At this point in this discussion I feel that I am beating a dead horse just by putting in my two cents worth. Nevertheless, here goes. First of all I have owned many houses over the years within communities both with and without restrictive covenants and have seen many of the positives and negatives which can result from each situation. I personally prefer to have such rules in place to protect my investment and will abide by them until they can be changed if it is for the good of the community as a whole. That said, there are times when the rules can be misinterpreted by the governing authorities to an extreme which can be just as bad.
Our community clearly has rules against any "yard ornaments" other than seasonal ornaments which must be removed after 30 days. I know that the OP used a small (approx. 8") ornament as an example and my question is if one 8" ornament is acceptable what happens when it becomes 6, 8 or 12? One of the latest fads for decorating yards are what I believe are called gazing balls (10-12" brightly colored reflective balls) placed as accent pieces in the flower beds. Personally I like the look but can easily see how even that could get out of hand very quickly if someone decided to place one of every color around their yard.
Although it may seem a minor infraction to some once the rules begin to be broken and even worse ignored by the governing body they are essentially worthless. One statue leads to a fence or a storage shed or perhaps a 30' short wave radio antenna (painted blue of course to match the sky)! I am exaggerating of course but you can see my point. The rules are there for a reason. Rather than acting like the rules should apply to everyone else except you accept the fact that this is what you agreed to when you signed the purchase papers and decided to move to TV.
In our particular area of The Villages the restrictive covenants were created "For the purpose of enhancing and protecting the value, attractiveness and desirability of the lots or tracts constituting such Subdivision". This same document further speaks to the enforcement of this covenants by the property owners by stating "All Owners shall have the right and duty" to prosecute violators of these covenants, conditions or restrictions. The Villages of Lake-Sumter Inc. as having the "right but not the duty to enforce ....... as though Declarant were the Owner...". Notice the differences? We as Owners have a duty to attempt to rectify violations whereas The Villages can do so if they see fit but is under no legal obligation to enforce these regulations. Although it may not seem the neighborly thing to do to turn someone in it is your duty! This does not mean you have to be rude or mean spirited in your actions but you certainly owe it to yourself and your neighbors to bring the infraction to someone's attention. Perhaps you are too shy to directly talk to the offending party and would prefer ask The Villages to do so on your behalf. Personally I see no problem with either scenario. That said, submitting 70, 80 or 90 so called violations seems to be someone going overboard trying to make his/her point.
I believe at this point I have exceeded my two cents worth and have probably used up the better part of a nickel. Thoughtful comments are welcomed. Rants will be politely ignored!
|