White cross on lawn in letters to the editor

[The Mountaineer]

I tried to sign on to respond there but couldn't get through.

My thoughts are that the same rule should apply to everyone in that particular Village.

Also, the government cannot promote one religion over another. Or even lack of religion.

If a white cross is permitted, then what about a sculpture of a Quran? A statue of Buddha? A sculpture of Ganesha? The star of David? Or a black cross on a white background inside a red circle with a diagonal red slash, the atheist symbol?[/COLOR]

[Mleeja]

Or those UnIversity of West Virginia flags? Different districts have some minor differences in their restrictions on yard displays. I think it is a slippery slope when you start trying to say what and what not can be displayed.

[jsw14]

Hmmm, I say display anything U want too. If I see it when I drive by UR house, & on my way home I can't see it from My house.... Just a Thought. Plus I Sleep Good at night...........

[DonH57]

Hmmm, I say display anything U want too. If I see it when I drive by UR house, & on my way home I can't see it from My house.... Just a Thought. Plus I Sleep Good at night...........

Quite frankly I've grown sick of hearing about these little white crosses or how it even came up. Luckily we live in district 2 and don't have to worry about it.

[VApeople]

If a white cross is permitted, then what about a sculpture of a Quran? A statue of Buddha? A sculpture of Ganesha? The star of David? Or a black cross on a white background inside a red circle with a diagonal red slash, the atheist symbol?

All of those are OK with me. A Confederate battle flag or a Nazi flag with a swastika would also be acceptable. I can't think of any kind of symbol that would offend me.

[Kazmi]

Instead of depending on the complaint system just level the playing field by enforcing this across the board. We signed our deed when we bought. Stick to the deal you willingly signed. Do I mind a cross - absolutely not. Do I mind metal birds, etc. Nope. I do mind though the petty bickering and lawn ornament police. Just make it fair and stop pitting neighbor (or non-neighbor) and against neighbor who can't stick to the rules.

[Barefoot]

Instead of depending on the complaint system just level the playing field by enforcing this across the board. We signed our deed when we bought. Stick to the deal you willingly signed.:agree:

[rubicon]

We never gave Florida a second look initially when searching for a retirement place. Then we focused on taxes and Florida became promising but we were not sold until we visited The Villages and albeit not truly a gated community we liked the demands for rules and deep compliance's that are absent in much of Florida.

Its a truism that as time passes, a community expands and new people move in such rules are gradually weakened. It is also true that relying on common sense and good taste of all people is futile

So it is imperative that residents speak up when they see violations or homes that are becoming run down. My focus with this thread is to maintain The Villages in a pristine state. My wife and I like freshly painted and often power washed properties. We owe that to ourselves and to our neighbors. Its how proprieties maintain their value. One rotten home could ruin it for an entire neighborhood.

Personal Best Regards:

As to acceptable symbols i believe that is a subject matter best left in political talk

[biker1]

There is little upside to the Developer or CDD proactively enforcing the deed restrictions, where they exist, with regard to tchotchkes in the yards. It would take manpower and they would come off as being heavy handed. The current complaint driven system is not ideal but from the Developer and CDD point of view is probably the best. All organizations tend to do what is in their own best interests. I would, however, like to see a requirement that any complaint has a name attached to it.

Instead of depending on the complaint system just level the playing field by enforcing this across the board. We signed our deed when we bought. Stick to the deal you willingly signed. Do I mind a cross - absolutely not. Do I mind metal birds, etc. Nope. I do mind though the petty bickering and lawn ornament police. Just make it fair and stop pitting neighbor (or non-neighbor) and against neighbor who can't stick to the rules.

[rubicon]

A resident lodging a complaint should be given anonymity. Why? Because if not, many residents would not speak up because of concern that they would be harassed by the probable offender.

Deep compliance relies exclusively on resident complaints and if they are not provided anonymity would never speak up.

I trust the people working in Deed compliance to respond in an intelligent and tactful manner

Personal Best Regards:

[Count'n the days]

Why single out one school? Am I missing something?

[Bay Kid]

We hopefully did read our restrictions when we bought because at signing we agreed to live by these rules.

[PennBF]

I am as religious as the next guy BUT that does not mean I have the right to force my beliefs on others. This a form of advertising regardless of the reasons given by the ones who post the cross. Think how far this can go if it was allowed. Where does it stop and who is the censor? We all signed the restrictions agreement and if we don't like them now then sell and go where it is allowed to advertise your religion. If you want to be a "Mission" then for God's sake there are a lot of countries who could use Missions and please go to them and help them. The Villages, thankfully don't need missions so your work is misplaced. :shrug:

[skip0358]

I know there are rules and I try my best to follow them I was turned in for an infraction which proved not to be one. If I was a nasty person the houses to the left and right of me and behind all have a violation. Not my problem. It's not offensive. What I don't understand is why my front yard according to the rules has to be a certain way but someone's back yard facing a street can look like crap.Trees, cactus, planters, birds you name it. JMO. Don't worry I won't turn you in unless it's really nasty. This is paradise sit back and enjoy it !

[n8xwb]

I think it's crazy that some folks look at this as a "religious" issue...it's not. It's simply a matter of following the rules you agreed to follow when you bought your home. If you don't like the rules, don't buy a home. Seems simple to me.

I note that this thread was started by the mountaineer -- perhaps born in Wild, Wonderful W.V.? I lived there for over 17 years
. A beautiful state. BUT, at least where I lived, there was no zoning rules -- what a shame. Someone would build a lovely home only to have someone next door put up a shack. I'd hate to see what our retirement community would look like if the covenants and restrictions weren't abided by. Just sayin........

[autumnspring]

All of those are OK with me. A Confederate battle flag or a Nazi flag with a swastika would also be acceptable. I can't think of any kind of symbol that would offend me.

For me freedom of speech is sacred. For me freedom of speech is most important when you do not agree with what is being said.
I wonder as they remove confederate statues etc in the name of POLITICALLY CORRECT and yet I would strongly object to NAZI FLAGS, KKK FLAGS, ISSIS FLAGS OR BLACK POWER FLAGS BEING FLOWN.

If, I recall, one of the supreme court justices said, pornography is impossible to define but I will know it when I see it. As my dad said, your rights end where the other persons rights begin.

While I am not christian, I have no objection to the small white crosses that some have chosen to put in front of their homes. There is a point where it gets to be too much
For me I don't think we are at that point and I hope we never get there.

[autumnspring]

A resident lodging a complaint should be given anonymity. Why? Because if not, many residents would not speak up because of concern that they would be harassed by the probable offender.

Deep compliance relies exclusively on resident complaints and if they are not provided anonymity would never speak up.

I trust the people working in Deed compliance to respond in an intelligent and tactful manner

Personal Best Regards:

RE: anonymous reports
Under the law of our nation you have the right to face your accuser.
For me, if I had an issue I would directly speak to the person before resorting to the architectural committee etc.

My next door neighbor hired one of the landscape people to do stone work etc. Part of what they did was actually on my property. The neighbor, agreed to have it moved. The worker came over to me and told me I was a ....... etc etc etc etc. I told him directly that I was going to check.
I called the architectural people. First of all the "EXPERT" had not even filed a plan as he needs to. He was in VIOLATION and they forced him to move it. They actually were nice about it.

Some of these things can really get out of hand. Was someone to report you or me you would be offended and you would guess who did it-perhaps incorrectly.

NEIGHBOR REPORTING NEIGHBOR-I HOPE NOT.

[charmed59]

I'm curious what are reasons people are putting white crosses in their yard.

[Gpsma]

I'm curious what are reasons people are putting white crosses in their yard.

I may be mistaken but I believe its a symbol for those who are Right to Lifers.

Frankly I don't care what anyone puts on their lawn as long as its not offensive or goes beyond the "spirit" of the deed restrictions.

What is more annoying are those, some on here, who pontificate about "reading the deed restrictions". I guess those are the same people that routinely obey the speed limit and never ever go one mile above it.

[biker1]

How would you know what the "spirit" of the deed restrictions are unless you actually read them? Regardless, the "spirit" doesn't matter. You signed up for a set of rules and should follow them.

I may be mistaken but I believe its a symbol for those who are Right to Lifers.

Frankly I don't care what anyone puts on their lawn as long as its not offensive or goes beyond the "spirit" of the deed restrictions.

What is more annoying are those, some on here, who pontificate about "reading the deed restrictions". I guess those are the same people that routinely obey the speed limit and never ever go one mile above it.

[biker1]

Would "never" speak up? Sorry, not true. There may be less complaints filed. It would also probably reduce trolling. I have lived in a gated community with deed restrictions and where complaints were not anonymous. It worked fine.

A resident lodging a complaint should be given anonymity. Why? Because if not, many residents would not speak up because of concern that they would be harassed by the probable offender.

Deep compliance relies exclusively on resident complaints and if they are not provided anonymity would never speak up.

I trust the people working in Deed compliance to respond in an intelligent and tactful manner

Personal Best Regards:

[Barefoot]

Would "never" speak up? Sorry, not true. There may be less complaints filed. It would also probably reduce trolling.I think that requiring complainers to give their names would lead more aggression among neighbors.
It's scary (to me) the way residents sometimes threaten the use of guns.

[Taltarzac725]

I think that requiring complainers to give their names would lead more aggression among neighbors.
It's scary (to me) the way residents sometimes threaten the use of guns.

And we have some really nasty Villagers around who seem to really enjoy causing as many problems as possible. Once a punk; always a punk.

[Bogie Shooter]

IT HAS ALL BEEN SAID BEFORE......264 POSTS.
https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/liquid-lights-vs-white-crosses-241070/?highlight=white+crosses
https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/small-white-crosses-218257/?highlight=white+crosses
https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/deed-restriction-enforcement-230165/?highlight=white+crosses

[biker1]

The trouble is, with the exception of trollers, you will probably figure out who did complain or incorrectly assume who complained. The net result may be even more tension. If your name is associated with a complaint, you are probably going to be more certain that there is really an issue and perhaps even try talking directly with your neighbor first. This is all actually moot since a change in the policy is not coming. My personal preference on how people should interact is a pipe dream.

I think that requiring complainers to give their names would lead more aggression among neighbors.
It's scary (to me) the way residents sometimes threaten the use of guns.

[Gpsma]

How would you know what the "spirit" of the deed restrictions are unless you actually read them? Regardless, the "spirit" doesn't matter. You signed up for a set of rules and should follow them.

It's quite reasonable to know what the "spirit" is. It's sorta like when you are on your Harley doing 75 in a 65 and the cop doesn't pull you over because you are driving just fine.

I suggest more people start stretching the deed restrictions. Bring a little diversity to TV in appearance.

[perrjojo]

I'm curious what are reasons people are putting white crosses in their yard.
I used to think it was a marker for a deceased pet but then there got to be so many.

[golfing eagles]

How would you know what the "spirit" of the deed restrictions are unless you actually read them? Regardless, the "spirit" doesn't matter. You signed up for a set of rules and should follow them.

I take that to mean you ALWAYS come to a COMPLETE stop at that red octagonal sign when you are riding????:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[biker1]

The deed restrictions are black and white. Following up on your analogy, when is says you cannot have an outside mounted clothesline, it doesn't say that the clothesline cannot be longer than 65 feet and perhaps the CDD doesn't enforce the rule until you have a clothesline that is over 75 feet. You cannot have an outside mounted clothesline (unless permitted by some other law), period, and there is no "spirit" or "stretching" of the rule. I am curious as to which deed restrictions you are proposing that people start to stretch (i.e. violate)? I hope you are not suggestion that people start putting abandoned cars up on concrete blocks in their front yard. That would certainly bring a bit more diversity to The Villages ;-)

It's quite reasonable to know what the "spirit" is. It's sorta like when you are on your Harley doing 75 in a 65 and the cop doesn't pull you over because you are driving just fine.

I suggest more people start stretching the deed restrictions. Bring a little diversity to TV in appearance.

[biker1]

Probably about as often as you do and you signed up for the same rules as me ;-) And when you are driving, I am sure you also come to a complete stop at every stop sign and have never exceeded the speed limit, or jaywalked, or ... And the discussion was about the deed restrictions, of which I don't violate any. So, what's your point regarding the deed restrictions?


I take that to mean you ALWAYS come to a COMPLETE stop at that red octagonal sign when you are riding????:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[EdFNJ]

I take that to mean you ALWAYS come to a COMPLETE stop at that red octagonal sign when you are riding????:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:



Actually that's a good example (but not in the way you meant it to be). By not stopping you ARE breaking the law and just like the deed restrictions eventually you COULD get caught. Also Like the deed restrictions you may get away with it forever. My golf cart can go 29mph. When I "speed" eventually I'll get caught but it's my choice to take the chance.

When one buys here you (should) know what you are signing up for. These types of DR's exist all over the world.

Also, these aren't the kind of laws that require "the constitutional right to face you accusers". I believe the USSC upheld deed restrictions many years ago.

If one is willing to challenge them, which is their right, they should also be willing to face the consequences if they lose.





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Jim 9922]

(i.e. violate)? I hope you are not suggestion that people start putting abandoned cars up on concrete blocks in their front yard. That would certainly bring a bit more diversity The Villages ;-)


It is already being done around the Villages by a couple of hamburger joints and one on the "outskirts" of downtown Brownwood, not to mention a few rotten boats swamped in Lake Sumter. But oh yes, that's the Developers "yard' so it is OK.
chilout

[biker1]

I believe the swamped boats are intentional - part of the nautical ambiance of Lake Sumter. I have always wondered where you buy that stuff - "www.decrepitboats.com" ??

It is already being done around the Villages by a couple of hamburger joints and one on the "outskirts" of downtown Brownwood, not to mention a few rotten boats swamped in Lake Sumter. But oh yes, that's the Developers "yard' so it is OK.
chilout

[autumnspring]

I may be mistaken but I believe its a symbol for those who are Right to Lifers.

Frankly I don't care what anyone puts on their lawn as long as its not offensive or goes beyond the "spirit" of the deed restrictions.

What is more annoying are those, some on here, who pontificate about "reading the deed restrictions". I guess those are the same people that routinely obey the speed limit and never ever go one mile above it.

Off topic or on topic. I recall seeing a BOOK of traffic violations in NY. It was many years ago. I expect it is no longer printed. I recall you could be ticketed for a rock chip in your windshield. Look, you probably have one. The police have the good sense not to enforce this ticket-even in NY. I have a friend who got a ticket for rolling through a stop sign on a bicycle. I don't know about Fla but in NY you can be ticketed for having you car parked in the same spot for 24 hours straight. Parking your car facing the wrong way on the street is also a violation in NY. Probably in Fla as well.

Sometimes it is not a law but COMMON SENSE that should direct your behavior. SADLY hear as in real life some people either cannot see or refuse to see that they are ever WRONG.

For me, I too do the best I can. I do not object to activity by others that I think is ok for me. Re: someone else s yard, I've not seen a single truly bad yard. Truth be told, thanks to all the rain and the fact that I am doing my own fertilizers-my lawn is pretty darn fine. I have no plan on starting my lawn is greener than your lawn.

[golfing eagles]

Probably about as often as you do and you signed up for the same rules as me ;-) And when you are driving, I am sure you also come to a complete stop at every stop sign and have never exceeded the speed limit, or jaywalked, or ... And the discussion was about the deed restrictions, of which I don't violate any. So, what's your point regarding the deed restrictions?

Now I'm confused.:confused::confused::confused:

Are you saying that deed restrictions should be followed to the exact letter of the sales documents, but traffic laws are optional????

[biker1]

I am sorry you are confused ;-). Please feel free to do whatever makes you happy as I won't report you to the CDD and I have nothing to do with traffic law enforcement so you are free, as far as I am concerned, to violate as many laws as you wish. As far as I am concerned, I follow the deed restrictions but violate traffic laws probably as frequently as the next guy (I admit that I have gone over the speed limit before, I will say my 3 Hail Marys). What's with the tangent to traffic laws?

Now I'm confused.:confused::confused::confused:

Are you saying that deed restrictions should be followed to the exact letter of the sales documents, but traffic laws are optional????

[autumnspring]

It's quite reasonable to know what the "spirit" is. It's sorta like when you are on your Harley doing 75 in a 65 and the cop doesn't pull you over because you are driving just fine.

I suggest more people start stretching the deed restrictions. Bring a little diversity to TV in appearance.

I used to know a guy that regularly rode a motorcycle with no PLATES, LICENSE OR INSURANCE. The cops chose not to chase him because it would be dangerous for the cop, the rider and everyone else.

[golfing eagles]

I am sorry you are confused ;-). Please feel free to do whatever makes you happy as I won't report you to the CDD and I have nothing to do with traffic law enforcement so you are free, as far as I am concerned, to violate as many laws as you wish. As far as I am concerned, I follow the deed restrictions but violate traffic laws probably as frequently as the next guy.

Looks like I need to rephrase the question.

You stated "You signed up for a set of rules and should follow them. "


I asked if you felt the same way about stop signs while riding your bike.

Somewhere between the question and answer someone made a wrong turn and got off on a tangent.

then you state "As far as I am concerned, I follow the deed restrictions but violate traffic laws probably as frequently as the next guy."

So I'm still confused. Maybe some people follow the traffic laws but violate the deed restrictions as frequently as the next guy. What does that mean?????

[autumnspring]

I believe the swamped boats are intentional - part of the nautical ambiance of Lake Sumter. I have always wondered where you buy that stuff - "www.decrepitboats.com" ??

Look on Craiglist, there are always free boats.

[Wiotte]

I think that requiring complainers to give their names would lead more aggression among neighbors.
It's scary (to me) the way residents sometimes threaten the use of guns.



Thanks to the abuse of the 2nd, no one is safe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[biker1]

There are a bunch of things you *should* do in life and when you don't there might be consequences. You *should* follow the traffic laws, and you effectively committed to them when you obtained a driver's license, but many don't and when they get caught there is often a monetary penalty. You signed up for deed restrictions and you *should* follow them but many don't and when they get caught they need to fix the problem or there will be a monetary penalty.

What you *should* do and what you actually do are often two different things. I have no control over what you or others do and unless you put a car up on concrete blocks in my neighborhood I probably don't care. I can only point out what you signed up for, and it appears that many people have no idea what they signed up for with the deed restrictions. Also, trying to discuss deed restrictions and traffic laws in the same sentence is sort of silly since one falls under criminal law and the other is strictly civil. I think that is enough philosophy for the day, don't you?

Looks like I need to rephrase the question.

You stated "You signed up for a set of rules and should follow them. "


I asked if you felt the same way about stop signs while riding your bike.

Somewhere between the question and answer someone made a wrong turn and got off on a tangent.

then you state "As far as I am concerned, I follow the deed restrictions but violate traffic laws probably as frequently as the next guy."

So I'm still confused. Maybe some people follow the traffic laws but violate the deed restrictions as frequently as the next guy. What does that mean?????

[golfing eagles]

There are a bunch of things you *should* do in life and when you don't there might be consequences. You *should* follow the traffic laws, and you effectively committed to them when you obtained a driver's license, but many don't and when they get caught there is often a monetary penalty. You signed up for deed restrictions and you *should* follow them but many don't and when they get caught they need to fix the problem or there will be a monetary penalty.

What you *should* do and what you actually do are often two different things. I have no control over what you or others do and unless you put a car up on concrete blocks in my neighborhood I probably don't care. I can only point out what you signed up for, and it appears that many people have no idea what they signed up for with the deed restrictions. Also, trying to discuss deed restriction and traffic laws in the same sentence is sort of silly since one falls under criminal law and the other is strictly civil. I think that is enough philosophy for the day, don't you?

Quite agree:beer3::beer3:

Happy biking

[Gpsma]

Yes...let's just all agree I'm right and be done with it!!

[biker1]

That works for me!

Yes...let's just all agree I'm right and be done with it!!

[Barefoot]

I suggest more people start stretching the deed restrictions. Bring a little diversity to TV in appearance.I think you're not serious -- just trying to stir the cauldron? :jester:

[Gordon82]

I am as religious as the next guy BUT that does not mean I have the right to force my beliefs on others. This a form of advertising regardless of the reasons given by the ones who post the cross. Think how far this can go if it was allowed. Where does it stop and who is the censor? We all signed the restrictions agreement and if we don't like them now then sell and go where it is allowed to advertise your religion. If you want to be a "Mission" then for God's sake there are a lot of countries who could use Missions and please go to them and help them. The Villages, thankfully don't need missions so your work is misplaced. :shrug:

Nonsense. If it wasn't a white cross but instead a little white bird no one would say a thing.

[Mrs. Robinson]

I am as religious as the next guy BUT that does not mean I have the right to force my beliefs on others. This a form of advertising regardless of the reasons given by the ones who post the cross. Think how far this can go if it was allowed. Where does it stop and who is the censor? We all signed the restrictions agreement and if we don't like them now then sell and go where it is allowed to advertise your religion. If you want to be a "Mission" then for God's sake there are a lot of countries who could use Missions and please go to them and help them. The Villages, thankfully don't need missions so your work is misplaced. :shrug:

Nonsense. If it wasn't a white cross but instead a little white bird no one would say a thing.

You are correct, Gordon82, but it isn't nonsense.
Most people would prefer to see a little white bird, not a white cross.
Personally, I find it offensive.
I don't want to see anyone's religious item on their front lawn, or anywhere else that is visible when passing the property.
It is not in good taste and at this stage of the game, I see defiance in those who refuse to remove it.

PennBF is correct in that if you want to carry on the work of a missionary, go somewhere else and do it.
Those crosses do not belong in a residential area. Period!

[Wiotte]

Little white crosses, big white crosses. Very different powerful messages from each. Keep it private, keep it inside. Deed restrictions apply to ALL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gordon82]

You are correct, Gordon82, but it isn't nonsense.
Most people would prefer to see a little white bird, not a white cross.
Personally, I find it offensive.
I don't want to see anyone's religious item on their front lawn, or anywhere else that is visible when passing the property.
It is not in good taste and at this stage of the game, I see defiance in those who refuse to remove it.

PennBF is correct in that if you want to carry on the work of a missionary, go somewhere else and do it.
Those crosses do not belong in a residential area. Period!

It doesn't matter one bit if you find it offensive, or what most people prefer. If you want to take the deeds argument, then fine. ALL yard art should be removed. Short of that, a small white cross is not different than anything else that identifies someone as being part of a group (a Patriots fan, a Wisconsin resident, etc.). Your idea of what is in good taste, or my idea of what is in good taste, is not at issue. We're talking about a one foot high white cross, which is much smaller than most other things found in people's front yards in The Villages.

I'm glad you see defiance. I don't have one of those crosses, but if I did I would refuse to remove it. I'm tired of people thinking they have a right to not be offended at someone else's beliefs or opinions to the point of casually throwing away the right of free speech and expression. Should people with a cross on their driveway or lamppost sign be forced to remove those because you are offended? Apparently so, since you don't want to see anything religious when passing someone else's property.

Again, if The Villages wants to take the deed restriction to 100% enforcement, that is fine. But it is not fine to selectively enforce it against yard art that is religious in nature.

[Challenger]

Little white crosses, big white crosses. Very different powerful messages from each. Keep it private, keep it inside. Deed restrictions apply to ALL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And that says it all

[Mrs. Robinson]

Little white crosses, big white crosses. Very different powerful messages from each. Keep it private, keep it inside. Deed restrictions apply to ALL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It doesn't matter one bit if you find it offensive, or what most people prefer. If you want to take the deeds argument, then fine. ALL yard art should be removed. Short of that, a small white cross is not different than anything else that identifies someone as being part of a group (a Patriots fan, a Wisconsin resident, etc.). Your idea of what is in good taste, or my idea of what is in good taste, is not at issue. We're talking about a one foot high white cross, which is much smaller than most other things found in people's front yards in The Villages.

I'm glad you see defiance. I don't have one of those crosses, but if I did I would refuse to remove it. I'm tired of people thinking they have a right to not be offended at someone else's beliefs or opinions to the point of casually throwing away the right of free speech and expression. Should people with a cross on their driveway or lamppost sign be forced to remove those because you are offended? Apparently so, since you don't want to see anything religious when passing someone else's property.

Again, if The Villages wants to take the deed restriction to 100% enforcement, that is fine. But it is not fine to selectively enforce it against yard art that is religious in nature.

Wiotte -- You made it very simple and without a lot of fanfare.

Gordon82 -- My thoughts must have bothered you greatly since you sent your dissertation (above) via your Iphone.
Let's get something straight. I am not offended by anyone's belief.
But religion is a personal thing and should be practiced in a place of worship or in one's own home, not on a residential front lawn!

You say that one of these crosses is tantamount to someone displaying a Patriots' something-or-other?
Surely you jest???
That small white bird in lieu of a cross is becoming a better and better idea, thanks to your suggestion.

All "yard art" should be removed? I presume you are referring to what I would call junk or an eyesore, however, there are tons of properties that are landscaped beautifully with some unique and different items which add to an overall "wow" look.

The size of a cross is not the issue. The issue is that it is a cross, which could never be considered part of landscaping under any circumstances.

[Rapscallion St Croix]

How would you know what the "spirit" of the deed restrictions are unless you actually read them? Regardless, the "spirit" doesn't matter. You signed up for a set of rules and should follow them.

Should interpret my deed restrictions to mean that I really can only have two fish in my aquarium and comply, or should I be a scofflaw and sneak a third one in under the radar?

[graciegirl]

You are correct, Gordon82, but it isn't nonsense.
Most people would prefer to see a little white bird, not a white cross.
Personally, I find it offensive.
I don't want to see anyone's religious item on their front lawn, or anywhere else that is visible when passing the property.
It is not in good taste and at this stage of the game, I see defiance in those who refuse to remove it.

PennBF is correct in that if you want to carry on the work of a missionary, go somewhere else and do it.
Those crosses do not belong in a residential area. Period!


My friend Ruthie is gone now. Breast cancer took her away. She had on her front door a little Jewish sign that someone gave her affectionately, just as I gave her a star of David necklace, me her Catholic friend.. She was a dear friend to me and my next door neighbor and she had her port for chemo and I had mine when we moved in next to each other in Hadley. We shopped for stuff for our homes and ate lunch out and laughed at the same things. Ruthie was not a religious Jewish girl, didn't do the holidays or keep the Sabbath, but she put up her mezzuza and I touched it each time I went in her door.

Religion or lack of it isn't the dividing factor. It is lack of kindness that divides us. I miss you Ruthie. I think I will find a Mezzuza and put it on my door.

[dbussone]

My friend Ruthie is gone now. Breast cancer took her away. She had on her front door a little Jewish sign that someone gave her affectionately, just as I gave her a star of David necklace, me her Catholic friend.. She was a dear friend to me and my next door neighbor and she had her port for chemo and I had mine when we moved in next to each other in Hadley. We shopped for stuff for our homes and ate lunch out and laughed at the same things. Ruthie was not a religious Jewish girl, didn't do the holidays or keep the Sabbath, but she put up her mezzuza and I touched it each time I went in her door.

Religion or lack of it isn't the dividing factor. It is lack of kindness that divides us. I miss you Ruthie. I think I will find a Mezzuza and put it on my door.



Gracie - I've been to more memorial services for friends in the past year, than in all my prior years. I'm a religious person so I'm not offended at all by the little white crosses. They represent a peace we can believe in now, and realize later. For those who are offended, I'm sorry they don't get it. Some soul searching on their part is in order.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Polar Bear]

...I see defiance in those who refuse to remove it...
But you see none in those who refuse to accept it?

[dbussone]

But you see none in those who refuse to accept it?



[emoji41][emoji106]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Mrs. Robinson]

But you see none in those who refuse to accept it?

[emoji41][emoji106]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

I completely accept everyone's decision to practice the religion of their choice.
I said it before and I'll say it again: Religion is a personal thing.
If you're proud of being a ----- (fill in the blank) -- fine.
However, I fail to see the necessity of displaying it as though it is part of one's landscaping.
It isn't and really doesn't belong there.

[graciegirl]

I completely accept everyone's decision to practice the religion of their choice.
I said it before and I'll say it again: Religion is a personal thing.
If you're proud of being a ----- (fill in the blank) -- fine.
However, I fail to see the necessity of displaying it as though it is part of one's landscaping.
It isn't and really doesn't belong there.

How ya feel about Burqa's? They look kinda stand outy to me. I always think they mean that the man IS the man of the house, that folks in the family don't like gay people a lot and they probably won't have a Blessed Virgin in the landscaping. And they look HOT. Worse than bras. But to each their own you say...and I say. I think sometimes some of us including me shouldn't share their thoughts on personal things like religion. It is very tricky these days to get along.

[Wiotte]

Much like our ever expanding universe, the distant between ourselves grows and the attraction that once binded us lessens ever more. Human fractionization by way of religious intolerance is our current reality as it has been through the ages and only through humanistic tolerance can we all get along. :beer3: Let us now pray...

[dbussone]

I completely accept everyone's decision to practice the religion of their choice.

I said it before and I'll say it again: Religion is a personal thing.

If you're proud of being a ----- (fill in the blank) -- fine.

However, I fail to see the necessity of displaying it as though it is part of one's landscaping.

It isn't and really doesn't belong there.



I don't have a cross in my yard. Mine is in my home & heart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[biker1]

Since enforcement of the deed restrictions is complaint driven, unless you invite someone into your home and they see the third fish you are probably good to go ;-)

Should interpret my deed restrictions to mean that I really can only have two fish in my aquarium and comply, or should I be a scofflaw and sneak a third one in under the radar?

[graciegirl]

I don't have a cross in my yard. Mine is in my home & heart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

We don't either. We have three very small ceramic gecko's hidden on a ledge under a bush that were made by our resident artist Helene. The real gecko's sit on them...

until the snake comes. I think there is a religious allegory there somewhere.....

[Challenger]

I don't have a cross in my yard. Mine is in my home & heart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The more appropriate location.

[New Englander]

The more appropriate location.

I agree.

[quietBern]

I notice this thread is about placing various articles in the landscaping in the front of the house. Do the same rules apply to the rear of the property? What about if the back of your house faces the street?

[EnglishJW]

Instead of depending on the complaint system just level the playing field by enforcing this across the board. We signed our deed when we bought. Stick to the deal you willingly signed. Do I mind a cross - absolutely not. Do I mind metal birds, etc. Nope. I do mind though the petty bickering and lawn ornament police. Just make it fair and stop pitting neighbor (or non-neighbor) and against neighbor who can't stick to the rules.

I would love to see it work this way too.

[Challenger]

I would love to see it work this way too.

Yes

[graciegirl]

The Villages have tried to stay out of these kinds of situations where THEY are left to decide what is bothering people and to levy fees and fines. AND...If this was a manned job..then it would require remuneration to the hunter of restriction rule breakers...and his/her riding around in a car and that my friends is where all those taxes get raised or fees get heisted up and that is when the real bitching begins. If you are annoyed report them. Anonymously. They shouldn't have done it and if they figure out you dropped the dime. Well, there you are.

Gracie the fiscal conservative.

[Barefoot]

If you are annoyed report them. Anonymously. They shouldn't have done it and if they figure out you dropped the dime. Well, there you are.
Gracie the fiscal conservative.
:agree: with Gracie.
Fine to say "enforce this across the board", but I think residents would be incensed by an increased amenity fee to enforce this.
68 posts later :popcorn: and I don't think any poster has YET convinced another poster to switch sides. An impasse.

[Bavarian]

This fight over the small White Crosses is what started the Lutherens, of which I am not, in Frankenmuth to start the campaign.

Want to see Burgas, go to Bad Toelz, only one so far. We sent them to Fr. Merkel.

[Chi33]

Be respectful, just shape a hedge into a cross.

[graciegirl]

This fight over the small White Crosses is what started the Lutherens, of which I am not, in Frankenmuth to start the campaign.

Want to see Burgas, go to Bad Toelz, only one so far. We sent them to Fr. Merkel.

Lutherans. I think it was more than that.

[dbussone]

Lutherans. I think it was more than that.



Shhhh! (he's German GG, don't get him upset) And please don't let him know he misspelled Lutheran.

But I admit he does make fine cars.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[John_W]

There was one time about 1986 I saw a cross and it was scary. I was driving into Chapel Hill, NC about 10:00 at night. I was to pick up a bicycle I had ordered from Performance Bikes. After you get off I-95 it's just 2 lane country roads until you get to town. Just a couple of miles before Chapel Hill, home to a huge university, I saw about a 10' tall burning cross. I didn't slow down to take a good look. I caught the news that night on TV and it was the KKK having some fun. It was scary to me, I hate to think what a black person felt like.

[Edjkoz]

it doesn't matter one bit if you find it offensive, or what most people prefer. If you want to take the deeds argument, then fine. All yard art should be removed. Short of that, a small white cross is not different than anything else that identifies someone as being part of a group (a patriots fan, a wisconsin resident, etc.). Your idea of what is in good taste, or my idea of what is in good taste, is not at issue. We're talking about a one foot high white cross, which is much smaller than most other things found in people's front yards in the villages.

I'm glad you see defiance. I don't have one of those crosses, but if i did i would refuse to remove it. I'm tired of people thinking they have a right to not be offended at someone else's beliefs or opinions to the point of casually throwing away the right of free speech and expression. Should people with a cross on their driveway or lamppost sign be forced to remove those because you are offended? Apparently so, since you don't want to see anything religious when passing someone else's property.

Again, if the villages wants to take the deed restriction to 100% enforcement, that is fine. But it is not fine to selectively enforce it against yard art that is religious in nature.
bravo!

[autumnspring]

Much like our ever expanding universe, the distant between ourselves grows and the attraction that once binded us lessens ever more. Human fractionization by way of religious intolerance is our current reality as it has been through the ages and only through humanistic tolerance can we all get along. :beer3: Let us now pray...


You really need to do some reading of history.

Look at these posts. People in the villages are older, more educated and wealthier than the general population.
Sadly even here you cannot discuss religion or politics.
SADLY IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN SO

[dbussone]

You really need to do some reading of history.



Look at these posts. People in the villages are older, more educated and wealthier than the general population.

Sadly even here you cannot discuss religion or politics.

SADLY IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN SO



I do think it is possible to discuss religion here, but politics is an intolerable mix of oil and water on TOTV. People have lost the ability to debate. It has been replaced by posting links and citing sources both reasonable and unreasonable. Above all else people have lost their sense of humor...much more rant than laugh. Thank goodness for the ignore button.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[natalierp]

I read through this thread and the immaturity of some of the posts for older adults. It is simple justvlike when we had our golf cart outside in our yard for sale. The enforcement officier knocked on our door stating that is against the deed you signed having items for sale in your yard. I simply aid thank you for the information I was not aware and put it in a parking lot in a square or ref center at his suggestion. Whether that legal or not J don't know but if told it is against the deed remove and move on period. Most people donhjngs then are told because really not everyone reads every little things they signed propbably 85% don't.

[perrjojo]

I think this horse has been beat to death. :crap2:

[graciegirl]

I think this horse has been beat to death. :crap2:

Excellent summary. I stand with deed restrictions. It is one of the top reasons we moved HERE.

I just hope that no one near me begins to let their landscape take care of itself and save water in the name of green. Florida Friendly seems like such a lovely NAME,...........

Ugly, some of it. Looks like lazy people live there.

[dyobrien]

I don't think you should run to the lawn police until that is a last resort. Knock on your neighbor's door first. What happened to the friendliest hometown?

[graciegirl]

I don't think you should run to the lawn police until that is a last resort. Knock on your neighbor's door first. What happened to the friendliest hometown?

I disagree. I don't think people take kindly to being told directly they have bad taste in lawn ornaments. There are some far less ugly than these...but I have seen these......

plywood lawn ornament of fat bend over lady - Bing (https://www.bing.com/search?q=plywood+lawn+ornament+of+fat+bend+over+la dy&form=EDGHPT&qs=PF&cvid=bfccfc8d91cb4c80956795be03372fc3&cc=US&setlang=en-US&elv=AXXfrEiqqD9r3GuelwApulpdjKytkUIownv7Myq9PzDzuT vodJf%21ObX*gE6p3PGin6CHXGxcTKc2*YQlje9B%21obC03Fp AH11UZS1zailbIvZ)

[rlcooper70]

After reading the post from the guy who says that the Nazi symbol is okay with him ..... oh my ... is that where we are heading? Is he okay with a bunch of guys with pointed hats burning crosses too?

[merrymini]

No lawn ornaments means no lawn ornaments. That includes anything that is a lawn ornament, religious or not. Simple, very simple. Abide by the restrictions in your district. Follow the rules. The restrictions are not onerous. Keep the anonymous system. I have seen confrontations between neighbors over a stupid ornament and it can divide a neighborhood. What is it that people do not understand about this?

[JBM12]

I am considering buying in The Villages, so thought you might like my take on this:
One of the reasons I would buy is for aesthetics and uniformity in appearance as this keeps home values up, so it's important that everyone adhere to the rules. It's impossible to let one display an item and then deny someone else this ability, which is why there are rules in the fist place.
Where I live now, some residents began shining the green "military support" lights on the exterior of their home. While a noble gesture -- and I certainly support our troops -- we had to stop this because it was a violation, and where would you draw the line? If allowed, we would soon have a carnival atmosphere in our community with pink lights supporting breast cancer awareness, blue lights supporting our police, red lights supporting heart health, etc. -- each very worthy. However, we had to enforce our covenants.
If I see lots of lawn ornamentation -- however important to the homeowner -- I WILL NOT BUY, for this would be a huge red flag to me of problems ahead!
My suggestion: Display your ornamentation INSIDE your house in a window. This can still be seen from outside by passersby who look, but it would not violate your contract.

[Polar Bear]

I am considering buying in The Villages, so thought you might like my take on this:
One of the reasons I would buy is for aesthetics and uniformity in appearance as this keeps home values up, so it's important that everyone adhere to the rules. It's impossible to let one display an item and then deny someone else this ability, which is why there are rules in the fist place.
Where I live now, some residents began shining the green "military support" lights on the exterior of their home. While a noble gesture -- and I certainly support our troops -- we had to stop this because it was a violation, and where would you draw the line? If allowed, we would soon have a carnival atmosphere in our community with pink lights supporting breast cancer awareness, blue lights supporting our police, red lights supporting heart health, etc. -- each very worthy. However, we had to enforce our covenants.
If I see lots of lawn ornamentation -- however important to the homeowner -- I WILL NOT BUY, for this would be a huge red flag to me of problems ahead!
My suggestion: Display your ornamentation INSIDE your house in a window. This can still be seen from outside by passersby who look, but it would not violate your contract.
A voice of reason. I hope you do decide to move here. :)

[OhioBuckeye]

Well,I consider myself as a Christian & I have no complaints about a 10 in. white cross in somebodies yard. I feel & this is just my own opinion, I think this got started when we had a president that pushed other religions. So I think some people are just trying to show America that this is a Christian country, not one of the others. Personally If one of my neighbors were showing a symbol of their religion I probably won't be real neighborly, maybe a HI to them. This symbol of our religion is getting a little carried away, I think! What's our country coming to!!!

[mellincf]

Well,I consider myself as a Christian & I have no complaints about a 10 in. white cross in somebodies yard. I feel & this is just my own opinion, I think this got started when we had a president that pushed other religions. So I think some people are just trying to show America that this is a Christian country, not one of the others. Personally If one of my neighbors were showing a symbol of their religion I probably won't be real neighborly, maybe a HI to them. This symbol of our religion is getting a little carried away, I think! What's our country coming to!!!
This is not a Christian country. Christians need a history lesson. This country was founded because Christians were being burned alive BY OTHER CHRISTIANS because they belonged to the wrong denomination of Christianity. Read about the Thirty Years War, Bloody Mary, etc. and realize there is a reason that God is not mentioned in our Constitution, which is by the PEOPLE and for the PEOPLE, not any religion.

[Susan Schonfeld]

I agree and when I see people not adhering to rules and nothing is being done about it I get very annoyed. I keep asking community development to put put a newsletter abput rules but they won"t and what a waste of money for the community watch who only drive around and can't even cite a violation. They should put in guarded and gated entrances and do away with them. It seems it would be cheper than paying for trucks and gas for these people to just drive around. Garbage in front of houses more than 24 hours in advance, and lawn debris in bags being kept in front of their garages all the time - why can't people be comsiderate of their neighbors. It dosen't take much to start bringing down the looks of the community. And I do not think white crosses or any religious memorabalia should be in view except at Christmas. There are many relgions and I don't think you would want to see a STAR OF DAVID HANGING ON A TREE or the insignias for any other religion so people should stop putting them there. People are ruining putting beautiful swans, etc in their fromt yards because it will be everything or nothing.

[genobambino]

Agree with Rubicon, couldn't have said it better...people buy in here because of the way it looks and then the first thing they want to do is start changing it...It's amazing how people sign contracts and don't read what it says...

[ColdNoMore]

This is not a Christian country. Christians need a history lesson. This country was founded because Christians were being burned alive BY OTHER CHRISTIANS because they belonged to the wrong denomination of Christianity. Read about the Thirty Years War, Bloody Mary, etc. and realize there is a reason that God is not mentioned in our Constitution, which is by the PEOPLE and for the PEOPLE, not any religion.

An excellent and intelligent response. :BigApplause:


I think the underlying issue comes from those that actually believe this great nation was founded as a 'Christian Nation' and believe that incorrect assumption...allows them the ability to denounce anything that does not fit that illusion or their own bias. :shrug:

[Boomer]

Never mind. Off topic. I didn't really want to be in this thread anyway.

[Wiotte]

No lawn ornaments means no lawn ornaments. That includes anything that is a lawn ornament, religious or not. Simple, very simple. Abide by the restrictions in your district. Follow the rules. The restrictions are not onerous. Keep the anonymous system. I have seen confrontations between neighbors over a stupid ornament and it can divide a neighborhood. What is it that people do not understand about this?



Christians feel they are being persecuted. They feel they're being singled out while others with non religious ornaments are not. If everyone kept personal statements out of sight it would not be an issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mwann1]

I think put whatever you want as long as it is not overdone but if all must be enforced then all flag pole's ,banners ,ect must go but that is not my belief.

[Gpsma]

Agree with Rubicon, couldn't have said it better...people buy in here because of the way it looks and then the first thing they want to do is start changing it...It's amazing how people sign contracts and don't read what it says...

Change is good. Too many people stuck in their line dance here....

[biker1]

The flag poles in my area have been approved (at least the ones owned by people I know) and they are presumably not in the same category as yard ornaments, which are specifically disallowed in some deed restrictions.

I think put whatever you want as long as it is not overdone but if all must be enforced then all flag pole's (sic) ,banners ,ect must go but that is not my belief.

[Dennis and Rose]

I disagree. I believe a person has the right to know the identity, of his/her accuser. Cowards who do not identify themselves , become internet tough guys. They can say anything they want with impunity. Besides, I have found differences can be solved over a little coffee and danish

[graciegirl]

I disagree. I believe a person has the right to know the identity, of his/her accuser. Cowards who do not identify themselves , become internet tough guys. They can say anything they want with impunity. Besides, I have found differences can be solved over a little coffee and danish

You well may be right. And you could also be wrong. I think it depends on what you expect and have learned to expect where you lived before and THAT is very geographical. I would rather someone report me than be told directly I have bad taste. I would rather report someone anonymously than tell them they aren't doing things according to Hoyle.

Here is the lineup...Two neighbors both from Minnesota...no problem. Two neighbors both from Utah. No problem. One neighbor from Ohio one from The Bronx. You get where I'm going? Some states people teach their children that it is rude to honk your horn at other people.

[bluiiis]

I'm amazed that people have nothing better to do than worry about small crosses.

[CindyNah1]

I life in a "hood" that has lots of crosses. I'm not fond of them. I would not be interested in living in a police state where the villages trolled theyarea looking for violations. I attended a district 3 meeting when I first moved here about 2 yr ago they said they are "complaint driven" meaning if a neighbor objects and they are in violation of a rule, the villages will respond.

I prefer to be peaceful with my neighbors and honor their "right" to display their beliefs, even when I don't share them

LIVE and LET live and let's stop trying to CONTROL others and stick with self management.

[dbussone]

This is not a Christian country. Christians need a history lesson. This country was founded because Christians were being burned alive BY OTHER CHRISTIANS because they belonged to the wrong denomination of Christianity. Read about the Thirty Years War, Bloody Mary, etc. and realize there is a reason that God is not mentioned in our Constitution, which is by the PEOPLE and for the PEOPLE, not any religion.



But God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Gpsma]

Here is the lineup...Two neighbors both from Minnesota...no problem. Two neighbors both from Utah. No problem. One neighbor from Ohio one from The Bronx. You get where I'm going? Some states people teach their children that it is rude to honk your horn at other people.

Is there something wrong with someone giving a quick toot on the horn to get your attention if they want to wave at you?

[Mleeja]

I think this horse has been beat to death. :crap2:

Just don't bury it with a white cross on top. (Unless you live in District 2!)

[Gordon82]

This is not a Christian country. Christians need a history lesson. This country was founded because Christians were being burned alive BY OTHER CHRISTIANS because they belonged to the wrong denomination of Christianity. Read about the Thirty Years War, Bloody Mary, etc. and realize there is a reason that God is not mentioned in our Constitution, which is by the PEOPLE and for the PEOPLE, not any religion.

Other people need a lesson on the Bill of Rights.

I'm all for following the deed restrictions. It protects us all. But certain types of lawn ornaments being singled out because they are religious in nature is not acceptable.

[graciegirl]

Other people need a lesson on the Bill of Rights.

I'm all for following the deed restrictions. It protects us all. But certain types of lawn ornaments being singled out because they are religious in nature is not acceptable.

I don't think they are being singled out because they are religious in nature. No ornament is allowed unless it is under the eaves or gets permission from ARC. It is a deed restriction and it keeps people from being too...artistic and flamboyant and schlocky.

I am really sorry that this thread started because now I know that many don't have much in the way of tolerance for other's religion. I am sadly surprised. I am always glad to know that people have something to fall back on, a comforting philosophy or faith in difficult times and as we age there are scary and sad times.

[Mleeja]

Well, when the crosses go, I am going after the Penn State flags! :-)

[dbussone]

Well, when the crosses go, I am going after the Penn State flags! :-)



Try it! My son-in-law went there. (It would not be a good idea to mess with him.)

Personally, I like to fly the 13 star flag attributed to Betsy Ross.

[emoji41][emoji106]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[coffeebean]

I'm amazed that people have nothing better to do than worry about small crosses.

I am worried....I do not appreciate those little crosses and I'm afraid there's going to be more of that crap to come. I used to have to look at religious statues gracing people's front lawns in my old neighborhood in New Jersey. I didn't like it there and I will certainly not like to see those statues here.

I feel folks who are religious (I certainly am NOT as you can probably tell) are ramming their religious beliefs down my throat. STOP IT for crying out loud. I'm tired of having to look the other way so I don't see those damn crosses!!!

Rant over. Thank you for letting me vent.

[graciegirl]

Getting sadder and madder.

Remember I agree with deed restrictions. I would never tell someone their religion made me mad unless it was one that subjugated woman and felt that people who didn't belong should be dead.

[Island57]

I am worried....I do not appreciate those little crosses and I'm afraid there's going to be more of that crap to come. I used to have to look at religious statues gracing people's front lawns in my old neighborhood in New Jersey. I didn't like it there and I will certainly not like to see those statues here.

I feel folks who are religious (I certainly am NOT as you can probably tell) are ramming their religious beliefs down my throat. STOP IT for crying out loud. I'm tired of having to look the other way so I don't see those damn crosses!!!

Rant over. Thank you for letting me vent.
So nice to hear a rational voice!! The first time I saw one of those little crosses, I thought it was a marker for a buried pet. What ever happened to just stringing one around your neck and calling it a day!

[JanBrown]

I tried to sign on to respond there but couldn't get through.

My thoughts are that the same rule should apply to everyone in that particular Village.

Also, the government cannot promote one religion over another. Or even lack of religion.

If a white cross is permitted, then what about a sculpture of a Quran? A statue of Buddha? A sculpture of Ganesha? The star of David? Or a black cross on a white background inside a red circle with a diagonal red slash, the atheist symbol?[/COLOR]

The First Amendment to the Constitution says we have the freedom OF religion, not FROM religion. This expressly means we Americans can, uh, express our religion - like a little white cross.

It is easy to use scare tactics of suggesting we'll have a bunch of Nazi, Muslim, atheist symbols across The Villages, but honestly...seriously... do you really think so? The use of this scare tactic is shameful coming from an American who doesn't understand he is shutting down free speech here in The Villages.

[Island57]

An excellent and intelligent response. :BigApplause:


I think the underlying issue comes from those that actually believe this great nation was founded as a 'Christian Nation' and believe that incorrect assumption...allows them the ability to denounce anything that does not fit that illusion or their own bias. :shrug:
Excellent post. Do free thinkers have a club here in TV? There appear to be a few of us! Woohoo!

[coffeebean]

So nice to hear a rational voice!! The first time I saw one of those little crosses, I thought it was a marker for a buried pet. What ever happened to just stringing one around your neck and calling it a day!

Same with me....I thought there was a buried pet. Then the crosses started popping up all over the place and I realized there couldn't have been that many pets that died in such a short amount of time.

[Wiotte]

So nice to hear a rational voice!! The first time I saw one of those little crosses, I thought it was a marker for a buried pet. What ever happened to just stringing one around your neck and calling it a day!



https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170725/44b6e590a613bc68c7b3067b97866ed4.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wiotte]

Why can't we all just get along.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170725/6d8e3052f1f6fd3235a486b3277027a2.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Challenger]

The First Amendment to the Constitution says we have the freedom OF religion, not FROM religion. This expressly means we Americans can, uh, express our religion - like a little white cross.

It is easy to use scare tactics of suggesting we'll have a bunch of Nazi, Muslim, atheist symbols across The Villages, but honestly...seriously... do you really think so? The use of this scare tactic is shameful coming from an American who doesn't understand he is shutting down free speech here in The Villages.

Crosses are ornaments and therefore not allowed. Has nothing to do with religion or free exercise thereof. Be careful what you ask for- you may get it. For instance a life sized religious statue in a yard near Spanish Springs or the dog making a toilet out of a fireplug(same area). I don't believe that Jesus would erect a religious symbol in his yard if he had bought in a neighborhood with a deed restriction prohibiting such décor.

[Barefoot]

Change is good. Too many people stuck in their line dance here....

Even if you agreed with the deed restrictions when you purchased a home in TV?

No lawn ornaments means no lawn ornaments. That includes anything that is a lawn ornament, religious or not. Simple, very simple. Abide by the restrictions in your district. Follow the rules. The restrictions are not onerous. Keep the anonymous system. I have seen confrontations between neighbors over a stupid ornament and it can divide a neighborhood. What is it that people do not understand about this?

It seems there are lots of residents who didn't bother to read the deed restrictions when they purchased a home in TV. :shrug:

[graciegirl]

Even if you agreed with the deed restrictions when you purchased a home in TV?



It seems there are lots of residents who didn't bother to read the deed restrictions when they purchased a home in TV. :shrug:

Barefoot, always a sane, calm voice of reason. You are a kind person and it is my pleasure to know you.

[Gpsma]

Even if you agreed with the deed restrictions when you purchased a home in TV?



It seems there are lots of residents who didn't bother to read the deed restrictions when they purchased a home in TV. :shrug:

I remember there was a time when builders use to have deed restrictions not allowing sales to Jews and Blacks.

Deed restrictions are not set in steel. Time for TV to have a re-look at the restrictions.

With the unbridled growth of TV most new buyers aren't of a generation comfortable living with houses made of Ticky Tacky That All Look The Same.

[OhioBuckeye]

This is not a Christian country. Christians need a history lesson. This country was founded because Christians were being burned alive BY OTHER CHRISTIANS because they belonged to the wrong denomination of Christianity. Read about the Thirty Years War, Bloody Mary, etc. and realize there is a reason that God is not mentioned in our Constitution, which is by the PEOPLE and for the PEOPLE, not any religion.
Whoa, whoa, I don't need a history lesson about what god I believe in, I'm just answering a simple question about these little white crosses. Keep your history speeches for your faith. Nobody came here to argue, just making a simple comment.

[graciegirl]

I remember there was a time when builders use to have deed restrictions not allowing sales to Jews and Blacks.

Deed restrictions are not set in steel. Time for TV to have a re-look at the restrictions.

With the unbridled growth of TV most new buyers aren't of a generation comfortable living with houses made of Ticky Tacky That All Look The Same.

Not a single person was forced to buy here. And not a single person need stay if they don't like the way a CDD is run. Their home can be sold and usually at a profit if it is clean, appropriately priced, not smoked in or peed in a lot by animals. People can live in bigger homes nearby and not have to pay the approximately $150 amenity fee levied for all no matter how big or how small their homes are.

Nope. If a person doesn't like it here then they can choose to live elsewhere. The cost of moving is much less here than in any other part of the country.

Gracie, who has never seen one segment of Game of Thrones and who had lived comfortably in her old neighborhood for more than twenty years with many ethnicities and nationalities attracted by good jobs at Proctor and Gamble...

The old neighborhood had deed restrictions too. It keeps your property values protected. For most of us a home is a huge investment.

[Rapscallion St Croix]

Are these crosses religious statements or yard art?

To the person who placed the cross in their yard..............Religious Statement or possibly an act of defiance
To the person who complained...............................Probably seen as Religious Statement which offends their sensibilities
To the Deed Compliance Staff..................................Probably Yard Art which is in violation of deed restrictions

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4161e9231033aa335aca697a3ef0c4e2

[Mikeod]

Are these crosses religious statements or yard art?

To the person who placed the cross in their yard..............Religious Statement or possibly an act of defiance
To the person who complained...............................Probably seen as Religious Statement which offends their sensibilities
To the Deed Compliance Staff..................................Probably Yard Art which is in violation of deed restrictions

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4161e9231033aa335aca697a3ef0c4e2
Very true that people view these crosses and whether they are a problem from different angles. Whatever your feeling about these, the fact remains it is a violation of the deed restrictions everyone agreed to when purchasing your home. As others have said, if the restrictions are too onerous, don’t buy the house.
The deed restrictions are not a violation of your freedom of religion. That freedom is a guarantee that the government cannot establish a national religion over others and restrict your practicing your chosen religion. However, like other “rights” it can be waived by private establishments. An example frequently used is your right to free speech does not allow you to yell “Fire” in a crowded theater. Or your employer can certainly discipline you for what you say to a customer. In this case, you agreed that all lawn ornaments (which these crosses are) cannot be placed in certain positions in the front yard. It has nothing to do with religious tolerance.

For those who feel this is much ado about nothing, to allow these ornaments is a slippery slope that I feel The Villages will not risk. As others have said, allowing these, even by ignoring the violation, could mean that all restrictions on lawn ornaments become unenforceable. There is a provision in law that if an entity shows a pattern of ignoring a rule or such, it becomes moot.

If you want to change the restriction, it would appear it would have to be done CDD by CDD. And perhaps finally by the VCCDD and SLCDD. I would not hold out any hope that could be accomplished. As an example, I brought to the AAC a proposal that active duty service members visiting family in TV have their greens fee/cart fee waived by presenting their service ID and guest pass at the starter shack. TV has always shown support for the military, so I thought it would be a no-brainer. Wrong. It was turned down for the reason that there are many groups such as police, sheriff, fire fighters, etc., who are also deserving of our appreciation and who could justifiably ask why they were not included. The slippery slope.

Please place your cross under the eaves of your home or in the back yard. Then no one can tell you to remove it as it meets the deed restrictions. Problem goes away.

[autumnspring]

Is there something wrong with someone giving a quick toot on the horn to get your attention if they want to wave at you?

But in reply to you.
As I've said many times, your rights end where they intrude on the right of others.

As you read through these debates. It is not like your horn is only heard by your friend. I've seen people simply stop in the middle of the street to gossip. No attention to anyone but themselves on the road.

We will as always have tones of differing opinions on every subject but, why don't you simply pull over?

[Gpsma]

But in reply to you.
As I've said many times, your rights end where they intrude on the right of others.

As you read through these debates. It is not like your horn is only heard by your friend. I've seen people simply stop in the middle of the street to gossip. No attention to anyone but themselves on the road.

We will as always have tones of differing opinions on every subject but, why don't you simply pull over?

What are you talking about? You have never given a quick toot on your horn to get someone's attention to just give them a friendly wave? Your bothered by someone doing that but not by the noise of construction, trucks, garbage removal etc? Do you want total silence around you?

BTW...that question was addressed to Gracie.

[graciegirl]

Very true that people view these crosses and whether they are a problem from different angles. Whatever your feeling about these, the fact remains it is a violation of the deed restrictions everyone agreed to when purchasing your home. As others have said, if the restrictions are too onerous, don’t buy the house.
The deed restrictions are not a violation of your freedom of religion. That freedom is a guarantee that the government cannot establish a national religion over others and restrict your practicing your chosen religion. However, like other “rights” it can be waived by private establishments. An example frequently used is your right to free speech does not allow you to yell “Fire” in a crowded theater. Or your employer can certainly discipline you for what you say to a customer. In this case, you agreed that all lawn ornaments (which these crosses are) cannot be placed in certain positions in the front yard. It has nothing to do with religious tolerance.

For those who feel this is much ado about nothing, to allow these ornaments is a slippery slope that I feel The Villages will not risk. As others have said, allowing these, even by ignoring the violation, could mean that all restrictions on lawn ornaments become unenforceable. There is a provision in law that if an entity shows a pattern of ignoring a rule or such, it becomes moot.

If you want to change the restriction, it would appear it would have to be done CDD by CDD. And perhaps finally by the VCCDD and SLCDD. I would not hold out any hope that could be accomplished. As an example, I brought to the AAC a proposal that active duty service members visiting family in TV have their greens fee/cart fee waived by presenting their service ID and guest pass at the starter shack. TV has always shown support for the military, so I thought it would be a no-brainer. Wrong. It was turned down for the reason that there are many groups such as police, sheriff, fire fighters, etc., who are also deserving of our appreciation and who could justifiably ask why they were not included. The slippery slope.

Please place your cross under the eaves of your home or in the back yard. Then no one can tell you to remove it as it meets the deed restrictions. Problem goes away.

I agree. Well said.

[ColdNoMore]

I can't help but wonder, if those who are so adamant that they be allowed to display a small religious cross in their yards, feel that others should have the same right to display small swastikas, confederate flags, witch symbols, Islamic symbols, etc., etc., etc...in their front yards?

I have this sneaky suspicion, that the answer by the majority would be a resounding...NO!

Therefore, I think the answer as to should everyone be required to follow the deed restrictions...becomes crystal clear. :shrug:

[quietBern]

Are we allowed to put articles in the landscaping in the rear of our homes.
What if the back of your house faces the street?

[dbussone]

Are we allowed to put articles in the landscaping in the rear of our homes.

What if the back of your house faces the street?



Yes, but ONLY the back of each item may be displayed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Wiotte]

Yes, but ONLY the back of each item may be displayed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro



I wish I had said that ! [emoji1303]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dbussone]

I wish I had said that ! [emoji1303]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



You can own it for $1.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Mrs. Robinson]

Not that there still wouldn't be issues, but if the entire Villages all had the same (as in identical) rules for everything, it would simplify many things.

[Barefoot]

With the unbridled growth of TV most new buyers aren't of a generation comfortable living with houses made of Ticky Tacky That All Look The Same.
On the other hand, the new buyers probably want to protect their investments just like the older buyers.
And I'd think the buyers who don't want "Ticky Tacky" houses probably also don't want multi-colored garage doors and stuffed moose on the front lawn. Opening Pandora's box to relax deed restrictions may not be as popular as you think. :ohdear:

[dbussone]

On the other hand, the new buyers probably want to protect their investments just like the older buyers.
And I'd think the buyers who don't want "Ticky Tacky" houses probably also don't want multi-colored garage doors and stuffed moose on the front lawn. Opening Pandora's box to relax deed restrictions may not be as popular as you think. :ohdear:



Now that hurt my feelings. (I know, you probably don't care.) We just had our 5 year old home painted, and updated the color of the garage doors. We used a new color from the newly minted center of The Villages, around CR44. Staff of the ARC loved it.

The garage doors are painted Sherman Williams Red Copper!




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Barefoot]

The garage doors are painted Sherman Williams Red Copper!
If it's approved by The Villages and the ARC, then I'm sure it's tasteful.

[coffeebean]

Crosses are ornaments and therefore not allowed. Has nothing to do with religion or free exercise thereof. Be careful what you ask for- you may get it. For instance a life sized religious statue in a yard near Spanish Springs or the dog making a toilet out of a fireplug(same area). I don't believe that Jesus would erect a religious symbol in his yard if he had bought in a neighborhood with a deed restriction prohibiting such décor.

Is that for real? Oh my goodness. I would have to move if my home faced the statue. Is that allowed.....even on the historic side?

[Wiotte]

If I need to sell my house, am I allowed to bury a statue of St. Joseph in my front yard ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dbussone]

If I need to sell my house, am I allowed to bury a statue of St. Joseph in my front yard ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Yes, but only upside down, facing Bethlehem . And make sure his toes don't show. But most importantly, under your eaves.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Wiotte]

Yes, but only upside down, facing Bethlehem . And make sure his toes don't show. But most importantly, under your eaves.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro



Bethlehem PA ???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dbussone]

Bethlehem PA ???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Absolutely. Sorry I missed that detail.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[pauld315]

Is that for real? Oh my goodness. I would have to move if my home faced the statue. Is that allowed.....even on the historic side?

I haven't seen that but I have seen a full sized cannon in somebody's yard in Santo Domingo and a yard decorated with plastic flowers in Santiago. Do you still wonder why the made the rules tougher as they learned ?

[Barefoot]

I don't believe that Jesus would erect a religious symbol in his yard if he had bought in a neighborhood with a deed restriction prohibiting such décor. :pray:

[Christopher schneider]

Amen !

[Dklink]

I for one have a small white cross in support of christianity with several other ornamental items. If strict inforcement says the cross should be removed then I believe all ornaments should be removed so all you see in the front yards is grass and plants. I would miss the variety of front yards.

[biker1]

The enforcement is complaint driven on a house by house basis. If someone files a complaint against your house then you will have to react. Complaints would need to be filed against all non-compliant houses in order to obtain your goal of the removal of all ornaments if you can't have a cross in your yard (because of a complaint against your house).



I for one have a small white cross in support of christianity with several other ornamental items. If strict inforcement says the cross should be removed then I believe all ornaments should be removed so all you see in the front yards is grass and plants. I would miss the variety of front yards.

[graciegirl]

I for one have a small white cross in support of christianity with several other ornamental items. If strict inforcement says the cross should be removed then I believe all ornaments should be removed so all you see in the front yards is grass and plants. I would miss the variety of front yards.

I am not sure, but I think that all ornamentation without approval from ARC are NOT allowed south of 466. I have always believed that there are fewer deed restrictions north of 466.

South of 466, you may have what can fit under the eaves of the house.

I don't think this has ANYTHING at all to do with religion and I do believe that most people who live here would not be against your faith at all.

[New Englander]

I haven't seen that but I have seen a full sized cannon in somebody's yard in Santo Domingo and a yard decorated with plastic flowers in Santiago. Do you still wonder why the made the rules tougher as they learned ?

A full sized cannon in their front yard?

[Wiotte]

I haven't seen that but I have seen a full sized cannon in somebody's yard in Santo Domingo and a yard decorated with plastic flowers in Santiago. Do you still wonder why the made the rules tougher as they learned ?



Spanish fort ???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gerald]

I though the little white crosses are for departed pets.
I suggest that you remember when people buy a home in the villages from the original home owner. The new home owners don't sign any rules. After a while you will have no rules that can be inforced by the villages.

[Wiotte]

I though the little white crosses are for departed pets.

I suggest that you remember when people buy a home in the villages from the original home owner. The new home owners don't sign any rules. After a while you will have no rules that can be inforced by the villages.



Wow, you really need a few lessons in real property law.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chi-Town]

What next?

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170726/8865c94a191fd276d918c895d9084f45.jpg

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

[Wiotte]

What next?

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170726/8865c94a191fd276d918c895d9084f45.jpg

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk



So, you're a Jurassic lover too ? Excellent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[coffeebean]

Bethlehem PA ???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I love to read this forum for the chuckles I have. People here have wonderful senses of humor.

[coffeebean]

I haven't seen that but I have seen a full sized cannon in somebody's yard in Santo Domingo and a yard decorated with plastic flowers in Santiago. Do you still wonder why the made the rules tougher as they learned ?

Is it not possible, at this time, to make new rules in the older sections that are so lenient with the clutter on properties? I can see why the newer villages look more pristine than the older section. The developer is building new homes in the historic section where the pre-fab homes stood. Wouldn't the developer want this section to be as pristine as the newer sections?

[coffeebean]

I for one have a small white cross in support of christianity with several other ornamental items. If strict inforcement says the cross should be removed then I believe all ornaments should be removed so all you see in the front yards is grass and plants. I would miss the variety of front yards.

I would much prefer to see healthy grass and healthy plants and trees only. Nix the other chotskies. Too many on a property and it looks schlocky (is that really a word?) You get the idea.

[Wiotte]

I would much prefer to see healthy grass and healthy plants and trees only. Nix the other chotskies. Too many on a property and it looks schlocky (is that really a word?) You get the idea.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170726/b13fab723d8e26b13060859a13f89eea.jpg







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[graciegirl]

I though the little white crosses are for departed pets.
I suggest that you remember when people buy a home in the villages from the original home owner. The new home owners don't sign any rules. After a while you will have no rules that can be inforced by the villages.

That is simply incorrect. Deed Restrictions follow the deed.

[Wiotte]

Or,

Yiddish Dictionary Online ייִדיש װערטערבוך אַפֿן װעב (http://www.yiddishdictionaryonline.com/)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wiotte]

That is simply incorrect. Deed Restrictions follow the deed.



Yep, ad infinitum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[coffeebean]

What next?

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170726/8865c94a191fd276d918c895d9084f45.jpg

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

Not in my old neighborhood, but I used to pass a home in NJ that had a life size buffalo statue on his front lawn. The property had a very large set back from the street but the buffalo was very visible. At Christmastime, the buffalo wore a huge wreath around his neck.

[coffeebean]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170726/b13fab723d8e26b13060859a13f89eea.jpg







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LOL. See what I mean? Chuckling!!!

[dbussone]

Yep, ad infinitum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



And ad nauseam as well?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Challenger]

I though the little white crosses are for departed pets.
I suggest that you remember when people buy a home in the villages from the original home owner. The new home owners don't sign any rules. After a while you will have no rules that can be inforced by the villages.

Deed restrictions run with the land no matter who owns the property. They are recorded in the land records of the county and are public info. They remain in force forever, unless the State or Federal govt passes a law making them inoperative as in the case of American Flags in Florida. A new buyer should be informed by his attorney or the real estate professional representing him of the restrictions. Failure to be informed does no relieve one from the responsibility to comply ( but may be cause for action against attorneys or agents). Any property owner subject to the same recorded restrictions has standing to go to court ( if necessary) to inforce such restrictions. Petitions to change restrictions normally require a super majority of those property owner which are subject to the restraints (up to 100per cent ) to compel changes.

[coffeebean]

...........Please place your cross under the eaves of your home or in the back yard. Then no one can tell you to remove it as it meets the deed restrictions. Problem goes away.

I've seen many white crosses in folks' back yards......those are the yards that face the main roads such as Odel Circle. That is just like placing the yard ornaments in the front yard, actually.

[coffeebean]

Yes, but ONLY the back of each item may be displayed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Another chuckle from me. Too funny!

[xcaligirl]

CC&R's are in place for a reason. If not in compliance, it needs to be addressed by Deed Compliance. If one person gets by doing whatever they feel is okay (even if they are a renter), where does the abuse of the CC&R's end? I don't like being in compliance and others seem to have the feeling they can do whatever they want even though we did sign paperwork stating we understand and will comply when we bought the house. I personally don't like looking at bad yard art and it started with a cross.... now there's even large ceramic cowboy boots

[xcaligirl]

I so agree Challenger! No excuse for the abuse.

[stan the man]

CC&R's are in place for a reason. If not in compliance, it needs to be addressed by Deed Compliance. If one person gets by doing whatever they feel is okay (even if they are a renter), where does the abuse of the CC&R's end? I don't like being in compliance and others seem to have the feeling they can do whatever they want even though we did sign paperwork stating we understand and will comply when we bought the house. I personally don't like looking at bad yard art and it started with a cross.... now there's even large ceramic cowboy boots

Feel free to make a call anytime you want ,when you see a violation of the building regulations

[Mrs. Robinson]

I think it's absurd and bordering on ridiculous that the deed restrictions say you can't have lawn ornaments, BUT . . .
the only way to have such items removed, is to file a complaint. Huh? Then why the restrictions?

Going a step further, it is then okay to put the item(s) in your window, under the eaves of your house,
in your back yard, etc.

How stupid this all is!

[Mrs. Robinson]

I would much prefer to see healthy grass and healthy plants and trees only. Nix the other chotskies. Too many on a property and it looks schlocky (is that really a word?) You get the idea.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170726/b13fab723d8e26b13060859a13f89eea.jpg


I saw a cross in the front yard of someone's house (yes, here in TV) -- a rather large one about 2 feet high.
It was not white but rather looked like old wood -- sort of driftwoody, and definitely home made.
In addition, around it was draped a schmata. :girlneener:

[maureenod]

Just drive through areas where there are no deed restrictions. Talk about trashy and tacky. That is why.

[jsw14]

I have called Community Development just to ask a question about leaving a trailer/boat, or a small camper in my driveway. I know about the 72 hour rule. But my question was IF I take out, (say every 50 hours or so) under the 72 hour rule, & come back & park it in my driveway again, (the same day) does the 72 hour rule start over again? They told me YES!!!! Hmmm, so I guess anyone can park anything in their own driveway & keep it there, just don't go over 72 hours all at one time.......!!!! Why Pay storage if I can do that & Not get a Ticket?

[cologal]

While I agree and completely comply with the deed restrictions there can be issues with the system.

A neighbor of mine has lived here for years peacefully in her patio villa, that is until a new neighbor moved in. He has reported her to the compliance department now 9 times.

He did not want any shrubs or plants touching his house. So she cut back the plants. Then another complaint for the same issue even though no plants were touching his house.

So she asked how far back did her plants need to be? The response 1 foot. She cut the plants back once again. And yet there came another visit from the deed restriction guy. He saw that the plants were 2 feet away from the house. We went down to meet with the compliance people, now she was told her plant had to be cut back to 3 feet. She did that and put up a string line to indicate where the 3 foot line was. Any yet the deed guy came back yet again. The only thing left to do was to move her garden to the other side. But the deed guy came back again because her neighbor now wanted her to fill in vacant area with rock. She was in compliance.....

And yet the agent returned again this time with a complaint that a arbor on her side might fall and hit his house. Clearly he could see that was a stretch but now she has to have the arbor approved.

I thinking of taking bets on how long it will be before he strikes again!

Personally I believe the deed compliance office, in this case is a vehicle for a bully to harass a neighbor.

[Challenger]

Feel free to make a call anytime you want ,when you see a violation of the building regulations

Doesn't matter whether a home owner signs or not. Property is still under pertinent Restrictions

[jsw14]

Doesn't matter whether a home owner signs or not. Property is still under pertinent Restrictions

Thank You for Pointing that out.....:wave:

[graciegirl]

I am a huge fan of deed restrictions.

[jsw14]

While I agree and completely comply with the deed restrictions there can be issues with the system.

A neighbor of mine has lived here for years peacefully in her patio villa, that is until a new neighbor moved in. He has reported her to the compliance department now 9 times.

He did not want any shrubs or plants touching his house. So she cut back the plants. Then another complaint for the same issue even though no plants were touching his house.

So she asked how far back did her plants need to be? The response 1 foot. She cut the plants back once again. And yet there came another visit from the deed restriction guy. He saw that the plants were 2 feet away from the house. We went down to meet with the compliance people, now she was told her plant had to be cut back to 3 feet. She did that and put up a string line to indicate where the 3 foot line was. Any yet the deed guy came back yet again. The only thing left to do was to move her garden to the other side. But the deed guy came back again because her neighbor now wanted her to fill in vacant area with rock. She was in compliance.....

And yet the agent returned again this time with a complaint that a arbor on her side might fall and hit his house. Clearly he could see that was a stretch but now she has to have the arbor approved.

I thinking of taking bets on how long it will be before he strikes again!

Personally I believe the deed compliance office, in this case is a vehicle for a bully to harass a neighbor.

Hmmm, U mean their's a Loop-Hole in the DEED, ALL of us can use here in TV??

[Wiotte]

I have called Community Development just to ask a question about leaving a trailer/boat, or a small camper in my driveway. I know about the 72 hour rule. But my question was IF I take out, (say every 50 hours or so) under the 72 hour rule, & come back & park it in my driveway again, (the same day) does the 72 hour rule start over again? They told me YES!!!! Hmmm, so I guess anyone can park anything in their own driveway & keep it there, just don't go over 72 hours all at one time.......!!!! Why Pay storage if I can do that & Not get a Ticket?

There's a homeowner on Cross Hill Drive that does that very same thing. 3 on 2 off, 3 on 2 off, for the entire month of this past March. :cus:

[jsw14]

There's a homeowner on Cross Hill Drive that does that very same thing. 3 on 2 off, 3 on 2 off, for the entire month of this past March. :cus:

YUP, I hear ya. But what burns my Goat is my neighbor does that 365 days a year!!!! :cus:

[DonH57]

While I agree and completely comply with the deed restrictions there can be issues with the system.

A neighbor of mine has lived here for years peacefully in her patio villa, that is until a new neighbor moved in. He has reported her to the compliance department now 9 times.

He did not want any shrubs or plants touching his house. So she cut back the plants. Then another complaint for the same issue even though no plants were touching his house.

So she asked how far back did her plants need to be? The response 1 foot. She cut the plants back once again. And yet there came another visit from the deed restriction guy. He saw that the plants were 2 feet away from the house. We went down to meet with the compliance people, now she was told her plant had to be cut back to 3 feet. She did that and put up a string line to indicate where the 3 foot line was. Any yet the deed guy came back yet again. The only thing left to do was to move her garden to the other side. But the deed guy came back again because her neighbor now wanted her to fill in vacant area with rock. She was in compliance.....

And yet the agent returned again this time with a complaint that a arbor on her side might fall and hit his house. Clearly he could see that was a stretch but now she has to have the arbor approved.

I thinking of taking bets on how long it will be before he strikes again!

Personally I believe the deed compliance office, in this case is a vehicle for a bully to harass a neighbor.

Upon reading this I'm wondering why clearly the rules kept changing to passify the complainer which in my opinion is only doing this not because there is a violation but because he found a way to harass his neighbor. Restrictions are restrictions but I get the picture her neighbor has personal issues that should be addressed . Nothing will make him happier to force her to leave. Compliance, is not the issue. This scenario is clearly abuse of the system and a sad one!

[dbussone]

Upon reading this I'm wondering why clearly the rules kept changing to passify the complainer which in my opinion is only doing this not because there is a violation but because he found a way to harass his neighbor. Restrictions are restrictions but I get the picture her neighbor has personal issues that should be addressed . Nothing will make him happier to force her to leave. Compliance, is not the issue. This scenario is clearly abuse of the system and a sad one!



I concur. Sounds like a neighborhood intervention might be useful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[DonH57]

I concur. Sounds like a neighborhood intervention might be useful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

If this poor lady kept getting different rulings believing she's doing every thing in compliance and having the rug pulled under her it seems some people in the compliance department shouldn't be serving in this capacity.

[ColdNoMore]

If this poor lady kept getting different rulings believing she's doing every thing in compliance and having the rug pulled under her it seems some people in the compliance department shouldn't be serving in this capacity.

Just as with some golf ambassadors and community watch employees, some people have waited all of their lives to have some type of authority...and they use these positions to live out their fantasies of control.

Not all by any means are like this, but it's usually quickly discernible...which ones fit that description. :ohdear:

[Challenger]

While I agree and completely comply with the deed restrictions there can be issues with the system.

A neighbor of mine has lived here for years peacefully in her patio villa, that is until a new neighbor moved in. He has reported her to the compliance department now 9 times.

He did not want any shrubs or plants touching his house. So she cut back the plants. Then another complaint for the same issue even though no plants were touching his house.

So she asked how far back did her plants need to be? The response 1 foot. She cut the plants back once again. And yet there came another visit from the deed restriction guy. He saw that the plants were 2 feet away from the house. We went down to meet with the compliance people, now she was told her plant had to be cut back to 3 feet. She did that and put up a string line to indicate where the 3 foot line was. Any yet the deed guy came back yet again. The only thing left to do was to move her garden to the other side. But the deed guy came back again because her neighbor now wanted her to fill in vacant area with rock. She was in compliance.....

And yet the agent returned again this time with a complaint that a arbor on her side might fall and hit his house. Clearly he could see that was a stretch but now she has to have the arbor approved.

I thinking of taking bets on how long it will be before he strikes again!

Personally I believe the deed compliance office, in this case is a vehicle for a bully to harass a neighbor.
My suspicion is that there is a lot more to this second or third hand story.

[graciegirl]

My suspicion is that there is a lot more to this second or third hand story.

I agree. Deed restrictions are complaint driven only if the complaint is a valid breech of restrictions.

Sounds wrong. Something is inaccurate.

[Dklink]

They are all fine with me if that is what they believe in. wrong thread

[biker1]

Without pictures and the exact wording of the complaint, it is hard to know exactly what is going on here. I suggest nobody jump to conclusions.

While I agree and completely comply with the deed restrictions there can be issues with the system.

A neighbor of mine has lived here for years peacefully in her patio villa, that is until a new neighbor moved in. He has reported her to the compliance department now 9 times.

He did not want any shrubs or plants touching his house. So she cut back the plants. Then another complaint for the same issue even though no plants were touching his house.

So she asked how far back did her plants need to be? The response 1 foot. She cut the plants back once again. And yet there came another visit from the deed restriction guy. He saw that the plants were 2 feet away from the house. We went down to meet with the compliance people, now she was told her plant had to be cut back to 3 feet. She did that and put up a string line to indicate where the 3 foot line was. Any yet the deed guy came back yet again. The only thing left to do was to move her garden to the other side. But the deed guy came back again because her neighbor now wanted her to fill in vacant area with rock. She was in compliance.....

And yet the agent returned again this time with a complaint that a arbor on her side might fall and hit his house. Clearly he could see that was a stretch but now she has to have the arbor approved.

I thinking of taking bets on how long it will be before he strikes again!

Personally I believe the deed compliance office, in this case is a vehicle for a bully to harass a neighbor.

[jsw14]

I've read this more then Twice & can't make sense of it. I say to each their own...... :shrug:

[DonH57]

I've read this more then Twice & can't make sense of it. I say to each their own...... :shrug:

Same here. The compliance department should have stopped after she met the 1 foot distance she was told originally was the required distance.