[Escape Artist]

Originally Posted by oldtimes

Then The Villages should not be advertised as an age restricted over 55 retirement community because the developer is not making a good faith effort to provide housing for elderly persons. They are throwing up houses as quickly as possible and selling them to anyone who has the money. The deed restrictions are just a joke, why have them at all?

Yes! Thank you! I’ve been saying this exact thing in the different threads related to this topic. I was shocked when I found out a person I know purchased a home in TV even though he’s in his early 40’s. It’s a investment, perhaps a place to live someday and a way to make money in the meantime. If a few people do this, no biggie, but it’s become an epidemic in TV and that’s the problem. TV turns a blind eye to actions that are strictly profit-driven and does not adhere to its own tenets and by-laws.

[Escape Artist]

Originally Posted by mntlblok

Fascinating! Those silly under 55's let us roll up $30 trillion of debt on their backs, too. :-)

Post -1995, you still could not buy a home in an age restricted senior community using a VA loan or any other government backed loan because the restriction was viewed as age discrimination. It happened to my father who bought a home in Del Webb/Sun City.

[margaretmattson]

M

Originally Posted by Escape Artist

Yes! Thank you! I’ve been saying this exact thing in the different threads related to this topic. I was shocked when I found out a person I know purchased a home in TV even though he’s in his early 40’s. It’s a investment, perhaps a place to live someday and a way to make money in the meantime. If a few people do this, no biggie, but it’s become an epidemic in TV and that’s the problem. TV turns a blind eye to actions that are strictly profit-driven and does not adhere to its own tenets and by-laws.

Good to see another Villager with eyes wide open. I found a real estate attorney who questions your/ours issues and is willing to work with me provided I gather the requested information. Just in a preliminary phase right now.
Florida law states there are criterias that must be maintained at ALL TIMES to be considered a 55+ community. Not certain AT ALL TIMES is being met here.

[Pairadocs]

Originally Posted by oldtimes

I have looked into this exhaustively and there is pretty much nothing we can do as long as the developer chooses to ignore it. Until something horrible happens that negatively affects sales it will continue. At some point if it becomes uncomfortable enough we will probably move into a community that does enforce the restrictions.

Not saying we are moving, but has never been a consideration until the last 12-18 mos. Always had a couple "snow bird" neighbors, looked forward to their arrival, and always kept in touch over the summer months in case any of them needed one of us in the neighborhood to do something or check something for them. But THIS, this in and out in and out, with 4, 5, and even SIX cars and 3 golf carts AND a garage that when opened is backed to the door edge. Most in neighborhood are beginning to think there is a business being run out of the 2 car garage, and the AB&B is a separate business in the home. Drives blocked constantly, trucks coming and going bringing things, furniture, golf carts, etc. all the time. Have been corresponding with relatives who retired in another state, also a golf course community. When the AB&B craze began, they had no idea how it was going to deteriorate their "senior" community, which is now a party community, and their property values have plummeted, and I do mean the bottom fell out. They are devastated, and stuck ! Made us do some serious thinking. Weill everything from the "historic" side to Brownwood gradually become more short term rentals with no restrictions ? Will this fuel sales in the newest areas ? Has us thinking enough that we have gone on two weekend trips now to look at options before things get worse. In this "designer" neighborhood, not long ago advertised as "very desirable location between SS and LSL, a home sold within 14 days ! Now there are 3 lovely large designers that have been on the market since early spring, and 2 more people are leaving permanently before fall. Very unsettling. While some people do not mind the nightly rental thing, as they state on here often, we've found many more DO object but don't know what to do except move ? It's a shame. MANY communities have been hit with this, it's a shame we can't pass some of the restrictions other communities have found work !

[Pairadocs]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

Not necessarily so. I found a Florida law that requires all vacation rentals which are rented out more than three times a year must have a Florida license.

Also, I found information that a bill was voted on in the Florida Government in 2021 regarding HOA ability to ban vacation rentals. The bill was passed by a large margin. I just can't seem to find more information..

Anyone who is truly bothered by this please read Florida laws on Air BNBs and vacation rentals. I think together, we may find something. The developer, at the very least, would have to follow Florida Law.

Just asking... could that be the reason the Villages is very proud to advertise: NO HOA fees ? Since there is no HOA, could that exempt them from the Florida laws ? If so, that would explain why we know people in other communities where this whole short term thing was stopped in it's tracks when it started to be disruptive to the "intended sense of community" the development was built to create. If you read the Orlando paper and other papers, you've probably seen the effective actions various HOA's have taken to stop nightly and other short term rentals, stop the devaluation of their property, etc. Made me wonder, perhaps it's the lack of an HOA that allows this and keeps the developers "safe" ? Perhaps the legal eagles out there know ?

[Pairadocs]

omission

Originally Posted by oldtimes

Then The Villages should not be advertised as an age restricted over 55 retirement community because the developer is not making a good faith effort to provide housing for elderly persons. They are throwing up houses as quickly as possible and selling them to anyone who has the money. The deed restrictions are just a joke, why have them at all?

Why have them at all ? No way to know for sure, but, perhaps it's just another piece in the jig-saw puzzle of "gates and gate attendants", passes to enter the "gates" at $50 each (don't know the present cost, but when we built, at closing you were required to purchase TWO passes, regardless of only having one auto, regardless if only one person, etc. No exceptions, no pointing out that a card was not needed to enter public roads ! ? Also part of the puzzle, country clubs where the advertising says, everyone is a member, when actually they are public restaurants where anyone can dine, and where anyone can golf as long as they pay. Not saying any of this is "bad", but many MANY people just seem to have the illusion that this is a very private, every exclusive, enclave ! ? It does not take long to find another posting from a frustrated resident who does not understand why the development is "over run" with "outsiders" (seemingly those who do not live IN one of he villages) are doing here at the squares, in the country clubs, etc. ! ?

I don't remember what well know entrepreneur said: You SELL the SIZZLE, not the steak".

[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by Pairadocs

omission

Why have them at all ? No way to know for sure, but, perhaps it's just another piece in the jig-saw puzzle of "gates and gate attendants", passes to enter the "gates" at $50 each (don't know the present cost, but when we built, at closing you were required to purchase TWO passes, regardless of only having one auto, regardless if only one person, etc. No exceptions, no pointing out that a card was not needed to enter public roads ! ? Also part of the puzzle, is country clubs where the advertising says, everyone is a member, when actually they are public restaurants where anyone can dine, and where anyone can golf as long as they pay. Not saying any of this is "bad", but many MANY people just seem to have the illusion that this is a very private, exclusive, enclave !? It does not take long to find another posting from a frustrated resident who does not understand why the development is "overrun" with "outsiders" (seemingly those who do not live IN one of the villages) are doing here at the squares, in the country clubs, etc. !?

I don't remember what well know entrepreneur said: You SELL the SIZZLE, not the steak".

Don't forget the lack of medical services, overcrowded, and traffic issues. Ugh! Years ago, this place was a beautiful and quiet place to retire. Now it is a haven for wannabes who can't wait until they have reached the age of 55. Eastport is going to bring the under-age in by droves.

[Pairadocs]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

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.

So,just asking for the TRUTH so I am not naive as to why the sates of Florida, and all others desire more short term rental property in (once ?) stable neighborhoods and community developments ? Every time a property in the Villages is rented, for a night, or a weekend, does the STATE collect a tax from the land lord ? What about the county ? Do land lords here have to pay a tax to the county on each night's transaction, much like a motel, which actually, they are ! ? If the State and the county are making money on every night's rental, plus the land lord pays property taxes of course, so that would explain things a bit more !

[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by Pairadocs

So,just asking for the TRUTH so I am not naive as to why the sates of Florida, and all others desire more short term rental property in (once ?) stable neighborhoods and community developments ? Every time a property in the Villages is rented, for a night, or a weekend, does the STATE collect a tax from the land lord ? What about the county ? Do land lords here have to pay a tax to the county on each night's transaction, much like a motel, which actually, they are ! ? If the State and the county are making money on every night's rental, plus the land lord pays property taxes of course, so that would explain things a bit more !

The state of Florida did not start STR's in residential homes. The owners of the homes did! No reason for Florida to WANT strs to continue. The state courts vote in their favor because we live in a free-enterprise country.

Some lawmakers do not want them to continue. They have stated policing them is costly. Sanitation is a problem. Safety and human trafficking is a concern. Owners do not obtain proper licenses, and more. All in all, they believe Strs cost the state money.

It is an issue that will be addressed many times by lawmakers. If STR's cannot be eliminated, new laws can be made to address the problems they create. Proposing additional taxes on STRs is also on the table. STR owners should pay for the cost these "residential motels" are bringing to the state.

If you are truly concerned, please contact our state representatives. Be proactive and try to find solutions.

[Papa_lecki]

The developer isn’t the way to solve STR.
The local government is. Look at Coronado California. They banned STR and they monitor it very closely, and levy large fines - and there are no STR on the island.
The city of Wildwood or Leesburg could ban STR.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Pairadocs

So,just asking for the TRUTH so I am not naive as to why the sates of Florida, and all others desire more short term rental property in (once ?) stable neighborhoods and community developments ? Every time a property in the Villages is rented, for a night, or a weekend, does the STATE collect a tax from the land lord ? What about the county ? Do land lords here have to pay a tax to the county on each night's transaction, much like a motel, which actually, they are ! ? If the State and the county are making money on every night's rental, plus the land lord pays property taxes of course, so that would explain things a bit more !

Yes. Yes. Yes.

STR's are taxed similar to hotel rooms. They pay Sales Tax and Local Option Transient Rental Taxes.

https://floridarevenue.com/Forms_lib...t/gt800034.pdf

One of the more obvious reasons STR's are supported by most state governments, is their overall effect on the economy. Statistics say that vacationers spend more money locally, than residents do. Which means STR's bring in more money to local businesses, which in turn provides jobs and increases tax revenue.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Papa_lecki

The developer isn’t the way to solve STR.
The local government is. Look at Coronado California. They banned STR and they monitor it very closely, and levy large fines - and there are no STR on the island.
The city of Wildwood or Leesburg could ban STR.

They lost that opportunity 12 years ago

Florida Statute 509.032(7)(b)

 A local law, ordinance, or regulation may not prohibit vacation rentals or regulate the duration or frequency of rental of vacation rentals. This paragraph does not apply to any local law, ordinance, or regulation adopted on or before June 1, 2011.

[Normal]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

Don't forget the lack of medical services, overcrowded, and traffic issues. Ugh! Years ago, this place was a beautiful and quiet place to retire. Now it is a haven for wannabes who can't wait until they have reached the age of 55. Eastport is going to bring the under-age in by droves.

Not Eastport, Eastport is slated as over 55.

[Normal]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

They lost that opportunity 12 years ago

Florida Statute 509.032(7)(b)

 A local law, ordinance, or regulation may not prohibit vacation rentals or regulate the duration or frequency of rental of vacation rentals. This paragraph does not apply to any local law, ordinance, or regulation adopted on or before June 1, 2011.

Orlando follows the law, BUT in 2022 really hamstrung the STR industry and the problems it presented.

It is perfectly legal to : Among the strictest in the state, the city of Orlando – home to Walt Disney World and numerous other attractions – only allows hosted STRs, meaning those in which the host resides on-site, and hosts can only rent out half of the bedrooms in the home. All properties are subject to inspection before approval.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Normal

Orlando follows the law, BUT in 2022 really hamstrung the STR industry and the problems it presented.

It is perfectly legal to : Among the strictest in the state, the city of Orlando – home to Walt Disney World and numerous other attractions – only allows hosted STRs, meaning those in which the host resides on-site, and hosts can only rent out half of the bedrooms in the home. All properties are subject to inspection before approval.

Interesting. Thanks for finding this. I wonder if it has been challenged in court yet.