Misdirected anger - trampoline in front yard?
 

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/fo...d+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:

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.

bingo!!!!

What harm are they doing?

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

Witch hunt. Now that is entertainment.

I have a trampoline on my front porch.

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.

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.

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

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

:1rotfl:

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.

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

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

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

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?

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.

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?

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?

I wouldn’t report little white crosses, but. . .
 

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.

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?