Misdirected anger - trampoline in front yard?

[Gladys Turnip]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.

[Mortal1]

Kudos for putting it so well. If I see your trampoline or the ford pinto on blocks I'll happily provide my name and let the cdd know.

[ThirdOfFive]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.
Great post, and points.

I totally agree that the powers-that-be "have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance". Just why, I cannot speculate. But it would make sense to task Community Watch with monitoring properties: not so much for the picayune stuff such as ugly flamingoes, white crosses, lawns a bit beyond their mowing schedule, etc.--the more officious among us who care about such things can still report those and more power to them if they do--but the major stuff. Lawns overgrown with weeds. Windows fixed with duct tape. Significant mold on the siding. RVs parked on the street for weeks at a time. Stuff like that. THOSE are the things that negatively impact property values, and I think it is clear that the powers-that-be SHOULD be taking the responsibility to see to it that such things are controlled.

[vintageogauge]

There is a part of this that I don't understand regarding the violators. First of all I don't personally have a problem with the little white crosses or with the metal birds in front lawns. However, I have asked no less than 6 owners having the white crosses in their front yards "why don't you place the cross on your front door or make a planter with a cross both of which are allowed?" Not one offered to do it nor did even one answer the question, the only answer I got was "I'm allowed to profess my faith" which of course is true but they are not allowed to put the ornament in/on their front lawn.

[Stu from NYC]

The problem I have is people driving around looking for things they can report, aka two old biddies.

[Byte1]

There is a part of this that I don't understand regarding the violators. First of all I don't personally have a problem with the little white crosses or with the metal birds in front lawns. However, I have asked no less than 6 owners having the white crosses in their front yards "why don't you place the cross on your front door or make a planter with a cross both of which are allowed?" Not one offered to do it nor did even one answer the question, the only answer I got was "I'm allowed to profess my faith" which of course is true but they are not allowed to put the ornament in/on their front lawn.

I agree with what you said........HOWEVER..........how many on here have never violated the speed limit? Not even to pass someone going five miles an hour under the limit? Rules are not LAWS. There are compromises, flexibility for almost all rules. Just because someone puts one of those little crosses in their yard, that does not mean that tomorrow they plan to put an old rusted truck on blocks in their yard. I bet many of the ones complaining about violations to the rules are also lenient when it comes to what they think of illegal aliens violating our borders. Of course, that is a LAW that is broken, not a rule. That said, there is also the rule of law. However, we are speaking of civil or tort rules, not criminal law.

[tophcfa]

Great post, and points.

I totally agree that the powers-that-be "have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance".

Actually, they have done way worse than that, they have made the whole thing a sham by deciding to selectively enforce deed restriction violations. We’re coming after you if you have the audacity to put a little white cross in your garden, but if you’re disrupting the entire neighborhood by running a revolving door short term AIRBNB operation out of your home we’ll look the other way. What kind of a message does that send? Either enforce all violations or let people do whatever they want.

[Bogie Shooter]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/cdd-5-end-anonymous-complaints-336879/?highlight=Deed+restrictions


So, did you miss this thread with108 posts covering your topic? Or are you just trying to stir the pot back up.
It was beaten to death on that thread and the duplicate posts will continue here. :shrug::duck:

[JoMar]

If the neighborhood is satisfied then there will be no complaints. Hiring someone or asking CSD to report makes no sense to me. As stated, the restrictions are intended to support home values. If the neighborhood believes the violations will not have an impact then they may leave it alone. Of course definition of the neighborhood is questionable. I also support that the reporter should provide who they are but that should be kept confidential, that helps insure that the person reporting lives within the neighborhood. We had an instance where a neighbor had landscaping that was less than one foot over the line that faced the street and was reported by someone that lived several miles (yes miles) from us. Because it was over the line the neighbor had to have everything moved.

[ThirdOfFive]

actually, they have done way worse than that, they have made the whole thing a sham by deciding to selectively enforce deed restriction violations. We’re coming after you if you have the audacity to put a little white cross in your garden, but if you’re disrupting the entire neighborhood by running a revolving door short term airbnb operation out of your home we’ll look the other way. What kind of a message does that send? Either enforce all violations or let people do whatever they want.
bingo!!!!

[ThirdOfFive]

The problem I have is people driving around looking for things they can report, aka two old biddies.
What harm are they doing?

[El Gout Toe]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.


Well said Gladys!!! You and my wife Randi would get along great. She used to be a code enforcement officer in her native France and was known as "Beau Castor" for her diligence.

[Jayhawk]

The problem I have is people driving around looking for things they can report, aka two old biddies.

I doubt you even know for sure they exist. I for one think they do NOT. Just an urban legend. But like you, I have no proof either way.

[graciegirl]

Great post, and points.

I totally agree that the powers-that-be "have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance". Just why, I cannot speculate. But it would make sense to task Community Watch with monitoring properties: not so much for the picayune stuff such as ugly flamingoes, white crosses, lawns a bit beyond their mowing schedule, etc.--the more officious among us who care about such things can still report those and more power to them if they do--but the major stuff. Lawns overgrown with weeds. Windows fixed with duct tape. Significant mold on the siding. RVs parked on the street for weeks at a time. Stuff like that. THOSE are the things that negatively impact property values, and I think it is clear that the powers-that-be SHOULD be taking the responsibility to see to it that such things are controlled.

The answer is simple. Keeping costs down means a greater margin and that is simply good business practice. I am all for anonymous reporting for free.

Also some things are out of the control of anyone but the bank who owns the property in disrepair or with the weeds. That is beyond the developers powers to change. People own their property and if they don't pay their mortgage the bank then owns it and the bank is getting fined.

The developers do an excellent job of maintaining green space and common areas and they make wise decisions to dodge being much in public view. I have to say again what I have always said; THEY AREN'T OUR MOTHER.

I think offensive yard art is not picayune. I think that it destroys the look of the neighborhood. We have opted in our neighborhood before this one to live in a neighborhood with rules against junky looks. I haven't ever in the sixteen years I've lived here seen an RV stay for an inordinate amount of time in a driveway.

I like the way things have been and I think the district that is outing the people for reporting offensive breeches of deed restictions are really doing it wrong and their area will suffer because of it.

[BrianL99]

The problem I have is people driving around looking for things they can report, aka two old biddies.

That's not a "problem" ... that's how the system is supposed to work. They should be getting paid.

[BrianL99]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.

What a great job with your Post. I don't think you'd missing a legal distinction or position. We the residents, are 3rd Party Beneficiaries of the Deed Restrictions and other rules. I *think* we would have a perfect right to sue for enforcement and perhaps (I'll refrain from making this sound like a like opinion, because I'll get pummeled) we (the residents/owners) likely have the right to sue the Developer (or whatever entity is by deed and covenant) is obligated to enforce the Restrictions.

What CDD 5 has seemingly done, is completely abrogated their responsibility to the residents who want what they bought ... a Deed Restricted Residence. I'd love to see some lawyer, take up the issue. I don't see how they can refuse to enforce a valid Restriction, regardless of how they became aware of the violation.

[blueash]

t I also support that the reporter should provide who they are but that should be kept confidential, that helps insure that the person reporting lives within the neighborhood. .

By Florida law all governmental documents, with some exceptions, are public records. All CDD's are required to adhere to that public record requirement. They cannot keep the identification of the reporter confidential. I didn't fact check this, but was told this in the past so I will happily welcome a legal correction if I am wrong.

[Stu from NYC]

What harm are they doing?

In totalitarian countries your neighbors report on you to the govt. Is that a good thing?

[fdpaq0580]

In totalitarian countries your neighbors report on you to the govt. Is that a good thing?

Witch hunt. Now that is entertainment.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I have a trampoline on my front porch.

[Pairadocs]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.


Well stated and so true. Was discussing the situation here with relatives visiting for Thanksgiving and who live in a similar golf community in Arkansas. They asked for clarification about residents' being responsible for community covenants (standards), commenting that they had put their trash receptacle about 2-3' from where it is to be placed on pick up day (ONE TIME) and they received a warning in the mail ! A neighbor received a notice on her door concerning a warning to have her railing sanded for "rough surfaces" and painted. They were surprised that a community like the villages did not have similar standards, as you so eloquently stated.

[Pairadocs]

In totalitarian countries your neighbors report on you to the govt. Is that a good thing?

Definitely not a good thing ! But, in cases of public safety, extreme noise, fighting, loud parties, that type of thing, I realize one has a a responsibility to call police, but to enforce community standards, where security/watch people patrol constantly (and probably at GREAT COST for 24/7/365) you would think the burden would be on those employees to report obvious violations rather than leave it up to the residents ? Kind of unusual for these types of communities actually.

[asianthree]

What harm are they doing?

So you agree a person from piedmont should travel by cart to fernandina to drive through that neighborhood filling out a complaint (usually a 100) that they deemed a infraction.

They don’t live even close to that neighborhood, but since they fished out their own neighborhood, and all close by, they travel on, to different CDD’s.

I get neighbors a block over walking or driving past a house who has a plant that looks like it may or not be a cross that is offensive to the walker to write a complaint.

I just don’t get why one would travel miles to an area they would never frequent, to write hundreds of complaints? Is it a get even for an infraction that was leveled on their home? Or just a compulsive disorder to have upheaval wherever they deemed offensive, true or not.

Out of the 80 plus complaint written in our old neighborhood, only 11 were against deed restrictions.

So think of the amount of time to read hundreds of what May or not be a issue, individually respond to the complaints, then require them to waste resources such as gas to find out it’s a non issue. All because someone who lives 10 miles away is choosing this is “Their life long dream in Retirement to do unto to others that was probably done to them.

Because they chose that your home needs to be in line with their views. In their mind they are the “Chosen One”. Not a governing employee, a person who lives miles from you.

Where does one think the money and resources come from to pay for this? In our case it was a vine that had curled around to look like a cross, if you turned sideways and looked upside down. And NO, there would never be a cross in my yard.

Let those who live near keep their streets in compliance, travelers need not bother

[mikeycereal]

https://media.tenor.com/HnvCZUuv-zkAAAAd/abner-kravitz.gif
"Eeew! Pink flamingos!! Eeeww!!!"

:1rotfl:

[Challenger]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.

Agree with this post, almost 100 per cent. Neighbors who are subject to the same area deed restrictions can seek the intervention of the courts in the dispute. This does occur occasionally in other areas of the country. Problem is that this course can become very expensive for the complainig party to pursue.

[Challenger]

The problem I have is people driving around looking for things they can report, aka two old biddies.

May be truth in a few instances. Largely and "Urban Legend"

[Sandy and Ed]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!!!

Well said. I for one am not going to shoot the messenger of truth and logic.

Of course requiring reporters of violations to give their names will cause less reports! Why would I want to create an enemy of a neighbor who feels entitled to ignore a regulation. I should just “ mind my own business” if they want to raise chickens in their courtyard villa or put up a visible storage shed on th side of their home. A man’s home is his castle. Right? Wrong! You are part of a society and a community - obey society’s laws and community standards. If you don’t want to, then move!

All CDDs have a responsibility to enforce the standards and not shirk that responsibility by throwing up violation reporting requirements that would curb folks from bringing issues to their attention

[Challenger]

In totalitarian countries your neighbors report on you to the govt. Is that a good thing?

Most crimes are solved with significant input from "anonymous sources" No suggesting that Deed Violations are a crime.

[Mikee1]

So what, if you are in compliance they are just wasting gas and time.

If you are not in compliance you are in violation, why does it matter how it gets to the CDD?


The problem I have is people driving around looking for things they can report, aka two old biddies.

[Byte1]

These folks are in compliance

[banjobob]

Well written, good points and I agree but I do think the Community Watch should be the guardians and not individuals reporting violations. Many many homes have added very nice enhancements to yards, I would be against allowing actual building colors or designs to be changed.

[Judy n Ron]

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/cdd-5-end-anonymous-complaints-336879/?highlight=Deed+restrictions


So, did you miss this thread with108 posts covering your topic? Or are you just trying to stir the pot back up.
It was beaten to death on that thread and the duplicate posts will continue here. :shrug::duck:
Unless and until the CDD's do their job like EVERY OTHER DEED RESTRICTED community, it needs to be addressed over and over and over. Shame on The Villages for putting their compliant residents in the position of "neighborhood rat".

[Linnberg]

For those who haven’t been here that long, when we first moved here over 18 years ago, it was the Community Watch who were the ones responsible for reporting any compliance issues. It made sense because they knew all the rules plus the “grandfathered” allowances. In Glenbrook, no statues of any kind were allowed on your lawn BUT certain streets were grandfathered which is why Oak Forest has some of their lawns covered with lawn ornaments while other streets have none. Community Watch would knock on your door and have you move/remove the offensive item. They gave 2 warnings and if not removed, they would report the offense. I believe it changed to the current system after they complained that they didn’t like being the police and wanted to be the helpful group for the neighborhoods. However, that made more sense than “only if someone complains (anonymously) will anything be done. Ludicrous, as one house can be out of compliance and another reported maybe just because someone doesn’t like that person. Also totally agree how daily/weekly rentals have created potential major issues including all night parties, no following of rules, and potentially dangerous visitors.

[defrey12]

The OP’s eloquent post almost got it, but all you have to do is go to the county and ask to find out how it really works…and it ain’t gonna change.
District 5 only changed HOW violations are reported, wrongly in my view. All they will accomplish are “neighbor wars.” The Districts will NEVER police, even though they have people drive around all day, everyday—I know, it seems stupid—it’s a precept known as “selective enforcement.” They got you…but missed your neighbor. Then they (the enforcers) start doing getting people on “purpose” because they’re a “pain”. Barney Fife is alive and well! Then you sue…everybody sues. What’s the better business decision and more cost effective from the District’s view? Innumerable lawsuits or sending a guy out to verify when a report is made? You guessed it. I do agree with the one poster who said to keep confidential records of those who report—to ensure they have an actual interest (live) in the neighborhood.

[skippy05]

Facts: We all bought into the rules when we purchased. To equally enforce every rule all the time would require so many resources (time, money, employees) that it will never be practical to do so, ever. Certain people will always enjoy reporting violations as a hobby and that will never change. Therefore the current manner in which all of this goes down today will be the only practical way for it to continue in the future. If you sell and move into a non-HOA neighborhood you will never have this topic to complain about ever again. However, you will have new things to complain about.

[Daxdog]

I think some people are missing the point, you agreed to the restrictions. Also every place with a HOA will tell you when you are out of compliance, and will make you comply, why do you think TV should be any different? Most people that are complaining about restrictions probably never lived with a HOA, I never did. But living on military bases make you comply or they kick you off base. We had a neighbor that on the last day of living in TV sent a email turning in 19 houses for small and some big problems, but they moved out of TV the same day. But what are you supposed to do when a snowbird leaves and leaves the front yard and unfinished construction mess?

[Byte1]

These citizens are in compliance.

[ThirdOfFive]

In totalitarian countries your neighbors report on you to the govt. Is that a good thing?
Evasive answer. The situation now are NEIGHBORS reporting infractions to the government. No different than the two mythical BIDDIES reporting infractions to the government.

In either case the INFRACTIONS are what count, not the reporters. Nobody gets a correction order based solely on the report of a neighbor or two women in a golf cart.

I ask again: what harm are they doing?

[Mumsie]

I will object when someone moves into the neighborhood and hires a painter—who should be aware of the requirement to choose a paint color from the hundreds provided on the acceptable Community Standards color palette—to paint the trim on their home a color somewhere between “hazard” or ”semaphore” or “fluorescent mustard” yellow.
I guess their philosophy is “damn the rules!”
When we moved in to our neighborhood, I made an appointment to view the palette and chose colors that were approved. Individuality and uniqueness are great traits, just not when expressing them in your choice of paint color.

[ThirdOfFive]

So you agree a person from piedmont should travel by cart to fernandina to drive through that neighborhood filling out a complaint (usually a 100) that they deemed a infraction.

They don’t live even close to that neighborhood, but since they fished out their own neighborhood, and all close by, they travel on, to different CDD’s.

I get neighbors a block over walking or driving past a house who has a plant that looks like it may or not be a cross that is offensive to the walker to write a complaint.

I just don’t get why one would travel miles to an area they would never frequent, to write hundreds of complaints? Is it a get even for an infraction that was leveled on their home? Or just a compulsive disorder to have upheaval wherever they deemed offensive, true or not.

Out of the 80 plus complaint written in our old neighborhood, only 11 were against deed restrictions.

So think of the amount of time to read hundreds of what May or not be a issue, individually respond to the complaints, then require them to waste resources such as gas to find out it’s a non issue. All because someone who lives 10 miles away is choosing this is “Their life long dream in Retirement to do unto to others that was probably done to them.

Because they chose that your home needs to be in line with their views. In their mind they are the “Chosen One”. Not a governing employee, a person who lives miles from you.

Where does one think the money and resources come from to pay for this? In our case it was a vine that had curled around to look like a cross, if you turned sideways and looked upside down. And NO, there would never be a cross in my yard.

Let those who live near keep their streets in compliance, travelers need not bother
What is important here? The infraction, or the person/people/agency reporting the infraction? Again. NOBODY is issued a correction order based solely on the word of a reporter. It is checked out, and if not in compliance, the order is issued.

What does matter though is this neighbor-against-neighbor thing. Having Community Watch be responsible for monitoring and reporting infractions eliminates that type of infighting, which does nobody any good. The powers-that-be made the rules. The powers-that-be MUST be responsible for monitoring for rule infraction and then enforcing the rules. This cowardly way out that apparently those powers have chosen, especially with the cockamamie decision to make the names of the reporter(s) public, inevitably leads to bitter neighborhood feuds and completely arbitrary and random enforcement. And who really needs that?

[Heytubes]

Guess I have to remove my front yard sofa on blocks now.

[Hank’s mom]

Bull crap! In some villages some complaints are anonymous and in others they are not. Some homes can have rock gardens in front and others can’t. The complaints should be used for homeowners who do not take care of property, whose property is bothering neighbors.

[clouwho]

Into the fray, I leap…

It is wonderful to hear a calm, logical response from someone who understands the root of the deed compliance issue (which is actually as simple as a homeowner not being compliant😁…duh).

Compliant homeowners will have no issues. Non-compliant homeowners may or may not have an issue. But the people reporting non-compliance are definitely NOT the issue.

And yes, NORMAL deed restricted communities do in fact have people responsible for making sure homes are in compliance. We pay for Community watch to drive down every one of our safe, sleepy streets every day of the year. It is a no brainer for them to simply snap a photo of a home that isn’t in compliance and once a day download those pics and address at end of each shift. Perhaps a total of 10-15 minutes of their shift would be doing a valuable task that would protect our property values and keep the minority that are CONSTANTLY squawking on every forum QUIET.

We initially bought in the area near Savannah Center. We were under the impression that ALL of The villages had deed restrictions. We found out within a year that all manner of yard junk and poor maintenance was starting to pile up in yards surrounding ours.

We sold and moved to the Village of Largo which thankfully DOES have deed restrictions, and when you drive through THIS villages, as opposed to our old village, those restrictions show in the form of a mostly very tidy, well maintained set of homes. It is worth noting that property values are significantly higher per square foot in our deed restricted villages than they are in our former unrestricted village. No coincidence.

So, if you want to live in The Villages and “express yourself” via your yard art, you are certainly free to move to the mobile home section or the area around Spanish Springs where there are minimal restrictions. Fortunately there are still villages in the Spanish Springs area that are nicely maintained because the owners care about the look or their community and their home values. They are voluntarily keeping their villages nice.


There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.

[clouwho]

I have heard about these two trolls for years, but never have seen proof that they exist. I do hope that they don’t, because that would be a super sad way to spend the short, final chapter of life when you have been blessed to live in such a lovely place with so many wonderful opportunities to spend your final days in healthy, happy, fulfilling ways.

The problem I have is people driving around looking for things they can report, aka two old biddies.

[clouwho]

There is unfortunately nothing in our deed restrictions about short term rentals. And the developers are actually encouraging that to get more people to buy their new homes.

IMHO short term rentals are one of the single biggest negative quality of life and property value issues we are going to face here in TV in the upcoming years. I am hoping via VHA we can band together with an overwhelming consensus and vote for deed restrictions addendums in all CDDs that require a MINIMUM of a one month lease period. That will allow “investors” to still rent to the targeted 55+ demographic we are supposed to be, while keeping the undesirable revolving door of mystery people out of our neighborhoods.

We do a lot of rentals in resort type communities in Florida. The nicer ones almost all have a minimum of one month rentals, and some require two months.


Actually, they have done way worse than that, they have made the whole thing a sham by deciding to selectively enforce deed restriction violations. We’re coming after you if you have the audacity to put a little white cross in your garden, but if you’re disrupting the entire neighborhood by running a revolving door short term AIRBNB operation out of your home we’ll look the other way. What kind of a message does that send? Either enforce all violations or let people do whatever they want.

[Byte1]

Evasive answer. The situation now are NEIGHBORS reporting infractions to the government. No different than the two mythical BIDDIES reporting infractions to the government.

In either case the INFRACTIONS are what count, not the reporters. Nobody gets a correction order based solely on the report of a neighbor or two women in a golf cart.

I ask again: what harm are they doing?

Good question. So, what harm are those that have minor infractions? NONE is the correct answer, because if you suggest that it is lowering the property value, you are wrong. Houses are being rapidly sold in the Villages for much more than they were purchased for. What harm? They are proving how miserable they are by reporting on folks, when they don't have the guts to confront them with their opinion about the subject. All they do is make themselves happy and satisfied by making others miserable. Like those that come on here complaining about daytime noise. Get over it. You all are on your last days in this world and should be making folks happy, not as miserable as yourselves. Kind of like complaining about a TV channel when you can't simply pick up the remote and changing channels. Like complaining about leaves that blow into your yard from your neighbor's tree. Like complaining about your neighbor smoking a cigar on his/her lanai. I have yet to see an old truck suddenly appear after a small cross or a bird lawn ornament was installed on someone's property. Why does someone's flag bother you?
Some folks are just too darned sensitive for their own good. One good result is that most folks that are stressed over simple things, have a short lifespan.

[jimjamuser]

I agree with what you said........HOWEVER..........how many on here have never violated the speed limit? Not even to pass someone going five miles an hour under the limit? Rules are not LAWS. There are compromises, flexibility for almost all rules. Just because someone puts one of those little crosses in their yard, that does not mean that tomorrow they plan to put an old rusted truck on blocks in their yard. I bet many of the ones complaining about violations to the rules are also lenient when it comes to what they think of illegal aliens violating our borders. Of course, that is a LAW that is broken, not a rule. That said, there is also the rule of law. However, we are speaking of civil or tort rules, not criminal law.
I agree with the part about "illegal aliens violating our borders". That is a good example of "bending our laws".

[merrymini]

What difference does it make, where people come from? The rules in your district should be adhered to regardless. CDD5 is making a terrible mistake and the builder is not interested. There are deeper issues here that meet the eye. If I hear about the two old ladies riding around in a golf cart with the clipboard again, I will scream. What makes people believe these ridiculous stories?

[I'm Popeye!]

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/cdd-5-end-anonymous-complaints-336879/?highlight=Deed+restrictions


So, did you miss this thread with108 posts covering your topic? Or are you just trying to stir the pot back up.
It was beaten to death on that thread and the duplicate posts will continue here. :shrug::duck:

The OP is entitled to post whatever they want within the rules!
Just move on or skip the post if you don't like it...

[Oldragbagger]

We have lived in two previous deed restricted communities. One (in Venice, FL) was attached to an HOA. The other (in Danville, KY) had no HOA.
In Venice the HOA policed the covenants and restrictions. They were worse than any two biddies in carts could ever be. They were always on patrol and would cite for the most minor of infractions. A violation could be something as minor as a guest who parked their car incorrectly (the only violation we ever had) to an ARC violation, but regardless of how minor there were always multiple notifications and threats for everything from increasingly stiff fines to losing your privileges to the amenities (but you still had to pay your dues). The funny thing is, it didn’t result in perfection in the community as you might think, and it led to a gestapo like presence. HOA’s are run by people and, as with all things that involve people, it boils down to giving a little person a little power and they can use it to make your life miserable.
The deed restricted community in Kentucky had no HOA so the burden of enforcing compliance was completely upon the homeowners and the only way to do so was for the complaining homeowner(s) to take the violators to court to have the restrictions enforced. We were aware of only one time this happened. There were people out of compliance for sure but if everyone liked them and the violation didn’t warrant thousands of $$$ to go to court then everyone turned a blind eye.
Neither of the above situations were ideal. It seems what we have is somewhere in between that. It isn’t a perfect system either but it seems to work better than the other two options. There is a neighbor in our patio villa community that is very out of compliance. They have put up fences for their dog, lawn ornaments galore, and some pretty hideous landscaping. It has been that way for nearly a year. I figure if the people who actually live next to them are bothered by it they will report it and if they are not, it is none of my business. I only have to see it if I choose to drive down that street.

[jimjamuser]

Actually, they have done way worse than that, they have made the whole thing a sham by deciding to selectively enforce deed restriction violations. We’re coming after you if you have the audacity to put a little white cross in your garden, but if you’re disrupting the entire neighborhood by running a revolving door short term AIRBNB operation out of your home we’ll look the other way. What kind of a message does that send? Either enforce all violations or let people do whatever they want.
I worry most about the speeding I see in my Village. I have seen a blue Jeep with big tires and a raised body and loud mufflers doing what I estimate to be 45 to 50 MPH in a 25 MPH zone. I can easily tell what 25 MPH is because MOST drivers do that or maybe 30 MPH. This was at dusk on a gray day recently on a busy road that has MANY couples walking their dogs. I have seen this particular Jeep spending often so the driver likely lives in the Village. I can't tell the age of the driver because, of course, the windows are tinted dark. I don't sit outside TRYING to observe speeding. I just notice it when I am cutting the grass in the front yard. If I can notice a particular car speeding when I am NOT looking for that, I am amazed that the local Police or Community Service can't control this DANGEROUS behavior. I can live with the white crosses and a don't get upset if a dog uses my yard for its toilet. The white crosses do NOT weigh several tons and speed at 50 MPH - so I don't worry that they will KILL any residents. Laws are laws and right IS right - I say to enforce the MOST IMPORTANT situations FIRST - the ones that can threaten human life !

[RiderOnTheStorm]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.


Whatever happened to simply talking things out with the neighbor?

[asianthree]

I worry most about the speeding I see in my Village. I have seen a blue Jeep with big tires and a raised body and loud mufflers doing what I estimate to be 45 to 50 MPH in a 25 MPH zone. I can easily tell what 25 MPH is because MOST drivers do that or maybe 30 MPH. This was at dusk on a gray day recently on a busy road that has MANY couples walking their dogs. I have seen this particular Jeep spending often so the driver likely lives in the Village. I can't tell the age of the driver because, of course, the windows are tinted dark. I don't sit outside TRYING to observe speeding. I just notice it when I am cutting the grass in the front yard. If I can notice a particular car speeding when I am NOT looking for that, I am amazed that the local Police or Community Service can't control this DANGEROUS behavior. I can live with the white crosses and a don't get upset if a dog uses my yard for its toilet. The white crosses do NOT weigh several tons and speed at 50 MPH - so I don't worry that they will KILL any residents. Laws are laws and right IS right - I say to enforce the MOST IMPORTANT situations FIRST - the ones that can threaten human life !

This morning at 0650 driving From Seabreeze on Odell to Morse. Speed 32, little over, but being cautious since it a busy time for dog walks. I was passed by a silver suv that had to crossover a double yellow, on a curve. Speeding away, then slammed on their brakes because the gate hesitated it open. By the time I reached roundabout , the car was already breaking at the next light.

It’s 7am folks, that walker and dog will be a life changer for them and you, when you choose to pass at those speeds. But guess that driver is too selfish to worry about someone else.

[Byte1]

I'll worry about deed restrictions when someone else is responsible for the mowing and landscaping. If I am responsible, then I do it my way. Don't like it? Mind your OWN business. My neighborhood has very little restrictions, as it is an older section. We do not see any homes for sale longer than a week or two and they all sell much higher than when purchased. Interesting how every section of the Villages has a different set of restrictions. And some restrictions have been changed by neighborhood consensus using a petition, such as home color or driveway color or adding shutters. One restriction does not fit all areas. No one seems to care about golf carts blowing through STOP signs, because it's no big deal. It's a law that is often overlooked by neighbors, yet a minor little cross is a great offense.
“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”

[JWGifford]

As a prospective resident (ok, most of you can stop reading now, lol) I find the deed restrictions an appealing feature of The Villages. Protecting property values is, of course, important but also just protecting and preserving the visual appeal of the neighborhood is important. I live in a deed restricted community now and I’m constantly amazed by people who buy a home, sign the 2 inch thick stack of papers agreeing to everything, then start complaining about it immediately. If people don’t like the deed restrictions in TV there are plenty of other places they can live without any constraints. I hear that Villagers move 3 times (on average). Maybe one of those moves should be outside the villages if you don't like the rules.

[BrianL99]

Good question. So, what harm are those that have minor infractions? NONE is the correct answer, because if you suggest that it is lowering the property value, you are wrong. Houses are being rapidly sold in the Villages for much more than they were purchased for. What harm? They are proving how miserable they are by reporting on folks, when they don't have the guts to confront them with their opinion about the subject. All they do is make themselves happy and satisfied by making others miserable. Like those that come on here complaining about daytime noise. Get over it. You all are on your last days in this world and should be making folks happy, not as miserable as yourselves. Kind of like complaining about a TV channel when you can't simply pick up the remote and changing channels. Like complaining about leaves that blow into your yard from your neighbor's tree. Like complaining about your neighbor smoking a cigar on his/her lanai. I have yet to see an old truck suddenly appear after a small cross or a bird lawn ornament was installed on someone's property. Why does someone's flag bother you?
Some folks are just too darned sensitive for their own good. One good result is that most folks that are stressed over simple things, have a short lifespan.

This is exactly what's wrong the world today. Folks think they can pick & choose what rules and regulations that feel they should abide by.

When you buy a home, you sign a contract/deed, that you agree to abide by each and every rule/restriction contained in those documents. You don't then get to decide there are some you don't like.

If someone was running a drug operation in the house next to you, is that ok? Or is that a "rule" you think should be enforced?

If your neighbor decided to decorate his home for Gay Pride Day, is that ok?

What if all the Trump supporters, decided to put up 12" inflatable likenesses of The Donald? Is that acceptable?

Or heaven forbid, the others put up 14' inflatables of Nancy Pelosi's?

You don't get to "pick & choose" the rules you like. You signed up for all the rules and it's everyone's responsibility to adhere to them and report violations.

EVERY single "rule violation" hurts property values. Folks have a RIGHT to expect what they "bought into" will be maintained and any and all deviations detract from the whole.

Those are facts, not an opinion. When you buy a product on Amazon and the color looks different "in person", you send it back. That's because you want what you think you bought, not a facsimile.

[Marathon Man]

There is a part of this that I don't understand regarding the violators. First of all I don't personally have a problem with the little white crosses or with the metal birds in front lawns. However, I have asked no less than 6 owners having the white crosses in their front yards "why don't you place the cross on your front door or make a planter with a cross both of which are allowed?" Not one offered to do it nor did even one answer the question, the only answer I got was "I'm allowed to profess my faith" which of course is true but they are not allowed to put the ornament in/on their front lawn.

Because it is about defiance. They seem to be confirming that, don't they.

[asianthree]

What many don’t realize the 100 complaints filed, by the same person, only a small percentage has deed compliance issues. The rest are not even in a grey area (20 pink flamingos for a birthday, or a cocktail sign for a driveway party on Friday).

That is where the waste of time. The person who came to our house, about the alleged infraction had a great sense of humor.

Laughed at what was construed as a “white cross”. His thoughts were if the handful of those who file hundreds of complaints had to pay a fee per complaint, with fee returned if it was a true complaint. It would cut his waste of time and grief down by 80%.

Well off to Brownwood for Hanukkah story telling.

[Indydealmaker]

Critical Thinking dictates that an "all or nothing " approach is not sustainable. A moderated approach will work: one (architectural committee) approved lawn ornament per home. A pre-approved image list can expedite things. Overall limitations and unique can be approved by the ARC. Public online record of what has been has been approved will render angst by trolls to a bare minimum.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

What many don’t realize the 100 complaints filed, by the same person, only a small percentage has deed compliance issues. The rest are not even in a grey area (20 pink flamingos for a birthday, or a cocktail sign for a driveway party on Friday).

That is where the waste of time. The person who came to our house, about the alleged infraction had a great sense of humor.

Laughed at what was construed as a “white cross”. His thoughts were if the handful of those who file hundreds of complaints had to pay a fee per complaint, with fee returned if it was a true complaint. It would cut his waste of time and grief down by 80%.

Well off to Brownwood for Hanukkah story telling.

Actually - some kind of "nuisance fee" for people who file the complaints isn't a bad idea. Example:

Amos likes complaining, he's a "right-fighter" and feels like it's his duty to point out the inadequacies of everyone else.

He submits 3 complaints in one day, about three different properties in the same neighborhood. Community standards takes the call. Takes the first name, Amos's street *number* (not street name) and the phone number he called from. His assigned account name is now AS17215. This stands for A(mo)S 17(29) (515-777-7)215.

That is how Community standards will know him, and what the record will show if anyone questions the source of the complaint.

Three days later, account AS17215 makes another 5 complaints against 4 properties in a different neighborhood.

Community standards now notes the account as being a potential nuisance account, but does their due diligence and checks the complaints out.

The following week, account AS17215 makes another 4 accounts against 4 properties in his own neighborhood. Well - that's definitely a nuisance account now. He gets billed $1 per complaint, payable by credit card only, with the usual credit card fee because of course everyone in Florida charges extra for credit cards.

If he doesn't pay it, he is charged 29% interest on the full balance including previous credit card fees, compoundable daily, also including any new complaint fees.

If they get to $1000 total, they put a lien on the property.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Critical Thinking dictates that an "all or nothing " approach is not sustainable. A moderated approach will work: one (architectural committee) approved lawn ornament per home. A pre-approved image list can expedite things. Overall limitations and unique can be approved by the ARC. Public online record of what has been has been approved will render angst by trolls to a bare minimum.

No, it'd actually increase complaints because now, everyone knows that some are approved and some aren't, and the ones who LIKE making complaints, the ones who seek attention and this is their method of getting it, will make more complaints. "We think this neighbor is violating the rule. Maybe he got permission. But it's YOUR job, community standards, to check it. Get to work."

[Byte1]

Actually, like man caused climate change, there is no proof that any homes have been devalued in the Villages due to someone's little white cross or bird ornament. But, elitists must have it there way, so............

[Jayhawk]

Actually - some kind of "nuisance fee" for people who file the complaints isn't a bad idea. Example:

Amos likes complaining, he's a "right-fighter" and feels like it's his duty to point out the inadequacies of everyone else.

He submits 3 complaints in one day, about three different properties in the same neighborhood. Community standards takes the call. Takes the first name, Amos's street *number* (not street name) and the phone number he called from. His assigned account name is now AS17215. This stands for A(mo)S 17(29) (515-777-7)215.

That is how Community standards will know him, and what the record will show if anyone questions the source of the complaint.

Three days later, account AS17215 makes another 5 complaints against 4 properties in a different neighborhood.

Community standards now notes the account as being a potential nuisance account, but does their due diligence and checks the complaints out.

The following week, account AS17215 makes another 4 accounts against 4 properties in his own neighborhood. Well - that's definitely a nuisance account now. He gets billed $1 per complaint, payable by credit card only, with the usual credit card fee because of course everyone in Florida charges extra for credit cards.

If he doesn't pay it, he is charged 29% interest on the full balance including previous credit card fees, compoundable daily, also including any new complaint fees.

If they get to $1000 total, they put a lien on the property.

Or here's a crazy idea. Maybe everyone who AGREED to the deed restrictions simply honor their written promise and not violate the terms. Now wouldn't that be easier?

[Altavia]

https://www.districtgov.org/departments/community-standards/communityStandardsFAQ.pdf


Q: What is an external deed restriction and who can enforce them?
A: Deed restrictions are declarations between the Declarant (Developer named in your individual Declaration of Restrictions) and the Property Owner. Who can enforce the external deed restrictions?
• Any property owner of any lot may seek to enforce external restrictions against another property owner.
• The Declarant may seek to enforce external and internal restrictions.
• The Village Community Development Districts through adopted Rule may enforce certain EXTERNAL restrictions that have been adopted by each Board to enforce as
authorized by Chapter 190 of Florida Statutes.
• Examples of external deed restriction violations include, but are not limited to, external
modifications made without ARC approval, overgrown or dead grass and weeds, and inoperable vehicles.
Q: What is an internal deed restriction and who can enforce them?
A: Deed restrictions are declarations between the Declarant (Developer named in your individual Declaration of Restrictions) and the Property Owner. Who can enforce the internal deed restrictions?
• Any property owner of any lot may seek to enforce internal restrictions against another property owner.
• The Declarant may seek to enforce internal restrictions.
• Examples of internal deed restriction violations include, but are not limited to,
underage children living in the home or running a business from the home.

Q: Why can’t the Districts enforce internal deed restrictions?
A: The Village Community Development Districts through adopted Rule may enforce certain EXTERNAL restrictions that have been adopted by each Board to enforce as authorized by Chapter 190 of Florida Statutes.
Q: If the District only enforces certain external restrictions, what do I do if I have a complaint about something occurring inside the home?
A: If you have a concern regarding internal deed restrictions such as underage children in the home, business in the home, or the like, contact the Community Standards Department at 352- 751-3912 or email deedcompliance@districtgov.org, and the information will be forwarded to the Developer to address.
Q: How can I submit a concern?
A: You can report potential violations by contacting the Community Standards Department at (352) 751-3912, visiting our office at 984 Old Mill Run, or emailing deedcompliance@districtgov.org.
Q: Do I have to provide my name when submitting a complaint?
A: Each of the District Boards determined that reporting potential violations will be an anonymous complaint system; except for District 5. District 7 only allows one complaint per day from an individual. Please keep in mind that the District is subject to public records law and if you provide an email address, your name, or your home address, staff would be required to disclose that information if requested. The best way to file an anonymous complaint is by telephone.
Q: Once I submit a concern, what happens next?
A: Once Community Standards receives a complaint about an external violation, the Staff verifies the complaint. If the complaint is verified, the Staff works with the property owner in an attempt to bring the property into compliance. If contact is not made with the Owner, Staff begins the process as adopted by each District Board. If a complaint is received for an internal violation, the complaint is provided to the Declarant.

[PugMom]

https://media.tenor.com/HnvCZUuv-zkAAAAd/abner-kravitz.gif
"Eeew! Pink flamingos!! Eeeww!!!"

:1rotfl:

:a20::a20::bowdown:

[Altavia]

The adopted rules by District are available here.

VCDD Community Standards (https://www.districtgov.org/departments/community-standards/DistrictAdoptedRules.aspx)

https://www.districtgov.org/departments/community-standards/communityStandardsFAQ.pdf


Q: What is an external deed restriction and who can enforce them?
A: Deed restrictions are declarations between the Declarant (Developer named in your individual Declaration of Restrictions) and the Property Owner. Who can enforce the external deed restrictions?
• Any property owner of any lot may seek to enforce external restrictions against another property owner.
• The Declarant may seek to enforce external and internal restrictions.
• The Village Community Development Districts through adopted Rule may enforce certain EXTERNAL restrictions that have been adopted by each Board to enforce as
authorized by Chapter 190 of Florida Statutes.
• Examples of external deed restriction violations include, but are not limited to, external
modifications made without ARC approval, overgrown or dead grass and weeds, and inoperable vehicles.
Q: What is an internal deed restriction and who can enforce them?
A: Deed restrictions are declarations between the Declarant (Developer named in your individual Declaration of Restrictions) and the Property Owner. Who can enforce the internal deed restrictions?
• Any property owner of any lot may seek to enforce internal restrictions against another property owner.
• The Declarant may seek to enforce internal restrictions.
• Examples of internal deed restriction violations include, but are not limited to,
underage children living in the home or running a business from the home.

Q: Why can’t the Districts enforce internal deed restrictions?
A: The Village Community Development Districts through adopted Rule may enforce certain EXTERNAL restrictions that have been adopted by each Board to enforce as authorized by Chapter 190 of Florida Statutes.
Q: If the District only enforces certain external restrictions, what do I do if I have a complaint about something occurring inside the home?
A: If you have a concern regarding internal deed restrictions such as underage children in the home, business in the home, or the like, contact the Community Standards Department at 352- 751-3912 or email deedcompliance@districtgov.org, and the information will be forwarded to the Developer to address.
Q: How can I submit a concern?
A: You can report potential violations by contacting the Community Standards Department at (352) 751-3912, visiting our office at 984 Old Mill Run, or emailing deedcompliance@districtgov.org.
Q: Do I have to provide my name when submitting a complaint?
A: Each of the District Boards determined that reporting potential violations will be an anonymous complaint system; except for District 5. District 7 only allows one complaint per day from an individual. Please keep in mind that the District is subject to public records law and if you provide an email address, your name, or your home address, staff would be required to disclose that information if requested. The best way to file an anonymous complaint is by telephone.
Q: Once I submit a concern, what happens next?
A: Once Community Standards receives a complaint about an external violation, the Staff verifies the complaint. If the complaint is verified, the Staff works with the property owner in an attempt to bring the property into compliance. If contact is not made with the Owner, Staff begins the process as adopted by each District Board. If a complaint is received for an internal violation, the complaint is provided to the Declarant.

[roob1]

Can I ask where and for how long you were trained to obtain the ability to state facts indicating why people you don't know behave in certain ways?

Or just an armchair analysis...... Ph.D certificate from eBay?


Good question. So, what harm are those that have minor infractions? NONE is the correct answer, because if you suggest that it is lowering the property value, you are wrong. Houses are being rapidly sold in the Villages for much more than they were purchased for. What harm? They are proving how miserable they are by reporting on folks, when they don't have the guts to confront them with their opinion about the subject. All they do is make themselves happy and satisfied by making others miserable. Like those that come on here complaining about daytime noise. Get over it. You all are on your last days in this world and should be making folks happy, not as miserable as yourselves. Kind of like complaining about a TV channel when you can't simply pick up the remote and changing channels. Like complaining about leaves that blow into your yard from your neighbor's tree. Like complaining about your neighbor smoking a cigar on his/her lanai. I have yet to see an old truck suddenly appear after a small cross or a bird lawn ornament was installed on someone's property. Why does someone's flag bother you?
Some folks are just too darned sensitive for their own good. One good result is that most folks that are stressed over simple things, have a short lifespan.

[Finchs]

:BigApplause:There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.

[Fastskiguy]

I just don't understand why following the rules is so damn difficult.

Joe

[Altavia]

I just don't understand why following the rules is so damn difficult.

Joe

I don't understand why anyone doesn't understand some people won't follow rules :-)

[Byte1]

Can I ask where and for how long you were trained to obtain the ability to state facts indicating why people you don't know behave in certain ways?

Or just an armchair analysis...... Ph.D certificate from eBay?

My apology. I should have made it simple and used a disclaimer that my post was my opinion, unlike everyone else's that are based only on fact....:angel:

[Byte1]

It's not brain surgery or nuclear science. The rules are quaint, and mostly used as a guide, NOT LAW. Some folks enjoy Freedom and Liberty and think that most rules of this sort are flexible. Rules to allow the authority to rule against big signs, old cars on blocks, unkempt lawns, crazy house colors, etc. I doubt anyone (maybe I'm wrong) thought that this development would be so sterile as to appear that we live on military housing. Isn't it interesting that each district has a different set of deed restrictions? In my district, just about everything goes. It seems that the newer the district, the more restrictive. And yet, no one is having trouble selling their homes due to house values being degraded by someone's disorderly/violation of a property. Go figure.
None of the homes in my neighborhood are offensive to me. And believe me when I say that some of them have some pretty cluttered properties. But, my preference doesn't matter to them and theirs does not matter to me.

[BrianL99]

Actually, like man caused climate change, there is no proof that any homes have been devalued in the Villages due to someone's little white cross or bird ornament. But, elitists must have it there way, so............

"Devalued" isn't the criteria.

People want what they paid for and they're not getting it, if people are violating the Restrictions.

Whether they're offended by the violations or simply don't want to look at them.

Simple. Very, very simple.

[BrianL99]

It's not brain surgery or nuclear science. The rules are quaint, and mostly used as a guide, NOT LAW. Some folks enjoy Freedom and Liberty and think that most rules of this sort are flexible.
.


They are LAW and part of a Contract between the Developer and all Residents.

Folks who believe the "rules are flexible" are the problem, singularly and collectively.

If you enjoy "freedom and liberty" to do as you please with your property, you need to live somewhere other than The Villages ... & then don't complain about trailer park next door. Even some trailer folk enjoy freedom and liberty.

[oneclickplus]

Possible solution that may keep the complaint driven system going and effectively negate the idea that less complaints is less violations.

Why don't "we" create an unofficial group of 2-3 in a community. These 2-3 people will be willing volunteers and will be the official complainers. I know there are people that would "love" to do this. I personally would be one of them but I am not here year round (or even now). The community can bring these violations to their attention and they will make the official violation complaint. Since it would always be one of these few people submitting, it would be effectively anonymous again. Could easily be setup with facebook groups (or other) to facilitate photo transmission. Digital forms easily created. This group will submit and follow up on all complaints. Anonymity reinstated

Complaint: trampoline in front yard
Who: Gladys Turnip
Address: blah blah blah
Photo attached
Respectfully submitted 12/19/22
Bill Broccoli
CDD5 violation supervisor & troll representative



There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.

[asianthree]

Everyone seems to think that hundreds of people read or didn’t read deed restrictions, and choose to buck the system. Really not true.

Wondering how many posters in this thread, have actually had a complaint filed against them. If you had, you have first hand knowledge, that not all complaints are legitimate. I would say most are in compliance, and being new to the area, might have placed a pinwheel from their previous house. Passing neighbors LTK it not allowed. No harm no fowl. It’s removed.

In our case the 80 plus complaints filed on the same day, only a handful were true compliance issues. Our old neighborhood sent out the email blast on deed restriction issues, so everyone could fix potential problems before a fine May be levied.
6 garden flags, 3 small garden figures, 1 sundial, 1 gazing ball. Our potluck sign in the driveway of meeting 2 days later(cute painted sign with balloons)

And our 1 foot cross, that was a vine from a Hawaiian plant, in dormant stage, not a cross, so not a deed issue.

So out of 80 plus complaints, only a hand full needed to be corrected. Many were moving in, so what was construed as lawn ornaments was really just item being put away.
Since this was a brand new neighborhood, only weeks old, all issues were removed at the first visit of compliance personnel. Not one resident was angered or defiant to leave the item on their lawn or flowerbed.

Apologies, from the few, at the next neighborhood potluck, and pics of the chosen 2 people who drove through the neighborhood filing the 80 complaints. Great potluck meeting, and we continued using the driveway potluck sign, placing at the home of the next gathering

[midiwiz]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.


Nice write up, and in fact most HOAs have gone the hands off route due to the fact that the courts will side with the homeowner first in this state. The exception is the gestapo, sorry TV. I spent just shy of 4 years as a HOA president and what I can tell you is that a trampoline in the front yard does NOT decrease the value of the home and neighbors, it MAY inhibit a faster sale, but in this state the value is the value.

I have been witness to a person buying an abandoned home, stench inside, actually so bad it didn't only not pass inspection it also needed to be torn down and rebuilt due to the pipes in the foundation being broken. House sold, and not for cheap, it went for full price as if nothing was wrong with it.

So this stuff doesn't protect your values, what it does do is add to the marketing of the development. You've just been convinced over time that all these regulations are for your benefit, they actually aren't.

Took me a couple years in that HOA president seat to learn that lesson.

[MangoMama]

I don’t think the community watch volunteers should be on rule patrol.

The term “ watch” is exactly what these neighbors do. They watch for open doors, an enormous amount of newspapers piled in the drive, a broken window. All signs of a community member having a distressful situation.

Patrollers should not be rule enforcers. Why? Because most people who volunteer for authority positions can turn into power freaks, especially if one violator is ticketed and another isn’t.

Let people have some freedom on their property. Our only distinguishing feature shouldn’t be the number on the house, and the color of the roof.

[GizmoWhiskers]

there sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in the villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, i don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) the homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) the cdd/developer aka the villages community standards department (csd), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the csd. The csd then decides whether or not to verify the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the csd will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the csd to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with the villages (the csd). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the developer/cdd/csd in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in the villages, the developer, the cdds, and the csd (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the cdd community standards faqs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are not reported by community standards, community watch, or any other district department."

this hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that community watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of your home.

A lot of people seem to think that cdd 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that cdd 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other cdds in the villages because no one is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 ford pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.
ditto.

[Altavia]

Everyone seems to think that hundreds of people read or didn’t read deed restrictions, and choose to buck the system. Really not true.

Wondering how many posters in this thread, have actually had a complaint filed against them. If you had, you have first hand knowledge, that not all complaints are legitimate. I would say most are in compliance, and being new to the area, might have placed a pinwheel from their previous house. Passing neighbors LTK it not allowed. No harm no fowl. It’s removed.

In our case the 80 plus complaints filed on the same day, only a handful were true compliance issues. Our old neighborhood sent out the email blast on deed restriction issues, so everyone could fix potential problems before a fine May be levied.
6 garden flags, 3 small garden figures, 1 sundial, 1 gazing ball. Our potluck sign in the driveway of meeting 2 days later(cute painted sign with balloons)

And our 1 foot cross, that was a vine from a Hawaiian plant, in dormant stage, not a cross, so not a deed issue.

So out of 80 plus complaints, only a hand full needed to be corrected. Many were moving in, so what was construed as lawn ornaments was really just item being put away.

Since this was a brand new neighborhood, only weeks old, all issues were removed at the first visit of compliance personnel. Not one resident was angered or defiant to leave the item on their lawn or flowerbed.

...



We had a similar situation with an individual shotgunning dozens of complaints where many were erroneous.

For example, complaining landscaping that was installed by the developer before sale was not approved. This was dismissed with a phone call.

I had the impression complaints are handled by the Developer for some period (1yr) after an area is complete.

[Byte1]

Glad to see so many rule abiding citizens in the Villages. I hope that since you believe in living up to the rules of the Villages, you all will also be willing to live up to the LAWS in the Villages and quit running STOP signs, use your turn signals and do not exceed the speed limit when attempting to make your T time. And for the poster that said the rules ARE laws, not true. But, if you are so adamant about rules, surely you will not get upset when the good citizens of our community complain about your irresponsible operation of golf carts and cars. And I know that NONE of you have ever driven a golf cart after having a couple of beverages after playing golf. That would be breaking the LAW and we know that none of you would do that.
Rules are flexible. If you can't see that, then maybe you should move to where the HOA care-takes your property and makes it look exactly like your neighbors.
A modest personalization of ones' property is not the same as old trucks, sofas and appliances littering your property.
"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"

[BrianL99]

Nice write up, and in fact most HOAs have gone the hands off route due to the fact that the courts will side with the homeowner first in this state. The exception is the gestapo, sorry TV. I spent just shy of 4 years as a HOA president and what I can tell you is that a trampoline in the front yard does NOT decrease the value of the home and neighbors, it MAY inhibit a faster sale, but in this state the value is the value.

I have been witness to a person buying an abandoned home, stench inside, actually so bad it didn't only not pass inspection it also needed to be torn down and rebuilt due to the pipes in the foundation being broken. House sold, and not for cheap, it went for full price as if nothing was wrong with it.

So this stuff doesn't protect your values, what it does do is add to the marketing of the development. You've just been convinced over time that all these regulations are for your benefit, they actually aren't.

Took me a couple years in that HOA president seat to learn that lesson.

Most of the United States is protected by local or state Zoning Regulations. Why? In order to orderly develop land, housing and businesses and protect land owners from near by, non-compatible uses.

Same as Deed Restrictions. If Developers didn't see value in them, they wouldn't adopt them. If Buyers didn't see the benefits, they wouldn't buy.

The reason Condominiums are so popular, is the same reason "managed neighborhoods" are so ubiquitous. People want to know what they're buying and know it will remain essentially the same.

Courts in the US, almost unfailingly enforce Zoning and Deed Compliance.

[Dlbonivich]

An Airbnb is not a deed restriction. All restrictions are on the CDD website. Follow them and you will be fine. The little white cross people would probably get mad if I erected a Virgin Mary statue or a 10 ft high satan, you are never going to please everyone. Put your cross out on religious holidays. If you love god and Jesus no one needs to know but you. You can profess your love by your actions and deeds.

[ThirdOfFive]

Or here's a crazy idea. Maybe everyone who AGREED to the deed restrictions simply honor their written promise and not violate the terms. Now wouldn't that be easier?
In TV? When pigs fly!

Too many F.I.P. live here. "Laws for thee, but not for me"...

[NavyBoy]

kudos for putting it so well. If i see your trampoline or the ford pinto on blocks i'll happily provide my name and let the cdd know.

agree.....cdd 5 were not smart and will end up looking like wildwood or worse

[asianthree]

We had a similar situation with an individual shotgunning dozens of complaints where many were erroneous.

For example, complaining landscaping that was installed by the developer before sale was not approved. This was dismissed with a phone call.

I had the impression complaints are handled by the Developer for some period (1yr) after an area is complete.

Same at our neighborhood, 65% of complaints filed by the gruesome twosome, was landscaping, 8 houses hadn’t even closed yet.

That’s why I don’t get why Everyone is so bent on saying you aren’t abiding by the rules in place. When in reality those who travel to different areas miles away from their home base, and file 100 complaints, need help from a medical provider.

Just because they file complaints, doesn’t mean there are infractions, just couple people who really have such a miserable life, that they need inflict upon others.

Those who have deed violations and refuse to abide (the white cross lawsuit) are very few. Most just say thank for letting me know, and take care of the item.

Some of new TV residents, May have read their restrictions, and just plain forgot that item couldn’t be in their yard. I find that many times with dementia people, who just don’t remember from one day to the next.

Our parents as they aged in place, put out a garden flag, so they could find their house easily in the dark, I had to let them know it needed to be removed. Guessing some on this site would burn them at the stake for not following deed restrictions :girlneener:

[Fastskiguy]

I don't understand why anyone doesn't understand some people won't follow rules :-)

Well I certainly have friends who like to sometimes lean on the rules pretty hard, no doubt about that. Sometimes I wonder if it is just for sport?

Joe

[ThirdOfFive]

We had a similar situation with an individual shotgunning dozens of complaints where many were erroneous.

For example, complaining landscaping that was installed by the developer before sale was not approved. This was dismissed with a phone call.

I had the impression complaints are handled by the Developer for some period (1yr) after an area is complete.
The quoted post refers to something that has not been, at least to my knowledge, discussed in any detail. Sure, there may be biddies on golf carts making the rounds, or neighbors reporting, but it is possible that a lot of those people are not acting out of vindictiveness or officiousness but may be simply misunderstanding the rules.

Remembering a post further up, the writer referenced something like 100 reports with only something like eleven proving to be legitimate. That is a positive thing; it is only one example but it indicates that Villagers are not as out-of-compliance with the rules as many seem to believe. But it costs time and money to check each report. Additionally such a high percentage of baseless complaints is a guarantee that there will be hard feelings. No one likes having to debunk a complaint is without merit. Again going by the example quoted, there are going to be 89 P.O.'ed and suspicious people wondering just who in their neighborhood is messing with them, vs. only eleven who actually have to fix something. NOT a good situation.

The ONLY logical solution is to have those who made the rules in the first place own up to their responsibility of checking for violations and then enforcing the rule when the homeowner in question is out of compliance.

[nn0wheremann]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.
…

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.
Pinto, OK, but don’t try a 63 Rambler! :)

[tophcfa]

An Airbnb is not a deed restriction.

Deed restrictions state that one cannot run a business out of a home and that homes are restricted to single family residential use. Running an Airbnb out of a home, while living in the home simultaneously, violates both deed restrictions.

[mikempp]

I live in a villa, my neighbors gate to their backyard have to go through my driveway. I was out of the country for an extended period. She contacted a mutual neighbor that had a key to my home and pickup truck in the drive. Supposedly she needed it moved to have a lanai put in. I told them move the truck over if it would help. She said no I need to move my truck NOW or she will have my pickup towed. I ignored her, so the next week my neighbor said I had a flat tire, and the community watch said fix it or they would tow my truck, they left a note on my door. I called, they asked, when will you fix it, I said in three months when I get back, they said no problem, sorry about your neighbor. When I got back all the tire needed was air, I guess she let the air out of my tire hoping they would tow my truck. When I got back she would hide from me, not that I'd do anything. About 2 weeks later she sold her Villa, told my neighbor, "not enough liberals around here", so she moved back to California, good reddens!

[golfing eagles]

I worry most about the speeding I see in my Village. I have seen a blue Jeep with big tires and a raised body and loud mufflers doing what I estimate to be 45 to 50 MPH in a 25 MPH zone. I can easily tell what 25 MPH is because MOST drivers do that or maybe 30 MPH. This was at dusk on a gray day recently on a busy road that has MANY couples walking their dogs. I have seen this particular Jeep spending often so the driver likely lives in the Village. I can't tell the age of the driver because, of course, the windows are tinted dark. I don't sit outside TRYING to observe speeding. I just notice it when I am cutting the grass in the front yard. If I can notice a particular car speeding when I am NOT looking for that, I am amazed that the local Police or Community Service can't control this DANGEROUS behavior. I can live with the white crosses and a don't get upset if a dog uses my yard for its toilet. The white crosses do NOT weigh several tons and speed at 50 MPH - so I don't worry that they will KILL any residents. Laws are laws and right IS right - I say to enforce the MOST IMPORTANT situations FIRST - the ones that can threaten human life !

Let's not change the 874th deed restriction thread into the 874th speeding thread.

But just to play devil's advocate, which scares you more?
A vehicle travelling 45 in a 25 residential area, which can kill you, driven by a 14-time NASCAR champion, or a vehicle traveling 20, which can kill you, driven by a 92-year-old with cataracts that can't see over the steering wheel????

I've always thought that while speed limits are the law, they play to the lowest common denominator of driving skills. While completely impractical, I wish drivers could be "rated" for speed in various areas based on skill level, and then quadruple the fines for driving "out of your weight class". After all, you can't play organized softball or pickleball without getting "rated"

[Altavia]

Deed restrictions state that one cannot run a business out of a home and that homes are restricted to single family residential use. Running an Airbnb out of a home, while living in the home simultaneously, violates both deed restrictions.

Has anyone tried to enforce a restriction as a property owner? Airbnbcould be a good one for neighbors to get together to enforce?

" Q: What is an external deed restriction and who can enforce them?

A: Deed restrictions are declarations between the Declarant (Developer named in your individual Declaration of Restrictions) and the Property Owner. Who can enforce the external deed restrictions?

• Any property owner of any lot may seek to enforce external restrictions against another property owner.

• The Declarant may seek to enforce external and internal restrictions.

• The Village Community Development Districts through adopted Rule may enforce certain EXTERNAL restrictions that have been adopted by each Board to enforce as
authorized by Chapter 190 of Florida Statutes.

• Examples of external deed restriction violations include, but are not limited to, external
modifications made without ARC approval, overgrown or dead grass and weeds, and inoperable vehicles.


Q: What is an internal deed restriction and who can enforce them?

A: Deed restrictions are declarations between the Declarant (Developer named in your individual Declaration of Restrictions) and the Property Owner.

Who can enforce the internal deed restrictions?
• Any property owner of any lot may seek to enforce internal restrictions against another property owner.
• The Declarant may seek to enforce internal restrictions.
• Examples of internal deed restriction violations include, but are not limited to,
underage children living in the home or running a business from the home.
2

[golfing eagles]

.....

In our case the 80 plus complaints filed on the same day, only a handful were true compliance issues. Our old neighborhood sent out the email blast on deed restriction issues, so everyone could fix potential problems before a fine May be levied.
6 garden flags, 3 small garden figures, 1 sundial, 1 gazing ball. Our potluck sign in the driveway of meeting 2 days later(cute painted sign with balloons)...


I know a number of posters believe that the two old biddies with their clipboard are an urban myth, but I would think that 80 complaints on the same day is prima facie evidence that they may not be a myth.

[Stu from NYC]

I know a number of posters believe that the two old biddies with their clipboard are an urban myth, but I would think that 80 complaints on the same day is prima facie evidence that they may not be a myth.

Awhile ago someone posted a picture of two old ladies in a golf cart holding a clipboard. That convinced me they are real and should get a life.

[Aces4]

Evasive answer. The situation now are NEIGHBORS reporting infractions to the government. No different than the two mythical BIDDIES reporting infractions to the government.

In either case the INFRACTIONS are what count, not the reporters. Nobody gets a correction order based solely on the report of a neighbor or two women in a golf cart.

I ask again: what harm are they doing?


Nothing has changed, properties will still be protected. What everyone appears to be yammering about is the fact that they can no longer hide behind the biddies skirts, have to grow two and address the problem with a phone call while cowering behind their draperies. Hopefully, they would contact or talk with their neighbor first. It’s really a matter of cowardice.

[Byte1]

My understanding, from a Villages Sales agent is that the deed restrictions were incorporated by the developer as a means to make a better presentation for future new home sales, as was the original intention of the flower beds around the circles and the village squares. If true, I can see how it would benefit the developer in their endeavor to promote beauty and consistency in the Villages.
Personally, I look forward to a time when the authorities decide to ban anonymous complaints. Disgruntled old biddies will then have to find something else to entertain themselves.
By the way, you don't have to "move if you don't like the restrictions." Just live in an older section of the Villages. Some of us enjoy our Villages just as much and don't have to worry about some old hens sneaking around and making complaints. We don't have such strict restrictions and yet our sales are just as fast as those to the South of us. Everyone to their own, as they say.
FYI: if I have a problem with my neighbor, I take it upon myself to discuss it with them and work out a resolution. It has nothing to do with deed restrictions, because I mind my own business when it comes to what others wish to do with their property (within my ability to flex without breaking).

[jimjamuser]

There is unfortunately nothing in our deed restrictions about short term rentals. And the developers are actually encouraging that to get more people to buy their new homes.

IMHO short term rentals are one of the single biggest negative quality of life and property value issues we are going to face here in TV in the upcoming years. I am hoping via VHA we can band together with an overwhelming consensus and vote for deed restrictions addendums in all CDDs that require a MINIMUM of a one month lease period. That will allow “investors” to still rent to the targeted 55+ demographic we are supposed to be, while keeping the undesirable revolving door of mystery people out of our neighborhoods.

We do a lot of rentals in resort type communities in Florida. The nicer ones almost all have a minimum of one month rentals, and some require two months.
As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section. Also, various drivers speeding. I would think that it would be a lot easier to stop the speeders than the undesirable-looking young residents. And, a speeding vehicle can injure or kill an older resident out walking their dog much easier than a threatening look from an undesirable.

[jimjamuser]

This morning at 0650 driving From Seabreeze on Odell to Morse. Speed 32, little over, but being cautious since it a busy time for dog walks. I was passed by a silver suv that had to crossover a double yellow, on a curve. Speeding away, then slammed on their brakes because the gate hesitated it open. By the time I reached roundabout , the car was already breaking at the next light.

It’s 7am folks, that walker and dog will be a life changer for them and you, when you choose to pass at those speeds. But guess that driver is too selfish to worry about someone else.
Yes, I agree. I have seen a lot of speeding in the last 2 or 3 years. And "speed kills"

[DAVES]

There sure seems to be a lot of people who are upset with the ability of neighbors to anonymously report (alleged) violations of our deed restrictions.

I think these people are missing the point.

Starting from the beginning, the purpose of the deed restrictions is to safeguard the long-term value of neighboring properties and the community at large. We all agreed to these restrictions when we chose to buy a house in The Villages.

Sort of like motherhood and apple pie, I don’t see how anybody could be against wanting to uphold the value of their home.

Next let’s look at the parties involved in a deed restriction violation. There are only two:

(1) The homeowner (who may or may not be in violation), and

(2) The CDD/Developer aka The Villages Community Standards Department (CSD), who has the power to compel compliance with and enforce deed restrictions.

A neighbor should not even be involved, but if he is, he has no power to do anything. All he can do is bring a potential alleged violation to the attention of the CSD. The CSD then decides whether or not to VERIFY the complaint (that is, to dismiss it or pursue it).

People worry that a person who files a complaint – a so called Troll – might be reporting in bad faith, and that the report might be frivolous or even vengeful. But so what? If the alleged violation has no merit, the CSD will simply ignore/dismiss it; end of story. On the other hand, if there is an actual deed violation, we should all want the CSD to take the necessary steps to correct the situation in order to protect the value of the homes in our community.

If people want to be angry with someone, perhaps it should not be with the people who report potential violations, but in fact should be with The Villages (the CSD). Why? Because they have completely abdicated their role in monitoring compliance. In most jurisdictions throughout the country, whoever imposes deed restrictions (the Developer/CDD/CSD in our case), is also tasked with monitoring compliance and enforcement. To monitor, most places hire someone to simply drive around the neighborhood, pay attention, and notice if any properties may be in violation.

But oddly, in The Villages, the developer, the CDDs, and the CSD (that is, the people who created the long list of deed restrictions in the first place) have all washed their hands of the entire process of monitoring compliance, leaving it up to residents to bring (even obvious) potential violations to their attention. By their own words in the CDD Community Standards FAQs: “…reporting potential violations will be a complaint-driven process. Potential violations are NOT reported by Community Standards, Community Watch, or any other District department."

This hands-off position is not only unique, but also seems to make no sense given that Community Watch drives around all day anyway. Seems goofy to instruct these employees to turn a blind eye to possible deed violations, even if egregious.

Back to the original point about anonymous reports ….. I don’t see how you can get mad at someone who is merely trying to protect the value of the homes in our community; that is, protecting the value of YOUR home.

A lot of people seem to think that CDD 5 has it all figured out because reports of violations can no longer be anonymous, and thus they now get a lot fewer reports. But of course fewer reports do not mean there are fewer violations. It most likely simply means that CDD 5 will begin looking like a run-down trailer park sooner than other CDDs in The Villages because NO ONE is taking action to protect the aesthetic values that we all agreed to when we purchased our homes.

Okay, thanks for listening. I need to go now to set up the new trampoline in my front yard, right next to the 1979 Ford Pinto up on blocks. I’m sure no one will complain.

This is an endless debate. REALITY, people think they are right. People complain about others but do not see what they do.

A first question is does it really matter? Endless common complaints, dogs, golf cart speeds, noisy neighbors, people blocking traffic. PEOPLE ENDLESSLY FINDING STUFF TO COMPLAIN ABOUT.

[jimjamuser]

This is exactly what's wrong the world today. Folks think they can pick & choose what rules and regulations that feel they should abide by.

When you buy a home, you sign a contract/deed, that you agree to abide by each and every rule/restriction contained in those documents. You don't then get to decide there are some you don't like.

If someone was running a drug operation in the house next to you, is that ok? Or is that a "rule" you think should be enforced?

If your neighbor decided to decorate his home for Gay Pride Day, is that ok?

What if all the Trump supporters, decided to put up 12" inflatable likenesses of The Donald? Is that acceptable?

Or heaven forbid, the others put up 14' inflatables of Nancy Pelosi's?

You don't get to "pick & choose" the rules you like. You signed up for all the rules and it's everyone's responsibility to adhere to them and report violations.

EVERY single "rule violation" hurts property values. Folks have a RIGHT to expect what they "bought into" will be maintained and any and all deviations detract from the whole.

Those are facts, not an opinion. When you buy a product on Amazon and the color looks different "in person", you send it back. That's because you want what you think you bought, not a facsimile.
We have had our home robbed. And speeding leads up to robbing because it means that there is NOT enough law enforcement present. And small issues lead up to bigger issues. I would like to see more Police patrolling on bicycles or motorcycles. I would like to see multiple small drones with cameras flown by one operator.

[Aces4]

As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section. Also, various drivers speeding. I would think that it would be a lot easier to stop the speeders than the undesirable-looking young residents. And, a speeding vehicle can injure or kill an older resident out walking their dog much easier than a threatening look from an undesirable.

Your statements often leave me shaking my head. Talk about elitism…

[I'm Popeye!]

This is an endless debate. REALITY, people think they are right. People complain about others but do not see what they do.

A first question is does it really matter? Endless common complaints, dogs, golf cart speeds, noisy neighbors, people blocking traffic. PEOPLE ENDLESSLY FINDING STUFF TO COMPLAIN ABOUT.

It looks like you're COMPLAINING about the complaining on this thread... :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Byte1]

We have had our home robbed. And speeding leads up to robbing because it means that there is NOT enough law enforcement present. And small issues lead up to bigger issues. I would like to see more Police patrolling on bicycles or motorcycles. I would like to see multiple small drones with cameras flown by one operator.

That requires funding.....hmmm.....oh wait...:(

[Papa_lecki]

Not all the deed restrictions are the same - but this seems to cover the ****/AirBNB thing

Properties within the Subdivision are intended for residential use and no commercial, professional or similar activity requiring either maintaining an inventory, equipment or customer/client visits may be conducted in a Home or on a Homesite.

[DAVES]

As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section. Also, various drivers speeding. I would think that it would be a lot easier to stop the speeders than the undesirable-looking young residents. And, a speeding vehicle can injure or kill an older resident out walking their dog much easier than a threatening look from an undesirable.

My suggestion to all. You cannot control all others. Most people are reasonable. The ones we see are the on reasonable ones the what I call astronomers. The ones who think the world revolves around them. Ask not what they can, should do ask what you can do to avoid the problem. Suggestion to dog walkers. What I see. Wear bright clothes. Do not stop in the middle of the street to chat. Do not allow YOUR DOG to be out of control-you cannot control the dog on the end of a too long leash. I have a group, a mob, that stand on the corner with their dogs. Dirty looks-I DO NOT CARE. I am not going to be on the wrong side of the street so as to not disturb them. UNDESIRABLE?

[jimjamuser]

Let's not change the 874th deed restriction thread into the 874th speeding thread.

But just to play devil's advocate, which scares you more?
A vehicle travelling 45 in a 25 residential area, which can kill you, driven by a 14-time NASCAR champion, or a vehicle traveling 20, which can kill you, driven by a 92-year-old with cataracts that can't see over the steering wheel????

I've always thought that while speed limits are the law, they play to the lowest common denominator of driving skills. While completely impractical, I wish drivers could be "rated" for speed in various areas based on skill level, and then quadruple the fines for driving "out of your weight class". After all, you can't play organized softball or pickleball without getting "rated"
I have a holistic way of thinking about things. I see white crosses and other minor things as starting to make a neighborhood look bad and ugly. Then the residents begin to have less pride in their neighborhood and they see their neighbors CHEATING at following rules. So, then, more and more residents and their commercial workers begin to feel that it is OK to speed and go through stop signs. I see bad behavior as proceeding through a spectrum from little bad behaviors to big, bad, bad behaviors.

I think that there should be police and Community Service AND mechanisms for REWARDING good behavior.

[DAVES]

Awhile ago someone posted a picture of two old ladies in a golf cart holding a clipboard. That convinced me they are real and should get a life.

I expect it is different in different Villages. Two ladies surely cannot possibly cover the villages Not everyone with a clipboard is a troll.

I doubt the moderatos would allow such a photo to stay up.

[Aces4]

I have a holistic way of thinking about things. I see white crosses and other minor things as starting to make a neighborhood look bad and ugly. Then the residents begin to have less pride in their neighborhood and they see their neighbors CHEATING at following rules. So, then, more and more residents and their commercial workers begin to feel that it is OK to speed and go through stop signs. I see bad behavior as proceeding through a spectrum from little bad behaviors to big, bad, bad behaviors.

I think that there should be police and Community Service AND mechanisms for REWARDING good behavior.


There are countries out there that would happily provide those controls. Yikes!

[BrianL99]

Deed restrictions state that one cannot run a business out of a home and that homes are restricted to single family residential use. Running an Airbnb out of a home, while living in the home simultaneously, violates both deed restrictions.

I agree with you 100% and I'm fighting that battle at my home in NH.

That said, the courts in many jurisdictions, have been lax to distinguish between "single family use" and "short term rental use". Just a guess, but it seems to be occurring primarily in areas that have "vacation" potential and local businesses are in favor of it ... & leaning on the locally elected officials to look the other way.

[BrianL99]

As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section.



Can someone please post some photos, so I know what an "undesirable-looking person" looks like ? I'm thinking maybe I have to change my wardrobe or grow a mustache or something?

[Byte1]

I have a holistic way of thinking about things. I see white crosses and other minor things as starting to make a neighborhood look bad and ugly. Then the residents begin to have less pride in their neighborhood and they see their neighbors CHEATING at following rules. So, then, more and more residents and their commercial workers begin to feel that it is OK to speed and go through stop signs. I see bad behavior as proceeding through a spectrum from little bad behaviors to big, bad, bad behaviors.

I think that there should be police and Community Service AND mechanisms for REWARDING good behavior.

Yes, how about a "participation award"....me, me, me....:eclipsee_gold_cup:

[Aces4]

We have had our home robbed. And speeding leads up to robbing because it means that there is NOT enough law enforcement present. And small issues lead up to bigger issues. I would like to see more Police patrolling on bicycles or motorcycles. I would like to see multiple small drones with cameras flown by one operator.

You were held up at gunpoint in The Villages?

[Byte1]

I expect it is different in different Villages. Two ladies surely cannot possibly cover the villages Not everyone with a clipboard is a troll.

I doubt the moderatos would allow such a photo to stay up.

You are correct. One day, I saw two ladies in a golf cart with a clipboard, writing away. I immediately thought they were THE two, but then realized "what the heck they would be doing in our neighborhood." We don't have much in the way of the deed restrictions other districts enforce. Later, I found out they were scouting for ideas for a golf cart scavenger hunt. But, just because they weren't the two, does not make it a myth.

[Byte1]

You were held up at gunpoint in The Villages?

Some folks do not know the difference between a robbery vs a burglary. Although, I have heard of folks being held at gun point and robbed in their home.

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser View Post
As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section. Also, various drivers speeding. I would think that it would be a lot easier to stop the speeders than the undesirable-looking young residents. And, a speeding vehicle can injure or kill an older resident out walking their dog much easier than a threatening look from an undesirable.


I sure hope Orange Blossom and Nucky pass the desirable look.

[Aces4]

Some folks do not know the difference between a robbery vs a burglary. Although, I have heard of folks being held at gun point and robbed in their home.

That’s why I asked about the clarification.

[Jayhawk]

Awhile ago someone posted a picture of two old ladies in a golf cart holding a clipboard. That convinced me they are real and should get a life.

You ever see a picture of Bigfoot? Loch Ness?

With this logic they must be real, too, I guess.

[Jayhawk]

I just don't understand why following the rules is so damn difficult.

Joe

Even though they agreed to them, the entitled people think rules are for chumps. Certainly not for themselves or other violators.

[Bogie Shooter]

As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section. Also, various drivers speeding. I would think that it would be a lot easier to stop the speeders than the undesirable-looking young residents. And, a speeding vehicle can injure or kill an older resident out walking their dog much easier than a threatening look from an undesirable.

Originally Posted by jimjamuser View Post
As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section. Also, various drivers speeding. I would think that it would be a lot easier to stop the speeders than the undesirable-looking young residents. And, a speeding vehicle can injure or kill an older resident out walking their dog much easier than a threatening look from an undesirable.


I sure hope Orange Blossom and Nucky pass the desirable look.

Hey Jim is there a coloring book you use to identify undesirable-looking people, do you use a scale of 1-10 or is it just nobody that looks like you?
Have you found any of these characters in other Villages......?

[Jayhawk]

awhile ago someone posted a picture of two old ladies in a golf cart holding a clipboard. That convinced me they are real and should get a life.

96174

Cause photos never lie

[Jayhawk]

I know a number of posters believe that the two old biddies with their clipboard are an urban myth, but I would think that 80 complaints on the same day is prima facie evidence that they may not be a myth.

Maybe the myth is 80 complaints in one day. :boom:

[golfing eagles]

As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section. Also, various drivers speeding. I would think that it would be a lot easier to stop the speeders than the undesirable-looking young residents. And, a speeding vehicle can injure or kill an older resident out walking their dog much easier than a threatening look from an undesirable.

Yes, I agree. I have seen a lot of speeding in the last 2 or 3 years. And "speed kills"

And going the speed limit can kill and going 10 mph under the speed limit can kill. The skill of the driver is the ultimate deciding factor, not the absolute speed.

[Jayhawk]

In our case the 80 plus complaints filed on the same day, only a handful were true compliance issues.

Apologies, from the few, at the next neighborhood potluck, and pics of the chosen 2 people who drove through the neighborhood filing the 80 complaints.

Wow, those "old biddies" as some refer to them, are not only prolific but they appear to have a hell of a lot of stamina.


Let's review - that's 80 alleged violations in ONE neighborhood. If they drove around all day, say 8 hours, no bathroom breaks, cart gas, lunch, etc., they wrote 10 every hour. That's one every SIX MINUTES, all day long. Really? Does anyone REALLY believe this?

If you do, be aware there's a fat guy in a red suit coming in 6 days. He's coming in. Unless you've been naughty.

Be on the lookout.

:a040:

[midiwiz]

Most of the United States is protected by local or state Zoning Regulations. Why? In order to orderly develop land, housing and businesses and protect land owners from near by, non-compatible uses.

Same as Deed Restrictions. If Developers didn't see value in them, they wouldn't adopt them. If Buyers didn't see the benefits, they wouldn't buy.

The reason Condominiums are so popular, is the same reason "managed neighborhoods" are so ubiquitous. People want to know what they're buying and know it will remain essentially the same.

Courts in the US, almost unfailingly enforce Zoning and Deed Compliance.

I'll agree to disagree, I've already dealt with all of it, tons of experience with court and more. But you can go ahead and believe all that, because you just justified my position that deed restrictions are truly a sales device not a value protection device.

appreciate that.

[Papa_lecki]

Wow, those "old biddies" as some refer to them, are not only prolific but they appear to have a hell of a lot of stamina.


Let's review - that's 80 alleged violations in ONE neighborhood. If they drove around all day, say 8 hours, no bathroom breaks, cart gas, lunch, etc., they wrote 10 every hour. That's one every SIX MINUTES, all day long. Really? Does anyone REALLY believe this?

If you do, be aware there's a fat guy in a red suit coming in 6 days. He's coming in. Unless you've been naughty.

Be on the lookout.

:a040:

Or they drove around for 2 weeks, 10 a day, then took another week to do the paperwork - so it was 80 in one day, but it took a month for the whole process.

[golfing eagles]

Wow, those "old biddies" as some refer to them, are not only prolific but they appear to have a hell of a lot of stamina.


Let's review - that's 80 alleged violations in ONE neighborhood. If they drove around all day, say 8 hours, no bathroom breaks, cart gas, lunch, etc., they wrote 10 every hour. That's one every SIX MINUTES, all day long. Really? Does anyone REALLY believe this?

If you do, be aware there's a fat guy in a red suit coming in 6 days. He's coming in. Unless you've been naughty.

Be on the lookout.

:a040:

doubt it would take very long. One drives by the homes slowly, the other just write:
101--gnome
103--brass bird
105-- white cross
107--Trump sign

As long as there are obvious violations----and there are----could probably do 80 in an hour

[Jayhawk]

Or they drove around for 2 weeks, 10 a day, then took another week to do the paperwork - so it was 80 in one day, but it took a month for the whole process.

So with all the neighborhood witnesses who allegedly saw them driving around and took pictures of them over your example of one month, maybe they cleaned up their violations during the 30 days. I'm good with that, too, if it means they came into compliance. I DID buy a home here because I like deed restrictions on crappy stuff around houses. If you want to load up with a yard full of junk, there are plenty of non-deed restricted houses outside The Villages. Face it, violators are WAY IN THE MINORITY here since about 99% of residents DO follow the guidelines. They may not agree with everything but they honor their promises to the other homeowners. For that, I'm thankful.

If your yard junk means that much to you, stick it in the backyard. You'll be able to see it.

[ThirdOfFive]

My suggestion to all. You cannot control all others. Most people are reasonable. The ones we see are the on reasonable ones the what I call astronomers. The ones who think the world revolves around them. Ask not what they can, should do ask what you can do to avoid the problem. Suggestion to dog walkers. What I see. Wear bright clothes. Do not stop in the middle of the street to chat. Do not allow YOUR DOG to be out of control-you cannot control the dog on the end of a too long leash. I have a group, a mob, that stand on the corner with their dogs. Dirty looks-I DO NOT CARE. I am not going to be on the wrong side of the street so as to not disturb them. UNDESIRABLE?
Undesirable.

Isn't that a term from 1930s Germany?

[Jayhawk]

And believe me when I say that some of them have some pretty cluttered properties. But, my preference doesn't matter to them and theirs does not matter to me.

But did you sign and agree to deed restrictions? Did your neighbors?

That's the real issue. MOST homeowners like the rules as evidenced by the fact there are not a lot of violations.

Cluttered properties do matter to me and certainly a huge majority of others.

[PugMom]

Awhile ago someone posted a picture of two old ladies in a golf cart holding a clipboard. That convinced me they are real and should get a life.

they ARE real, you guys! i posted once in a previous thread how i had mistaken them for meter readers on my neighbors' property. since i am a warm & loving person, i said good morning to the woman with the clipboard & she spun around like i'd caught her in the act of something. she climbed into the cart & they drove off! what upset me the most is she had no business on our properties roaming between our homes. i let it go, but always keep an eye out for them & their suspicious behavior

[jimjamuser]

This is an endless debate. REALITY, people think they are right. People complain about others but do not see what they do.

A first question is does it really matter? Endless common complaints, dogs, golf cart speeds, noisy neighbors, people blocking traffic. PEOPLE ENDLESSLY FINDING STUFF TO COMPLAIN ABOUT.
It is generally talked about that. "The 1st step in SOLVING a problem is to IDENTIFY the problem".

[jimjamuser]

Your statements often leave me shaking my head. Talk about elitism…
I am NOT really an elitist, but as I was writing that post, I thought to myself that it sounded pretty cold. But, I did NOT change it because it showed some harsh realities about the situation. Most TV Landers have worked long and hard to enjoy The Villages as fruits of their labor. I remember that about 5 years ago a softball player had their Corvette stolen in a parking lot near the Junior High School. In that case, he was NOT getting his or her just rewards in retirement. Certainly, nothing is perfect, but, in general, the retirees living in TV land deserve high-tech Law Enforcement and plenty of it. I have suggested high-tech cameras in neighborhoods and camera-carrying military-grade drones. Police or community service people on E-bikes because those riders are FORCED to be aware of their environment more than in a 4-wheel motor vehicle.

I don't have a problem with volunteers wanting to keep or improve their neighborhoods, but it might be too INSIGNIFICANT to concentrate on LITTLE things like white crosses too close to the road, or wrong shrubs, or painting a house with an unapproved paint color. Now, I would rather volunteers in a neighborhood report things like a motorhome parked too long or some more serious infraction. If I had my way I would like to have volunteers with speed guns and cameras set up in a way that would allow a legal speeding ticket to be issued. of course, there may be some legal problems. I guess that my main point is to better utilize the idea of "TROLLS" by upgrading their attention to BIGGER problems.

[jimjamuser]

That requires funding.....hmmm.....oh wait...:(
I drone operator watching 8 cameras could be doing better work than say 8 Community Service vehicle drivers. And That would eliminate 7 jobs - and manpower is the most expensive factor in ANY BUSINESS. And 8 drones would cost less than 7 motor vehicles and use less fuel and hopefully be safer with fewer accidents. I see a win.....win...... to be possible here!

[Stu from NYC]

I don't have a problem with volunteers wanting to keep or improve their neighborhoods, but it might be too INSIGNIFICANT to concentrate on LITTLE things like white crosses too close to the road, or wrong shrubs, or painting a house with an unapproved paint color. Now, I would rather volunteers in a neighborhood report things like a motorhome parked too long or some more serious infraction. If I had my way I would like to have volunteers with speed guns and cameras set up in a way that would allow a legal speeding ticket to be issued. of course, there may be some legal problems. I guess that my main point is to better utilize the idea of "TROLLS" by upgrading their attention to BIGGER problems.

Arent we luck you do not have any control.

[Stu from NYC]

they ARE real, you guys! i posted once in a previous thread how i had mistaken them for meter readers on my neighbors' property. since i am a warm & loving person, i said good morning to the woman with the clipboard & she spun around like i'd caught her in the act of something. she climbed into the cart & they drove off! what upset me the most is she had no business on our properties roaming between our homes. i let it go, but always keep an eye out for them & their suspicious behavior

Thank you

[jimjamuser]

Can someone please post some photos, so I know what an "undesirable-looking person" looks like ? I'm thinking maybe I have to change my wardrobe or grow a mustache or something?
Well, 1st of all, young people are NOT supposed to be here year-round. Is this an over-55 community or is it NOT? As far as their looks, Police are trained to spot SUSPICIOUS people. I am NOT a trained Police-person. But, if I had to guess........they likely would look twice at someone wearing a black trench coat with a black hoody pulled up and dark pants. They likely would look for gang-related tattoos and possibly spiked hair - possibly wearing an excessively large fake gold chain. Now a perfectly wonderful person may also be displaying those markers, but they MAY increase the probability of problems. In Israel, the airport Police have become very adept at spotting terrorists. Just looking for something out of place.

[asianthree]

Wow, those "old biddies" as some refer to them, are not only prolific but they appear to have a hell of a lot of stamina.


Let's review - that's 80 alleged violations in ONE neighborhood. If they drove around all day, say 8 hours, no bathroom breaks, cart gas, lunch, etc., they wrote 10 every hour. That's one every SIX MINUTES, all day long. Really? Does anyone REALLY believe this?

If you do, be aware there's a fat guy in a red suit coming in 6 days. He's coming in. Unless you've been naughty.

Be on the lookout.

:a040:
No worries about your version of fat shaming some guy in a red suit, we light candles at our house.

Not that hard snap photo of issue, address is on your post. Less than 2 minutes per house. Phone in complaints and honestly, less than three minutes per complaint. All complaints were anonymous. Thats how it was explained to us. For many years there were hardly any complaints, until the “White Cross” issue.

Unless you have been tagged, you really have zero first hand knowledge. According to the gentleman who came to our door with a official letter of Deed compliance offense, the average complaints filed from the same persons was usually 10 streets in the same neighborhood. Our neighborhood Emailed photos of the cart with 2 women taking pictures of homes with cell phones. Email was to “be aware of strange cart driving slowly in the neighborhood”. Not one person recognized the golf cart or the two occupants.

At the time the concern was about safety, until Couple weeks later letters were delivered to homes. Then it came to light, why they were driving slowly in our streets.

[Aces4]

I am NOT really an elitist, but as I was writing that post, I thought to myself that it sounded pretty cold. But, I did NOT change it because it showed some harsh realities about the situation. Most TV Landers have worked long and hard to enjoy The Villages as fruits of their labor. I remember that about 5 years ago a softball player had their Corvette stolen in a parking lot near the Junior High School. In that case, he was NOT getting his or her just rewards in retirement. Certainly, nothing is perfect, but, in general, the retirees living in TV land deserve high-tech Law Enforcement and plenty of it. I have suggested high-tech cameras in neighborhoods and camera-carrying military-grade drones. Police or community service people on E-bikes because those riders are FORCED to be aware of their environment more than in a 4-wheel motor vehicle.

I don't have a problem with volunteers wanting to keep or improve their neighborhoods, but it might be too INSIGNIFICANT to concentrate on LITTLE things like white crosses too close to the road, or wrong shrubs, or painting a house with an unapproved paint color. Now, I would rather volunteers in a neighborhood report things like a motorhome parked too long or some more serious infraction. If I had my way I would like to have volunteers with speed guns and cameras set up in a way that would allow a legal speeding ticket to be issued. of course, there may be some legal problems. I guess that my main point is to better utilize the idea of "TROLLS" by upgrading their attention to BIGGER problems.


I think you should quit while you’re ahead, well maybe not ahead…

BTW, those 8 drones you proposed in your other post, you’re willing to pay the freight for 8 skilled drone operators? Think!

[asianthree]

Well, 1st of all, young people are NOT supposed to be here year-round. Is this an over-55 community or is it NOT? As far as their looks, Police are trained to spot SUSPICIOUS people. I am NOT a trained Police-person. But, if I had to guess........they likely would look twice at someone wearing a black trench coat with a black hoody pulled up and dark pants. They likely would look for gang-related tattoos and possibly spiked hair - possibly wearing an excessively large fake gold chain. Now a perfectly wonderful person may also be displaying those markers, but they MAY increase the probability of problems. In Israel, the airport Police have become very adept at spotting terrorists. Just looking for something out of place.

You are forgetting the 20% rule of under 55. We have 6 homes that owners are in their 30’s.

[BrianL99]

You are forgetting the 20% rule of under 55. We have 6 homes that owners are in their 30’s.


Ownership isn't relevant. The criteria is "occupancy".

[BrianL99]

... Police are trained to spot SUSPICIOUS people. I am NOT a trained Police-person. But, if I had to guess........they likely would look twice at someone wearing a black trench coat with a black hoody pulled up and dark pants. They likely would look for gang-related tattoos and possibly spiked hair - possibly wearing an excessively large fake gold chain. Now a perfectly wonderful person may also be displaying those markers, but they MAY increase the probability of problems. In Israel, the airport Police have become very adept at spotting terrorists. Just looking for something out of place.




"Profiling" is illegal by statue in Florida. Stereotyping may not be illegal, but surely not very charitable.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Well, 1st of all, young people are NOT supposed to be here year-round. Is this an over-55 community or is it NOT? As far as their looks, Police are trained to spot SUSPICIOUS people. I am NOT a trained Police-person. But, if I had to guess........they likely would look twice at someone wearing a black trench coat with a black hoody pulled up and dark pants. They likely would look for gang-related tattoos and possibly spiked hair - possibly wearing an excessively large fake gold chain. Now a perfectly wonderful person may also be displaying those markers, but they MAY increase the probability of problems. In Israel, the airport Police have become very adept at spotting terrorists. Just looking for something out of place.

Heh - there's a guy on our side of the Villages who wears mostly goth clothes. Black stovepipe jeans, a black jacket, has piercings and inks and funky hair. Looks to be somewhere in his mid-20's. I just assume he's living with family here. I see him walking down Paradise often. Never heard any trouble with him at all. Since I recognize him from the neighborhood I'd probably offer to give him a ride home, if I ever saw him heading in that direction while I was out in my golf cart.

Then again, I also gave a ride to a bum walking from Walmart toward Aldi's, because it was an incredibly hot day, he looked miserable, and was trying to hide an open can of chili with a plastic spoon from me, like he was ashamed. I felt horrible and told him I could take him as far as WaWa if he wanted. He only needed to go just past Aldi's to the corner there though, so that's where I let him out.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

As it is, there are lots of young and undesirable-looking people living in the Historic section. Also, various drivers speeding. I would think that it would be a lot easier to stop the speeders than the undesirable-looking young residents. And, a speeding vehicle can injure or kill an older resident out walking their dog much easier than a threatening look from an undesirable.

By lots, how many are we talking? By young, how young are you thinking here? And by undesirable, who are they undesirable to?

I've seen exactly two people under 40 on the Historic side of the villages whose "appearance" would definitely cause some random old geezer to need a pacemaker battery change. I haven't seen either of them in the papers for any crimes committed, so I'll just assume that either a) they're not committing any or b) they haven't been caught. In either case, there aren't any reports of rampant crime in our area either - which leads me to believe these two kids just enjoy looking freaky.

I did too back in the day, I was into the bell-bottom jeans with the YES logo written all over them in magic marker, tye-dye shirts and gauze blouses and a bandana tied over my hair. Each generation has its wardrobe quirks, its group of "non-conformists" who create their own conformity.

[Jayhawk]

Unless you have been tagged, you really have zero first hand knowledge.

Right you are. Because I follow the EFFIN rules.

[asianthree]

Ownership isn't relevant. The criteria is "occupancy".

Persons on the deed are the only legal proof for age. One can move here with 10 adult children, only those listed on the deed counts as age.

As for occupancy, no one goes door to door and search’s homes for humans, pets, or living plants. Unless there is a warrant or a raid:1rotfl:

[asianthree]

Right you are. Because I follow the EFFIN rules.

So do I, not my fault some OLD, vision impaired, crazy person thought a dormant flower vine was a “White Cross” in our Asian/Native/Jewish household. If I did use a white cross for any of my past relatives, they would kick the dirt off their mounded grave, roll over in coffins, and throw ashes from urns :1rotfl: Or according to stories passed down “ you will be visited by your great great grandmother to guide you on your path”

It’s hard to understand the small percentage of actual infractions compared to the percentage of complaints there really are. Unless you have first hand knowledge, it’s pointless.

[BrianL99]

Persons on the deed are the only legal proof for age. One can move here with 10 adult children, only those listed on the deed counts as age. As for occupancy, no one goes door to door and search’s homes for humans, pets, or living plants.



That's a lot like the subject that started this thread, folks making up their own rules or ignoring the existing ones.

Ownership isn't relative by law. The Law says 80% of the homes must be occupied by at least 1 person over the age of 55 and further: "The housing provider must engage in appropriate age verification procedures that includes a community census from time to time."

55 & Over Housing: What is the 80/20 Rule? | Florida Condo & HOA Law Blog (https://www.floridacondohoalawblog.com/2010/04/01/55-over-housing-what-is-the-8020-rule/)

The 80/20 Rule for 55+ Communities in Florida (https://www.legalteamforlife.com/2018/01/the-80-20-rule-in-55-communities-part-i-of-ii/)

[asianthree]

That's a lot like the subject that started this thread, folks making up their own rules or ignoring the existing ones.

Ownership isn't relative by law. The Law says 80% of the homes must be occupied by at least 1 person over the age of 55 and further: "The housing provider must engage in appropriate age verification procedures that includes a community census from time to time."

55 & Over Housing: What is the 80/20 Rule? | Florida Condo & HOA Law Blog (https://www.floridacondohoalawblog.com/2010/04/01/55-over-housing-what-is-the-8020-rule/)

The 80/20 Rule for 55+ Communities in Florida (https://www.legalteamforlife.com/2018/01/the-80-20-rule-in-55-communities-part-i-of-ii/)

Sarcasm Sheldon

[Two Bills]

Well, 1st of all, young people are NOT supposed to be here year-round. Is this an over-55 community or is it NOT? As far as their looks, Police are trained to spot SUSPICIOUS people. I am NOT a trained Police-person. But, if I had to guess........they likely would look twice at someone wearing a black trench coat with a black hoody pulled up and dark pants. They likely would look for gang-related tattoos and possibly spiked hair - possibly wearing an excessively large fake gold chain. Now a perfectly wonderful person may also be displaying those markers, but they MAY increase the probability of problems. In Israel, the airport Police have become very adept at spotting terrorists. Just looking for something out of place.

Your posts are probably the biggest threat to house sales in The Villages.
Surveillance drones, suspicious people spotters, Mossad experts from Israel to spot terrorists.....
You make the place sound as dangerous as Downtown Beirut!

[BrianL99]

Surveillance drones, suspicious people spotters, Mossad experts from Israel to spot terrorists.....
You make the place sound as dangerous as Downtown Beirut!

I think in real life, Court Gentry, Mitch Rapp and Pike Logan are probably good guys. That said, I think Gabriel Allon would probably be a better fit for TV.

[Altavia]

///

[JMintzer]

Your posts are probably the biggest threat to house sales in The Villages.
Surveillance drones, suspicious people spotters, Mossad experts from Israel to spot terrorists.....
You make the place sound as dangerous as Downtown Beirut!

Hey! Leave the Mossad out of this.They're too busy controlling the weather to have tine to monitor The Villages...

Wait, what? I wasn't supposed to tell?

[Two Bills]

Hey! Leave the Mossad out of this.They're too busy controlling the weather to have tine to monitor The Villages...

Wait, what? I wasn't supposed to tell?

Evidently Mossad are busy with the Jewish Space Lasers at the moment.
Trying to shoot down Santa according to a very reliable source of information!

[jimjamuser]

I think you should quit while you’re ahead, well maybe not ahead…

BTW, those 8 drones you proposed in your other post, you’re willing to pay the freight for 8 skilled drone operators? Think!
OK, I'll be glad to think as you so nicely put it. I do not know what the ABSOLUTE cutting-edge capabilities of drones are. I can imagine a time (maybe now, maybe in the future) that there are helium-filled drones or just large helium-filled balloons with cameras and several retaining wires - that basically act as a portable tall tower with say 10 cameras pointing in 360 degrees of view. This would be a more practical use of helium balloons than iust trailing ads for beer brands. Observing crime and encouraging safety by just the mere presence of such equipment. you could have physical towers with cameras. I was just "spitballing" out suggestions. Anyone is free to make better suggestions than me, but knocking down my suggestions without having one of their own is basically juvenile ! Corporate psychologists agree with the method of GROUP "spitballing" suggestions (and NEVER dismissing ANY suggestion OUTRIGHT as unacceptable. Then later they arrive at the best SOLUTION to a problem. Obviously, we are in the "spitballing" phase about how to prevent a neighborhood from gradually deteriorating. Many, many residents that I have talked to that have lived in The Villages for a long time (like 10 years) will invariably say that there has been a deterioration in friendliness and safety in the last 3 years or so.

Personally, I do not care about white crosses or such "ticky-tacky stuff. If volunteer residents are driving around the streets with clipboards........I don't care .......it is ALL good as long as they are concentrating on a level of problems ABOVE the low-level "ticky tacky" variety. That would probably be a duplication of effort because that is what (I assume) the Community Service people are doing.

And since I just thought of another suggestion.........the Community Service people could have 360 degree cameras mounted on their vehicles that send video signals back to trained monitors - because the drivers of the Community Service vehicles at concentrating on driving and looking forward. And the vireo could be recorded if needed in a legal case.

[Aces4]

OK, I'll be glad to think as you so nicely put it. I do not know what the ABSOLUTE cutting-edge capabilities of drones are. I can imagine a time (maybe now, maybe in the future) that there are helium-filled drones or just large helium-filled balloons with cameras and several retaining wires - that basically act as a portable tall tower with say 10 cameras pointing in 360 degrees of view. This would be a more practical use of helium balloons than iust trailing ads for beer brands. Observing crime and encouraging safety by just the mere presence of such equipment. you could have physical towers with cameras. I was just "spitballing" out suggestions. Anyone is free to make better suggestions than me, but knocking down my suggestions without having one of their own is basically juvenile ! Corporate psychologists agree with the method of GROUP "spitballing" suggestions (and NEVER dismissing ANY suggestion OUTRIGHT as unacceptable. Then later they arrive at the best SOLUTION to a problem. Obviously, we are in the "spitballing" phase about how to prevent a neighborhood from gradually deteriorating. Many, many residents that I have talked to that have lived in The Villages for a long time (like 10 years) will invariably say that there has been a deterioration in friendliness and safety in the last 3 years or so.

Personally, I do not care about white crosses or such "ticky-tacky stuff. If volunteer residents are driving around the streets with clipboards........I don't care .......it is ALL good as long as they are concentrating on a level of problems ABOVE the low-level "ticky tacky" variety. That would probably be a duplication of effort because that is what (I assume) the Community Service people are doing.

And since I just thought of another suggestion.........the Community Service people could have 360 degree cameras mounted on their vehicles that send video signals back to trained monitors - because the drivers of the Community Service vehicles at concentrating on driving and looking forward. And the vireo could be recorded if needed in a legal case.


Ah, memories of the KGB…

[jimjamuser]

I think you should quit while you’re ahead, well maybe not ahead…

BTW, those 8 drones you proposed in your other post, you’re willing to pay the freight for 8 skilled drone operators? Think!
Note.......I have not really been "ahead" since 1961.

[Aces4]

Note.......I have not really been "ahead" since 1961.


We’ve noticed.

[jimjamuser]

You are forgetting the 20% rule of under 55. We have 6 homes that owners are in their 30’s.
Yes, that is true. I am aware of that, but I did not want to write about it in my post. Personally, I am NOT overjoyed about that rule even existing. I don't remember voting on that rule. And I said that just to make a point. So, no one needs to bother telling me that I don't get a vote because The Villages is a privately owned organization. I AM aware of that. I know one 40-year-old couple that lives here and they are wonderful people. And I understand why they live here.........mainly for the safety, but other advantages. But, I also know of young children that have prison records and have difficulty getting jobs, so they "sponge" off their elderly parents or parent.

Most likely the vast majority of the plus 30 group are wonderful citizens and good neighbors. It is just a situation that I don't understand or see a need to exist. Now, some will say that workers need homes too. To that. I would say that the commuting distances from outside The Village bubble are NOT so great as to deter workers. That is just my opinion.......nothing more.

[ThirdOfFive]

OK, I'll be glad to think as you so nicely put it. I do not know what the ABSOLUTE cutting-edge capabilities of drones are. I can imagine a time (maybe now, maybe in the future) that there are helium-filled drones or just large helium-filled balloons with cameras and several retaining wires - that basically act as a portable tall tower with say 10 cameras pointing in 360 degrees of view. This would be a more practical use of helium balloons than iust trailing ads for beer brands. Observing crime and encouraging safety by just the mere presence of such equipment. you could have physical towers with cameras. I was just "spitballing" out suggestions. Anyone is free to make better suggestions than me, but knocking down my suggestions without having one of their own is basically juvenile ! Corporate psychologists agree with the method of GROUP "spitballing" suggestions (and NEVER dismissing ANY suggestion OUTRIGHT as unacceptable. Then later they arrive at the best SOLUTION to a problem. Obviously, we are in the "spitballing" phase about how to prevent a neighborhood from gradually deteriorating. Many, many residents that I have talked to that have lived in The Villages for a long time (like 10 years) will invariably say that there has been a deterioration in friendliness and safety in the last 3 years or so.

Personally, I do not care about white crosses or such "ticky-tacky stuff. If volunteer residents are driving around the streets with clipboards........I don't care .......it is ALL good as long as they are concentrating on a level of problems ABOVE the low-level "ticky tacky" variety. That would probably be a duplication of effort because that is what (I assume) the Community Service people are doing.

And since I just thought of another suggestion.........the Community Service people could have 360 degree cameras mounted on their vehicles that send video signals back to trained monitors - because the drivers of the Community Service vehicles at concentrating on driving and looking forward. And the vireo could be recorded if needed in a legal case.

Bingo!

Any golf-car ride in any village will probably reveal several dozen "infractions" of the hair-splitting variety. One eight-block stretch that we travel routinely reveals two statues of the Buddha, about ten of those white crosses, a couple of those BVM statues (as my brother calls them "Our Lady of the Bathtub" shrines), a more-or-less permanent dog statue doing his business against a tree, etc. etc. They've been there for years. Any attempt to do a wholesale clean-up of minor infractions that may have easily been there before the current owners bought their houses has about as much chance of succeeding as an attack of flatulence in mid-Katrina. I'm pretty sure the powers-that-be know this, and also know very well the amount of time (and money, not just in person-hours but legal fees as well) it would take to even make a dent in those. Such "ticky-tacky" things may offend someone's taste or sense of decorum but they don't negatively impact an entire community, such as a lawn overgrown with weeds, an RV parked in a driveway for weeks on end, windows patched with duct tape, houses with gross amounts of mold on them, houses missing siding for interminable amounts of time, etc.

Go after the big stuff first. Then start fixing the little stuff. Unfortunately the "little stuff" has been allowed to get out of hand by the powers-that-be for years. It will undoubtedly take an equal number of years, probably more, to get things back in compliance.

[golfing eagles]

OK, I'll be glad to think as you so nicely put it. I do not know what the ABSOLUTE cutting-edge capabilities of drones are. I can imagine a time (maybe now, maybe in the future) that there are helium-filled drones or just large helium-filled balloons with cameras and several retaining wires - that basically act as a portable tall tower with say 10 cameras pointing in 360 degrees of view. This would be a more practical use of helium balloons than iust trailing ads for beer brands. Observing crime and encouraging safety by just the mere presence of such equipment. you could have physical towers with cameras. I was just "spitballing" out suggestions. Anyone is free to make better suggestions than me, but knocking down my suggestions without having one of their own is basically juvenile ! Corporate psychologists agree with the method of GROUP "spitballing" suggestions (and NEVER dismissing ANY suggestion OUTRIGHT as unacceptable. Then later they arrive at the best SOLUTION to a problem. Obviously, we are in the "spitballing" phase about how to prevent a neighborhood from gradually deteriorating. Many, many residents that I have talked to that have lived in The Villages for a long time (like 10 years) will invariably say that there has been a deterioration in friendliness and safety in the last 3 years or so.

Personally, I do not care about white crosses or such "ticky-tacky stuff. If volunteer residents are driving around the streets with clipboards........I don't care .......it is ALL good as long as they are concentrating on a level of problems ABOVE the low-level "ticky tacky" variety. That would probably be a duplication of effort because that is what (I assume) the Community Service people are doing.

And since I just thought of another suggestion.........the Community Service people could have 360 degree cameras mounted on their vehicles that send video signals back to trained monitors - because the drivers of the Community Service vehicles at concentrating on driving and looking forward. And the vireo could be recorded if needed in a legal case.

Aside from the obvious Orwellian implications of that suggestion, let's focus on the part in bold:

The powers that be did not want to get involved in which lawn ornaments are acceptable and which aren't, which is a matter of taste, so they banned them all. People like to think a little white cross is acceptable---what if someone displayed it upside down because their religion is a bit darker? What if the bird was a large pink flamingo instead of a tasteful brass heron? How about a statue of their favorite political figure? The problem is that there is no universal agreement as to what constitutes "the low-level "ticky tacky" variety".

As I see it, the main problem is the vast differences in deed restrictions between different Villages, and even different units within a village. Some standardization would have been helpful.

[jimjamuser]

Heh - there's a guy on our side of the Villages who wears mostly goth clothes. Black stovepipe jeans, a black jacket, has piercings and inks and funky hair. Looks to be somewhere in his mid-20's. I just assume he's living with family here. I see him walking down Paradise often. Never heard any trouble with him at all. Since I recognize him from the neighborhood I'd probably offer to give him a ride home, if I ever saw him heading in that direction while I was out in my golf cart.

Then again, I also gave a ride to a bum walking from Walmart toward Aldi's, because it was an incredibly hot day, he looked miserable, and was trying to hide an open can of chili with a plastic spoon from me, like he was ashamed. I felt horrible and told him I could take him as far as WaWa if he wanted. He only needed to go just past Aldi's to the corner there though, so that's where I let him out.
That is a good story and you are a good humanitarian. I look at the bigger picture and say that the US in general should be ashamed of the way they turn "bums" and people with mental illness out on the street. Some people in National Government are aware of this problem and may EVEN SOMEDAY do something about it.

To me, as I have mentioned before, I had a burglary while I was out of town and had $5,000 worth of equipment stolen. And I know of a man that had his corvette stolen. when that happens to a person, they tend to HARDEN their views toward SAFETY in a community. I do not see how having 30-year-old residents in a 55-and-over community can INCREASE resident safety or well-being. It seems (to me) just the opposite. I can see how others may think that having 30-year-old residents is wonderful. I am just stating MY particular opinion. It means nothing more.

[jimjamuser]

"Profiling" is illegal by statue in Florida. Stereotyping may not be illegal, but surely not very charitable.
That may be, but I believe that the Police are always PROFILING. And so do almost ALL people as they walk by others.........they JUDGE. I believe that it is embedded in human DNA due to thousands of years of TRIBAL life and tribal wars. Modern humans have that alertness subconsciously, but today they consciously control it in order to smoothly interact in modern society.

[jimjamuser]

By lots, how many are we talking? By young, how young are you thinking here? And by undesirable, who are they undesirable to?

I've seen exactly two people under 40 on the Historic side of the villages whose "appearance" would definitely cause some random old geezer to need a pacemaker battery change. I haven't seen either of them in the papers for any crimes committed, so I'll just assume that either a) they're not committing any or b) they haven't been caught. In either case, there aren't any reports of rampant crime in our area either - which leads me to believe these two kids just enjoy looking freaky.

I did too back in the day, I was into the bell-bottom jeans with the YES logo written all over them in magic marker, tye-dye shirts and gauze blouses and a bandana tied over my hair. Each generation has its wardrobe quirks, its group of "non-conformists" who create their own conformity.
That's a good comment and I will try to remember to take a spare pacemaker battery with me as I walk around the neighborhoods.

[JMintzer]

Yes, that is true. I am aware of that, but I did not want to write about it in my post. Personally, I am NOT overjoyed about that rule even existing. I don't remember voting on that rule. And I said that just to make a point. So, no one needs to bother telling me that I don't get a vote because The Villages is a privately owned organization. I AM aware of that. I know one 40-year-old couple that lives here and they are wonderful people. And I understand why they live here.........mainly for the safety, but other advantages. But, I also know of young children that have prison records and have difficulty getting jobs, so they "sponge" off their elderly parents or parent.

Most likely the vast majority of the plus 30 group are wonderful citizens and good neighbors. It is just a situation that I don't understand or see a need to exist. Now, some will say that workers need homes too. To that. I would say that the commuting distances from outside The Village bubble are NOT so great as to deter workers. That is just my opinion.......nothing more.

There is no "Villages Rule" regarding the 80% must be over 55...

It's a FEDERAL LAW...

Per HUD:

The Fair Housing Act: Housing for Older Persons | HUD.gov / U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/fair_housing_act_housing_older_persons)

[jimjamuser]

Your posts are probably the biggest threat to house sales in The Villages.
Surveillance drones, suspicious people spotters, Mossad experts from Israel to spot terrorists.....
You make the place sound as dangerous as Downtown Beirut!
Like I said in other posts, I had my house broken into and burglarized to the tune of a $5 k loss. Maybe that has NOT happened to other people, but if and when it does, you tend to harden your attitude toward safety. Even the original Disney World needs profilers and many Police. Sometimes the magic kingdom becomes the tragic kingdom..

[golfing eagles]

That's a good comment and I will try to remember to take a spare pacemaker battery with me as I walk around the neighborhoods.

Actually, changing a pacemaker battery is a bit more complicated than changing one in your TV remote :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Bogie Shooter]

OK, I'll be glad to think as you so nicely put it. I do not know what the ABSOLUTE cutting-edge capabilities of drones are. I can imagine a time (maybe now, maybe in the future) that there are helium-filled drones or just large helium-filled balloons with cameras and several retaining wires - that basically act as a portable tall tower with say 10 cameras pointing in 360 degrees of view. This would be a more practical use of helium balloons than iust trailing ads for beer brands. Observing crime and encouraging safety by just the mere presence of such equipment. you could have physical towers with cameras. I was just "spitballing" out suggestions. Anyone is free to make better suggestions than me, but knocking down my suggestions without having one of their own is basically juvenile ! Corporate psychologists agree with the method of GROUP "spitballing" suggestions (and NEVER dismissing ANY suggestion OUTRIGHT as unacceptable. Then later they arrive at the best SOLUTION to a problem. Obviously, we are in the "spitballing" phase about how to prevent a neighborhood from gradually deteriorating. Many, many residents that I have talked to that have lived in The Villages for a long time (like 10 years) will invariably say that there has been a deterioration in friendliness and safety in the last 3 years or so.

Personally, I do not care about white crosses or such "ticky-tacky stuff. If volunteer residents are driving around the streets with clipboards........I don't care .......it is ALL good as long as they are concentrating on a level of problems ABOVE the low-level "ticky tacky" variety. That would probably be a duplication of effort because that is what (I assume) the Community Service people are doing.

And since I just thought of another suggestion.........the Community Service people could have 360 degree cameras mounted on their vehicles that send video signals back to trained monitors - because the drivers of the Community Service vehicles at concentrating on driving and looking forward. And the vireo could be recorded if needed in a legal case.
It’s so obvious that you have read this "1984 by george orwell" and thought it was a true story.

[JMintzer]

Actually, changing a pacemaker battery is a bit more complicated than changing one in your TV remote :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Maybe for you...

https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/5b6918511e6e11c3ee05ac60/5fa1ec8cd7c72db18c0a8071_iron-man-clip-short.gif

[golfing eagles]

Maybe for you...

https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/5b6918511e6e11c3ee05ac60/5fa1ec8cd7c72db18c0a8071_iron-man-clip-short.gif

But definitely easier than programming a 1980's VCR :posting:

[jimjamuser]

Aside from the obvious Orwellian implications of that suggestion, let's focus on the part in bold:

The powers that be did not want to get involved in which lawn ornaments are acceptable and which aren't, which is a matter of taste, so they banned them all. People like to think a little white cross is acceptable---what if someone displayed it upside down because their religion is a bit darker? What if the bird was a large pink flamingo instead of a tasteful brass heron? How about a statue of their favorite political figure? The problem is that there is no universal agreement as to what constitutes "the low-level "ticky tacky" variety".

As I see it, the main problem is the vast differences in deed restrictions between different Villages, and even different units within a village. Some standardization would have been helpful.
I agree with most of that post. The Villages have a whole crew of lawyers and experts available to them and SHOULD (?) be able to come to a list of what is insignificant (ticky tacky) and that which reaches a level serious enough to make a Village look like it is deteriorating. I saw a resident's yard get written up for overgrown grass and The Villages had a commercial lawnmowing person cut it and give the residents the bill. Now they are more diligent about cutting their lawn. I believe that a Community Service person wrote them up. So, I imagine that they have some guidelines as to what reaches the level that requires The Villages to act.

[golfing eagles]

I agree with most of that post. The Villages have a whole crew of lawyers and experts available to them and SHOULD (?) be able to come to a list of what is insignificant (ticky tacky) and that which reaches a level serious enough to make a Village look like it is deteriorating. I saw a resident's yard get written up for overgrown grass and The Villages had a commercial lawnmowing person cut it and give the residents the bill. Now they are more diligent about cutting their lawn. I believe that a Community Service person wrote them up. So, I imagine that they have some guidelines as to what reaches the level that requires The Villages to act.

Maybe. It's also possible that overgrown weeds, grass, peeling paint and mold on siding is in a different category than lawn ornaments

[Bogie Shooter]

I agree with most of that post. The Villages have a whole crew of lawyers and experts available to them and SHOULD (?) be able to come to a list of what is insignificant (ticky tacky) and that which reaches a level serious enough to make a Village look like it is deteriorating. I saw a resident's yard get written up for overgrown grass and The Villages had a commercial lawnmowing person cut it and give the residents the bill. Now they are more diligent about cutting their lawn. I believe that a Community Service person wrote them up. So, I imagine that they have some guidelines as to what reaches the level that requires The Villages to act.

They don’t do that!

[Two Bills]

Like I said in other posts, I had my house broken into and burglarized to the tune of a $5 k loss. Maybe that has NOT happened to other people, but if and when it does, you tend to harden your attitude toward safety. Even the original Disney World needs profilers and many Police. Sometimes the magic kingdom becomes the tragic kingdom..

We too have been burgled once, and another attempted break in with just damage.
We did install CCTV around property, movement sensors, razor wire on all boundary fences, dogs patrolling, and have hourly visits from Armed Response Security, but those two incidents did not make us paranoid about security!

[jimjamuser]

There is no "Villages Rule" regarding the 80% must be over 55...

It's a FEDERAL LAW...

Per HUD:

The Fair Housing Act: Housing for Older Persons | HUD.gov / U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/fair_housing_act_housing_older_persons)
I just read that act and it said that to qualify for over 55 status AT LEAST 80% of residents NEED to be over age 55. So, that means that The Villages COULD be 95% or 100 % to qualify. In my opinion, the nearly 100% would be, personally, preferable to me because age 30 workers could easily commute to work from the nearby non-Villages. I suppose there could be an exception for an over-55 resident that needed nearly full-time care by one of their children in order to continue to live in their home. But, that would be only a small % of residents.

[jimjamuser]

It’s so obvious that you have read this "1984 by george orwell" and thought it was a true story.
I respect what you are saying. But I am sorry that I don't see HOW trying to solve a neighborhood problem by "spitballing" for a solution........is such a Fascist Orwellian concept. It seems like "name-calling", which is known to close minds and polarize situations and ends up PREVENTING any SOLUTIONS.

[jimjamuser]

Maybe for you...

https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/5b6918511e6e11c3ee05ac60/5fa1ec8cd7c72db18c0a8071_iron-man-clip-short.gif
That DID make me laugh............thank you !!!!!!

[jimjamuser]

They don’t do that!
OK. I wonder who does then. And I wonder then what they ACTUALLY do. Maybe there was an article in The Village paper once upon a time, but I missed it. I am sure that the Community Service people do SOMETHING more than just ride around and smile.

[Bogie Shooter]

OK. I wonder who does then. And I wonder then what they ACTUALLY do. Maybe there was an article in The Village paper once upon a time, but I missed it. I am sure that the Community Service people do SOMETHING more than just ride around and smile.

22 rambling posts on this thread…………

[Jerseygirl08]

Actually, they have done way worse than that, they have made the whole thing a sham by deciding to selectively enforce deed restriction violations. We’re coming after you if you have the audacity to put a little white cross in your garden, but if you’re disrupting the entire neighborhood by running a revolving door short term AIRBNB operation out of your home we’ll look the other way. What kind of a message does that send? Either enforce all violations or let people do whatever they want.
I agree 100% with that statement. If they are going to enforce deed restrictions, ENFORCE ALL OF THEM; don't pick and choose which ones will be enforced.

[Stu from NYC]

Maybe. It's also possible that overgrown weeds, grass, peeling paint and mold on siding is in a different category than lawn ornaments

Very true

[thelegges]

I agree 100% with that statement. If they are going to enforce deed restrictions, ENFORCE ALL OF THEM; don't pick and choose which ones will be enforced.

A complaint needs to be filed. If one is unhappy with the airb in your area, file a complaint, only then can a deed restriction either be enforced or ignored by the powers that be. Other wise nobody is picking or choosing

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

There is no "Villages Rule" regarding the 80% must be over 55...

It's a FEDERAL LAW...

Per HUD:

The Fair Housing Act: Housing for Older Persons | HUD.gov / U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/fair_housing_act_housing_older_persons)

The law is that <at least> 80% of homes must have <at least> 1 person aged 55 or older living in it.

The law does not prevent The Villages from making that a 100% rule instead of 80%, or requiring that ALL persons in the homes instead of at least one must be at least 55 years or older. We had to deal with this law when I was on the board of a condo association back north.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I just read that act and it said that to qualify for over 55 status AT LEAST 80% of residents NEED to be over age 55. So, that means that The Villages COULD be 95% or 100 % to qualify. In my opinion, the nearly 100% would be, personally, preferable to me because age 30 workers could easily commute to work from the nearby non-Villages. I suppose there could be an exception for an over-55 resident that needed nearly full-time care by one of their children in order to continue to live in their home. But, that would be only a small % of residents.

Because this is a 55+ community, it stands to reason that there will be some folks who require 24/7 home health care. Not all home health caregivers are relatives, some are hired employees. Some of them live in the patient's home. My parents have 24/7 home health care, with 2 people working 12 hour shifts 7 days a week. They have different people on weekends, otherwise it's the same two people monday through friday. Each of them has "residence" access because their job requires them to use their own cars to transport my parents in and out of the community for doctors' appointments, grocery shopping, dining out, everything else. And they have access to the pool, because my mom is still able to swim, and the aide needs to be permitted to sit there. Visitors have limited numbers of days per year they're allowed to enter the community - it is a true gated community.

All of these aides are under 40, and they are granted residence status. Even though it is an age-restricted community. They are not related to my parents in any way, shape, or form (though one of them has been calling them Mom and Dad since they met, it's adorable).

[tophcfa]

A complaint needs to be filed. If one is unhappy with the airbnb in your area, file a complaint, only then can a deed restriction either be enforced or ignored by the powers that be. Other wise nobody is picking or choosing

I did about two years ago, the complaint was acknowledged as legitimate and it was confirmed that two deed restrictions were being violated. However, lots of excuses then followed about the complexities and difficulties of enforcing internal deed restrictions and ultimately nothing was done. So yes, the powers that be absolutely do pick and choose which deed restrictions to enforce and which to ignore. Fortunately, the woman who was running the extremely disruptive Airbnb in our neighborhood moved away, much to the delight of everyone living in the vicinity.

Having seen and experienced first hand how much it sucks to live close to a poorly run Airbnb operation, I sincerely wish the deed restrictions violated would be strictly enforced and truly feel sorry for fellow Villagers that have the unfortunate luck of living close to one. That’s not what people signed up for when purchasing a home in a deed restricted community.

[JMintzer]

But definitely easier than programming a 1980's VCR :posting:

Now I gotta' find a gif of Tony's "heart" blinking "12:00"...

[JMintzer]

The law is that <at least> 80% of homes must have <at least> 1 person aged 55 or older living in it.

The law does not prevent The Villages from making that a 100% rule instead of 80%, or requiring that ALL persons in the homes instead of at least one must be at least 55 years or older. We had to deal with this law when I was on the board of a condo association back north.

Did I say anything that implied the laws does that?

[Pairadocs]

May be truth in a few instances. Largely and "Urban Legend"

Oh they do it for sure, it's hysterical ! Some carry both cell phones AND a clip board they make notes on, then snap a picture. During the height of the Covid "pandemic", it was actually entertaining to watch the "watchmen" take pictures of what they considered inappropriate gatherings... meaning people NOT separated by 6 ft. What was so funny is, if such people were that concerned that their health would be impacted by people they didn't even know getting "too close" together....LOL... why were they out in carts and not in their homes ? ? People, it's just people, all of these types of things will always take place because...people are people and they come in all brands and varieties . Just sit back and enjoy the "show" !

[thelegges]

I did about two years ago, the complaint was acknowledged as legitimate and it was confirmed that two deed restrictions were being violated. However, lots of excuses then followed about the complexities and difficulties of enforcing internal deed restrictions and ultimately nothing was done. So yes, the powers that be absolutely do pick and choose which deed restrictions to enforce and which to ignore. Fortunately, the woman who was running the extremely disruptive Airbnb in our neighborhood moved away, much to the delight of everyone living in the vicinity.

Having seen and experienced first hand how much it sucks to live close to a poorly run Airbnb operation, I sincerely wish the deed restrictions violated would be strictly enforced and truly feel sorry for fellow Villagers that have the unfortunate luck of living close to one. That’s not what people signed up for when purchasing a home in a deed restricted community.

Maybe that’s why they moved. Sometimes letters, instead of legal action is worth the wait. But one will truly never know why they sold, but filing the complaint may have eventually helped. Most don’t like the conflict and pressure from neighbors, so they either stop the Issue, or just move.

We looked at a 5 bed here, that was Airbnb, (didn’t know it until the showing) agent told us they were selling because of the harassment from neighbors, to them and their drop in renter’s. So if that was our plan, we might want to think twice.

[jimjamuser]

Because this is a 55+ community, it stands to reason that there will be some folks who require 24/7 home health care. Not all home health caregivers are relatives, some are hired employees. Some of them live in the patient's home. My parents have 24/7 home health care, with 2 people working 12 hour shifts 7 days a week. They have different people on weekends, otherwise it's the same two people monday through friday. Each of them has "residence" access because their job requires them to use their own cars to transport my parents in and out of the community for doctors' appointments, grocery shopping, dining out, everything else. And they have access to the pool, because my mom is still able to swim, and the aide needs to be permitted to sit there. Visitors have limited numbers of days per year they're allowed to enter the community - it is a true gated community.

All of these aides are under 40, and they are granted residence status. Even though it is an age-restricted community. They are not related to my parents in any way, shape, or form (though one of them has been calling them Mom and Dad since they met, it's adorable).
Thank you for the clarification and the details. I assumed that there were some exceptions due to handicaps. And I assumed that it would be only a small % of the residents. I am glad that your parents are happy and getting good care while still living in their own home.

I still wonder why The Villages ownership decided to go with the 80% over 55 for residents instead of making it a HIGHER %. It seems to me that they have PLENTY of would-be buyers over 55 for ANY house to be sold here. I don't see any advantage to anyone for not maximizing the % of over 55 here ?

[jimjamuser]

Oh they do it for sure, it's hysterical ! Some carry both cell phones AND a clip board they make notes on, then snap a picture. During the height of the Covid "pandemic", it was actually entertaining to watch the "watchmen" take pictures of what they considered inappropriate gatherings... meaning people NOT separated by 6 ft. What was so funny is, if such people were that concerned that their health would be impacted by people they didn't even know getting "too close" together....LOL... why were they out in carts and not in their homes ? ? People, it's just people, all of these types of things will always take place because...people are people and they come in all brands and varieties . Just sit back and enjoy the "show" !
Covid WAS and still IS something that kills OLDER people. It would come under MY classification as Village problems greater than white crosses and dogs dumping on someone's perfect grass. What is serious and what can be ignored exists on a spectrum from like maybe..........murder.....drunk driving........Covid at the Delta-peak.......lots of things in the middle..........and then at the end.....the trivial ......like dog poo and white crosses.

Rules and enforcement need to be spelled out and who should enforce them? It seems, to me, like judging from the complaints and trolls, that Villages Land has loosely defined rules which give rise to the current "helter-skelter" approach - which allows vigilante groups to form and fill the vacuum.

[BrianL99]

Thank you for the clarification and the details. I assumed that there were some exceptions due to handicaps. And I assumed that it would be only a small % of the residents. I am glad that your parents are happy and getting good care while still living in their own home.

I still wonder why The Villages ownership decided to go with the 80% over 55 for residents instead of making it a HIGHER %. It seems to me that they have PLENTY of would-be buyers over 55 for ANY house to be sold here. I don't see any advantage to anyone for not maximizing the % of over 55 here ?


Because 55+ communities are generally about 90% of the price of non-age restricted homes, to begin with.

Narrowing the age demographic even more, would only increase the price disparity between age-restricted housing and non-age restricted housing.

[jimjamuser]

Because 55+ communities are generally about 90% of the price of non-age restricted homes, to begin with.

Narrowing the age demographic even more, would only increase the price disparity between age-restricted housing and non-age restricted housing.
As to the 1st sentence.......I read that to mean that around the WHOLE US the selling price for equal houses that a retiree in a 55 plus would buy is 10% cheaper than that in an any age area. I am then thinking about all the differences between LOCATION like between upstate New York and The Villages. Then there is the size of the over-55 community where a small one golf course community would be worth less than one with as many as TV-Land. Then, differences of climate and state government and taxes. IMO those are too many variables to make a blanket statement like that 1st sentence. If I interpreted it wrong, I apologize in advance.

As to the 2nd sentence.....let's say it is GIVEN that it is true, Then I don't understand if that WOULD favor the SELLER / The Villages or favor the BUYER / new resident ?
........There is another confusing thing about that 1st part of the 2nd sentence. let us assume that the average in an over 55 community is SAY (?) age 70 and the average age in a non-age community.......the parents SAY (?) would be about age 35. So, you can't change the non-age community. So, you would HAVE to change the age-controlled community to say over age 45 in order to "NARROW the age demographic" as you quoted.
.......As I interpret that, it would make the 2 age groups more similar and would RAISE the cost of homes for the over-age 45 group - thus decreasing the price disparity between home costs for the 2 groups. Which is OPPOSITE to the conclusion of the 2nd sentence. I am sure that you seem to understand these home costs differences better than I do, but I am still confused despite trying hard to understand.

[Byte1]

Actually, changing a pacemaker battery is a bit more complicated than changing one in your TV remote :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Maybe some instruction on how to fit the aluminum foil hat properly would be beneficial to some folks?

[JMintzer]

Covid WAS and still IS something that kills OLDER people. It would come under MY classification as Village problems greater than white crosses and dogs dumping on someone's perfect grass. What is serious and what can be ignored exists on a spectrum from like maybe..........murder.....drunk driving........Covid at the Delta-peak.......lots of things in the middle..........and then at the end.....the trivial ......like dog poo and white crosses.

Rules and enforcement need to be spelled out and who should enforce them? It seems, to me, like judging from the complaints and trolls, that Villages Land has loosely defined rules which give rise to the current "helter-skelter" approach - which allows vigilante groups to form and fill the vacuum.

As others have stated, it's a good thing YOU don't set the rules...

[BrianL99]

As to the 1st sentence.......I read that to mean that around the WHOLE US the selling price for equal houses that a retiree in a 55 plus would buy is 10% cheaper than that in an any age area. I am then thinking about all the differences between LOCATION like between upstate New York and The Villages. Then there is the size of the over-55 community where a small one golf course community would be worth less than one with as many as TV-Land. Then, differences of climate and state government and taxes. IMO those are too many variables to make a blanket statement like that 1st sentence. If I interpreted it wrong, I apologize in advance.

As to the 2nd sentence.....let's say it is GIVEN that it is true, Then I don't understand if that WOULD favor the SELLER / The Villages or favor the BUYER / new resident ?
........There is another confusing thing about that 1st part of the 2nd sentence. let us assume that the average in an over 55 community is SAY (?) age 70 and the average age in a non-age community.......the parents SAY (?) would be about age 35. So, you can't change the non-age community. So, you would HAVE to change the age-controlled community to say over age 45 in order to "NARROW the age demographic" as you quoted.
.......As I interpret that, it would make the 2 age groups more similar and would RAISE the cost of homes for the over-age 45 group - thus decreasing the price disparity between home costs for the 2 groups. Which is OPPOSITE to the conclusion of the 2nd sentence. I am sure that you seem to understand these home costs differences better than I do, but I am still confused despite trying hard to understand.


31% of the Population in FL is under 25 Years old ... unlikely home buyers.

61% are ages 25 - 74. Home buying age and potential buyers.

19% are ages 55 - 74.

Your available population (market) for age restricted housing, is 1/3 of all available buyers.

All things being equal, as you reduce your available market, prices decrease.

This is true in most areas, but I know of a specific example in Trinity, about 20 miles North of Tampa. Side by side, comparable sub-divisions. 1 age restricted, one not. The "premium" to buy in the non-age restricted sub-division is about 15%.

[jimjamuser]

31% of the Population in FL is under 25 Years old ... unlikely home buyers.

61% are ages 25 - 74. Home buying age and potential buyers.

19% are ages 55 - 74.

Your available population (market) for age restricted housing, is 1/3 of all available buyers.

All things being equal, as you reduce your available market, prices decrease.

This is true in most areas, but I know of a specific example in Trinity, about 20 miles North of Tampa. Side by side, comparable sub-divisions. 1 age restricted, one not. The "premium" to buy in the non-age restricted sub-division is about 15%.
Ok, you have made a good case and now I will explain how I see things differently. The main real estate principle everywhere is location, location, location. Tampa is a fast-growing large metropolitan area. A location ONLY 20 miles from DOWNTOWN Tampa would be a WONDERFUL LOCATION for a working family or singles that are about 30 years old. As a retirement LOCATION it is NOT too WONDERFUL - because of excess traffic and high crime. And probably ONLY one pool and maybe a pitch and putt golf course and many fewer clubs than The Villages and fewer card game activities. So the comparison of those 2 communities is UNEQUAL. So, no wonder they have to reduce the home prices by 15% in that situation of BAD location, location, etc for the retired types.

Now in The Villages, the situation is different for many reasons, but one is that it is located like a self-contained oasis from the hectic and crime-laden metro areas. That is its main selling CARD. We all know that retirees can get more HOME for their BUCK in nearby non-Village communities than inside the boundaries of The Villages. So, The Villagers are getting LESS home for MORE bucks. Yet, they do it for the (supposedly) crime-free environment and the more extensive activities and overall lifestyle.
.........Basically, all things are NOT equal in my 2 examples and I would further stipulate that they are RARELY or never EQUAL............there ate too many variables in various gated communities.

[jimjamuser]

31% of the Population in FL is under 25 Years old ... unlikely home buyers.

61% are ages 25 - 74. Home buying age and potential buyers.

19% are ages 55 - 74.

Your available population (market) for age restricted housing, is 1/3 of all available buyers.

All things being equal, as you reduce your available market, prices decrease.

This is true in most areas, but I know of a specific example in Trinity, about 20 miles North of Tampa. Side by side, comparable sub-divisions. 1 age restricted, one not. The "premium" to buy in the non-age restricted sub-division is about 15%.
Note......I still don't understand the 2 nd sentence in your post # 192 ?????

[BrianL99]

Ok, you have made a good case and now I will explain how I see things differently. The main real estate principle everywhere is location, location, location. Tampa is a fast-growing large metropolitan area. A location ONLY 20 miles from DOWNTOWN Tampa would be a WONDERFUL LOCATION for a working family or singles that are about 30 years old. As a retirement LOCATION it is NOT too WONDERFUL - because of excess traffic and high crime. And probably ONLY one pool and maybe a pitch and putt golf course and many fewer clubs than The Villages and fewer card game activities. So the comparison of those 2 communities is UNEQUAL. So, no wonder they have to reduce the home prices by 15% in that situation of BAD location, location, etc for the retired types.

Now in The Villages, the situation is different for many reasons, but one is that it is located like a self-contained oasis from the hectic and crime-laden metro areas. That is its main selling CARD. We all know that retirees can get more HOME for their BUCK in nearby non-Village communities than inside the boundaries of The Villages. So, The Villagers are getting LESS home for MORE bucks. Yet, they do it for the (supposedly) crime-free environment and the more extensive activities and overall lifestyle.
.........Basically, all things are NOT equal in my 2 examples and I would further stipulate that they are RARELY or never EQUAL............there ate too many variables in various gated communities.

All valid points, until you consider the original question of increasing the age requirement in The Villages.

Witness the current buying demographic in TV ... the south. Younger, more active, different needs, wants and motivations.

All the amenities and other considerations you mention, are primarily of interest to active, younger "retirees". The average 80 year old, isn't playing golf every day, swimming in the pool and get cranked up at Happy Hour. The TV demographic target is really 55-70 (72?)? If TV raised the "age limitation", they would be looking at narrowing their potential buying demographic by at least 50%.

TV is already an anomaly, in that their age-restricted housing is more expensive than surrounding non-age restricted housing, primarily because of the amenities offered.

There's no big secret why the TV Developers have been on a mission for the last 5-10 years, with expansion to the South. They need more potential buyers, so they've created a new "suburb" to TV down South, with fewer amenities and less of what "makes TV, TV" ... with prices more consistent with neighboring areas. The 55-65 year old demographic, is a much larger and profitable target audience than the 66-70 year old bracket.

The South doesn't even look like TV, it looks like every other subdivision in Central Florida. Most of those folks have "bought a home, not a lifestyle". People buy homes, primarily for (3) reasons: investment, shelter or lifestyle. The folks down South are mostly buying shelter, some investment. In the more traditional area of TV, most folks bought for lifestyle. There are way more shelter/investment buyers, than there are lifestyle buyers.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

[jimjamuser]

All valid points, until you consider the original question of increasing the age requirement in The Villages.

Witness the current buying demographic in TV ... the south. Younger, more active, different needs, wants and motivations.

All the amenities and other considerations you mention, are primarily of interest to active, younger "retirees". The average 80 year old, isn't playing golf every day, swimming in the pool and get cranked up at Happy Hour. The TV demographic target is really 55-70 (72?)? If TV raised the "age limitation", they would be looking at narrowing their potential buying demographic by at least 50%.

TV is already an anomaly, in that their age-restricted housing is more expensive than surrounding non-age restricted housing, primarily because of the amenities offered.

There's no big secret why the TV Developers have been on a mission for the last 5-10 years, with expansion to the South. They need more potential buyers, so they've created a new "suburb" to TV down South, with fewer amenities and less of what "makes TV, TV" ... with prices more consistent with neighboring areas. The 55-65 year old demographic, is a much larger and profitable target audience than the 66-70 year old bracket.

The South doesn't even look like TV, it looks like every other subdivision in Central Florida. Most of those folks have "bought a home, not a lifestyle". People buy homes, primarily for (3) reasons: investment, shelter or lifestyle. The folks down South are mostly buying shelter, some investment. In the more traditional area of TV, most folks bought for lifestyle. There are way more shelter/investment buyers, than there are lifestyle buyers.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.
"My mileage may vary"---------That's very, VERY funny. Very impressive, and a good way to end a post. I would say that this IS a teachable moment. A moment where I am mostly the student. Your 1st post was about a complex subject - it was 2 sentences long. Which left some people confused (I assume that I was NOT the only one). Your last post was about 12 sentences long. It was much more clarifying to an average reader (me). What may be teachable (?) is what someone on video TV once said, "words, Sheldon, use your words".

However, there was one little idea in that post that I am still "hazy" about. I will re-read it a few times and then perhaps have some more questions?

[Fastskiguy]

The South doesn't even look like TV, it looks like every other subdivision in Central Florida. Most of those folks have "bought a home, not a lifestyle". People buy homes, primarily for (3) reasons: investment, shelter or lifestyle. The folks down South are mostly buying shelter, some investment. In the more traditional area of TV, most folks bought for lifestyle. There are way more shelter/investment buyers, than there are lifestyle buyers.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though.

Joe

[BrianL99]

It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though.

Joe

I don't live in the South, but I agree with you 100%. It's a different "lifestyle" than the older, more traditional part of TV ... you young 'uns can stay up past 9 pm! If I bought in TV 10 years ago, I'd definitely be down south.

[jimjamuser]

"My mileage may vary"---------That's very, VERY funny. Very impressive, and a good way to end a post. I would say that this IS a teachable moment. A moment where I am mostly the student. Your 1st post was about a complex subject - it was 2 sentences long. Which left some people confused (I assume that I was NOT the only one). Your last post was about 12 sentences long. It was much more clarifying to an average reader (me). What may be teachable (?) is what someone on video TV once said, "words, Sheldon, use your words".

However, there was one little idea in that post that I am still "hazy" about. I will re-read it a few times and then perhaps have some more questions?
OK, my mileage is still varying, but my haze is lifting (like the weather). I NEVER asked the question, "why not raise the age limit." Even I am not that STUPID (hopefully)! I did ask, "why NOT keep the age limit at 55 and increase the PERCENTAGE of the over 55 and therefore DECREASED the numbers of the under age 55 from 20 % to SAY (?)
5 %. Your basic answer seems to be that The Villages organization saw the ABOUT age 75 type population as dying out and started marketing in south TV Land toward the next younger generation (you called them 1/3 of the available buyers)

OK, now everything is fine, my "haze" has started clearing up and I have CLOSURE on the concepts. I appreciate your "laying more words on me" to help. Thank you, have a GREAT holiday season, and to all a good night !!!!

[Bogie Shooter]

The South doesn't even look like TV, it looks like every other subdivision in Central Florida. Most of those folks have "bought a home, not a lifestyle". People buy homes, primarily for (3) reasons: investment, shelter or lifestyle. The folks down South are mostly buying shelter, some investment. In the more traditional area of TV, most folks bought for lifestyle. There are way more shelter/investment buyers, than there are lifestyle buyers.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

I don't live in the South, but I agree with you 100%. It's a different "lifestyle" than the older, more traditional part of TV ... you young 'uns can stay up past 9 pm! If I bought in TV 10 years ago, I'd definitely be down south.

Seems you are singing two different tunes.
The first is bashing the south as looking like every sub division in Florida.
The second is an appeasement to somebody calling you out.

[JMintzer]

OK, my mileage is still varying, but my haze is lifting (like the weather). I NEVER asked the question, "why not raise the age limit." Even I am not that STUPID (hopefully)! I did ask, "why NOT keep the age limit at 55 and increase the PERCENTAGE of the over 55 and therefore DECREASED the numbers of the under age 55 from 20 % to SAY (?)
5 %. Your basic answer seems to be that The Villages organization saw the ABOUT age 75 type population as dying out and started marketing in south TV Land toward the next younger generation (you called them 1/3 of the available buyers)

OK, now everything is fine, my "haze" has started clearing up and I have CLOSURE on the concepts. I appreciate your "laying more words on me" to help. Thank you, have a GREAT holiday season, and to all a good night !!!!

If the people in the older sections are "dying out", whom do you think is going to buy their homes?

I'll give you a clue... Younger people, just like those who are buying in the southern areas...

There is a constant turnover throughout TV... To quote Mufasa, "It's the circle of life"...

Oh, and one more thing... Sometimes, "Less is more"...

[Bogie Shooter]

If the people in the older sections are "dying out", whom do you think is going to buy their homes?

I'll give you a clue... Younger people, just like those who are buying in the southern areas...

There is a constant turnover throughout TV... To quote Mufasa, "It's the circle of life"...

Oh, and one more thing... Sometimes, "Less is more"...
Less is more…:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Altavia]

My neighbor got their trampoline off the yard...

[jimjamuser]

If the people in the older sections are "dying out", whom do you think is going to buy their homes?

I'll give you a clue... Younger people, just like those who are buying in the southern areas...

There is a constant turnover throughout TV... To quote Mufasa, "It's the circle of life"...

Oh, and one more thing... Sometimes, "Less is more"...
And 1 additional thing - as a great, old philosopher once said, "sometimes more (paragraphs) are better than less (one-liners"). And concentrating on ALWAYS rebuking only ONE poster is borderline psychotic.

[BrianL99]

Seems you are singing two different tunes.
The first is bashing the south as looking like every sub division in Florida.
The second is an appeasement to somebody calling you out.

I'm not bashing the "south", but it does look like every other subdivision in Florida ... that's no big secret.

& I said, "IF I was 10 years younger and BUYING IN TV, I would buy in the South.

When I was 15 years younger, I bought in Tampa. I just bought in TV last year, when I got old enough to have different needs and wants.

Quite honestly, I would never consider buying in the southern area of TV. No ocean, no golf, no Town Squares. It's just a subdivision like any other.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though.

Joe

The population is getting younger up north, what with all those people who moved in 20-30 years ago ready for assisted living, memory care, or - their final reward. You'd have to be a special kind of - not very bright - if you thought the people moving in must of course all be in their 80's.

We have a softball field, archery range, THREE pools (one of which has a hot tub) and a country club, two executive courses and one CC course, one lake and several retention ponds, easy access to - pretty much everything, mostly via golf-cart, dog park, our own church on-site for those who enjoy that sort of thing...

A lot of homes have been sold or rented to under-60's in the past year. Us younger folks in the north half can party too (and we do).

[Papa_lecki]

It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though.

Joe

All the “sections” have evolved. The Developer took feedback from the owners and made changes - that’s smart. The golf courses are coming on that side of the turnpike. People probably thought south of 466A was going to be terrible, until it was done.

The people buying new in the newer areas, are the same age as the families who bought new in, say, Tall Trees (for example).
And as someone said above, that same age is buying the pre owned all over TV

It’s not like, all of a sudden, 40 year olds are buying all the new homes.

[Fastskiguy]

The population is getting younger up north, what with all those people who moved in 20-30 years ago ready for assisted living, memory care, or - their final reward. You'd have to be a special kind of - not very bright - if you thought the people moving in must of course all be in their 80's.

We have a softball field, archery range, THREE pools (one of which has a hot tub) and a country club, two executive courses and one CC course, one lake and several retention ponds, easy access to - pretty much everything, mostly via golf-cart, dog park, our own church on-site for those who enjoy that sort of thing...

A lot of homes have been sold or rented to under-60's in the past year. Us younger folks in the north half can party too (and we do).

Did you mean to reply to me?

Here's what I said (although I probably don't have to repeat myself to someone like you....just trying to keep everybody else on the same page)

"It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though."

I mean....are you saying the population down south is older than the population up north? Because that's what it looks like you are saying. Or maybe you were replying to someone else?

Joe (aka one special type of dim)

[jimjamuser]

I'm not bashing the "south", but it does look like every other subdivision in Florida ... that's no big secret.

& I said, "IF I was 10 years younger and BUYING IN TV, I would buy in the South.

When I was 15 years younger, I bought in Tampa. I just bought in TV last year, when I got old enough to have different needs and wants.

Quite honestly, I would never consider buying in the southern area of TV. No ocean, no golf, no Town Squares. It's just a subdivision like any other.
The way I understand it is that golf is NOT very popular with generations younger than the baby-boomers. They seem to prefer the more rigorous sports like soccer, rock climbing, and hang gliding. Golf is from the "tea and crumpets" more docile era. Plus golf uses up too much land and fertilizer, which can run off and cause algae blooms. Plus golf courses eliminate many trees that are needed to keep metro areas cool and prevent excess CO2 from developing.

[golfing eagles]

The way I understand it is that golf is NOT very popular with generations younger than the baby-boomers. They seem to prefer the more rigorous sports like soccer, rock climbing, and hang gliding. Golf is from the "tea and crumpets" more docile era. Plus golf uses up too much land and fertilizer, which can run off and cause algae blooms. Plus golf courses eliminate many trees that are needed to keep metro areas cool and prevent excess CO2 from developing.

Not even worth a reply

[BrianL99]

Not even worth a reply

The way I understand it is that golf is NOT very popular with generations younger than the baby-boomers. They seem to prefer the more rigorous sports like soccer, rock climbing, and hang gliding. Golf is from the "tea and crumpets" more docile era. Plus golf uses up too much land and fertilizer, which can run off and cause algae blooms. Plus golf courses eliminate many trees that are needed to keep metro areas cool and prevent excess CO2 from developing.

The Developer could shut down all the golf courses and replace those 5000 acres of "green space", with housing.

[Papa_lecki]

The way I understand it is that golf is NOT very popular with generations younger than the baby-boomers. They seem to prefer the more rigorous sports like soccer, rock climbing, and hang gliding. Golf is from the "tea and crumpets" more docile era. Plus golf uses up too much land and fertilizer, which can run off and cause algae blooms. Plus golf courses eliminate many trees that are needed to keep metro areas cool and prevent excess CO2 from developing.

Facts are usually better than hearsay….

“New participants are increasingly younger; they’re hooked on the game and they want to get better,” David Maher, CEO of golf conglomerate Acushnet Holdings, said on the company’s second-quarter earnings call with analysts in August. “A lot of the energy is coming from avid dedicated players who are simply playing more and consistently; more juniors, more women, more younger [players], and more families.”

The number of female golfers grew 8% in 2020, the largest uptick in five years, according to NGF data. Forty-four percent of people who played a round of golf on a course in 2020 were under the age of 40, and nearly the same amount of people in their 30s played golf as those in their 60s, according to NGF data.

[JMintzer]

And 1 additional thing - as a great, old philosopher once said, "sometimes more (paragraphs) are better than less (one-liners"). And concentrating on ALWAYS rebuking only ONE poster is borderline psychotic.

Nice insult...

If you're talking about me (not that I would ever ASSume such a thing, but just in case...)

1: I rebuke plenty of other posters...

2: When certain posters continually post repetitive novellas, filled with nonsense, It make one ripe for "rebuking"...

[tophcfa]

Plus golf uses up too much land and fertilizer, which can run off and cause algae blooms. Plus golf courses eliminate many trees that are needed to keep metro areas cool and prevent excess CO2 from developing.

Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla.

[JMintzer]

Not even worth a reply

Agreed... Lest one appear to be "psychotic"...

BTW, have you noticed all of the 60+ yo "rock climbers" and "hang gliders"?

I mean they HAVE to outnumber the golfers of the same age, right?

[JMintzer]

The Developer could shut down all the golf courses and replace those 5000 acres of "green space", with housing.

Not to mention the "carbon capture" and "oxygen produced" by golf courses...

[tophcfa]

The way I understand it is that golf is NOT very popular with generations younger than the baby-boomers. They seem to prefer the more rigorous sports like soccer, rock climbing, and hang gliding.

It’s been that way forever, but then the younger generations get older and their bodies can no longer tolerate the more rigorous sports and they become golfers. One of the most common thing you will hear golfing with fellow Villagers is “ I wish I took up the sport when I was younger”.

[tophcfa]

The Developer could shut down all the golf courses and replace those 5000 acres of "green space", with housing.

Can’t build houses on golf courses designed as flood plains during heavy rain season.

[tophcfa]

Facts are usually better than hearsay….

“New participants are increasingly younger; they’re hooked on the game and they want to get better,” David Maher, CEO of golf conglomerate Acushnet Holdings, said on the company’s second-quarter earnings call with analysts in August. “A lot of the energy is coming from avid dedicated players who are simply playing more and consistently; more juniors, more women, more younger [players], and more families.”

The number of female golfers grew 8% in 2020, the largest uptick in five years, according to NGF data. Forty-four percent of people who played a round of golf on a course in 2020 were under the age of 40, and nearly the same amount of people in their 30s played golf as those in their 60s, according to NGF data.

You see that big time up north when you get away from retirement community living. You also see significant changes in the old school golfing etiquette as the younger generations brings their influence to the game. Some is for the better in my opinion, such as more relaxed dress code, but other changes seem to disrespect the integrity of the game and conditions of the courses.

[JMintzer]

Can’t build houses on golf courses designed as flood plains during heavy rain season.

There you go again... Using logic and reason...

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Did you mean to reply to me?

Here's what I said (although I probably don't have to repeat myself to someone like you....just trying to keep everybody else on the same page)

"It looks different down here but I can assure you, people living down south most definitely bought into the lifestyle in a big way. It looks different than up north but it's social, it's fun, and there is plenty to do. Stuff is fresh and new and the population is younger and ready to party! We could use more services down here though."

I mean....are you saying the population down south is older than the population up north? Because that's what it looks like you are saying. Or maybe you were replying to someone else?

Joe (aka one special type of dim)

I was replying to you, but I was saying that younger folks are moving north AND south. The south doesn't have the monopoly on younger folks. I was also saying there's lots of stuff (including partying) to do up north.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Not even worth a reply

...and yet - here you are, replying.

[Fastskiguy]

I was replying to you, but I was saying that younger folks are moving north AND south. The south doesn't have the monopoly on younger folks. I was also saying there's lots of stuff (including partying) to do up north.

^^^ You are now making a perfectly valid point that I agree with 100%. It is completely compatible with my previous comment. We are, and apparently have been, in agreement. However, I am missing the line where you said "sorry for calling you a special type of dim".

Joe

[BrianL99]

Can’t build houses on golf courses designed as flood plains during heavy rain season.

I was being facetious.

The golf courses are not "Flood Plains".

Some areas of some golf courses, are part of The Villages Stormwater Management System. An entirely different animal.

[jimjamuser]

Can’t build houses on golf courses designed as flood plains during heavy rain season.
As the atmosphere holds more water due to higher temperatures, in 30 years all of Florida will, likely become a flood plain. Then, the so-called "trolls" will need to put their clipboards in their rowboats, because golf carts are useless. Incidentally, the current US snowstorms are the result of warm air with high water content meeting the Canadian artic air.

[Papa_lecki]

TOTV needs a “This thread has gone off the rails, its time to close” button.

[golfing eagles]

...and yet - here you are, replying.

ironic, isn't it?????:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[golfing eagles]

As the atmosphere holds more water due to higher temperatures, in 30 years all of Florida will, likely become a flood plain. Then, the so-called "trolls" will need to put their clipboards in their rowboats, because golf carts are useless. Incidentally, the current US snowstorms are the result of warm air with high water content meeting the Canadian artic air.

30 years?????? Start adding zeros. You can add 2 zeros and multiply by 8, or add 3 zeros and take 70%---your choice. 30 years is NOT an option except in Fantasyland.

[jimjamuser]

It’s been that way forever, but then the younger generations get older and their bodies can no longer tolerate the more rigorous sports and they become golfers. One of the most common thing you will hear golfing with fellow Villagers is “ I wish I took up the sport when I was younger”.
I agree with that post. Golf IS a good sport for retired older people. I just wanted to point to the obvious fact that it is not so active at burning calories and strengthening the heart. To improve one's health it would be EVEN better to go outside and walk fast or slow jog on a soft surface like grass or the rubberized surfaces at the exercise machine, which also makes for a good workout. Also, those activities save you money as compared to paying golf fees. There are many other sports made for seniors that increase the heart rate faster than golf. Badminton would be one example. Water volleyball, regular volleyball, tennis, and softball, all increase the heart rate more than golf. I would personally advocate staying away from pickleball on a hard surface. Tennis can also be rough on the body when played on hard courts.

Notice the advantage of all these other sports over golf - namely that golf requires a huge infrastructure of outdoor area, grass cutting, fertilizer, and watering. All that wasted energy in maintenance and the maintenance workers are the only ones raising their heartbeat rate. Too much infrastructure money is spent for so little ATHLETIC and exercise rewards. A good yoga class would stretch the body and provide more mental and physical relaxation in a short time versus the long hours spent playing 18 holes of golf.

Personally, IF A PERSON must GOLF, THEN I think that a good COMBINATION of activities would be either a yoga class or a 1/2 hour of walking or slow jogging FOLLOWED by about 5 holes at a par 3 course. That would cut down on the waste of time and resources of regular golf while still maintaining good fitness. One can only prove the VALUE of what I have said by merely OBSERVING the stomach bulge on the majority of amateur or professional golfers - which is NOT present on the majority of tennis players.

[BrianL99]

I agree with that post. Golf IS a good sport for retired older people. I just wanted to point to the obvious fact that it is not so active at burning calories and strengthening the heart. To improve one's health it would be EVEN better to go outside and walk fast or slow jog on a soft surface like grass or the rubberized surfaces at the exercise machine, which also makes for a good workout. Also, those activities save you money as compared to paying golf fees. There are many other sports made for seniors that increase the heart rate faster than golf. Badminton would be one example. Water volleyball, regular volleyball, tennis, and softball, all increase the heart rate more than golf. I would personally advocate staying away from pickleball on a hard surface. Tennis can also be rough on the body when played on hard courts.

Notice the advantage of all these other sports over golf - namely that golf requires a huge infrastructure of outdoor area, grass cutting, fertilizer, and watering. All that wasted energy in maintenance and the maintenance workers are the only ones raising their heartbeat rate. Too much infrastructure money is spent for so little ATHLETIC and exercise rewards. A good yoga class would stretch the body and provide more mental and physical relaxation in a short time versus the long hours spent playing 18 holes of golf.

Personally, IF A PERSON must GOLF, THEN I think that a good COMBINATION of activities would be either a yoga class or a 1/2 hour of walking or slow jogging FOLLOWED by about 5 holes at a par 3 course. That would cut down on the waste of time and resources of regular golf while still maintaining good fitness. One can only prove the VALUE of what I have said by merely OBSERVING the stomach bulge on the majority of amateur or professional golfers - which is NOT present on the majority of tennis players.

I'm surprised more folks in The Villages, don't cover their heads with tin foil, to protect against intrusive thought waves. I'm going to Publix right now, to get a big roll of the "Heavy Duty" stuff!

I have a 33" waist and abhor Tennis and Yoga.

[Papa_lecki]

One can only prove the VALUE of what I have said by merely OBSERVING the stomach bulge on the majority of amateur or professional golfers - which is NOT present on the majority of tennis players.

Except for, obviously, John Daly, most PGA pros are in phenomenal shape. They realized, around mid 90s, that fitness is a differentiator. Pro golfers are tracking fitness metrics with wearables, inconceivable even 5 years ago.

[Bogie Shooter]

TOTV needs a “This thread has gone off the rails, its time to close” button.

Or maybe one poster has 33 posts! WOW!

[Stu from NYC]

30 years?????? Start adding zeros. You can add 2 zeros and multiply by 8, or add 3 zeros and take 70%---your choice. 30 years is NOT an option except in Fantasyland.

So in 29 years my house will be salable but not to people living in fantasyland who think in the next year will need a row boat to go food shopping?

[JMintzer]

The way I understand it is that golf is NOT very popular with generations younger than the baby-boomers. They seem to prefer the more rigorous sports like soccer, rock climbing, and hang gliding. Golf is from the "tea and crumpets" more docile era. Plus golf uses up too much land and fertilizer, which can run off and cause algae blooms. Plus golf courses eliminate many trees that are needed to keep metro areas cool and prevent excess CO2 from developing.

As the atmosphere holds more water due to higher temperatures, in 30 years all of Florida will, likely become a flood plain. Then, the so-called "trolls" will need to put their clipboards in their rowboats, because golf carts are useless. Incidentally, the current US snowstorms are the result of warm air with high water content meeting the Canadian artic air.

I agree with that post. Golf IS a good sport for retired older people. I just wanted to point to the obvious fact that it is not so active at burning calories and strengthening the heart. To improve one's health it would be EVEN better to go outside and walk fast or slow jog on a soft surface like grass or the rubberized surfaces at the exercise machine, which also makes for a good workout. Also, those activities save you money as compared to paying golf fees. There are many other sports made for seniors that increase the heart rate faster than golf. Badminton would be one example. Water volleyball, regular volleyball, tennis, and softball, all increase the heart rate more than golf. I would personally advocate staying away from pickleball on a hard surface. Tennis can also be rough on the body when played on hard courts.

Notice the advantage of all these other sports over golf - namely that golf requires a huge infrastructure of outdoor area, grass cutting, fertilizer, and watering. All that wasted energy in maintenance and the maintenance workers are the only ones raising their heartbeat rate. Too much infrastructure money is spent for so little ATHLETIC and exercise rewards. A good yoga class would stretch the body and provide more mental and physical relaxation in a short time versus the long hours spent playing 18 holes of golf.

Personally, IF A PERSON must GOLF, THEN I think that a good COMBINATION of activities would be either a yoga class or a 1/2 hour of walking or slow jogging FOLLOWED by about 5 holes at a par 3 course. That would cut down on the waste of time and resources of regular golf while still maintaining good fitness. One can only prove the VALUE of what I have said by merely OBSERVING the stomach bulge on the majority of amateur or professional golfers - which is NOT present on the majority of tennis players.

Let's recap, since we're all over the place...

Golf is no longer played by the generation behind the baby boom... Except that it is. And it's a good sport for older people except when it's not... It's not a good enough exercise, so yoga and/or walking must be added because, some golfers have big bellies, but no senior tennis player have them (except they do, as do pickleball players)...

Seniors should stay away from pickleball (due to it being played on hard surfaces), but regular volleyball, tennis and badminton are good (even though they are also played on hard surfaces). But rock climbing and hang gliding are good senior sports (I guess there no stress on the joints in either of those activities...)

They should also do three different activities, yoga, walking/jogging, followed by a partial round of executive golf... Why not do yoga one day, take a walk or jog another day, lift weights yet another day, and play an entire round of golf yet another day?

Isn't daily exercise better? What better way to fill your day?

But I guess it's all moot, since the whole region will be under water in 30 years...

I guess that sucks for those younger (55 year olds) people buying in the new, southern areas...

[jimjamuser]

I'm surprised more folks in The Villages, don't cover their heads with tin foil, to protect against intrusive thought waves. I'm going to Publix right now, to get a big roll of the "Heavy Duty" stuff!

I have a 33" waist and abhor Tennis and Yoga.
Great idea about the tin foil. You can "foil" away all the bad spirits. You may be in great shape with a 33" waist, but that would be a statistical N of 1 - and significantly narrower than the AVERAGE golfer.
........I don't REALLY expect anyone to quit golfing on my advice. I SIMPLY wanted to point out that there are some disadvantages (to ANY game or activity) and that there are people with different points of view.
.........Think of what I wrote as a "thought exercise".
PS.......The tin foil thing reminded me of the "Better Call Saul" series.

[jimjamuser]

Except for, obviously, John Daly, most PGA pros are in phenomenal shape. They realized, around mid 90s, that fitness is a differentiator. Pro golfers are tracking fitness metrics with wearables, inconceivable even 5 years ago.
I am sure that you are correct about the PRO golfers (amateurs, not so much). Many to nearly all Pro athletes that are top-ranked, have their own personal trainers and often multiple personal coaches.

[jimjamuser]

Or maybe one poster has 33 posts! WOW!
Sorry, if I had a life I might post less. And if I had a GREAT life, I would not even read any of this stuff. Actually myself, I would NOT care in ANY way how often another poster.......posts

[jimjamuser]

Let's recap, since we're all over the place...

Golf is no longer played by the generation behind the baby boom... Except that it is. And it's a good sport for older people except when it's not... It's not a good enough exercise, so yoga and/or walking must be added because, some golfers have big bellies, but no senior tennis player have them (except they do, as do pickleball players)...

Seniors should stay away from pickleball (due to it being played on hard surfaces), but regular volleyball, tennis and badminton are good (even though they are also played on hard surfaces). But rock climbing and hang gliding are good senior sports (I guess there no stress on the joints in either of those activities...)

They should also do three different activities, yoga, walking/jogging, followed by a partial round of executive golf... Why not do yoga one day, take a walk or jog another day, lift weights yet another day, and play an entire round of golf yet another day?

Isn't daily exercise better? What better way to fill your day?

But I guess it's all moot, since the whole region will be under water in 30 years...

I guess that sucks for those younger (55 year olds) people buying in the new, southern areas...
OK since that was so polite, I will add some of my 2 cents (as they say). One correction - volleyball and badminton are most often played on the wooden floor of a basketball court, which gives rebound spring and is easy on the legs. The most advanced tennis players often play on a green clay-like surface called Har True. I did NOT say that rock climbing and hang gliding are ideal SENIOR sports. I used those sports as examples of today's
younger generations wanting NEW sports, just like they want their OWN music, not rock and roll FOREVER. They are NOT as interested in the traditional games. They pioneered activities like rollerblading and sidewalk surfing. Question........isn't executive golf different than par 3. I really don't know.
......I believe that 30 years from today that Miami, Fl will likely be non-existent.

[Aces4]

OK since that was so polite, I will add some of my 2 cents (as they say). One correction - volleyball and badminton are most often played on the wooden floor of a basketball court, which gives rebound spring and is easy on the legs. The most advanced tennis players often play on a green clay-like surface called Har True. I did NOT say that rock climbing and hang gliding are ideal SENIOR sports. I used those sports as examples of today's
younger generations wanting NEW sports, just like they want their OWN music, not rock and roll FOREVER. They are NOT as interested in the traditional games. They pioneered activities like rollerblading and sidewalk surfing. Question........isn't executive golf different than par 3. I really don't know.
......I believe that 30 years from today that Miami, Fl will likely be non-existent.

It will still be there. But it’s name will probably be:
Ahora Es Mio.