[njbchbum]

Originally Posted by njbchbum

should the developer be allowed to take away a permitted practice you have enjoyed for 20+ years? what will you fight for re that issue?

and since when can one not fight for what is good for oneself?

and if one is fighting for something that has no impact on "we" why are "we" in the fight?

Originally Posted by mikeod

PLEASE show me where in the deed for your district it says signs other than the homeowner's name are permitted on non-villa properties OR show me where the developer has indicated his intent to initiate sign restrictions on villa properties and I will understand your displeasure.

You cannot claim that establishing a precedent of ignoring deed restrictions should be of no concern to me. It already has affected those north of 466 and there is no reason that residents and outside agencies pushing for this will not continue the fight to overcome existing deed restrictions once those districts south of 466 are turned over to resident boards.

my post was not specific to signs but it was to deed restrictions. it is a generic question re deed restrictions.

and since infractions of deed restrictions are dealt with on a complaint basis - enforcement of same should be left to the individual offender AND to their supervisors who are responsible for enforcement.

if an area has been granted the duty and responsibility to govern itself and thus enforce - and has chosen to not enforce a deed restriction - where does someone from outside that area have the right/authority to interfere with the area's governing practices? call it self-rule, home rule, autonomy - it is the business of the community.

do you want someone from the village of liberty park or silver lake or sanibel telling the supervising body of the village of caroline how to run things there?