question now is: How did this happen? How could Mr. Wahl possibly have overlooked this profound problem?

The POA believes that since Mr. Wahl is basically appointed by the developer and serves at his pleasure, he is unwilling to confront the developer on any issue adverse to the interests of the developer.

The POA believes that is why Mr. Wahl said nothing and to this day is derelict in his duties. We think this is a primary violation of his fiduciary duties to the people of The Villages in his stewardship position of administering the recreation facilities for the benefit of residents. And, we believe this is a conflict-of-interest that should not be tolerated.

We suspect this is also why he said nothing about the sinkhole repair arrangement on the Nancy Lopez pond. He oversaw the original contract between CDD4 and the developer and, we think, should have recognized that residents were being taken advantage of ... but he said nothing.

We think this is why he also said nothing when the grossly unfair arrangement whereby CDD4 was made responsible for maintenance of the Mulberry Square commercial stormwater discharge ponds was negotiated. We think he should have known what was going on ... but he said nothing.

We think he also should have known that the arrangement for maintenance of the Mulberry Square landscaped commercial areas forced on CDD4 residents by the developer was also unfair ... but he said nothing.

How many other situations whereby residents are taken advantage of will eventually come to light where Mr. Wahl should have recognized an unfavorable situation ¼ but said nothing? Heaven help us when all the bills for any other sweet deals for the developer finally come to light and end up costing residents more of their retirement funds.

This is one of the best arguments for giving the residents of The Villages north of highway 466 the vote on VCCDD matters. Mr. Wahl will then be responsible to the residents and won’t be able to hide behind the developer or look the other way.

We think one of the first things the newly formed Resident Authority Board (RAB) should do is to put Mr. Wahl on notice that his allegiance is to the residents and any backdoor sweetheart deals for the developer will not be tolerated.

We also ask that the VCCDD not give a long-term employment contract to Mr. Wahl just before handing over voting authority to the RAB.

Questions For Political Candidates

As mentioned in the POA meetings in June and July, the POA has prepared a short list of questions that it will submit to various candidates running in November for public office. This list of the five key questions is presented below. This list is short and direct and, we think, informative without being overbearing.

The POA will print the responses in future Bulletins. If candidates do not respond in a timely manner, we will also print a list of the non-responders.

This list was originally much longer than shown below. We decided to be brief and concise and limit the questions to those which tie in to POA issues and objectives mentioned in the past. So, we don’t have questions on insurance, recycling, Canadian prescription drugs, senior issues, etc., that were on the longer list. But, this shorter list gets right to the point on POA issues.

Hopefully, we will get a good response. And, residents will then see who does or does not support the various issues important to the POA.

1. Full Disclosure – Would you support legislation requiring developers to provide full disclosure for prospective home buyers along with stiff financial penalties for violations or non-compliance?

2. Controls on Developers – Would you support legislation to more closely regulate developers as they further develop Florida land?

3. Villages Voting Authority – Are you in favor of allowing Villages residents to have voting control of their center CDD’s decision-making process?

4. Villages Recreation Trails – In The Villages, are you in favor of having the center CDD districts pay for the maintenance and repair of the recreation trails?

5. Florida Hometown Democracy – A proposed amendment to the Florida State Constitution is called Florida’s Hometown Democracy. This amendment would shift the power to approve local developments away from elected officials in Florida’s cities and counties and give that power directly to local voters in a referendum about future land use. Would you support this amendment?

Disclosures When Buying Your Home

Reprinted below and in the columns on the right is the Disclosure Reform bill that we plan to submit again to the Florida Legislature for consideration in the next session.

In preparation for that, we are asking residents to send to us any examples they may have experienced of nonexistent, poor, or misleading disclosures on the purchase of property in The Villages. If, when purchasing your home, you weren’t told something, or were misled about anything relating to disclosure issues, we want to hear from you regarding what happened or didn’t happen.

Our plan is to develop a listing of specific examples that we can show to public officials willing to help our legislative initiative on Disclosure Reform.

So, please write us with your story at POA Disclosure, POBox 1657, Lady Lake, FL 32158, or email directly to us at the new POA email address of poa4us@gmail.com.

Please include your name and address and phone number – we have to have this for proper documentation and for any follow-up questions. And, be as specific as possible. Remember also that we need your story. If not enough people respond, the conclusion will be that there is no problem. So, if you had a problem with a disclosure, we need to hear from you. Thanks in advance for your help on this effort.

The POA Disclosure Reform Bill

The current disclosure language given to buyers at the time of home purchase in a CDD is in Section 190.048 Florida Statutes. The section is inadequate and should be revised. Revisions should apply to any sale of a CDD property by a developer or its agents.

There are several issues that need to be part of a comprehensive Disclosure Reform bill as follows:

1. Timing of Disclosure - The currently-required Disclosure is often given to potential buyers too late in the buyer’s decision-making process, or often delayed until the time of closing, or afterwards. The Disclosure should be given to a prospective purchaser: (a) no less than ten (10) business days prior to closing; or, (b) at an earlier date when the buyer first exhibits serious interest in a property; and, (c) updated at least three (3) business days prior to closing.

2. Receipt for Disclosure - Buyers often complain that the currently-required Disclosure was never given or was delivered after closing. A developer or its agents should be required to obtain a signed and dated receipt from a potential buyer indicating when the Disclosure was delivered.

3. Separate Sheet of Paper - The currently-required Disclosure is often buried in other lengthy closing documents. The Disclosure should be on separate sheets of paper, clearly identified.

4. Dollar Specifics - The currently-required Disclosure is not comprehensive and specific as to dollar amounts. The Disclosure should contain reasonable estimates of the dollar amounts for the first three (3) years for each tax, assessment, and/or monthly fee. Any bond obligations to be assumed by individual residents, the related interest rates, and repayment options should also be identified.

5. Undisclosed Liabilities - Any significant underfunded or unfunded liabilities of a CDD, potentially to be paid by residents within the next ten (10) years, should be identified, explained, and fully disclosed.

6. Special Agreements - Any agreement between a developer, a district, and/or any other party, which could have a current or potential significant financial impact on current or future residents in the district within the next ten (10) years, should be identified, explained, and fully disclosed.

7. Covenants and Restrictions - These details applying to the property should be fully listed and explained to a layman’s understanding.

8. Disclosure of Problems - The Disclosure should specifically disclose and explain any obnoxious, troublesome, or unsavory physical properties or characteristics of, on, or in the surrounding land within a ten (10) mile radius of the property of interest to a potential buyer.

9. Procedures to Follow - Many complaints in the past refer to sellers or sales agents not following proper procedures, or, at the worst, actually misleading prospective buyers on disclosure issues. The Statute should require specific disclosure and compliance as indicated herein by sellers and/or sales agents.

10. Noncompliance Fines - These requirements for specific disclosure and compliance are substantially weakened if a penalty fine is not specified and enforced. The Statute should specify a penalty fine of at least $2,500.00 for each violation of these Disclosure requirements to be paid within thirty (30) days by a violator to a prospective buyer affected by a violation upon notice of the violation from the prospective buyer. The total fine shall double each thirty days until paid up to a maximum of $10,000.00. Any legal, court, discount, or collection fees required to accomplish the collection of a fine shall also be paid by the violator above and beyond the previously mentioned $10,000.00 maximum.

11. Annual Reporting - Developers and commercial sales agents should be required to submit an annual report summarizing their compliance with these Disclosure requirements, any instances of non-compliance, and detailing the payment of any required fines, under penalty of a separate $50,000.00 fine and any other criminal penalties identified by the Florida State Legislature for non-compliance with any part of this annual reporting requirement.

The POA Hall of Fame

POA members need to start thinking about the names of individuals that should be considered for the POA Hall of Fame honor.

This honor is for previous members who have made a significant contribution to the POA as either a member, director, or officer. Candidates can be living or passed on and do not have to be living in The Villages or even be a POA member anymore. The honor is for the person’s contribution to the POA in the past and is not intended to be a popularity contest. Members must wait at least five years after their significant contributions before being considered for the honor.

The process starts with a Nomination Form that is available now at the POA monthly meetings or from any POA official. Candidates for the Hall of Fame honor can only be nominated by current POA members or by the Nominating Committee just formed for this purpose. The Nomination Form will contain the nominee's name and current contact information, if available. At least five (5) co-nominating signatures will be required from the persons making the nomination. A space will be provided for an explanation of why this person deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. This explanation is very important.

The Hall of Fame Nominating Committee is being formed by Frank Renner, a long-time POA member and past director. The committee will help with the process of reviewing, selecting, and nominating candidates for the honor. Candidates nominated by the committee will have their names forwarded to the POA Board of Directors for a final decision. Nominations each year must be received by the first of November.

The POA Board of Directors will review all nominations and make the final decision. Two or three of the most worthy candidates each year will be selected for induction into the Hall of Fame at the annual POA Christmas Party in December. Let’s make this a wonderful celebration of your POA and some of the really dedicated people who have served to make the POA the great organization that it continues to be.

The VHA Corner

The VHA recently had a story in the Daily Sun headlined: “VHA board provides update on organization’s state of affairs.”

In the story, the VHA treasurer had some recommendations on the priorities and direction of the organization.

He suggested establishing a program to get more members for the VHA, and to establish a Hall of Fame, and to have an appreciation program for all that the VHA does for our community.

It’s nice that the VHA wants to get more members and to pat itself on the back.

But, we think that the VHA has its priorities all mixed up.

The VHA should be taking stands on the many Residents’ Rights issues that affect Villagers. It should be speaking out on what is important for our homeowners in our community.

The best recent example that we can think of is the controversy surrounding the developer’s plan to make the residents of CDD4 pay for repair of the sinkhole on his Nancy Lopez golf course.

The developer originally declined to help CDD4 with a fair share of the repair charges.

The POA said the developer was wrong to snub CDD4 and should pay most if not all of the repair costs.

The VHA said nothing. Not a word. Nada. Zip. Nothing.

We continue to believe that the developer would have agreed to pay his full share early on if the VHA and joined with the POA and stood up for what was right and said what the developer should have paid.

But, the VHA said nothing. Not a word. Nada. Zip. Nothing.

So, the VHA talks about the idea of a Hall of Fame. And, it might like to pat itself on the back.

But, as far as serving the needs and interests of residents, it is a real disappointment in terms of promoting the best interests of Villages residents.

It is apparent that the VHA likes to promote the best interests of the developer and will never take a position on a Residents’ Rights issue that is contrary to the will and selfish interests of the developer.

So, go ahead, VHA – have your appreciation program and pat yourself on the back. It’s too bad you don’t have the best interests of residents as your primary focus.

Cheers and Jeers

Cheers - To the resident on the sixth hole of the Amberwood golf course who came out from his home to warn golfers of approaching dangerous weather. It is things like this that make you proud to be a Villager.

Jeers - To Pete Wahl for canceling his Tuesday morning radio program at 7:35 a.m. That was generally a worthwhile program when Pete talked about local issues. He should continue that five-minute program. The radio station should also publicize it more to attract a larger audience. Most Villagers didn’t even know about it.

Jeers - To the developer and his movie theaters for not showing the Al Gore movie about global warming. No matter what your politics, you should be upset that the developer would censor this movie and deny you the opportunity to see it locally.

Cheers - To the developer for finally paying the full cost of the Nancy Lopez sinkhole repair as well as assuming most of the maintenance and repair costs of the wet ponds in CDD4. For all the ill will and bad public relations this has caused, we wonder why the developer waited so long and was so bullheaded on these issues. This delay was bad form and showed poor business judgment.

Jeers - To some store employees around The Villages who won’t go the extra mile to help Villagers when help is needed. Remember, we can spend our money anywhere. And, anywhere means somewhere else when employees or salespeople aren’t helpful.

Our Place Column

The “Pete’s Place” column has evolved into the “Our Place” column in the recreation supplement to the Thursday Daily Sun. The writing responsibilities will now rotate among Pete Wahl, Janet Tutt, Monica Andersen, and John Rohan.

We view this development as worthwhile. It will be good to get to know Pete’s senior staff through their writings.

We have long been concerned with the occasional subject matter of the column under Mr. Wahl’s direction. He often seemed to run out of material and blabbered on about irrelevant matters. He often talked about football, or his hip surgeries, or the need to use sun block lotions, or his vacations, etc. These stories were nice, but way off the mark in terms of what the column should have been presenting. If Mr. Wahl wanted to write about these irrelevant matters, we often said that he should have presented the stories to the feature editor of the Daily Sun.

We think the Our Place column should focus on the living experience here and the operations of the various local governments. Focus on the CDDs, local governmental matters, new construction developments, community problems, administrative and maintenance issues, amenity issues, traffic, etc.

We were pleased to see Ms. Tutt agree with this in her first column on June1. She said: “We felt it was important for you to get to know us better by using ‘Our Place’ as a way to improve our communication with you. Each of us will talk about the districts, our areas of responsibility, and any changes occurring, and to provide responses to any questions you may have.”

OK – that is a nice start. But, please, no more blabbering about sun block lotions.

Letter to the Editor - Robert & Cecile Kraus:

Recreation Trails Letter

Open Letter to: Pete Wahl, Janet Tutt, and Monica Andersen.

It is our understanding that responsibility for maintenance of the Recreation Trails, which are delineated on The Villages Street Map by MAPSource, (were) discussed at the VCCDD meeting on June 30.

We cannot understand how these can be considered anything but recreation facilities, available to and used by all Villages residents, and even so designated on The Villages Street Map. They are provided for the use of walkers, joggers, skaters, bicyclists, golf carts, and other users.

As recreation facilities, maintenance should be funded by the monthly amenities fees paid by all Villages residents.

A question we have is why some sections of these trails, especially along Buena Vista Boulevard, are so badly deteriorated while adjacent sections are in very good condition. As an engineer who spent a career involved with construction, I would suspect that either the original construction specifications for materials and methods were inadequate, or portions of the trail were not built to the specifications.

Perhaps you can shed some light on this for us.

We would also like to know who, on behalf of future Villages residents, inspects and accepts the Recreation Trails from the developer. There are some places where defects existed right from the start. A section of the trail along Buena Vista Boulevard, just south of the Belle Aire entrance, has been horribly uneven since it was built. There are many places where extra concrete has been patched in to widen the trails in the interest of safety, because they were not built sufficiently wide to begin with.

Please clarify for us how, and by whom, facilities like these are accepted with defects right at the outset.

Update from Elaine Dreidame: Recreation Trails Update

Many thanks to all of you who attended the June 30, 2006, VCCDD meeting in which the recreation trail issue was discussed. Even though the VCCDD Board denied our request, we still believe that the Developer, or his assign, the VCCDD, are responsible for maintaining the recreation trails which run along the side of Buena Vista Boulevard and El Camino Real. We are currently requesting and reviewing a number of documents which Mr. Wahl and Supervisor Moyer referred to during the meeting. Hopefully, by next month, we can advise you as to how we plan to advance our case. Again, thank you for your support.

Letter to the POA President: Villager's Comments

I appreciate the POA's work on behalf of our citizens and am amazed how brainwashed some of these folks are by the developers and Pete Wahl. Keep up the good work.

1. Tires on golf carts not approved. What a mistake. Pete said they have no say in this matter since it has been turned over to a private contractor. This scares me. How many of our amenities will be turned over and we have no say in the future. My tires never damaged the golf course. I drive slowly and observe the 90 degree rule .

2. Roads on east side are in urgent need of repair or re-paving. These are: Lester, Nell and Vermont. These are heavily used by all.

3. Why are so many old, original trailers being replaced with new large ones on the east side? I was told this was a Historic District.

4. Is a class action suit possible against the developer to recover monies we the residents will be paying for years to come through debt service tacked on to our amenities? By the time the politicians get around to investigating and reforming Chapter 190, (the developer) will be gone with millions.

There is much that is good about The Villages and I enjoy living here. However, I do not believe that we should just ignore wrong because we are happy here. It could be much better if we improve on the good and expose the wrong and fight for what is right.

I know that you personally have taken a lot of unjust criticism simply because you stand up to the powers that be and fight for us. Without you we would be without a voice and our lot would be worse. We appreciate your work and willingness to stand up for us. Thank you.

The Villagers have a friend in you, whether they know it or not.

Neil and Mary Garcia

West Schwartz Blvd

VCCDD on VNN?

We happened to notice recently a news story on VNN, The Villages News Network TV, about the frequent meetings of the Lady Lake Town Council. This story was complete with video tape of the meeting and showed several Villagers speaking before the town commissioners.

This got us wondering about having full VNN coverage of the VCCDD and the SLCDD meetings here in The Villages.

Why not broadcast these important meetings here in The Villages on VNN for the benefit of all Villagers?

The meetings are only once a month and generally last about 30-45 minutes. Some meeting were done in 20 minutes; some of the more important meetings have gone on for two hours. Admittedly, some of the meetings are boring; but, these are a minority of the meetings.

Certainly, if Lady Lake Town meetings are broadcast (highlights only), why not broadcast these important center district meetings for our community?

And, since VNN is so repetitive during the day, we doubt that the one or two hours of regular VNN programming would be missed. We think Villagers would welcome the opportunity to see the VCCDD or SLCDD meetings, once a month, rather than the umpteenth showing of the same baseball or bowling plays day after day after day after¼.

The Patron Program Continues to Irritate

The Patron Program at the Lifelong Learning Center continues to allow special discounts for various programs and Lifelong Learning Center courses held in Villages facilities.

The course catalog for Lifelong Learning Center courses shows a multitude of courses in Villages facilities with these special discounts at places like the Savannah Center, the Mulberry Center, the Saddlebrook Recreation Center, Laurel Manor, etc. The rub here is that the Center charges a lower fee for Patron members and a higher fee for residents of The Villages who are non-Patron members.

This is still wrong and unfair to residents who pay the original costs and the upkeep of these Villages facilities. These facilities belong to us and we should not be charged extra to use them.

Residents who are not Patron members pay the costs of these facilities, but are then charged more than Patron members to use them.

This is a continuation of the special consideration for special people who can afford to pay a $50.00 to $75.00 bribe to the Lifelong Learning Center for these special discounts.

Remember the POA Surveys in past years which showed that the Patron Discount program had the lowest favorable score out of 30 items rated by Villages residents. Remember also the separate written polls conducted in a variety of nationality and state club meetings that showed over 99% unfavorable rating for the Patron Discount program.

Why don't the officials at the Lifelong Learning Center get it that Villagers overwhelmingly think the Patron Discount program is unfair and should be discontinued?

What is so hard to understand about this? This is a matter of equity for all Villagers.

Please end this unpopular program now.

POA Survey: Comments Continued

This is a continuation of comments we received in the recently completed Villages Survey. As space permits, we will continue this listing of comments in the future.

********************************

Developer should consider the bar code entry method for gate entry.

Why no gate requiring card at Shay entrance for security?

I bought this property as a gated community per the developer’s ads. That is not true in the Belvedere, Churchill area. Teenagers leaving school are racing down Belvedere to beat the traffic on 466.

And why the gate cards? They are useless. Why not just take the gates down

Sink Holes

Sinkhole solution: Whoever receives the golf course receipts is responsible for golf course maintenance.

Developers are responsible for sink holes. The Morses appear to have their own interests at heart while filling their bank accounts over the needs and interests of residents. We need representation to stop false statements then charging for building golf courses.

Regarding residents paying to fix sinkholes, I think it is an ethical disgrace. These repairs should come out of the greens fees, not from people who don’t play golf and have never stepped foot on Nancy Lopez Golf Course.

Greed

When a snow bird leaves for 5 or 6 months they continue to pay $15.95 to have no garbage picked up. The developer knows how to invoice but knows nothing about reimbursing his own residents (greed).

It is very nice living in The Villages, but we are very concerned about the blatant greed of the developer. We moved here because we liked the philosophy and development principles of Harold Schwartz.

Charges for golf instruction, bowling, restaurants, etc. have increased rapidly. Mr. Schwartz meant this to be a middle class community, but costs are getting out of hand! The Morse family appears to be very greedy! Rents are too high; commissions too low and services are being cut or eliminated.

Golf

I would rate the championship course a “1” except they are playable in the winter. They need to hire a good greens keeper and some people that are golfers. The current pros aren’t worthy of the name. Put some SAND in the sand traps.

The biggest complaint I have is the tee time system. I prefer to play nearer home with a simple phone call to golf course you wish to play. Why complicate things.

Activities

Need pickleball courts on “historic side.”

Need for a Villages dog park.

We would like to have fireworks on the July 4th at the Polo field for residents and guests. Police or firemen could set them.

Landscaping, Maintenance

Flowers are changed too often when they’re still good (added cost).

The streets are kept clean but the tunnels and post office areas are not clean. It is awful in the tunnels!

Misc.

Should be able to make payments against the bond at any time.

Love music on Square but too loud. Too much country, too much line dancing. Music not suited for people in their 60’s & 70’s. Too many dogs on squares. No control by Villages of dogs.

You do a great service to the residents. Maybe we could establish a group in each section to voice problems at meetings. I don’t think the developer would appreciate bad press. May be we should hit them there.

Bonds should be incorporated in price of home instead of “bond.” Up North, developer pays bond.

Pools are not monitored. It would be easy to get in. I’m worried about pool care.

Don’t like change decisions without sounding boards first.

Regarding VHA, a joke. Very protective of developer.

What ever happened to bus service that was offered when we bought.

When the building is complete, seems like some areas should be self governing.

Before we bought our home, pools were shown to be heated to 86 degrees. Now they are between 81–82. Much too cool and complaints by all are disregarded. Safety concerns (burglaries) were not a problem before. We need more security!

Gary Lester seems to feel that he owes us nothing, not even the courtesy of answering questions.

Problems? Go to those in charge. Rarely is anything resolved. We live in the Friendly Place – that means no problems.

· To be continued¼.