Quote:
Originally Posted by njbchbum
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?
|
Again, my concern is with the decision to not enforce an existing deed restriction and the precedent it sets. First, the absence of complaints does not, in itself, mean everyone in the district agrees with not enforcing the restriction. Should the board have conducted a survey/vote to get the actual opinion of the residents? What about residents who bought because of the restrictions in the deed. Ignore them, too? Second, as stated previously, what other restriction is next to be ignored or not enforced? And what prevents that philosophy from being adopted by future boards without resident input since the precedent has been set. Does not enforcing the restriction mean that if someone in the district complains, their complaint will be ignored? After all, the district has chosen to not enforce it. To me, it is a very slippery slope.