[TJ_Woody]

Perhaps a better way to handle complaints would be:

1) Reporter must live in the same village - no outsiders reporting

2) Reporter must provide their name, address, and phone number

3) When compliance goes out, the inspector inspects BOTH properties.

[eyc234]

Originally Posted by Marathon Man

Yes, yes. It's always someone HEARD about two women. There are about 10,000 people out there wanting to take a picture of them, but it has never happened. Can't take a picture of a myth.

Ain't it amazin that two old women riding around in a golf cart, with a clip board, in a senior community where homeowners are out and about all day long and keep an eye out for suspicious activity have never been questioned, photographed or spoken to by even one of the thousands of people in the community. They must be better at disguises than Tom Hanks in Mission Impossible.

Follow the rules and your neighbors will stop reporting you.

[Joe C.]

NO.....Its not two women riding around in a golf cart......that's a rumor.

What I HAVE SEEN is Sasquatch riding around with a pen and clipboard in a souped up golf cart.

[eyc234]

Originally Posted by DeanFL

.
.
.
IMO this 'overseeing' and reporting should be open and 'legal'. Perhaps a Committee of an officially sanctioned group of residents in each CDD responsible to identify and report to CDD infractions. Allow each group to have this official responsibility. No anonymity. And the "accused" homeowner can face the "accuser".
.
.
.

Huge question why do you need to face your accuser? If you have broken the rules to which you have agreed to follow, facing your accuser means nothing other than to create animosity and retributions. Does it matter how the offender is reported? Whether there is an official reporter or not, the fact of the matter is if an investigation shows an infraction of the deed compliance rules you are guilty and are required to remedy the infraction to meet the deed compliance. Any other discussion is mute.

Originally Posted by eyc234

Huge question why do you need to face your accuser? If you have broken the rules to which you have agreed to follow, facing your accuser means nothing other than to create animosity and retributions. Does it matter how the offender is reported? Whether there is an official reporter or not, the fact of the matter is if an investigation shows an infraction of the deed compliance rules you are guilty and are required to remedy the infraction to meet the deed compliance. Any other discussion is mute.

Agree. Besides, the accuser is actually deed enforcement. The complainer just notifies deed enforcement of a possible violation. Deed enforcement checks it out and if vaild they contact the home owner. So the homeowner actually does face his/her accuser. There is no valid reason the conplainee needs to know who complained.

[Velvet]

Originally Posted by EdFNJ

My night vision camera caught 'em ..... trying to enlarge the clipboad.

Looking at this photo: the ladies look quite young, from their neckline and toned calves, to have nothing else to do. They seem to have a golf club bag with clubs in the back of the golf cart. And if they were caught by night vision, then they were driving by at night. Might be hard to see any infarctions in the dark. To me it looks like they were returning from a game of late in the day golf. But I could be wrong.

[jagdl]

This does not mean that yards can be out of compliance. The complaint can still be filed and the homeowner can still be forced into compliance. It just means you know who complained. If the trolls want to keep their vigilance they just have to put down their names. It is better than suspecting 95% of your neighbors for the trivial complaint than knowing the one who was displeased.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by jagdl

This does not mean that yards can be out of compliance. The complaint can still be filed and the homeowner can still be forced into compliance. It just means you know who complained. If the trolls want to keep their vigilance they just have to put down their names. It is better than suspecting 95% of your neighbors for the trivial complaint than knowing the one who was displeased.

But, if the purpose for having a compliance enforcement system is to increase compliance, this new method will surely result in decreasing, not increasing compliance. The exact opposite of what you are trying to achieve. It makes no sense.

[Villageswimmer]

Originally Posted by jagdl

This does not mean that yards can be out of compliance. The complaint can still be filed and the homeowner can still be forced into compliance. It just means you know who complained. If the trolls want to keep their vigilance they just have to put down their names. It is better than suspecting 95% of your neighbors for the trivial complaint than knowing the one who was displeased.

See post 72. If you’re out of compliance, who cares if you suspect “95% of your neighbors” ? If you don’t think there are nut jobs who live here that would intimidate—or worse—you’re sadly mistaken.

No one should have to put up with a neighbor who doesn’t abide by rules because they’re frightened as to how he’ll react.

The system may not be perfect, but it does protect residents. And it should.

[bellbuoy8]

We pay dearly into Community Watch.! Why can’t they report what they see, as part of them r duties?

[justjim]

Sounds like the committee who was suppose to create a better horse and managed to create a Camel. Pitting neighbor against neighbor is not a good idea IMHO. Yep, careful what you wish for.

[Spikearoni]

Originally Posted by eyc234

Huge question why do you need to face your accuser? If you have broken the rules to which you have agreed to follow, facing your accuser means nothing other than to create animosity and retributions. Does it matter how the offender is reported? Whether there is an official reporter or not, the fact of the matter is if an investigation shows an infraction of the deed compliance rules you are guilty and are required to remedy the infraction to meet the deed compliance. Any other discussion is mute.

Well said. I think the advantages of anonymous reporting outweigh the other arguments. I am concerned about the deteriorating appearance of properties here without anonymous reports. I also worry about how unfriendly The Villages will become if reports are made without the benefit of anonymity. So, now that the 3-2 decision was made, what happens next? Does anyone know?

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by CFrance

I thought this was a developer's rule. How can that be changed?

Not in district developer sold out.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Spikearoni

Well said. I think the advantages of anonymous reporting outweigh the other arguments. I am concerned about the deteriorating appearance of properties here without anonymous reports. I also worry about how unfriendly The Villages will become if reports are made without the benefit of anonymity. So, now that the 3-2 decision was made, what happens next? Does anyone know?

They could of made not so trolling? How? By putting village ID on the complaint. This clears up several concerns. You have to be villages resident, you have live in that district to file complaint. No ID number, trashed, don’t live in that district, trashed. No one but district authorities would know who turned in the complaint and villager has to live in that district due to all district don’t have the exact same rules.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by bellbuoy8

We pay dearly into Community Watch.! Why can’t they report what they see, as part of them r duties?

Each district have some differences in rules. IMO only it will work is have to be villager and living i. That district, name don’t have to be revealed with village ID number and not public information.