Lawn ornament trolls

[Love2Swim]

Honestly, I don't like having to look at all the crosses. Nothing like wearing "it" on your sleeve. I say nothing and just endure them.

I'm with you. :bigbow:

[graciegirl]

Well. Now we know how a couple people feel.

Me and my house?

We abide by the deed restrictions. :)

[coffeebean]

placing a lien against the property.

Without looking for the answer, I figured this would be the end result. Guess I was correct.

[coffeebean]

OMG they can't seize your home or evict you.
God what planet did you come from.
They can fine and penalize to convince you to comply.
If you feel it to be unfair then you can take them to court. Furthermore they are not Jesus Christ himself!
It takes a lot to fine you and they better be spot on, most of there enforcement is intimidation.
If your, wrong then take in down if you are right stand up for your rights.
There are restrictions they try to impose that are preempted by state and Federal laws. to give examples Religious beliefs, outside antenna, close-line. etc...
You own your property PERIOD and no one can take it from you, including they have no right to come on it without your permission and the easements are only for the said person on your deed!
Home owners can use outside clothes lines? I had no idea. I've never seen one here.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

No clothes lines, no antennae. Against the deed restrictions.

[BobnBev]

No clothes lines, no antennae. Against the deed restrictions.

Antennas are protected by federal law-----closelines aren't.:popcorn:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

That's Lake County. https://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/lake/L-3.pdf section 2.8: "No television antennae of any kind are permitted in the development."
Here's one for a Sumter County division: https://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/sumter/District%201/S1-12.pdf section 2:14: "No aerials, satellite reception dishes, or antennae of any kind are permitted in the subdivision."

So - as I've said countless times already, which I'm sure many of you are tired of seeing: If the rules are incorrect, unenforceable, and unenforced, they need to be replaced.

If these rules are legally invalid, then they need to be eliminated because just having those rules in the documentation would be in violation of the law. People would be signing an agreement to abide by rules that are not legally allowed to exist. If they're legally permissible and you want them to be viable rules, then they need to be enforced. Unless no one wants these rules to exist, in which case they need to be voted off the documentation.

[graciegirl]

That's Lake County. https://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/lake/L-3.pdf section 2.8: "No television antennae of any kind are permitted in the development."
Here's one for a Sumter County division: https://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/sumter/District%201/S1-12.pdf section 2:14: "No aerials, satellite reception dishes, or antennae of any kind are permitted in the subdivision."

So - as I've said countless times already, which I'm sure many of you are tired of seeing: If the rules are incorrect, unenforceable, and unenforced, they need to be replaced.

If these rules are legally invalid, then they need to be eliminated because just having those rules in the documentation would be in violation of the law. People would be signing an agreement to abide by rules that are not legally allowed to exist. If they're legally permissible and you want them to be viable rules, then they need to be enforced. Unless no one wants these rules to exist, in which case they need to be voted off the documentation.

THEY are NOT legally INVALID.

[Fraugoofy]

That's Lake County. https://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/lake/L-3.pdf section 2.8: "No television antennae of any kind are permitted in the development."
Here's one for a Sumter County division: https://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/sumter/District%201/S1-12.pdf section 2:14: "No aerials, satellite reception dishes, or antennae of any kind are permitted in the subdivision."

So - as I've said countless times already, which I'm sure many of you are tired of seeing: If the rules are incorrect, unenforceable, and unenforced, they need to be replaced.

If these rules are legally invalid, then they need to be eliminated because just having those rules in the documentation would be in violation of the law. People would be signing an agreement to abide by rules that are not legally allowed to exist. If they're legally permissible and you want them to be viable rules, then they need to be enforced. Unless no one wants these rules to exist, in which case they need to be voted off the documentation.Do you even live here yet? Or has your husband changed his mind? Geez...

Sent from my SM-N920R4 using Tapatalk

[Challenger]

That's Lake County. https://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/lake/L-3.pdf section 2.8: "No television antennae of any kind are permitted in the development."
Here's one for a Sumter County division: https://www.districtgov.org/images/DeedRestiction/sumter/District%201/S1-12.pdf section 2:14: "No aerials, satellite reception dishes, or antennae of any kind are permitted in the subdivision."

So - as I've said countless times already, which I'm sure many of you are tired of seeing: If the rules are incorrect, unenforceable, and unenforced, they need to be replaced.

If these rules are legally invalid, then they need to be eliminated because just having those rules in the documentation would be in violation of the law. People would be signing an agreement to abide by rules that are not legally allowed to exist. If they're legally permissible and you want them to be viable rules, then they need to be enforced. Unless no one wants these rules to exist, in which case they need to be voted off the documentation.

They are still active restrictions that have been pre-empted in part by Federal or State Legislative actions or FCC regulatory directives.

[Chellybean]

I think this posts may out do POOP post. LMAO
:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::boxi ng2::boxing2::boxing2::BigApplause::BigApplause:

[VApeople]

Unless no one wants these rules to exist, in which case they need to be voted off the documentation.

Who would do the voting?

I did not realize that we residents have the power to vote on the rules in TV.

[bluedivergirl]

No clothes lines, no antennae. Against the deed restrictions.

Antennae are protected by Federal law.

Clotheslines are allowed by Florida law.

163.04 Energy devices based on renewable resources.—
(1) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter or other provision of general or special law, the adoption of an ordinance by a governing body, as those terms are defined in this chapter, which prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the installation of solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources is expressly prohibited.
(2) A deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or similar binding agreement may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources from being installed on buildings erected on the lots or parcels covered by the deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or binding agreement. . . .

Statutes & Constitution
:View Statutes
:

Online Sunshine (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0100-0199/0163/Sections/0163.04.html)

[Barefoot]

So - as I've said countless times already, which I'm sure many of you are tired of seeing: If the rules are incorrect, unenforceable, and unenforced, they need to be replaced. Unless no one wants these rules to exist, in which case they need to be voted off the documentation.

I did not realize that we residents have the power to vote on the rules in TV.

It's news to me also. Perhaps Jazuela can let us know the process.

[Barefoot]

Clotheslines are allowed by Florida law.
You read it first on TOTV. :popcorn:
Good to know I guess; but I sincerely hope we don't end up with a sea of clotheslines. :ohdear:

[NatureBoy]

You read it first on TOTV. :popcorn:
Good to know I guess; but I sincerely hope we don't end up with a sea of clotheslines. :ohdear:

Put them in the front yard and hang decorative rugs & sheets from them. :1rotfl:

And put out "ornaments" with solar cells on top that let them light up at night!

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71C%2B5f59ALL._SL1000_.jpg (https://www.amazon.com/Welcome-Lantern-Outdoor-Garden-Statue/dp/B00ZFG4SKM)

[Bogie Shooter]

How can someone who doesn’t live here be such an authority?

[Boomer]

Hi Jazuela,

Because the "governing" of TV is unique, or relatively so, it can take some getting used to. I remember going to a meeting in 2007 when I had just begun to do my TV homework. In 2007 TV was about half the size it is now.

After that meeting, I still had questions. But I know myself well -- I always have asked questions -- since I started talking. I also catch myself overthinking some things. And, I must confess that sometimes I really like a good argument, er, debate. (Maybe some of this sounds familiar. :) )

Anyway, in 2007, we were not ready to buy yet, but 5 years later we did. But we kept the northern house, though we downsized there. I have said before though, and I will say it again, that I think there is a definite advantage to making the commitment to living year-round in TV if you are going to own. But we are at a point in our lives now where that probably will not happen.

Here I am, going on and on, when what I really want to present, for your consideration, is how I got my head around the way TV is run:

- I think of us as living in a corporation.

-Owning a house in TV is like owning stock in a corporation.

- All corporations make decisions that are intended to be in the best interest of the corporation itself. But a successful corporation will make its stockholders successful, too.

- "The Lifestyle" is the dividend paid to the "stockholders" in this "corporation" where we live.

- Views of what is expected from "The Lifestyle" dividend will vary by owner.

- Just like any stock that is owned for the dividend, if the stockholder sees the corporation cut the dividend, the stockholder can decide, individually, to hold or to sell.

(So far, so good, with the overall success of TV, even though there are things that make some "stockholders" unhappy.)

One of the things that made us decide to buy "stock" in TV was my observation of how things went during the housing crisis 10 years ago. Sales might have slowed some because it was taking longer for northerners to sell their homes. But, in the big picture, TV survived nicely. At the time, there were quite a few smaller retirement communities that were over-leveraged, resulting in lots of problems.

Even though, for me, TV now is feeling kind of too big, I do think there is a lot to be said for the momentum and planning. I think that is exactly what got TV through the housing crisis, unscathed.)

I have been around TOTV forever. I learned and have continued to learn things about TV. I do not know if I would buy now, maybe, maybe not. I find the rapid growth to be limiting but others cheer it on.

(Also, I am still in a snit about the loss of the Lifelong Learning College. I was there a lot. I know. I know I need to get over it.)

Anyway, Jazuela, you can see that there are those among us here who are not too happy with your posts. (Sometimes there are those who do not like my posts either.) When I saw the back and forth here, I had to smile and think about how it could have been fun to have you as a student. You like to think -- and debate -- and theorize. :)

For now though, I must quote a great philosopher:

You've got to know when to hold 'em,
Know when to fold 'em,
Know when to walk away,
Know when to run.


I have no doubt that you will do a lot more thinking. You will figure out whether "to hold" or "fold" by doing what works for you and yours -- together -- based on what is the known -- for the time being.

I wish you well in whatever you decide to do.

Boomer

PS: Also, the historic side is a wonderful nickname for the beginnings of TV. The history of Central Florida is not like New England history. I think the historic side has an advantage of being the most walkable part of TV. The streets look wider and the overall feel seems more relaxed.

[CWGUY]

Hi Jazuela,

Because the "governing" of TV is unique, or relatively so, it can take some getting used to. I remember going to a meeting in 2007 when I had just begun to do my TV homework. In 2007 TV was about half the size it is now.

After that meeting, I still had questions. But I know myself well -- I always have asked questions -- since I started talking. I also catch myself overthinking some things. And, I must confess that sometimes I really like a good argument, er, debate. (Maybe some of this sounds familiar. :) )

Anyway, in 2007, we were not ready to buy yet, but 5 years later we did. But we kept the northern house, though we downsized there. I have said before though, and I will say it again, that I think there is a definite advantage to making the commitment to living year-round in TV if you are going to own. But we are at a point in our lives now where that probably will not happen.

Here I am, going on and on, when what I really want to present, for your consideration, is how I got my head around the way TV is run:

- I think of us as living in a corporation.

-Owning a house in TV is like owning stock in a corporation.

- All corporations make decisions that are intended to be in the best interest of the corporation itself. But a successful corporation will make its stockholders successful, too.

- "The Lifestyle" is the dividend paid to the "stockholders" in this "corporation" where we live.

- Views of what is expected from "The Lifestyle" dividend will vary by owner.

- Just like any stock that is owned for the dividend. when the stockholder feels that the dividend is being cut, the stockholder can decide to hold or to sell.

(So far, so good, with the overall success of TV, even though there are things that make some "stockholders" unhappy.)

One of the things that made us decide to buy "stock" in TV was my observation of how things went during the housing crisis 10 years ago. Sales might have slowed some because it was taking longer for northerners to sell their homes. But, in the big picture, TV survived nicely. At the time, there were quite a few smaller retirement communities that were over-leveraged, resulting in lots of problems.

Even though, for me, TV now is feeling kind of too big, I do think there is a lot to be said for the momentum and planning. I think that is exactly what got TV through the housing crisis, unscathed.)

I have been around TOTV forever. I learned and have continued to learn things about TV. I do not know if I would buy now, maybe, maybe not. I find the rapid growth to be limiting but others cheer it on.

(Also, I am still in a snit about the loss of the Lifelong Learning College. I was there a lot. I know. I know I need to get over it).

Anyway, Jazuela, you can see that there are those among us here who are not too happy with your posts. [SIZE="1"](Sometimes there are those who do not like my posts either.) -- When I saw the back and forth here, I had to smile and think about how it could have been fun to have you as a student. You like to think -- and debate -- and theorize. :)

For now though, I must quote a great philosopher:

You've got to know when to hold 'em,
Know when to fold 'em,
Know when to walk away,
Know when to run.


I have no doubt that you will do a lot more thinking. You will figure out whether "to hold" or "fold" by doing what works for you and yours -- together -- based on what is the known -- for the time being.

I wish you well in whatever you decide to do.

Boomer

PS: Also, the historic side is a wonderful nickname for the beginnings of TV. The history of Central Florida is not like New England history. I think the historic side has an advantage of being the most walkable part of TV. The streets look wider and the overall feel seems more relaxed.

:ho: Run Forrest Run :icon_wink:

[Boomer]

:ho: Run Forrest Run :icon_wink:

Aw, CW, you quoted me before I got my editing done. (I bumped the dang submit key before I was finished. I really need to stop trying to do a bunch of things at the same time.)

Oh well, I still luv your avatar. 'tis a hoot and a half. :)

[Bjeanj]

///

[Boomer]

aaaaaaaaaaaaugh!!!!!

Hey everybody, I just saw a dead horse in the Publix parking lot -- looks like it could use a beatin'.

Ohhhhhhhhh, nooooooo, now I am looking really bad. But I could not resist. I must apologize for my outburst:

There is no dead horse. That would be awful.

I like horses -- though they have been known to bite me.

And my apologies to whoever I stole that line from. I think I read it long ago here on TOTV when a thread had reached the definition of insanity -- and I have been right there with it in this one.

Babbling Boomer :loco:

[Challenger]

nnI was under the impression that the deed restrictions were a contract between The Villages and each individual homeowner. If that’s the case, then wouldn’t changing the restrictions require each individual homeowner agree to and sign the amendment to the contract?

Deed restrictions are binding on all properties that are subject to the same set of restrictions. Normally requires that 100% of owners of all properties subject to the same restrictions agree to changes, unless superseded by Federal, State or Local law.
Extremely difficult process to change.

[villagetinker]

ALL,
I never suggested changing the deed restrictions, I like the restrictions.

Also, I never suggested changing the way these are enforced by Community Standards.

What I was suggesting was a change in the REPORTING system, since this in the current implementation by Community Standards, I believe that this can be changed if enough people ask/demand a change. It has nothing to do with the existing deed restrictions or enforcement. My suggestion was to try to implement a way to limit "trolls" while still keeping anonymity for those reporting infractions.

There are a lot of very intelligent people here, and if we work together, i am sure that we could craft a system that would work better than the existing REPORTING system.

Just my humble opinion.

Also, I was not a victim of the most recent "troll" report, but I have a few friends that were, and I personally liked the items that were complained about.

[Challenger]

ALL,
I never suggested changing the deed restrictions, I like the restrictions.

Also, I never suggested changing the way these are enforced by Community Standards.

What I was suggesting was a change in the REPORTING system, since this in the current implementation by Community Standards, I believe that this can be changed if enough people ask/demand a change. It has nothing to do with the existing deed restrictions or enforcement. My suggestion was to try to implement a way to limit "trolls" while still keeping anonymity for those reporting infractions.

There are a lot of very intelligent people here, and if we work together, i am sure that we could craft a system that would work better than the existing REPORTING system.

Just my humble opinion.

Also, I was not a victim of the most recent "troll" report, but I have a few friends that were, and I personally liked the items that were complained about.

Whose "likes" should prevail??? MHO= Restrictions as the now exist are fine, enforcement process is ok, I actually wish more complaints would be submitted and actions taken. Lots of Floridians love chain link fences.

[fw102807]

aaaaaaaaaaaaugh!!!!!

Hey everybody, I just saw a dead horse in the Publix parking lot -- looks like it could use a beatin'.

Ohhhhhhhhh, nooooooo, now I am looking really bad. But I could not resist. I must apologize for my outburst:

There is no dead horse. That would be awful.

I like horses -- though they have been known to bite me.

And my apologies to whoever I stole that line from. I think I read it long ago here on TOTV when a thread had reached the definition of insanity -- and I have been right there with it in this one.

Babbling Boomer :loco:

Thread closed - Dead horse is starting to decompose

[Happydaz]

Whose "likes" should prevail??? MHO= Restrictions as the now exist are fine, enforcement process is ok, I actually wish more complaints would be submitted and actions taken. Lots of Floridians love chain link fences.

If you would like to report complaints you will be very busy. Just take your golf cart or your car with a paasenger on board and drive around each and every street in each village to note each address and each infraction. You will be surprised how many infractions you will see. Just looking at the number of bird statues all over the Villages will keep you very busy. But after you do this to your neighbors you will have opened up a bee hive as people love their neighbors small, tasteful bird statues. The real purpose of this deed reporting system is to provide a mechanism to stop people from putting a tank statue or 24 three foot trolls in their front yard. In fact if anyone actually does this and submits thousands of deed restriction violations to VCCD you would see changes come quickly. I agree, keep the deed restrictions in place, but look to improve the complaint reporting system.

[Barefoot]

There are a lot of very intelligent people here, and if we work together, i am sure that we could craft a system that would work better than the existing REPORTING system.
Some of us are happy with the existing reporting system.
If you follow the deed restrictions, no need to change it.
After 276 posts on this topic, positions are clear. :icon_wink:

[ColdNoMore]

Some of us are happy with the existing reporting system.
If you follow the deed restrictions, no need to change it.
After 276 posts on this topic, positions are clear. :icon_wink:
:boom:


:bigbow:...:bigbow:...:bigbow:

[Happydaz]

:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:Boom! Boom! Boom! Boom! :boom: :boom: :boom: :boom:

[Barefoot]

I have only posted on this thread recently because it concerns my neighborhood. Great, now your position is also clear! :laugh:

[Bjeanj]

nn

Deed restrictions are binding on all properties that are subject to the same set of restrictions. Normally requires that 100% of owners of all properties subject to the same restrictions agree to changes, unless superseded by Federal, State or Local law.
Extremely difficult process to change.

That’s what I thought.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

FWIW - one doesn't have to actually live in a community to have read the deed restrictions of it. Someone challenged me to read them. So I did. Since I STILL couldn't figure out which ones applied to the property we're thinking of buying, I read ALL OF THEM. All the information I've gotten with regards to voting and changing the rules and the expiration dates of the restrictions and their subsequent renewals, I got from reading the actual deed restrictions. Every. Single. One.

If you want to know what's in them, I'll spit right back to you what you spit at me: Read them.

[CFrance]

I don’t agree with you. My position is clear. You post a lot more than I do. How many posts do you have on this thread? I have only posted on this thread recently because it concerns my neighborhood. You appear to post thousands of times on all the threads.
What does this mean?

[Happydaz]

Great, now your position is also clear! :laugh:

You didn’t know I lived in the Village affected? Your reading comprehension is not very good. Posting over 17,000 times doesn’t give you much time to read. Frequent posters think they can flood a topic with all their posts and overpower any position they don’t like. Not today they don’t.

[Barefoot]

You didn’t know I lived in the Village affected? Your reading comprehension is not very good. Posting over 12,000 times doesn’t give you much time to read. Frequent posters think they can flood a topic with all their posts and overpower any position they don’t like. Not today they don’t.
I apologize. I have obviously offended you. I'm sorry.

[Kenswing]

You didn’t know I lived in the Village affected? Your reading comprehension is not very good. Posting over 12,000 times doesn’t give you much time to read. Frequent posters think they can flood a topic with all their posts and overpower any position they don’t like. Not today they don’t.
Uh.. You've posted in this thread 18 times. Barefoot, 9.. Just sayin..

[Chellybean]

Antennae are protected by Federal law.

Clotheslines are allowed by Florida law.

163.04 Energy devices based on renewable resources.—
(1) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter or other provision of general or special law, the adoption of an ordinance by a governing body, as those terms are defined in this chapter, which prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the installation of solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources is expressly prohibited.
(2) A deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or similar binding agreement may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources from being installed on buildings erected on the lots or parcels covered by the deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or binding agreement. . . .

Statutes & Constitution
:View Statutes
:

Online Sunshine (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0100-0199/0163/Sections/0163.04.html)

Thank You for that info! i didn't want to be the one to rub there nose in it.
Sometimes you can't fix stupid!

[Boomer]

I apologize. I have obviously offended you. I'm sorry.

Barefoot, you are a much better woman than I am.

I have been sitting here chewing my typing fingers off.

I guess I have reading comprehension problems, too. I cannot possibly be reading that screen name correctly.

I have never reported anybody for lawn ornaments and in all my 3,000 plus posts and a hundred years on TOTV, I have reported only three posts — and one of them was me reporting myself. (blush)

But I was about to make it 4. (I didn’t though. Such an attack speaks for itself around here.)

You, Barefoot, are a really nice lady and so much classier than I am. :)

[sdedes]

?? It is just what I read.

Seriously?!?!

[fw102807]

The sad thing is none of this is going to change a thing

[graciegirl]

If you would like to report complaints you will be very busy. Just take your golf cart or your car with a paasenger on board and drive around each and every street in each village to note each address and each infraction. You will be surprised how many infractions you will see. Just looking at the number of bird statues all over the Villages will keep you very busy. But after you do this to your neighbors you will have opened up a bee hive as people love their neighbors small, tasteful bird statues. The real purpose of this deed reporting system is to provide a mechanism to stop people from putting a tank statue or 24 three foot trolls in their front yard. In fact if anyone actually does this and submits thousands of deed restriction violations to VCCD you would see changes come quickly. I agree, keep the deed restrictions in place, but look to improve the complaint reporting system.

The birds, the bronze birds are almost always permitted when ARC is asked. That and nicely done fountains. Not so much a bunch of ceramic mushrooms or little bunnies.

I see nothing wrong with someone reporting deed restrictions. But some do. I have only reported one and that was my neighbor in Hadley. But there is one in my friends neighborhood where the driveway is lined with schlocky things and I have to think that she has to have been reported many times up to the limit. And she probably has a lien on her home. I am always tempted to call when I go by there, but I don't.

[Happydaz]

Let me apologize to everyone. I was out of line. I guess since this topic affected me personally I got too close to the subject. Let this be my last post on this thread.

[BK001]

I apologize. I have obviously offended you. I'm sorry.

Let me apologize to everyone. I was out of line. I guess since this topic affected me personally I got too close to the subject. Let this be my last post on this thread.


It happens to the best of us. But it takes a big person to apologize. Kudos to both of you.

The nature of quickly written posts, like e-mails, is that without the benefit of voice tone and facial expressions, it is very easy to misunderstand each other's intentions. I believe, for the most part, we are all good people who just want the best for ourselves, our loved ones, our friends, and, in most cases, our neighbors.

[CFrance]

It happens to the best of us. But it takes a big person to apologize. Kudos to both of you.

The nature of quickly written posts, like e-mails, is that without the benefit of voice tone and facial expressions, it is very easy to misunderstand each other's intentions. I believe, for the most part, we are all good people who just want the best for ourselves, our loved ones, our friends, and, in most cases, our neighbors.
The "submit" button should have a 15-second delay.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Thank You for that info! i didn't want to be the one to rub there nose in it.
Sometimes you can't fix stupid!

Personal attacks are against the rules. But I won't report this. Instead, I'll respond, since clearly it went right over your head.

People are saying to abide by the rules, and stop complaining if they get caught breaking them.

I am saying - the rules might not be good rules, and perhaps it's time to rewrite them.

Case in point, the rule about antennae. The rules of the Villages says they're not allowed. Federal law says they are.

So which rule is wrong, which rule needs to be changed? They can't both be right.

If being capable of cognizant thought is equal to being stupid, then color me guilty. I wonder though, if this makes me stupid, then what label would you assign to yourself?

[Boomer]

It happens to the best of us. But it takes a big person to apologize. Kudos to both of you.

The nature of quickly written posts, like e-mails, is that without the benefit of voice tone and facial expressions, it is very easy to misunderstand each other's intentions. I believe, for the most part, we are all good people who just want the best for ourselves, our loved ones, our friends, and, in most cases, our neighbors.


Thank you Barefoot and Happydaz for the peace.

BK001, thank you for a nice summary of the situation.

[Chellybean]

Personal attacks are against the rules. But I won't report this. Instead, I'll respond, since clearly it went right over your head.

People are saying to abide by the rules, and stop complaining if they get caught breaking them.

I am saying - the rules might not be good rules, and perhaps it's time to rewrite them.

Case in point, the rule about antennae. The rules of the Villages says they're not allowed. Federal law says they are.

So which rule is wrong, which rule needs to be changed? They can't both be right.

If being capable of cognizant thought is equal to being stupid, then color me guilty. I wonder though, if this makes me stupid, then what label would you assign to yourself?

The federal law and state law always preempts any HOA restriction Period.
If you haven't learned that by now i can't help you!. Also just to clarify Federal law trumps State law, but it depends when and where. That should confuse you for a while. And for what you classify yourself as its up to you.
It seems you have tried to pick a fight with some of the post on this forum.
People come here to brainstorm and not fight with people. Have a good night.

[CFrance]

The federal law and state law always preempts any HOA restriction Period.
If you haven't learned that by now i can't help you!. Also just to clarify Federal law trumps State law, but it depends when and where. That should confuse you for a while. And for what you classify yourself as its up to you.
It seems you have tried to pick a fight with some of the post on this forum.
People come here to brainstorm and not fight with people. Have a good night.
Well, I was kind of thinking the same thing, or else someone is just a literal person by nature, in which case letting "gray areas" of rules lie just doesn't seem too easy. Throw in the fact that a person may be moving here under duration may be exacerbating things. Spell check had to help me with exacerbating.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Federal law supercedes community rules. That means the community rules are invalid. This means, from a legal standpoint, that the rule needs to be removed. It -cannot- be complied with, yet new homeowners who don't spend hours reading government websites and the deed restrictions of a 100k+ community aren't likely to know that, nor would it occur to them to even check. It's not a grey area. It's clearcut. The Villages is not, by law, allowed to impose this particular rule on its residency.

This makes one wonder what OTHER rules it's imposing on its residency, that it isn't allowed to impose, that people are following blindly because they a) don't know better or b) don't care. Everyone tells each other right here on this very forum, that if we don't like the rules, either don't move in, or move somewhere else.

Seems no one knew about the antennae part. Why not? Why didn't any of YOU - who already live there - know about this? Why didn't you know it was a rule, AND why did you not know that the rule was not legal to impose? Why did you sign to agree to abide by this rule, that is legally not allowed to exist? What OTHER rules have you agreed to abide by, that isn't legally allowed to exist? Which illegal rules have cause the Community watch group to infract homeowners, who should not have been infracted, because the rules were not legal to exist? How much money in fines have been paid to the Development group as a result of infractions of rules that were illegal to enforce?

I'm not calling for a protest, or mutiny, or rile up the masses. I'm asking why people who live here and say "stop complaining, you knew the rules coming in" don't already know about this stuff? I'm asking them to "know of what ye speak" before coming down on people asking questions here. Yes, I know the rule going in. But thanks to this forum, I also know that one of those rules cannot legally be enforced (the antenna rule). That makes me wonder why the rule was put in, in the first place. Maybe it was put in before federal law decreed otherwise, and the authority of the Villages just never bothered to remove that rule. How many people are paying for cable, when they could have antennae and no cable instead? How many residents would have preferred it that way, but read the rules, saw it was a restricted activity, and just sucked it up and paid for some other method when they didn't have to, because federal law allows it?

And why would anyone here be upset about my pointing it out? ESPECIALLY when I'm just repeating back what Chellybean posted - that federal law supercedes community rules. If it does, then it stands to reason that the community rule is invalid and needs to be removed.

[NatureBoy]

Federal law supercedes community rules. That means the community rules are invalid. This means, from a legal standpoint, that the rule needs to be removed. It -cannot- be complied with, yet new homeowners who don't spend hours reading government websites and the deed restrictions of a 100k+ community aren't likely to know that, nor would it occur to them to even check. It's not a grey area. It's clearcut. The Villages is not, by law, allowed to impose this particular rule on its residency.

This is a general problem. Companies are caught all the time with clauses in contracts that are unenforceable or illegal. As Jazuela points out, most people aren’t lawyers and don’t know. Companies take advantage of that. They are swindling their customers with these practices.

TV’s deed restrictions fall under that umbrella. Maybe the restrictions used to be valid, but they aren’t any more. They should be removed, or TV is lying to their residents. They are ruling by intimidation and relying on ignorance of the law.

And this has drifted away from lawn ornament rules to deed restrictions in general,but I think it’s still an important topic.

[Challenger]

The argument that unenforceable Deed Restrictions need to be revised is a "straw man" argument" by those who don't really want to abide by rules to which they agreed upon purchase of property. For those restrictions that have been preempted, there is no attempt at enforcement. The District does not enforce complaints related to restrictions falling into the preempted category. Additionally pre emption legislation is often not prevailing over all of the specific elements of a Deed Restriction.

[dewilson58]

300 posts.............wow.


I read the first five.


:MOJE_whot:

[graciegirl]

300 posts.............wow.


I read the first five.


:MOJE_whot:

I know you are joshing us, but I think it is kind of wonderful that this thread has not been shut down. It has allowed a lot of information to be dispensed. It has allowed venting and debate and mostly patient listening to others and I think for the most part it has stayed within reasonable limits. I am very pleased that we were allowed to discuss this. (For some, ad nauseum) but as a parent and a retired teacher, I know that repeating things SOMETIMES gets information across.

[CFrance]

Federal law supercedes community rules. That means the community rules are invalid. This means, from a legal standpoint, that the rule needs to be removed. It -cannot- be complied with, yet new homeowners who don't spend hours reading government websites and the deed restrictions of a 100k+ community aren't likely to know that, nor would it occur to them to even check. It's not a grey area. It's clearcut. The Villages is not, by law, allowed to impose this particular rule on its residency.

This makes one wonder what OTHER rules it's imposing on its residency, that it isn't allowed to impose, that people are following blindly because they a) don't know better or b) don't care. Everyone tells each other right here on this very forum, that if we don't like the rules, either don't move in, or move somewhere else.

Seems no one knew about the antennae part. Why not? Why didn't any of YOU - who already live there - know about this? Why didn't you know it was a rule, AND why did you not know that the rule was not legal to impose? Why did you sign to agree to abide by this rule, that is legally not allowed to exist? What OTHER rules have you agreed to abide by, that isn't legally allowed to exist? Which illegal rules have cause the Community watch group to infract homeowners, who should not have been infracted, because the rules were not legal to exist? How much money in fines have been paid to the Development group as a result of infractions of rules that were illegal to enforce?

I'm not calling for a protest, or mutiny, or rile up the masses. I'm asking why people who live here and say "stop complaining, you knew the rules coming in" don't already know about this stuff? I'm asking them to "know of what ye speak" before coming down on people asking questions here. Yes, I know the rule going in. But thanks to this forum, I also know that one of those rules cannot legally be enforced (the antenna rule). That makes me wonder why the rule was put in, in the first place. Maybe it was put in before federal law decreed otherwise, and the authority of the Villages just never bothered to remove that rule. How many people are paying for cable, when they could have antennae and no cable instead? How many residents would have preferred it that way, but read the rules, saw it was a restricted activity, and just sucked it up and paid for some other method when they didn't have to, because federal law allows it?

And why would anyone here be upset about my pointing it out? ESPECIALLY when I'm just repeating back what Chellybean posted - that federal law supercedes community rules. If it does, then it stands to reason that the community rule is invalid and needs to be removed.
Why do you make such a statement? How do YOU know who knows about this law and who doesn't? We certainly knew about it, and the few other restrictions here that are superseded by state and federal law.



And I think people are not upset with what you are saying so much as the manner in which you are saying it. It's aggressive, inflammatory and very argumentative.



If you're so concerned about this, why not take it to the developer.

[graciegirl]

This is a general problem. Companies are caught all the time with clauses in contracts that are unenforceable or illegal. As Jazuela points out, most people aren’t lawyers and don’t know. Companies take advantage of that. They are swindling their customers with these practices.

TV’s deed restrictions fall under that umbrella. Maybe the restrictions used to be valid, but they aren’t any more. They should be removed, or TV is lying to their residents. They are ruling by intimidation and relying on ignorance of the law.

And this has drifted away from lawn ornament rules to deed restrictions in general,but I think it’s still an important topic.

BE ASSURED that The Villages Inc. is represented well by legal counsel, has researched these issues and are abiding by the law. I think that the CDD form of government is new to most people who come from other parts of the country. There is a class here to explain just how The Villages work. No one is forced or coerced to buy here. The Villages has a number of things that make it different from other places most people have lived. The bond (which pays for the infrastructure is separate from the cost of the home) The amenity fees are based on the cost of living index. They even went down a teeny bit once. The people who run the place are not voted on if you live south of 466. South of 466 is run solely by the CDD, i.e. The Developers. Many of us hope that it will always be that way, they are doing a good job. If this place was left to the power wannabees it would be the typical city and not the wonderful place it is. I don't think many places could be this successful. I think the Morse family is ethical and hard working. I have never met them and I don't nor have I ever sold real estate. I am just delighted with living here.

PLUS, like many, I have lived here for many years and have had a lively interest in what is going on. I do know what it is like to think it is too good to be true. I was like that at first, too.

[graciegirl]

The argument that unenforceable Deed Restrictions need to be revised is a "straw man" argument" by those who don't really want to abide by rules to which they agreed upon purchase of property. For those restrictions that have been preempted, there is no attempt at enforcement. The District does not enforce complaints related to restrictions falling into the preempted category. Additionally pre emption legislation is often not prevailing over all of the specific elements of a Deed Restriction.

The voice of reason and back on subject.

[New Englander]

Federal law supercedes community rules. That means the community rules are invalid. This means, from a legal standpoint, that the rule needs to be removed. It -cannot- be complied with, yet new homeowners who don't spend hours reading government websites and the deed restrictions of a 100k+ community aren't likely to know that, nor would it occur to them to even check. It's not a grey area. It's clearcut. The Villages is not, by law, allowed to impose this particular rule on its residency.

This makes one wonder what OTHER rules it's imposing on its residency, that it isn't allowed to impose, that people are following blindly because they a) don't know better or b) don't care. Everyone tells each other right here on this very forum, that if we don't like the rules, either don't move in, or move somewhere else.

Seems no one knew about the antennae part. Why not? Why didn't any of YOU - who already live there - know about this? Why didn't you know it was a rule, AND why did you not know that the rule was not legal to impose? Why did you sign to agree to abide by this rule, that is legally not allowed to exist? What OTHER rules have you agreed to abide by, that isn't legally allowed to exist? Which illegal rules have cause the Community watch group to infract homeowners, who should not have been infracted, because the rules were not legal to exist? How much money in fines have been paid to the Development group as a result of infractions of rules that were illegal to enforce?

I'm not calling for a protest, or mutiny, or rile up the masses. I'm asking why people who live here and say "stop complaining, you knew the rules coming in" don't already know about this stuff? I'm asking them to "know of what ye speak" before coming down on people asking questions here. Yes, I know the rule going in. But thanks to this forum, I also know that one of those rules cannot legally be enforced (the antenna rule). That makes me wonder why the rule was put in, in the first place. Maybe it was put in before federal law decreed otherwise, and the authority of the Villages just never bothered to remove that rule. How many people are paying for cable, when they could have antennae and no cable instead? How many residents would have preferred it that way, but read the rules, saw it was a restricted activity, and just sucked it up and paid for some other method when they didn't have to, because federal law allows it?

And why would anyone here be upset about my pointing it out? ESPECIALLY when I'm just repeating back what Chellybean posted - that federal law supercedes community rules. If it does, then it stands to reason that the community rule is invalid and needs to be removed.

Jazuela, do you live in TV?

[VApeople]

The argument that unenforceable Deed Restrictions need to be revised is a "straw man" argument" by those who don't really want to abide by rules to which they agreed upon purchase of property. For those restrictions that have been preempted, there is no attempt at enforcement.

I very much agree with your post.

As we walk around TV we have seen a few things that violate the deed restrictions, but we have no desire to report them to the authorities.

For example, one house has an equipment shed on their property. It is a small plastic shed behind their garage, barely visible from the street, and it appears the neighbors don't care.

However, I still support the rule TV has against equipment sheds because it might prevent people from having those large metal sheds so common in our Virginia neighborhood.

[roob1]

Below, from one of 240+ posts by Jazuela (posted last month):

"We've been a few times now, including a lifestyle visit this past September."


Jazuela, do you live in TV?

[Aw Man]

Jazuela, do you live in TV?

Why does it matter if she lives in TV??
I wasn't aware this forum was limited to TV residents.

Besides, she has said in many posts that she and her husband are seriously considering moving here. To me it seems her interest and opinions are part of a due diligence process.

Perhaps you and many other posters on this thread should be more understanding and less apt to bully.

[Chi-Town]

Why does it matter if she lives in TV??

I wasn't aware this forum was limited to TV residents.



Besides, she has said in many posts that she and her husband are seriously considering moving here. To me it seems her interest and opinions are part of a due diligence process.



Perhaps you and many other posters on this thread should be more understanding and less apt to bully.You may not have to live here, but you at least have to visit here to get get a real feel for what The Villages is all about. If she has visited here and considers this a possibility then opine away

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Mortal1]

Their "eaves". Not to be confused with "eves"...the night before....

[Topspinmo]

All I can say is there are very few homes that are in total compliance with all of the rules. Planting in the in the drainage swails, hedges that have turned into walls,raised corner flower beds to close to the property line, to many dogs, yard & lawn ornaments etc. There is never a problem with this until some one person gets turned in and then out comes the troll.

I read through all the restrictions even though some are hard to understand and I am In total compliance.

I also make sure my bushes are foot off the neighbors wall and property line, bushes out front are less than 4 foot tall were they could be vision problem off the street when neighbors pull out driveway or turn at corner. I pressure wash mold off sidewalks, house, walls, and concrete strip out at street. I keep my shrubs trimmed and debris picked up. I don’t play obnoxious loud music or have Harley, I don’t park in the street or leave my car sticking out of my driveway. I can actually get my car in the garage is small CYV garage. I help out neighbors when asked. Basiclly I’m the prefect neighbor hardly seen or heard.:ho:

[graciegirl]

Why does it matter if she lives in TV??
I wasn't aware this forum was limited to TV residents.

Besides, she has said in many posts that she and her husband are seriously considering moving here. To me it seems her interest and opinions are part of a due diligence process.

Perhaps you and many other posters on this thread should be more understanding and less apt to bully.

I don't think you have read all of the posts from both sides.

[IndianaJones]

With apologies to Frank Zappa:

I'll take a drive to THE VILLAGES
Just before dawn
An' knock the little jockeys
Off the rich people's lawn
An' before they get up
I'll be gone, I'll be gone
Before they get up
I'll be knocking the jockeys off the lawn

[Topspinmo]

I read through all the restrictions even though some are hard to understand and I am In total compliance.

I also make sure my bushes are foot off the neighbors wall and property line, bushes out front are less than 4 foot tall were they could be vision problem off the street when neighbors pull out driveway or turn at corner. I pressure wash mold off sidewalks, house, walls, and concrete strip out at street. I keep my shrubs trimmed and debris picked up. I don’t play obnoxious loud music or have Harley, I don’t park in the street or leave my car sticking out of my driveway. I can actually get my car in the garage is small CYV garage. I help out neighbors when asked. Basiclly I’m the prefect neighbor hardly seen or heard.:ho:

Why can’t all villagers be like me, the prefect neighbor and follow all the rules. :a040:

[ColdNoMore]

Why does it matter if she lives in TV??
I wasn't aware this forum was limited to TV residents.

Besides, she has said in many posts that she and her husband are seriously considering moving here. To me it seems her interest and opinions are part of a due diligence process.

Perhaps you and many other posters on this thread should be more understanding and less apt to bully.


:bigbow:...:bigbow:...:bigbow:



:agree:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I'm putting a deposit down tomorrow and we're moving in some time in late June/early July. So no, I don't live here yet. And if you took the time to learn that I've had 240+ posts, you could've wasted another 5 minutes to read a few of them and learn that I've already said I didn't live here yet, that we were seriously considering moving in, and that I was doing my due dilligence. Turns out we "could" put in a tacky pink flamingo on our front yard if we wanted to, at the home we're buying. I won't though, because I think they're tacky. And the neighbors so far seem to be especially lovely. Welcoming, warm and inviting. I think my husband and I did the right thing by looking in the "hysterical" section.

[fw102807]

I'm putting a deposit down tomorrow and we're moving in some time in late June/early July. So no, I don't live here yet. And if you took the time to learn that I've had 240+ posts, you could've wasted another 5 minutes to read a few of them and learn that I've already said I didn't live here yet, that we were seriously considering moving in, and that I was doing my due dilligence. Turns out we "could" put in a tacky pink flamingo on our front yard if we wanted to, at the home we're buying. I won't though, because I think they're tacky. And the neighbors so far seem to be especially lovely. Welcoming, warm and inviting. I think my husband and I did the right thing by looking in the "hysterical" section.

Some very nice people live there.

[Garywt]

Seriously?!?!

Yes, seriously...

[Garywt]

I am not up on the federal antenna law and understand that the Villages don’t want thousands of antennas sticking out of roofs alover but many install attic antennas which no one sees thus they are not an issue. This seems to work. Not sure if the federal law just says they are allowed in general or if roof top outside ones are allowed.

[Kenswing]

I am not up on the federal antenna law and understand that the Villages don’t want thousands of antennas sticking out of roofs alover but many install attic antennas which no one sees thus they are not an issue. This seems to work. Not sure if the federal law just says they are allowed in general or if roof top outside ones are allowed.

A quick google search.. Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule | Federal Communications Commission (https://www.fcc.gov/media/over-air-reception-devices-rule)

[NatureBoy]

Why can’t all villagers be like me, the prefect neighbor and follow all the rules. :a040:

Even the ones that are illegal and unenforceable.

[Garywt]

A quick google search.. Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule | Federal Communications Commission (https://www.fcc.gov/media/over-air-reception-devices-rule)

Thank you

[Bogie Shooter]

I'm putting a deposit down tomorrow and we're moving in some time in late June/early July. So no, I don't live here yet. And if you took the time to learn that I've had 240+ posts, you could've wasted another 5 minutes to read a few of them and learn that I've already said I didn't live here yet, that we were seriously considering moving in, and that I was doing my due dilligence. Turns out we "could" put in a tacky pink flamingo on our front yard if we wanted to, at the home we're buying. I won't though, because I think they're tacky. And the neighbors so far seem to be especially lovely. Welcoming, warm and inviting. I think my husband and I did the right thing by looking in the "hysterical" section.

Takes no time at all, TOTV keeps the total every time you post...……...you are at 242.

[CWGUY]

Takes no time at all, TOTV keeps the total every time you post...……...you are at 242.
.

:ohdear: That's what my systolic goes up to when I read TOTV. :icon_wink:

[BobnBev]

Antennae are protected by Federal law.

Clotheslines are allowed by Florida law.

163.04 Energy devices based on renewable resources.—
(1) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter or other provision of general or special law, the adoption of an ordinance by a governing body, as those terms are defined in this chapter, which prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the installation of solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources is expressly prohibited.
(2) A deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or similar binding agreement may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources from being installed on buildings erected on the lots or parcels covered by the deed restriction, covenant, declaration, or binding agreement. . . .

Statutes & Constitution
:View Statutes
:

Online Sunshine (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0100-0199/0163/Sections/0163.04.html)And that says it all, folks.:bigbow::boom:

[New Englander]

I'm putting a deposit down tomorrow and we're moving in some time in late June/early July. So no, I don't live here yet. And if you took the time to learn that I've had 240+ posts, you could've wasted another 5 minutes to read a few of them and learn that I've already said I didn't live here yet, that we were seriously considering moving in, and that I was doing my due dilligence. Turns out we "could" put in a tacky pink flamingo on our front yard if we wanted to, at the home we're buying. I won't though, because I think they're tacky. And the neighbors so far seem to be especially lovely. Welcoming, warm and inviting. I think my husband and I did the right thing by looking in the "hysterical" section.

I don't have time to read 240+ posts. I'm busy driving around looking for violators who put plastic pink flamingos on their lawn.

[Moderator]

This thread is closed. Posts have devolved to sniping at each other. The original topic has been debated ad nauseum.

Moderator