Or it could be an urban legend.

They did seem to be sure this is true though for whatever it is worth.

So it's ok for backyard sheds and 12 year olds living in The Villages as long as not in your neighborhood?

Nevermind, I see your approving arguments on this in previous posts.

I've seen them more than once. I don't stop to take a pic because I really don't care whether you believe it or not. I wouldn't be hell bent on telling everybody they don't exist unless I was the one with the clipboard.

.
.
.
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".
.
.
.

Those two women were reported to be working south of 44, they must rent a golf car to make their weekly rounds down here or maybe there are 4 of them. They gotta be getting pretty old by now, maybe they're training new recruits for the southern villages.

According to my florist a group of contractors have gotten together to offer a reward for people making these complaints figuring it will generate extra jobs for them.

How is that for a conspiracy theory?

It's been interesting to follow the various threads on this issue. While I hope our eventual home will comply with all of the required deed restrictions (after all, we will have agreed to doing so when we sign the papers) if it doesn't I would have no problem being told so. As far as who is reporting me, I couldn't care less as I'm either in compliance, or I'm not. Even the police use anonymous tips, to minimize the potential of retribution or payback, and I would think the same reasoning would apply to those reporting a lack of compliance. As I understand it, the non-compliance has to be investigated by a TV representative before action can be taken, so what is the purpose of demanding to know the person who reported it? "Facing your accuser" doesn't apply in this case, since the actual accuser will be the TV rep after they've investigated and I'll know who that is when they contact me.

The reason for crime stoppers anonymous is that it is harder to take retribution. Why would you want to intimidate someone who tries to uphold the rules? If their reports are inaccurate nothing is going to happen anyways.

If the anonymous reporting stops I would like it to be replaced by paid regular inspectors to enforce the deed restrictions that we all accepted. There should be a referendum held on this topic. Let us see what the majority of the home owners want.

I would not like to see TV turn into a trailer park.

Well since the genie is now out of the bottle, here are my 2 cents: This is a proposal to LIMIT the complaints to only those who live in the vicinity of the offense while still maintaining an anonymous system. I am sure this suggestion can be improved, but I think it is a start.

The CDDs through the VCDD would use this new procedure.

1. Anyone desiring to file a written, but anonymous complaint would be required to get a form from the VCDD (either online on at the office). Phoned in complaints will no longer be accepted.

2. The complainer would fill out the form, which would include the nature of the complaint, the location of the infraction, and whether it is a serious infraction. Serious infractions would involve, buildings, water flow/drainage, infraction of build lines, permits, etc. Minor infractions would typically be signs, lawn ornaments, pink flamingos, etc.

3. The completed form would need to presented in person, with complainer’s village photo ID to the VCDD. The reason for this is that going forward, only people living in the same village would be allowed to file complaints in that village.

4. There will be a charge to be paid for each complaint filed, cash only. My thought, if the fee is high enough, it will limit the number of complaints, and only the more serious ones will actually be filed.

5. If the review board finds the complaint to be valid, then the existing procedures will be used to get the property into compliance.

This is being present for discussion, please be kind with comments, thank you.

And I’d like to see the charge to file financially compensated or even rewarded as you would have to do if you hire people as inspectors. Otherwise you are punishing the person who is trying to do the right thing!

Nuisance and unwarranted claims are a different thing completely. If the claim is unwarranted then the person filing it should be charged for the time wasted by officials. There has to be a way of discouraging them.

I don't see how the proposed new rules will improve anything. It will just allow more people to violate the rules and get away with it. If I have a violation, I'll fix it. No problem.

If the complainer pays a fee to file the complaint, I think the VCDD is legally obligated to correct bona fide violations, or they are accepting money under false pretense. Why doesn't the violator pay the fee?

There are pictures out there, most were picked up by outside cameras. More than one resident took cell phone pics as they would do drive by in multiple neighborhoods, with more than 50 complaints in a week. The 90 yo veteran that had to change landscape that had been there many years was a very sad story.

When we first moved here I thought Community Watch would report violations, or did I just dream that?

And the always "it must be you comment". Because after all, we need to try to silence those that apply fact and logic.

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




https://i.postimg.cc/4yfh4RQs/ladies.jpg