Hypothetical
 

If a thirties-age couple purchase a resale (under 55 can purchase resales) and then the couple then have a baby, what happens? Would they be forced to move? If not, could the child attend The Villages Charter School?

As new owners, would they be eligible for all of the amenities offered by TV?

They would have to move.

They have to give the baby away. For at least 11 months of the year.

Thanks for the sense of humor to start my day! :laugh:

You are assume that they will have children...if so they could keep the house and rent it and move to family area and if they work for the villages could attend charter school...but when my oldest moves here there are no worries about children.... They have a career and no children will be in the picture

Yes, they would be eligible for all the amenities as owners. Yes, they would have to move if they had a baby.

If a twenty something buys a house here she is not allowed to use the neighborhood pools.

you all should look into the question a little more. The rules in the villages are set up that most but not all owners must be over 55. The villages could not ask them to leave if they had a child. and yes they could use all the facilities according to the rules. remember there are pools for younger people also.

"They have a career and no children will be in the picture"

and I just wonder how many millions of children are born each year that were not "in the picture"!!!!!!!

btk

You are correct that The Villages could not ask them to leave if they had a child, but the child would not be allowed to live in that home for more than 30 days a year until the child turns 19 years old.

To the OP: if you and your child were living in one of the family neighborhoods adjacent to TV, your child could attend the Charter School as long as you are working for TV. There are no amenities in the family neighborhoods.

Not sure if you meant this to be read the way I read it, but just to clarify, location of one's home has absolutely nothing to do with admission to the Charter School. Employment is the only factor. (Off topic I know)

Yes they can MAKE them move if they have a child.

Correct. When the Charter School was formed back in the early 2000's, employee's children were admitted first, followed by vendor's children, followed by businesses in TV's children. However, as the school has grown to capacity, they may have eliminated some of these categories.

The children attending the school can live anywhere.

I realize that the OP had entitled the thread "Hypothetical".

Is it just a hypothetical question or is it one that really exists? I have heard on the TOTV forum of children staying with parents or grandparents on a full-time basis due to some kind of hardship. The Villages management does not have the authority to let them stay. If one family were permitted to stay, all would be permitted to stay. The deed restricted "over 55" ruling would be null and void. With the type of covenants we have in place, no children are allowed to stay permanently.

I think, and seriously hope, buggyone is correct.

What do you base this statement on? It is wrong.

I know two couples who had grandchildren living with them. They had to move.. Both couples moved with their grandchildren to the family section until their grandchildren were no longer with them.

You can not live in The Villages with children under the age of 20 years old. If you are reported, you will have to move.

Now... why would anyone want to have children living here... with no other children to play... not to mention, they would have to be hid so as not to be reported... I'm pretty sure no one would want to do that to a child.

Hypothetical qn
 

Actually, interesting question. I believe there is a federal law which mandates a certain percentage of homes in age-qualified communities such as TV may be available for sale to people under that age limit. Thus, if a pair of 30-somethings purchased, moved in and had a child the question then becomes twofold: whether that child can participate in TV amenities and where s/he would be educated if one of the parents did not work TV. I'd call the local school board, starting at the county level to figure that out.

OliversMom, your question has already been answered by Angie.

wondered when someone would pick up on that comment..at an early age my son did care about smoking or not smoking section he wanted no children section......uhhhhh in this case not going to happen...they chose their lifestyle at an early age and took a surgical action...hard to say sometimes but my son and his wife would have not made good parents, and thank god they relized that

OliversMom, that’s not quite correct. The federal law mandates 80% of the homes be occupied by at least one person 55+. However, what is done with the other 20% is completely up to the individual communities. Some 55+ communities require that 100% of all homes be occupied by at least one person 55+. That was the case with the last community I lived in. In fact, I had to turn down an offer on my home by someone who wasn’t quite 55 yet.

To the OP: You stated “under 55 can purchase resales”. Just to be clear...that is true, but it is not just resales...it is also true of new homes. However, if the percentages ever reach or come close to 20% of homes be occupied by younger people, then even resales would be affected by who could buy them, as was the case in my personal example above.

As to the hypothetical question of a minor child, that's been answered.

and if they kept their home and rented it out they could continue to use the a.menities