Quote:
Originally Posted by orangeblossombaby
i'm not overly concerned about whether or not we allow rentals. My concern is more about management of those rentals. I think people should be allowed to rent their properties. But they should be required to either a) still actually live in the villages while renting out their rental unit or b) give over the management of their rental unit to a licensed, insured, local property management company.
That way if something goes wrong, the entire neighborhood isn't at the mercy of "when the owner gets around to it" or "when the owner is able to come down and handle it." instead, they'd call the local property management company, who would then - manage the property. Either kick out the short-term tenants with their toddler child, or oversee the replacement of the exploded hot water heater, or shut down the golf-cart-sales business the tenant is conducting in the driveway.
Landlords who don't live in the villages, don't have that same investment into the community that residents have. They also don't have the same sense of urgency when something goes wrong. And they're not getting paid to care.
|
good idea. I think the mgmt company should be a sub division of the sheriffs department . Staffed by ,first preference, retired leo's