Since you have recently joint in 2022, you may have a short track record for TV.

We Have been here since 2007, “Mark my words TV and all of Florida is and always has been a Zoo in the winter”.

This winter will not be any different than winters in the past in TV. We find the father north you go and the far south is much quieter, than the middle.

Which Florida law? The one that prohibits local governments from passing laws or the one that allows HOAs to restrict rentals? The former might apply if a local government was involved but it is not. The latter might apply if an HOA was involved but it is not. And neither applies unless rentals are being restricted which they are not.

What bill are the lawmakers working on at this time? Florida legislators are not in session at this time so they aren't working on a bill. If County or City legislators are not likely working on a bill since that would be restricted by the Florida statute.

I have no personal feelings on this other than a strong dislike of people claiming "it's a law" when it isn't and a distaste for the use of proof by emphatic assertion.

Not going to criticize you for having an opinion. But, it is for a judge to decide. Florida lawmakers are already in the process of stopping AIRbnbs. That is a fact. Nothing anyone's opinion is going to change.

Florida lawmakers are the ones who passed the law preventing local governments from stopping airbnbs. The latest law they passed (I believe in the recent session) has been criticized by local governments and concerned citizens as not doing much to help them solve their short term rental problem.

Florida lawmakers are not in session now so they are doing precious little of anything.

If it is indeed a fact then please provide a link or two to support your assertion.

A link has already been provided on this thread.

A story from 2021 about a bill that had the regulatory sections removed? That is hardly "already in the process of stopping AIRbnbs" and *that* is truly a fact.

I wonder if that wasn't passed as the current statute that actually *prohibits* regulating rentals. (EDIT: No, it is not. The "no local regulation" statute appears to be a 2011 addition)

Relief is Coming
 

The Villages aren’t the only community suffering from this. Laws are in place to heavily restrict **** and AirbNB. “If a Florida court were to apply a frequency-based test, restrictions prohibiting nonresidential use would prove to be an effective tool to regulate or prohibit Airbnb and ****. There is a risk, however, that rental property owners who do not use Airbnb or other similar businesses could become collateral damage under that interpretation.”

It will only be a matter of time till short term rentals are in the past. Frequency is the key. Keep squeaking those wheels.

Florida’s First District Court of Appeal in Bennett v. Walton County, 174 So. 3d 386 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), presented a means to potentially and significantly legally impair the Airbnb and **** business model. It takes time, but they will pass.

Is it possible that this "problem" is more apparent than real?

First, considering what I've heard and read (NOT experienced directly) the primary customer base of Airb&bs seem to be a) Disney customers; and b) college kids. Neither of those two groups, it would seem, would be using Airb&bs as anything more than a base of operations: I mean, do people really think that parents with young kids or groups of college kids down for spring break are actually going to RECREATE with and among a bunch of crochety geriatrics? I doubt it. They'll be sleeping here, but off during the day doing whatever it is they're here to do.

Second, if they ARE a nuisance--doesn't the mechanisms to report and control that already exist? Florida has noise ordinances (one passed just last year, as I recall, makes it illegal for anyone to be generating a noise that can be clearly heard over a certain distance away) and a few calls to local law should clear that up. Improper parking, disturbances, littering, whatever: seems as if the issues peeving people, if reported often enough to the appropriate authorities (Community Standards? Law?) could be enough to get the offending landlord's attention and initiate appropriate remedial action--especially if fines and/or other sanctions are imposed against said landlord.

The more I think about this, the more I think that there are people here who just want to gripe.

I'm not certain everyone is just griping. Some are collecting the facts and doing their research. I have stated I am not fully committed either way. Perhaps that is what others are debating as well.

Actually, quite easy-----don't issue guest IDs to any renter staying less than a month. They can sit in their rented Airbnb and watch TV.

That would work well until our parents/grands/siblings wanted to visit for a week, at our other homes. Although we could just get passes at our residence

Doc said “renter” not visitor. Any effort to clean up TV would be appreciated.

I think You would have to establish what the meaning of a guest pass is. Family and friends are obviously guests. Are paying customers guests? I have been to hotels who use the term guest. Not certain what the legal meaning of guest is.

////

Yes---a limit of ONE (if it is a rental property). Family/friend guests are different. The yardstick is whether or not money has exchanged hands. And the people who live next to one of these revolving door STRs know exactly where they are.

Better Solution. The number allowed is not addressed in our Deed Restrictions? Odd! They set a limit on how long a minor can stay. Guess I am going to have to carefully read the entire deed restrictions. I am guilty of not doing so.

That is absolute nonsense. The truth is exactly the opposite, as it is in most of the USA.

Most every "vacation area" in the USA is facing the same problem and time and time again, the Courts have ruled in favor of STR's (they are NOT "AirBnbs", they are Short Term Rentals).

They're a financial boondoggle for government. STR's raise property values and generate revenue ... which is why state governments all over the USA are supporting them ... just like Florida has.

Why do you think the State of Florida passed a law that PREVENTED local governments from banning STR's?

Trying to establish credibility by blatant and vociferous assertion, is part of what makes the Internet the wasteland it is. People without a clue, with little or no experience in a subject, can't wait to assert their uneducated and naive opinion and present it as fact.

Sure….wink wink

Anyone would love to move into a neighborhood full of them. Meanwhile those STRs milk off the very system that full time residents pay for.
NOT

Didnt I say it is up to the judge/court/lawmakers to decide? If a judge/lawmakers say they are legal then we abide by that. If they make a new law banning them, then we follow that. Not understanding your point, whatsoever. Anyone can file a civil lawsuit if they feel they are being wronged. Doesn't mean they are going to win and I never asserted it.

Oh, and I cant give my opinion because I don't have a clue? What makes your opinion so valid? The reason government doesn't ban STR's is because they raise property value and generate revenue? Is that a hard-core fact? No! You/we have no idea what is behind a lawmaker's decision to write a bill on STRs. Again, just let the government handle it. In the end, we will have to abide by their decision. There are lawmakers who support STRs and there are lawmakers who are trying to get them banned. FACT!

There are tall people and short people. FACT!

Some folks have experience and an understanding of certain issues, some just blow smoke and change like the wind. FACT!

You must be talking about YOUR lack of knowledge/experience/smoke blowing. Within a few minutes I can list many reasons why lawmakers may want to make a bill on STR's.
1. They don't want to police them
2. Sanitation issues
3. Want to protect homeowner's rights
4. Curtail online sales
5. make certain the sales tax collected on the rentals actually are sent to Florida
6. Public nuisance
I can go on and on.

See? None of them have a thing to do with your supposed " thorough understanding" of this issue. You/We are only guessing the motives behind lawmakers decisions.

And please, don't post about my opinions stating I have no experience and I change like the wind. Must be nice to have a "through understanding " on someone you never met. Wish I had those magical powers that "some folks have!"

Clearwater FL has a ban on STR's in residential zones of the City. Could that possibly mean that some lawmakers want to and have banned STR's? Asking, because you have "experienced" everything! I couldn't have possibly lived in Clearwater, now could I? I'm just a dummy who doesn't know anything. You better google and check! Wouldn't want you to believe us know-nothings.
You may also want to check the new ordinance in Indian Rocks Beach. But, then again, DON'T TRUST SOMEONE WHO IS NOT AS SMART AS YOU!

Once you google the truth, would that be FACT? Just asking because sometimes a moron like me needs to have her vocabulary checked.

I stated twice on this thread that I am not fully committed either way. I see both sides! ( because I have lived it) You, however, want to force me to accept your smoke blowing as truth. This is a forum, not a court of law. Let's just agree to disagree.

Exactly. This is not a Developer problem on its face. It is a Community Standards problem once the neighborhood transfers over to T V. (However, grey area because deed restrictions are written using "developer" in the language. So as with most legal battles include everyone until they are eliminated. I digress).

Villas have different Deed Restrictions than the homes relative to businesses being run out of single family residences.

Damages... it all comes down to how a homeowner or homeowners are being damaged by Developer/Community Standards NOT enforcing deed restrictions.

Reporting, how many neighbors are reporting the abnb's being run out of homes? Ie: villas - short term rentals (6 months or less) without a business license as required by Florida law.

A business license means a business is being run out of a villa which by DEED businesses are NOT allowed in Villas.

Simple google of "villa deeds restrictions the villages fl" click on county then villa neighborhood.

VCDD Deed Compliance - Sumter County

Ie Rhett Villas: USE RESTRICTION Section 2: "No business of ANY KIND shall be conducted on any residence..."
Section 3 states no "noxious" (harmful or unpleasant) activities shall be carried on or in the homes - full circle to damages.

Silently the abuses continue.

The Villages — Disney for adults?
 

What I see happening is that The Villages is slowly evolving into a vacation destination. I have rented Airbnb’s to TV, and I have friends who do the same. In fact, a friend of mine just returned home after renting for a month in TV. She and her husband enjoyed the free live entertainment at the town squares. But they are also considering buying a villa, both have recently retired. In the meantime, they’re enjoying what TV has to offer. And apparently, they aren’t the only ones.

Young adults with children - renting
 

How does one get young families to move out after 30 days? I called community standards and they said if they are renting there is a loop hole and they can’t do anything about it. Also they have a large trailer that has been there - I reported and other neighbors too- yet it is still there. Any advice?:shrug::shrug:

T V is NOT upholding restrictions. 30 days is limit for children to reside in a home. Good question... residents imho need to pull together, from there... need representation legally and politically. Here in lies the problem...

I did read an article about a board member in District 5 working against abnb's. link:

https://www.**************.com/2023/...-the-villages/

The villages will be nothing but a Holiday Inn Express in a few years nothing here is enforced a free for all of day rentals and kids on golf carts get used to it

You don’t have to live in The Villages to go to the charter school just work here. They have a pecking order of what jobs you have as to if your kids get in with working directly for the developer the highest. Working in any business that leases from the developer entitles you.

How about a little AI from ChatGPT?

No matter the law, the rule, the contract banning STR is near impossible to enforce. Best focus your thoughts and energy on things you are able to control.

There is an 80/20 standard. 80% of homes must be occupied by someone over 55. Someone needs to find a way to see if this is truly happening. One entire street in my CYV neighborhood is rented out. If the actual number of homes in TV are not OCCUPIED by someone 55+ or older, we can get the Developer for false advertising. Any unoccupied rental can be counted as not part of the 80% criteria as well as those that are occupied with no one over 55 plus. Can we demand to see the actual number?

If we can get the Developer for false advertising. Rentals would seize. Unless the Developer wants to buy back all 55+ owners homes. Would we be able to break the numbers up by district? Find one district with less than 80% who are 55+ and we got what we need.

Not true at all! Some cities in Fl already have banned/restricted STRs. Check Clearwater and Indian Rocks Beach if you do not believe it.

Kids may be on the championship golf courses because of Middleton. You don't have to be a resident to golf on those. Plus, they will probably get the discounted fees.

But they have to 14 years old, or have a letter from a Villages PGA pro certifying they are able to follow the rules and etiquette of golf.

Young family:
- If all are over 19 years of age then the argument might be that they are renting and not permanently residing and the restrictions do not prohibit that
- If all are over 19 years of age then the Developer could invoke the "hardship" provision to avoid enforcing the restrictions
- If some are younger than 19 then there does not seem to be any exception in the restrictions
- The Developer has the right but not the duty to enforce these restrictions and in this case the Developer may be choosing to not enforce them

Trailer:
- Send an email to Community Standards asking about the progress on this complaint and Cc at least one of your CDD Commissioners to get them involved
- Go to the next meeting of your CDD and stand up at the microphone and ask about the complaint to get it on the official record

In both cases you, the homeowner, has the right to take your neighbor to court to enforce the restrictions. Talk to a lawyer to see whether you actually have a case and what the chances are that a ruling would be in your favor.

The highlighted statement is completely wrong.

(i) at least 80 percent of the occupied units are occupied by at least one person who is 55 years of age or older

Unoccupied homes would not be part of the 80/20 count.

It is unclear what "occupied" means in regards to a rental. Does it mean occupied on the day someone knocked on the door to take the count? Does it mean occupied for at least a week? If the count is performed by looking at the age on the Resident IDs that have been issued for a home then it would depend on when the list of IDs was created.

Actually more homes available for sale keep the valuations of existing residences down. The only beneficiary of more new homes is the Developer. Existing home values have leveled off or decreased in recent months.

There has to be a bored Attorney here that would like to be relevant again.

When the Super Bowl was 20 minutes from our home in Minnesota, we tried to make our house a rental for one week. The city immediately contacted us said “no” you cannot rent your house out without a license or you will be fined. Of course, we took it off. Perhaps these rentals should be taxed differently?

Quite informative to read this thread. Just from the responses from various users, it becomes more and more clear which participants are neighbors (people who actually live in their home) and which are investors.

This is what I was leading to. Not everything has to be a guessfest. If we believe we are being wronged, just file a civil suit. Worst that can happen judge disagrees completely. If we win great! But judge may also set standards that must be followed. Won't know unless you try!