Quote:
Originally Posted by graciegirl
QUOTE=Madelaine Amee;1092085
Of course, TV knows who had this work done
Why do you say that? What would make them cover it up? How could the District get anything out of this to benefit them? I just don't understand. WHAT am I missing???????????
Someone said that the tree cutting deal would make The Villages look bad. I say, big whoopin' deal. Sex on the Square makes The Villages look bad. People who don't live here, don't care if people cut down trees. It's not shocking, hardly interesting. If I read that a man from Reynoldsburg, Ohio cut down trees in the middle of their town square, I wouldn't turn up the TV and huddle close. It just isn't news worthy.
|
Hi GG: i most often agree with you but concerning your thoughts here I might remind you that this thread and a similar one have been ongoing for sometime. And the caption isn't "cutting trees". "Its residents get stuck with big bill because someone cut down trees in a protected area".
As to the couple having sex in the square having sex in public is done in every state in the union the difference here is that this is a 55+ community and that's what made it news but then sex sells in America. Two different issues altogether. I believe the people in charge thought they could play it don and pay without much notice that's why Ceward call to the sheriff got the brush off.
VHA, POA District Developer have an aversion to bad publicity, and/or lawsuits because they protect the brand. that's why the IRS were hush hush until they could not be hushed any longer by any of them. that's why the POA's filing of the amenity lawsuit got settled so quickly and to my thinking the POA caved too quickly
I can see why this issue carries on because its hard to believe that those tall oaks could be removed in such a stealth manner because not much is missed in this community
Personal Best Regards: