20 & 30 Year Old Villagers

[N44125]

I'm getting a little tired of 20 & 30 year old 'Villagers' always in trouble as headlined in our electronic newspaper.

Renters, owners, 'kids' who moved back in with their parents...whatever!

[Rags123]

I'm getting a little tired of 20 & 30 year old 'Villagers' always in trouble as headlined in our electronic newspaper.

Renters, owners, 'kids' who moved back in with their parents...whatever!

The Villages has changed so tremendously over the years. I first became a "Villager" in 1999 and bought our first home in 2001.

The changes are mostly the explosion in population and with that explosion a change in attitude of those who move here. In addition, there has been an explosion of renters and "vactioners" who bring with them a totally different attitude. Add to the societal ills which at times brings children and grandchildren with problems to live with the family, and you now have quite a mix.

I do not mind the population explosion at all but do mind the attitude change I have seen here in The Villages. Those who come here and forget that this is our home for 12 months a year and we are no on vacation.

Don't mean to sound negative, but telling you what I have seen over the years. This may be an age restricted community, but it is not a retirement community any longer, in my view

[rn1tv]

It is sad that that is where the news media publicity is still placed. I think these younger folks are here because they are unable to make it on their own in today's world. Yes, it is tough out there but don't come here and make a disgrace of yourself and this wonderful community! I am really tired of my northern "friends" calling to ridicule my hometown because of a few who probably don't belong here. Just my humble opinion!

[Bogie Shooter]

Many in the 35 to 45 age group. With a rap sheet.

[Topspinmo]

IMO age restrictions only on new homes. Several people own more than 1 home in the villages for the winter rent money. Long as someone got the bucks they could care less how old or what morale's they have. IMO you should only be able to own one house in retirement community. But, that's My Opinion.

[Wandatime]

Looked to me like there were plenty of seniors AND even officers of the law in the latest round-up.

[George Bieniaszek]

In a community of over 100,000 people like The Villages, you have to expect a few crazies to sneak in thru the gates :)

[onslowe]

Looked to me like there were plenty of seniors AND even officers of the law in the latest round-up.

Please look again. A 23 year old Villager and a 28 year old Villager were arrested. What the OP is complaining about, as I am, is the summer long parade of under 55's and who are listed as "Villagers" being arrested each week it seems.

This is not a game of tag. To refer to seniors being arrested is to deflect the focus from the problem, the long array of younger people getting into serious trouble with the law here - as residents. Please deal with the topic and don't imply the OP is lying or off his rocker. That's smokescreening and dishonest.

The problem is not the 80/20 rule. All sorts of snappy mathematicians can prove the inherent flaws in such a system and still have the system 'technically' valid. Not the point. The spirit of the 80/20 rule is being violated.

I bought here in reliance upon certain very pronounced items, like it being essentially a retirement community. I did not really get that, and it seems that I am getting less and less of it as each week goes by.

Another person or family trust or such buys a place here and rents it out to anyone who can breathe and walk and pay rent. Age doesn't matter. Apparently references don't either in all too many cases.

Last year it was a meth lab set up by some sterling under 55 tenants. This summer we had stolen beer cases and golf cart chases, lots of DWI's, and so on all performed by these persons who are certainly not retirement age. This week's arrests included cocaine possession. How does one support a drug habit? Hmmmm.

There is apparently no oversight and no review of these landlords who seemingly don't care a damn about what we worked for and what we thought we were buying into.

Please take a break from liberal platitudes and ever so 'rational' and snide observations and consider this is, for most of us, our biggest investment and our home. Maybe remember the old definition of a liberal - a person who hasn't been mugged yet.

[VT2TV]

I have no problem doing the math of the 80/20 rule. But I could have sworn that I read in one of the POA or HOA papers several months ago that a developer could actually over ride that . I doubt that they would because there are bound to be various incentives for that rule. But does anyone know anything about the developer over riding the rule or was I asleep when I read the paper. Wonder if it gets to be a problem there is any adjustments or fewer numbers of young people who are eligible to reside here. And finally, does anyone know how or if anyone is even attempting to keep track of the under 55 numbers. I personally know a LOT of people who have kids and/or even grandkids living with them, not to mention the huge number of under 55 who buy here. I am not totally against people under 55, it would be nice to have some smaller number that are allowed. No flames please, I am just asking questions to see if anyone know the answers.

[Indydealmaker]

IMO age restrictions only on new homes. Several people own more than 1 home in the villages for the winter rent money. Long as someone got the bucks they could care less how old or what morale's they have. IMO you should only be able to own one house in retirement community. But, that's My Opinion.

In spite of what it may look like, the age restrictions apply to all homes in The Villages. Since up to 20% MAY be under 55 (yet over 19) that means that right now 10,000 homes or more can be legally occupied by whipper snappers. We are nowhere near that benchmark. Also keep in mind that every home that has a 55+ resident can also have two or three more legal residents as young as 19, so eliminating rentals might not have the aging impact that you would hope for.

[N44125]

....

[2BNTV]

Fortunately or unfortunately, the word is out the TV is a party type town that will attract all ages. I'm sure they are some kids who moved back with their parents to get their life together, and some younger people, who still have problems, and resort to criminal behavior.

I agree this should be a 55 plus town, but it does the heart good to see younger people having a good time. With the population at 110,000 and still growing, they are always going to be a small percentage of younger people who don't have good intentions on their minds. IMHO

[Walter123]

I'm getting a little tired of 20 & 30 year old 'Villagers' always in trouble as headlined in our electronic newspaper.

Renters, owners, 'kids' who moved back in with their parents...whatever!

A generalization at best. Yes, I agree with the poster that said there are plenty of seniors being arrested. The Villages is a pretty big city with diversity and the same problems as any big city.

[Walter123]

Looked to me like there were plenty of seniors AND even officers of the law in the latest round-up.

:agree:

[rubicon]

I believe the original post and that which followed paints with a very broad brush. If you are going to be critical here then please be more definitive. Not all residents allowed mooching kids to come live with them. There are village residents here whom for various reasons had their adult children come and live with them and many live quietly and uneventfully, going totally unnoticed in the community.

I too have had a concern for the manner in which this community was marketed and the manner in which it really is unfolding.

[perrjojo]

Is the atmosphere of TV really changing or is it that the "other online news" reports every little thing that goes wrong in TV?

[Bogie Shooter]

I have no problem doing the math of the 80/20 rule. But I could have sworn that I read in one of the POA or HOA papers several months ago that a developer could actually over ride that . I doubt that they would because there are bound to be various incentives for that rule. But does anyone know anything about the developer over riding the rule or was I asleep when I read the paper. Wonder if it gets to be a problem there is any adjustments or fewer numbers of young people who are eligible to reside here. And finally, does anyone know how or if anyone is even attempting to keep track of the under 55 numbers. I personally know a LOT of people who have kids and/or even grandkids living with them, not to mention the huge number of under 55 who buy here. I am not totally against people under 55, it would be nice to have some smaller number that are allowed. No flames please, I am just asking questions to see if anyone know the answers.

Children are a deed violation. Call Community Standards.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

I have no problem doing the math of the 80/20 rule. But I could have sworn that I read in one of the POA or HOA papers several months ago that a developer could actually over ride that . I doubt that they would because there are bound to be various incentives for that rule. But does anyone know anything about the developer over riding the rule or was I asleep when I read the paper. Wonder if it gets to be a problem there is any adjustments or fewer numbers of young people who are eligible to reside here. And finally, does anyone know how or if anyone is even attempting to keep track of the under 55 numbers. I personally know a LOT of people who have kids and/or even grandkids living with them, not to mention the huge number of under 55 who buy here. I am not totally against people under 55, it would be nice to have some smaller number that are allowed. No flames please, I am just asking questions to see if anyone know the answers.

You may not have a problem with the math, but a lot of people have a problem understanding the rule. Under the 80/20 rule, up to 80% of the people living in The Villages could be under 55.

The other thing as someone already pointed out is that we are a community of over 100,000 people and still growing. Look at the crime rates of other cities of that size in this country and you'll dee that we have a very small problem. Of course if you read a certain online newspaper every morning you'll see that almost every day one or two people are arrested for something. That might seem like a lot but read the police reports of other cities of 100,000 people and you'll se that what we have in a month, they have in a day.

If you think that there is going to be zero crime, you are living in fantasy land.

Additionally, some of those arrested are over 55. So the small problem that we have is not caused 100% by younger people living here.

[blueash]

Out of curiosity I did a search using the term DUI on the electronic news site. I then selected only those stories where the person was a Villager and sorted by age decade. Note that this only found stories with DUI in the story. For instance the recent story of a young man on a cart path at night with his brake lights on (very suspicious) does not have DUI in the story thus it was not a hit.

I went back several pages and had 26 stories:

Age 20 - 29 0
30 - 39 5
40 - 49 4
50 - 59 6
60 - 69 7
70 + 4

There were 17 men and 9 women

[Bogie Shooter]

You may not have a problem with the math, but a lot of people have a problem understanding the rule. Under the 80/20 rule, up to 80% of the people living in The Villages could be under 55.

The other thing as someone already pointed out is that we are a community of over 100,000 people and still growing. Look at the crime rates of other cities of that size in this country and you'll dee that we have a very small problem. Of course if you read a certain online newspaper every morning you'll see that almost every day one or two people are arrested for something. That might seem like a lot but read the police reports of other cities of 100,000 people and you'll se that what we have in a month, they have in a day.

If you think that there is going to be zero crime, you are living in fantasy land.

Additionally, some of those arrested are over 55. So the small problem that we have is not caused 100% by younger people living here.

Hey doc, isn't it 20% under 55?

[N44125]

Blueash..nice work. Your analysis certainly puts things in perspective as to which age group is causing the majority of the problems. Thanks for the effort.

[redwitch]

When I first moved here, my daughter lived with me. My neighbors loved her! She was kind, helpful, considerate. Once she found a job and had saved some money, she moved out. One neighbor kindly suggested that I move to her apartment and she stay here.

There are several young adults living in TV with their parents mainly for economic reasons. The majority are great neighbors. Yes, some kids here have issues and some get in trouble and some are downright bad news but the majority are not.

As to there being more crime here today, I'm not convinced. We wanted a source letting us know everything going on in TV. We now have it. Sadly, it lets us know that there are people in TV that are not always good and that use poor judgment. My gut feeling is that these people were around and being arrested as long as TV existed, we just didn't know about it.

[rubicon]

Is perception someone's reality? The 80/20 rule is a standard application for retirement communities and it means age 55+ 80% of population under 55 20%..It was easy to forecast these the state of The Village because these complaints were raised by a few of us long ago but our concerns were shut out by residents that didn't care or didn't want to know. A few mis-characterized it as animus against/toward the Developer .

[ajbrown]

You may not have a problem with the math, but a lot of people have a problem understanding the rule. Under the 80/20 rule, up to 80% of the people living in The Villages could be under 55.

<stuff snipped by Alan>



Although, I suspect you made a typo, your statement is not wrong. Nothing in the housing act prevents 90% of the people living in The Villages from being under 55 and still qualify as a 55 and over community. The act is not about ownership, it simply states at least 80 percent of the occupied units must be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or greater

So imagine in my exaggerated example, the homeowner is 30, living with his wife (32), his father who is 57, his father's wife who is 49, their brother-in-law and his wife who are 26.

That situation qualifies as over 55 household.

[NotGolfer]

There are several young adults living in TV with their parents mainly for economic reasons. The majority are great neighbors. Yes, some kids here have issues and some get in trouble and some are downright bad news but the majority are not.

As to there being more crime here today, I'm not convinced. We wanted a source letting us know everything going on in TV. We now have it. Sadly, it lets us know that there are people in TV that are not always good and that use poor judgment. My gut feeling is that these people were around and being arrested as long as TV existed, we just didn't know about it.

I was going to post exactly what you said in the "bold" type, Redwitch! I'd venture to say that there is even still much more going on that doesn't make the papers as well. We don't live in a gilded world....wish we did however.

As for several posters, I know of one house a few blocks from where we lived that always has cars in the driveway (as in staying there) and the place is unkempt (it's south of 466) by the rest of the neighborhood standards. I'm quite surprised that their immediate neighbors haven't complained about that part. We surmise that the parent(s) bought the place and ALL the kids and relatives there of come and use it as a vacation place....at least that's what it looks like to us. I have no problem with family coming but at least keep the place up.

[manaboutown]

It seems to me the issue many folks are having with "wild" young adults residing within The Villages is that it alters the character from that of a 55 and over retirement community. Most mature adults who move to a 55 and over community want to live in a 55 and over community, not among the population at large. That is why they make the move in the first place. Granted some residents will require adult children or paid attendants living with them as caretakers. In some cases the caretaking children themselves are over 55.

Problems arise when the bungee kids are those with substance abuse problems, serious criminal records or are otherwise disruptive and incapable of doing life on their own. Many parents tend to take in such malfeasors which of course increases crime within the community.

The Villages is not the only 55 and over community in which this is happening which I realize is not comforting in the least.

[billethkid]

It seems to me the issue many folks are having with "wild" young adults residing within The Villages is that it alters the character from that of a 55 and over retirement community. Most mature adults who move to a 55 and over community want to live in a 55 and over community, not among the population at large. That is why they make the move in the first place. Granted some residents will require adult children or paid attendants living with them as caretakers. In some cases the caretaking children themselves are over 55.

Problems arise when the bungee kids are those with substance abuse problems, serious criminal records or are otherwise disruptive and incapable of doing life on their own. Many parents tend to take in such malfeasors which of course increases crime within the community.

The Villages is not the only 55 and over community in which this is happening which I realize is not comforting in the least.

I disagree that it alters the image of TV. I do believe that it reflects a normal statistical presence found in any community.

I also believe increased communications of instances that have been ongoing but are now known do make it "seem" like things are getting worse. In reality they are not. Just the visibility has now been raised.

TV is more than double from when we built here in 2004. It is a much larger shopping community than when we moved here. For us TV has only improved over the years.

We just do not believe in allowing the minority (not race) or isolated incidents change the perspective....which media emphasis tends to promote.

[2BNTV]

People used to complain The Daily Fun only reported good news items, as it was the developer's paper, or tool. The Daily Sun now reports these type of problems and people complain about these types of episodes in TV, as if there is a major crime wave.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, even though it's my birthday. :D

As Red said, I suspect these type of things happened before, but were never reported. You have to expect some element of crimes happening, with a population of 110,000. To expect zero crimes, is unrealistic. That is a pretty big town, not to mention the surrounding area population, that comes into TV.

[Polar Bear]

I disagree that it alters the image of TV. I do believe that it reflects a normal statistical presence found in any community...


Agree 100%.

[Wandatime]

Please look again. A 23 year old Villager and a 28 year old Villager were arrested. What the OP is complaining about, as I am, is the summer long parade of under 55's and who are listed as "Villagers" being arrested each week it seems.

This is not a game of tag. To refer to seniors being arrested is to deflect the focus from the problem, the long array of younger people getting into serious trouble with the law here - as residents. Please deal with the topic and don't imply the OP is lying or off his rocker. That's smokescreening and dishonest.

The problem is not the 80/20 rule. All sorts of snappy mathematicians can prove the inherent flaws in such a system and still have the system 'technically' valid. Not the point. The spirit of the 80/20 rule is being violated.

I bought here in reliance upon certain very pronounced items, like it being essentially a retirement community. I did not really get that, and it seems that I am getting less and less of it as each week goes by.

Another person or family trust or such buys a place here and rents it out to anyone who can breathe and walk and pay rent. Age doesn't matter. Apparently references don't either in all too many cases.

Last year it was a meth lab set up by some sterling under 55 tenants. This summer we had stolen beer cases and golf cart chases, lots of DWI's, and so on all performed by these persons who are certainly not retirement age. This week's arrests included cocaine possession. How does one support a drug habit? Hmmmm.

There is apparently no oversight and no review of these landlords who seemingly don't care a damn about what we worked for and what we thought we were buying into.

Please take a break from liberal platitudes and ever so 'rational' and snide observations and consider this is, for most of us, our biggest investment and our home. Maybe remember the old definition of a liberal - a person who hasn't been mugged yet.

I was with you up til that last paragraph, which was rude and unnecessary.

[Bonny]

We moved here in 2000. I was 48 and hubby was 49. We were those bad people under 55 that many are complaining about.
We fully knew the 80 - 20 rule. They tell everyone. People that complain about it or don't like it, shouldn't have moved here.
Our daughter, 19, lived with us for awhile. She then met a great guy, got a good job, got married and moved to their own place.
Then my stepson, 27, came to stay with us. He got a job with the Villages reality, met a great gal and then they got their own place.
All my neighbors loved them.
So I take offence that everyone is putting everyone into these categories such as young trouble makers under 55 or ever so sweet law abiding people over 55.
Don't understand why people move here knowing all the things they don't like & now sit and complain about it all and want it changed. I just don't get it. :shrug:
I LOVE the Villages !!!

[TheVillageChicken]

I have compiled a list of the ways that having these younger folk live here have impacted my own life.

Here is my list:
1. There is a really nice looking younger gal that works out at the same time as I do. I don't skip my workouts.









.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Hey doc, isn't it 20% under 55?

The law reads that 80% of the homes must have at least one person over the age of 55 residing in them.

It's very improbable, but you could conceivably have four people living in every home and three could be under 55. And that's only in 80% of the homes. The other 20% of the homes could have all four people under the age of 55 living in them. To make things simple let's say that at build out there are 100,000 homes and 400,000 people. That would mean that only 80,000 of the 400,000 residents would be required to be over 55. That's only 20% of the residents.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Although, I suspect you made a typo, your statement is not wrong. Nothing in the housing act prevents 90% of the people living in The Villages from being under 55 and still qualify as a 55 and over community. The act is not about ownership, it simply states at least 80 percent of the occupied units must be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or greater

So imagine in my exaggerated example, the homeowner is 30, living with his wife (32), his father who is 57, his father's wife who is 49, their brother-in-law and his wife who are 26.

That situation qualifies as over 55 household.

That's true. I always use an example of four people to a household because we do have many two bedroom and some one bedroom homes. I believe that there are occupancy ordinances that limit the number of people in a home to two per bedroom. But yes, if there were six people living in every house the number of LEGAL under 55 residents could exceed 90%. In addition, don't forget that 20% of the homes could have all occupants under the age of 55.

Incidentally, I am one of those homes with an under 55 person. My wife is not yet 55. She is a good responsible person with a job and has never been in trouble. She rarely drinks and obeys all the laws.

Like I said before. The number of problems that we have for a community of this size is very, very small compared to other communities of 100,000 plus people.

[Indydealmaker]

People used to complain The Daily Fun only reported good news items, as it was the developer's paper, or tool. The Daily Sun now reports these type of problems and people complain about these types of episodes in TV, as if there is a major crime wave.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, even though it's my birthday. :D

As Red said, I suspect these type of things happened before, but were never reported. You have to expect some element of crimes happening, with a population of 110,000. To expect zero crimes, is unrealistic. That is a pretty big town, not to mention the surrounding area population, that comes into TV.

:agree:

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Is perception someone's reality? The 80/20 rule is a standard application for retirement communities and it means age 55+ 80% of population under 55 20%..It was easy to forecast these the state of The Village because these complaints were raised by a few of us long ago but our concerns were shut out by residents that didn't care or didn't want to know. A few mis-characterized it as animus against/toward the Developer .

This is a common misconception about the 80/20 rule.

As has been pointed out in several posts now, what the law says is that 80% of the occupied residences must have at least one person over the age of 55 living in them. You could conceivably have one person over 55 and 5 people under 55 legally living in a three bedroom home in 80% of the homes. Then you could have six people under the age of 55 living in 20% of the three bedroom homes.

[Indydealmaker]

We moved here in 2000. I was 48 and hubby was 49. We were those bad people under 55 that many are complaining about.
We fully knew the 80 - 20 rule. They tell everyone. People that complain about it or don't like it, shouldn't have moved here.
Our daughter, 19, lived with us for awhile. She then met a great guy, got a good job, got married and moved to their own place.
Then my stepson, 27, came to stay with us. He got a job with the Villages reality, met a great gal and then they got their own place.
All my neighbors loved them.
So I take offence that everyone is putting everyone into these categories such as young trouble makers under 55 or ever so sweet law abiding people over 55.
Don't understand why people move here knowing all the things they don't like & now sit and complain about it all and want it changed. I just don't get it. :shrug:
I LOVE the Villages !!!

Bonnie, After reading many of the posts on TOTV as well as the online newspaper, it would appear that many people moved here without reading the deed restrictions and researching age restricted communities. Some even were shocked to find out that The Villages is not a gated community.

[Bonny]

Bonnie, After reading many of the posts on TOTV as well as the online newspaper, it would appear that many people moved here without reading the deed restrictions and researching age restricted communities. Some even were shocked to find out that The Villages is not a gated community.
We looked at a few other places and they all said about the 80 - 20 rule. I knew it wasn't gated the day we first came to look cause I could go to the gate and say hi and they lifted the gate. LOL ;)
I have a friend who's been here 14 years and still complains about the bond. Ha ha

[PennBF]

The problem is not the under 55 restriction(s) but that when someone under 55 commits a rather serious crime there are no consequences. Any person under 55 who commits a felony or is charged with drugs should be restricted from visiting or living in The Villages. I know I did not include those 55 and over as they were and are living within the age "senior rules" of The Villages. But even with 55 and over those committing felonies/drug laws should have consequences. A fundemental problem today is there are no consequences for those who abuse communities and the quite llife of residents. Some examples are taking away
Country Club, pool, and Rec Center priveliges. The member cards can be so marked to control these people. I am betting the violations will fall.:police:

[onslowe]

I was with you up til that last paragraph, which was rude and unnecessary.

Wanda, I admit that I get revved up on this overall topic. That's an explanation of sorts, but certainly not an excuse for my leaving in my last paragraph which was a gratuitous zinger and a hurtful one to other posters, you included.

It was wrong of me, and I acknowledge it and apologize.

I have to say, perhaps to clarify my upset, that it is not and has never been an under 55 issue as such. I knew full well about the rule when I bought. Indeed, my Villages sales agent himself bought here when he was 40. I am sorry for any offense to Bonny or any others that my own words may have caused.

The issue is oversight of seemingly out of control single or multi-house landlords. I know very well that steps and measures can be introduced as mandatory items in the leasing process. I believe also that some kind of penalty should exist for the wrongdoing tenants, even those who might not maintain the rented property and allow it to become an eyesore. Of course, the same holds true for errant homeowners.

If there is a sense that 'anything goes' then, in fact, everything will indeed go. A person or corporation or family trust should not buy a house or houses and rent them out solely for the biggest return. Property rights do not go that far. There can be reasonable mandates in place so that maybe those who are habitual wrongdoers, or evictees or who become wrongdoers while here are faced with very strict penalties for the good of this place and the law abiding retirees who live here and have invested here.

I'm not Chicken Little, nor am I making mountains out of mole hills. Sometimes, it is wiser to redirect things in the early stages for the good of everyone - and the value of their investments and their right to quiet enjoyment of their homes and surroundings.

I think it is broken and should be fixed.

[Bonny]

The problem is not the under 55 restriction(s) but that when someone under 55 commits a rather serious crime there are no consequences. Any person under 55 who commits a felony or is charged with drugs should be restricted from visiting or living in The Villages. I know I did not include those 55 and over as they were and are living within the age "senior rules" of The Villages. But even with 55 and over those committing felonies/drug laws should have consequences. A fundemental problem today is there are no consequences for those who abuse communities and the quite llife of residents. Some examples are taking away
Country Club, pool, and Rec Center priveliges. The member cards can be so marked to control these people. I am betting the violations will fall.:police:
Sorry but if someone under 55 commits a felony or is charged with drugs and can't live here, then those over 55 committing the same crime shouldn't be allowed to live here either.
So that would mean if they are 54 out they go, 55 they can stay ?
Do you realize how many people over the age of 55 are using drugs here ? I can name at least 30 people that I know use drugs.
What are the "senior rules" in the Villages ? I've been here 14 1/2 years and I'm not familiar with them.

[Bizdoc]

There are good reasons for the 80/20 rule, mostly to maintain the exemption to fair housing laws based on age. If you read up on the early 55 plus communities, you'll find out what happens when you don't have that - the entire community becomes family housing and the seniors get squeezed out.

While I share the discomfort with the problems of 20/30 somethings who get in trouble, I also recall a fair number of people who moan about not being able to have their grandkids for more than 30 days per year. Folks, you can't have it both ways.

Alternately, vote in judges who will put the pedal to the metal in sentencing problem people. You may not agree with strict sentences, but they do help filter out problem people. Just don't get huffy when folks over 55 get equally stiff sentences.

I do have to admit that the latest tale of drunken sex on the cart path made me start humming "Why Don't We Do It in The Road"

[rubicon]

Villages marketing does with every marketing department do....market the upside. One can't say they lied but they certainly said things and staged The Villages that created a pivot affect for prospective buyers. For instance they call it a retirement community. What does that denote to most people? Perhaps some can retire before age 55 but not most. Prospective buyers whether with a realtor or on the trolley watched as people flashed gate passes in order to raise a gate.....and don't forget the existence of a gate in the first place. I can remember one marketer painting a picture of grand kids visiting and then losing sight of taillights as they returned home.

Some of us did the math on the 80/20 but always they came back to this was after all a retirement community and that was their market.

[Indydealmaker]

It would be a bit of nirvana to know that all of our neighbors were true blue, trustworthy, law-abiding, drug-free nice guys.

However, that cannot be legislated. The only legal housing restrictions that I know of relate to convicted sex offenders.

Everybody else gets to fly under the radar, until they don't.

[tuctba]

We bought in 2004 when we were 46. At the time we were told they surpassed the 80/20 and wouldn't sell to us. So instead they sent us to First Village Reality. We bought a new home that was being flipped by a couple who bought 3 homes at the time. One for them and 2 to flip. We paid forty thousand more for the house that they closed on only 6 weeks earlier. It was still the best thing we ever did! Love TV[emoji1]

[Indydealmaker]

We bought in 2004 when we were 46. At the time we were told they surpassed the 80/20 and wouldn't sell to us. So instead they sent us to First Village Reality. We bought a new home that was being flipped by a couple who bought 3 homes at the time. One for them and 2 to flip. We paid forty thousand more for the house that they closed on only 6 weeks earlier. It was still the best thing we ever did! Love TV[emoji1]

You could have dumped your spouse. Remarried an older one and saved some dough! :1rotfl:

[Bigben007]

We bought in 2004 when we were 46. At the time we were told they surpassed the 80/20 and wouldn't sell to us. So instead they sent us to First Village Reality. We bought a new home that was being flipped by a couple who bought 3 homes at the time. One for them and 2 to flip. We paid forty thousand more for the house that they closed on only 6 weeks earlier. It was still the best thing we ever did! Love TV[emoji1]


For me. . . . I could not imagine going to live in a retirement village at the age of 46! Huh?

[tuctba]

We didn't move yet. We've been only renting to snowbirds for the last 10 years and using the + 100k in income to pay down the debt. Hopefully in a couple of years we will retire to this home and make it our own.

[Wandatime]

Wanda, I admit that I get revved up on this overall topic. That's an explanation of sorts, but certainly not an excuse for my leaving in my last paragraph which was a gratuitous zinger and a hurtful one to other posters, you included.

It was wrong of me, and I acknowledge it and apologize.

I have to say, perhaps to clarify my upset, that it is not and has never been an under 55 issue as such. I knew full well about the rule when I bought. Indeed, my Villages sales agent himself bought here when he was 40. I am sorry for any offense to Bonny or any others that my own words may have caused.

The issue is oversight of seemingly out of control single or multi-house landlords. I know very well that steps and measures can be introduced as mandatory items in the leasing process. I believe also that some kind of penalty should exist for the wrongdoing tenants, even those who might not maintain the rented property and allow it to become an eyesore. Of course, the same holds true for errant homeowners.

If there is a sense that 'anything goes' then, in fact, everything will indeed go. A person or corporation or family trust should not buy a house or houses and rent them out solely for the biggest return. Property rights do not go that far. There can be reasonable mandates in place so that maybe those who are habitual wrongdoers, or evictees or who become wrongdoers while here are faced with very strict penalties for the good of this place and the law abiding retirees who live here and have invested here.

I'm not Chicken Little, nor am I making mountains out of mole hills. Sometimes, it is wiser to redirect things in the early stages for the good of everyone - and the value of their investments and their right to quiet enjoyment of their homes and surroundings.

I think it is broken and should be fixed.

Thank you for your most gracious apology. It is appreciated and accepted. You and the other posters all have some valid points. I'm not sure there is an easy answer, but like you I most definitely want to maintain the value of my investment in both the real estate and the lifestyle.

[janmcn]

For me. . . . I could not imagine going to live in a retirement village at the age of 46! Huh?


I agree, especially a retirement village in the middle of nowhere. IMO, It would seem that most people in their mid-forties would like to be where the action is regarding shopping, dining, entertainment, employment opportunities, cultural activities, etc, and that is certainly not this area.

[eweissenbach]

[QUOTE=billethkid;963193]I disagree that it alters the image of TV. I do believe that it reflects a normal statistical presence found in any community.

I also believe increased communications of instances that have been ongoing but are now known do make it "seem" like things are getting worse. In reality they are not. Just the visibility has now been raised.

TV is more than double from when we built here in 2004. It is a much larger shopping community than when we moved here. For us TV has only improved over the years.

We just do not believe in allowing the minority (not race) or isolated incidents change the perspective....which media empBhasis tends to promote.[/]

exactly

[DougB]

Out of curiosity I did a search using the term DUI on the electronic news site. I then selected only those stories where the person was a Villager and sorted by age decade. Note that this only found stories with DUI in the story. For instance the recent story of a young man on a cart path at night with his brake lights on (very suspicious) does not have DUI in the story thus it was not a hit.

I went back several pages and had 26 stories:

Age 20 - 29 0
30 - 39 5
40 - 49 4
50 - 59 6
60 - 69 7
70 + 4
There were 17 men and 9 women

I guess those 11 drunks over 60 we aren't tired of because they "belong" here?

[eweissenbach]

For me. . . . I could not imagine going to live in a retirement village at the age of 46! Huh?

I played golf at Palmer with two guys that I would guess were in their late thirties to early forties. One of them had moved to TV and the other visited him and soon he and his wife bought on the same street. Both of them worked in sales and spent a lot of time in their home offices on the computer and cel phone, communicating with customers. Both flew to customers a couple times a month. They were avid golfers and loved the golf available in The Villages. There are a million stories in the naked city.

[sueandskip]

I just recently bought a new home ...I had to sign as part of our contract with the bank a paper stating that atleast one of us was 55 years old or older...

[sueandskip]

by your numbers 55% of the DWI's are under the age of 50....Thank You for your support !

[jbdlfan]

I agree, especially a retirement village in the middle of nowhere. IMO, It would seem that most people in their mid-forties would like to be where the action is regarding shopping, dining, entertainment, employment opportunities, cultural activities, etc, and that is certainly not this area.

You're joking right? I was 49 and my spouse 45 when we bought here. Let's see, we go to dinner, the grocery store and work in a golf cart. I can drive down to a square with my other under 55 friends and enjoy a drink and music. I can play softball with my under 55 friends. My home value is generally rising each year. Gee, I don't know why any young person would move here.....
Do you all know how many people under 55 actually live here????? MANY

[Average Guy]

by your numbers 55% of the DWI's are under the age of 50....Thank You for your support !

Actually, his data show 9 under the age of 50 and 17 age 50 and older. So, 9 of 26 are under 50. That is 35 percent under the age of 50.

[TheVillageChicken]

Actually, his data show 9 under the age of 50 and 17 age 50 and older. So, 9 of 26 are under 50. That is 35 percent under the age of 50.

Conclusion......old folks can hold their liquor.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Actually, his data show 9 under the age of 50 and 17 age 50 and older. So, 9 of 26 are under 50. That is 35 percent under the age of 50.

What these statistics don't show, is that there is a much higher percentage of older people here. To make the numbers meaningful, you's need to know the number of residents in each of the age groups.

[The Mountaineer]

What these statistics don't show, is that there is a much higher percentage of older people here. To make the numbers meaningful, you's need to know the number of residents in each of the age groups.

Bishops send their pedophiles to someone else's diocese.

Snowbirds dump their bad boys on someone else's cities.

The lesson: If society doesn't solve the problem in someone else's back yard, it will wind up in your backyard.

We are looking forward to our three months in The Villages (January-March 2015) on Rainbow Drive off No. 5 green of Silver Lake Country Club. We were ecstatic about what we saw during our two weeks in December: People over 55 enjoying life.

There will ALWAYS be rotten apples in every barrel. There's no way to prevent that without having a dictator and machineguns to control the bad people.

So I just enjoy the good people, and The Villages is a tsunami of good people. I can't wait to immerse myself in the good clean fun.

[EnglishJW]

Thank you for your most gracious apology. It is appreciated and accepted. You and the other posters all have some valid points. I'm not sure there is an easy answer, but like you I most definitely want to maintain the value of my investment in both the real estate and the lifestyle.

While this started badly, I want to thank both of you for the prompt and gracious way it has ended. That is exactly the type of attitude that attracted us to TV.

[Average Guy]

What these statistics don't show, is that there is a much higher percentage of older people here. To make the numbers meaningful, you's need to know the number of residents in each of the age groups.

I completely agree with you. I was merely correcting an earlier poster's assertion that 55 percent of the DUI's were under 50.

[TraceyMooreRN]

IMHO, I think we should look at the person not the age. The coin has two sides to flip. Compare the person with the crime. I don't think age makes anyone of us commit crimes. I believe it is always our own decision to either commit or not commit crimes.

I am under the 55 age bracket (age 41), certainly don't live with my parents. Not everyone that is under the 55 age bracket lives with parents due to financial difficulties or to take advantage of parental funding. Actually, some younger people I know here take care of their parents. Some of us are just hard working husband/wife couples that decided to move here for the amenities. Someone almost weekly still asks me "Why do YOU want to live here" ...My response, "Don't you wish you could have moved here 30 years ago and enjoyed this lifestyle the whole time"....they usually answer .."yes"!!

Not everyone, under the age of 55 are creating the disturbances, drinking while driving, intoxication in public, theft, public nudity, domestic calls, hit and runs and just plain making poor decisions. If the population is 100,000 + and we are not even close to the 20%--isn't it logical that the actual criminals are in the 80% bracket???

Finally, if you are not happy living with younger people in a retirement community ...you are free to move again. I myself, have found my home for life---making this my own retirement community.

[eweissenbach]

IMHO, I think we should look at the person not the age. The coin has two sides to flip. Compare the person with the crime. I don't think age makes anyone of us commit crimes. I believe it is always our own decision to either commit or not commit crimes.

I am under the 55 age bracket (age 41), certainly don't live with my parents. Not everyone that is under the 55 age bracket lives with parents due to financial difficulties or to take advantage of parental funding. Actually, some younger people I know here take care of their parents. Some of us are just hard working husband/wife couples that decided to move here for the amenities. Someone almost weekly still asks me "Why do YOU want to live here" ...My response, "Don't you wish you could have moved here 30 years ago and enjoyed this lifestyle the whole time"....they usually answer .."yes"!!

Not everyone, under the age of 55 are creating the disturbances, drinking while driving, intoxication in public, theft, public nudity, domestic calls, hit and runs and just plain making poor decisions. If the population is 100,000 + and we are not even close to the 20%--isn't it logical that the actual criminals are in the 80% bracket???

Finally, if you are not happy living with younger people in a retirement community ...you are free to move again. I myself, have found my home for life---making this my own retirement community.

Hear, hear! :BigApplause:

[Bonny]

For me. . . . I could not imagine going to live in a retirement village at the age of 46! Huh?
I was 48 and hubby was 49 when we moved here !! Moving here is one of the best decisions we have made. We have had the time of our lives in this retirement community !! We love it here and have so many wonderful friends ! I wouldn't live any where else !

[Barefoot]

Is the atmosphere of TV really changing or is it that the "other online news" reports every little thing that goes wrong in TV?

I've wondered the same thing.
I think it may be the fact that we have a much greater focus on "wrong doers" because of the online newspaper.

[looneycat]

I'm getting a little tired of 20 & 30 year old 'Villagers' always in trouble as headlined in our electronic newspaper.

Renters, owners, 'kids' who moved back in with their parents...whatever!

I don't hear the 30 year olds complaining about the older people shooting their wives and then their selves, or the public lewdness charges against 60+ year old people, age discrimination is no better than any other kind, sorry no sympathy here. :lipsrsealed:

[Indydealmaker]

I've wondered the same thing.
I think it may be the fact that we have a much greater focus on "wrong doers" because of the online newspaper.

Maybe the renewed exposure to the real world is undesirable to some. From a lot of postings on here, particularly from newbies, there seems to be some expectation of "nirvana" or a remote "paradise" in which you are immediately immersed when you drive through the gates.

Nirvana or paradise is the product of a mindset. There is no way you are going to have a loose community of over 100,000 souls set amid another even looser community of at least another 100,000 "non-villagers" of all ages, levels of education and employment, with any reasonable expectation that the REAL WORLD has been locked out.

The reports of a dozen bad guys a week out of 200k really is inconsequential except these reports do serve to remind us that we do need to be AWARE.

[eweissenbach]

I've wondered the same thing.
I think it may be the fact that we have a much greater focus on "wrong doers" because of the online newspaper.

Probably so, but that is actually a good thing IMO. The daily fun is a marketing tool, and as such does not expose readers to any bad or negative news if possible. You need to know the bad as well as the good in order to make informed decisions about your activities and your safety.

[sunnyatlast]

While "the other paper" online is publishing info people want to know, the sensationalism they do by putting every creepy looking mugshot and police blotter incident on the front page and above the fold is overkill. And they always splash the age of the perp on every one. Readers can see how old the perp is in the mugshot they put there!

They make it look like these arrested dirtbags and mugshots are what The Villages should be known for.

As an example, look at the Leesburg paper online. They have simply "mugshot" pictures in the bottom 1/4 of the front page, where they can be clicked to see more info. At the top are News articles.

[Indydealmaker]

While "the other paper" online is publishing info people want to know, the sensationalism they do by putting every creepy looking mugshot and police blotter incident on the front page and above the fold is overkill. And they always splash the age of the perp on every one. Readers can see how old the perp is in the mugshot they put there!

They make it look like these arrested dirtbags and mugshots are what The Villages should be known for.

As an example, look at the Leesburg paper online. They have simply "mugshot" pictures in the bottom 1/4 of the front page, where they can be clicked to see more info. At the top are News articles.

When you click on a link in the email, you are not being taken to the "Front Page". Try going directly to the website. There is no sensationalist front page at all.

[manaboutown]

Frankly I find the other online paper factually informative and well balanced. It reports good news as well as bad. I am not an ostrich with my head in the sand kind of person. I want to know what is going on, the bad as well as the good and everything in between. Such information assists me in conducting my life safely and prudently.

What surprises me is that so many - by Villages standards - underage adults with criminal histories are Villagers. It does not surprise me that they continue to commit crimes, though. That is what criminals do. Certainly a few seniors collect DUI's, swipe cigars and take their own lives when their future looks hopeless but statistically, nationwide and no doubt worldwide, those who commit the most felonies and violent crimes are young adult males.

Considering their relatively small numbers these young Villagers appear to be committing a large percentage of the crimes taking place in The Villages. I want to know who they are, what they look like and where they reside so I can either avoid them or protect myself from them whenever possible.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Please look again. A 23 year old Villager and a 28 year old Villager were arrested. What the OP is complaining about, as I am, is the summer long parade of under 55's and who are listed as "Villagers" being arrested each week it seems.

This is not a game of tag. To refer to seniors being arrested is to deflect the focus from the problem, the long array of younger people getting into serious trouble with the law here - as residents. Please deal with the topic and don't imply the OP is lying or off his rocker. That's smokescreening and dishonest.

The problem is not the 80/20 rule. All sorts of snappy mathematicians can prove the inherent flaws in such a system and still have the system 'technically' valid. Not the point. The spirit of the 80/20 rule is being violated.

I bought here in reliance upon certain very pronounced items, like it being essentially a retirement community. I did not really get that, and it seems that I am getting less and less of it as each week goes by.

Another person or family trust or such buys a place here and rents it out to anyone who can breathe and walk and pay rent. Age doesn't matter. Apparently references don't either in all too many cases.

Last year it was a meth lab set up by some sterling under 55 tenants. This summer we had stolen beer cases and golf cart chases, lots of DWI's, and so on all performed by these persons who are certainly not retirement age. This week's arrests included cocaine possession. How does one support a drug habit? Hmmmm.

There is apparently no oversight and no review of these landlords who seemingly don't care a damn about what we worked for and what we thought we were buying into.

Please take a break from liberal platitudes and ever so 'rational' and snide observations and consider this is, for most of us, our biggest investment and our home. Maybe remember the old definition of a liberal - a person who hasn't been mugged yet.

The 80/20 rule is not being violated. Many people, and you may be one of them do not understand the 80/20 rule. What you are referring to is a federal laws that stipulates that in oder to classified as an over 55 community, at least 80% of the homes must be occupied by a t least one person over the age of 55. That means if there are five people living in a home, only one of them has to be over 55. And that is only for 80% of the homes. Twenty percent can be occupied by five or six people all under the age of 55. We could have as much as 90% of residents be under the age of 55 and still be in compliance with the law.

It is not that the law is being violated, it is that the law needs to be revised.

[manaboutown]

The 80/20 rule is not being violated. Many people, and you may be one of them do not understand the 80/20 rule. What you are referring to is a federal laws that stipulates that in oder to classified as an over 55 community, at least 80% of the homes must be occupied by a t least one person over the age of 55. That means if there are five people living in a home, only one of them has to be over 55. And that is only for 80% of the homes. Twenty percent can be occupied by five or six people all under the age of 55. We could have as much as 90% of residents be under the age of 55 and still be in compliance with the law.

It is not that the law is being violated, it is that the law needs to be revised.

Apparently it is doable to not only require that one occupant be 55 or over; other occupants must be at least 45 (under California Civil Code). Plus, homes may not be leased for more than 12 months at a time and financial requirements must be met to rent as well as own. These are the rules in Laguna Woods Village, formerly a Leisureworld. It is a seriously gated community which enjoys a very, very low crime rate.
Laguna Woods Village Southern California Retirement Community (http://www.lagunawoodsvillage.com/section.cfm?id=374)

[sueandskip]

i don't care how many properties you own , just have some morals and rent to 55 and older people...It is legal to ask there ages....

[Bizdoc]

Apparently it is doable to not only require that one occupant be 55 or over; other occupants must be at least 45 (under California Civil Code). Plus, homes may not be leased for more than 12 months at a time and financial requirements must be met to rent as well as own. These are the rules in Laguna Woods Village, formerly a Leisureworld. It is a seriously gated community which enjoys a very, very low crime rate.
Laguna Woods Village Southern California Retirement Community (http://www.lagunawoodsvillage.com/section.cfm?id=374)

I suspect that the restrictions are in the restrictive covenants which were created at the time of the development rather than local or state law.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Apparently it is doable to not only require that one occupant be 55 or over; other occupants must be at least 45 (under California Civil Code). Plus, homes may not be leased for more than 12 months at a time and financial requirements must be met to rent as well as own. These are the rules in Laguna Woods Village, formerly a Leisureworld. It is a seriously gated community which enjoys a very, very low crime rate.
Laguna Woods Village Southern California Retirement Community (http://www.lagunawoodsvillage.com/section.cfm?id=374)

Absolutely true! However this is not the law as it applies to The Villages. People are saying that the law is being violated. There's a difference between a current law being violated and not liking the law and wanting to replace it with another.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Frankly I find the other online paper factually informative and well balanced. It reports good news as well as bad. I am not an ostrich with my head in the sand kind of person. I want to know what is going on, the bad as well as the good and everything in between. Such information assists me in conducting my life safely and prudently.

What surprises me is that so many - by Villages standards - underage adults with criminal histories are Villagers. It does not surprise me that they continue to commit crimes, though. That is what criminals do. Certainly a few seniors collect DUI's, swipe cigars and take their own lives when their future looks hopeless but statistically, nationwide and no doubt worldwide, those who commit the most felonies and violent crimes are young adult males.

Considering their relatively small numbers these young Villagers appear to be committing a large percentage of the crimes taking place in The Villages. I want to know who they are, what they look like and where they reside so I can either avoid them or protect myself from them whenever possible.

I agree. I worked in city of 100,000 people for 20 years. The stuff that is in the online newspaper down here wouldn't even be mentioned in that city's paper as there were much more serious things going on. As has been mention in this forum several times, compare The Villages to any other community of 100,000 people and you'll understand how low the crime rate is here and how safe we are.
A guy tries to steal a case of beer down here makes the front page. Back where I worked that probably happened several times a day. It was a relatively minor incident. Down here it's cause to panic.

[graciegirl]

Frankly I find the other online paper factually informative and well balanced. It reports good news as well as bad. I am not an ostrich with my head in the sand kind of person. I want to know what is going on, the bad as well as the good and everything in between. Such information assists me in conducting my life safely and prudently.

What surprises me is that so many - by Villages standards - underage adults with criminal histories are Villagers. It does not surprise me that they continue to commit crimes, though. That is what criminals do. Certainly a few seniors collect DUI's, swipe cigars and take their own lives when their future looks hopeless but statistically, nationwide and no doubt worldwide, those who commit the most felonies and violent crimes are young adult males.

Considering their relatively small numbers these young Villagers appear to be committing a large percentage of the crimes taking place in The Villages. I want to know who they are, what they look like and where they reside so I can either avoid them or protect myself from them whenever possible.


I agree.

Yesterday a 72 year old villager's picture was in the online news for domestic violence. Maybe THAT will shame him enough to not do it again. Probably not, but at least his neighbors know what kind of man he is.

[NVtoFl]

Did you forget both "sexual escapades" were older members of the community?

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Did you forget both "sexual escapades" were older members of the community?

No, only the first one was. The second involved two people in their forties.

But regardless of that, the amount of violations and crimes that we have here in a month happen in most cities if this size in an night.

[BobnBev]

Did you forget both "sexual escapades" were older members of the community?

Hey, you there...pass the popcorn please....:popcorn::popcorn::beer3:

[Bogie Shooter]

Who, me?:popcorn:

[Barefoot]

A guy tries to steal a case of beer down here makes the front page. Back where I worked that probably happened several times a day. It was a relatively minor incident. Down here it's cause to panic.

I agree.
Today's big crime story in the online newspaper is a guy stealing two hanging baskets of flowers from Walmart. :popcorn:

[Indydealmaker]

I agree.
Today's big crime story in the online newspaper is a guy stealing two hanging baskets of flowers from Walmart. :popcorn:

Actually, if you look at the home page of the online news source, that incident is only a small linked headline on the right side of the page.