Quote:
Originally Posted by quidam65
But those liberties are controlled by covenants that, should I decide to move to TV, are covenants that I FREELY CHOOSE to accept. I currently live in a house within a homeowners' association (and one who's entire amenities are a flower bed at the entrance to the subdivision), so I am well aware of what types of property restrictions and requirements exist.
Blechman, however, would like the GOVERNMENT to DENY people (those over age 55) the right to choose the covenants they wish, and instead FORCE them to accept the covenants it desires to IMPOSE upon them. The only senior-restricted communities he supports are assisted living centers. Places like TV, Sun City, etc. would be OUTLAWED in Blechman's ideal world.
I am sorry you are unhappy with the requirements of TV, either in theory or in practice. Given the current economy I understand that, if you are an unhappy TV resident, you may be unable to sell your residence without taking an unsustainable loss. I hope that the economy improves to where you can sell and move to a place more to your liking. Maybe Blechman can give you some assistance.
|
Is that what Blechman wrote? I only thumbed through
Leisureville but did not get the impression that the writer wanted government to force covenants on home buyers. The NYT Times book review of
Leisureville makes it sound like some 55+ Playboy mansion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/bo...nd-t.html?_r=1
I have found that there are a good number of Democrats in the Villages. They just seem to like to stay in the woodwork more than the much more visible Republicans. There are also a lot of Independents.