[Wing-nut2]

I hope they keep the ban.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

What did it say?

Village Community Development Districts Signage Memo.pdf'&ql=standard

[njbchbum]

Originally Posted by Wing-nut2

I hope they keep the ban.

this issue is in cdd 1-5 - where there is no ban on for sale signs - but there is the expressed permission for same in their covenants. enforcement of same was turned over to each individual cdd by the developer years ago.

[njbchbum]

shux, bogie - nothing cme up for me will keep trying.

[justjim]

Originally Posted by njbchbum

thanks for posting, graciegirl! was wondering that there were no posts here yesterday after the meeting.

so now my wonderment is - if cdds 1-5 can choose to enforce or not enforce their covenants [and have been doing so], why did someone from district gov contact mls realtors to advise them the developer was going to exercise his right to enforce covenants - and then send homeowners with the signs a flyer about the enforcement and fines? none of the procedure[s] aeem to have been followed by the developer?

from the article gg posted, "Those supporting the signage ban said dropping enforcement would deteriorate the overall aesthetic look of the community" - i have to wonder why none of those supporters complained about realtor signs in the past!

if the reporter is correct, i guess each cdd will be able to decide for themselves at a future meeting...thus, i have to wonder whether the signs can stay in the lawns until the meeting is held! and further, what happens if the cdd never puts the issue on a meeting agenda?

i love the villages for its continuing episodes - this one seems like a cliff-hanger!

Njbchbum: This whole issue has been about as confusing as anything can get in TV. Were you at the meeting or do you know somebody who was? Did anybody give a compelling reason why the yard signs should no longer be allowed when in the past they were okay in CDD's 1-5. Has there been a "mountain" of complaints about the signs? It seems to me that the people who want them taken down would have filed a valid complaint with the CDD or CDD's at some point in time. From what I can understand, they (CDD'S) are the "enforcer" of such. I can understand that reasonable people can disagree about something but it has been my experience that the person or person's wanting a change is usually required to present a compelling reason to change a long standing precedent that has been in place for several years. Perhaps I am the one that just doesn't understand. Does the Developer have the power to change the long-standing policy on Yard Signs or does the CDD Boards have the power?? If its the Developer then why all the "fuss" and why bother with these meetings unless the Developer has not yet decided and wants input from the Community. Clear as mud!!!

[njbchbum]

justjim - only know what i have read here on totv and in the covenants and have been told by a 'participant' in the villages. i am in the same quandry as your are.

[swrinfla]

Tempest in a Teapot, methinks!

Yes, I agree that signs in yards are distasteful. I also think that there are ways around the "objectionable" signs!

In my friend's quite up-scale community near Nashville, political signs are banned, as are virtually all others. But, for sale signs are permitted - so long as they are uniform in appearance and content. No glaring, blaring push for Realtor X, no yelling for Realtor Y. Just a quiet, tasteful announcement, in same-case lettering, that this is house is being offered by Realtor Z, call ###.

The issue will eventually be resolved and the agitated folks will forget it; the dismayed folks will be happy, and we will all be able to get on with our lives!

Isn't that the best way???????????

SWR

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by njbchbum

shux, bogie - nothing cme up for me will keep trying.

try copy and paste to your browser. Or go to Village Community Development Districts
w w w.districtgov.org

[njbchbum]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

try copy and paste to your browser. Or go to Village Community Development Districts
w w w.districtgov.org

thanx - went to dist gov before and it did not show up - but it did now that you got me to try again

the material there states, "Due to the diversity of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions, it is important that you familiarize yourself with your particular set." i am just more confused with the developer's actions! if one checks their covenants and restrictions as directed to do and finds that a for sale sign IS permitted - why did the developer take the action he did? bet we will never know if it was for any reason other than to stir up a hornet's nest...and he sure succeeded at that!

[asianthree]

up north right now and you can't see the forest for the SIGNS

[jandbrare]

Thanks for posting the newspaper writeup, Gracie. I was at the meeting and have made a post regarding the signs on TOTV's. The newspaper summary is very accurate and good coverage.

[zcaveman]

Originally Posted by njbchbum

thanx - went to dist gov before and it did not show up - but it did now that you got me to try again

the material there states, "Due to the diversity of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions, it is important that you familiarize yourself with your particular set." i am just more confused with the developer's actions! if one checks their covenants and restrictions as directed to do and finds that a for sale sign IS permitted - why did the developer take the action he did? bet we will never know if it was for any reason other than to stir up a hornet's nest...and he sure succeeded at that!

If you go down to the fidth entry - Political Signage and Polling Location Activities - and click on the title the memo from Janet Tutt is pretty clear about the political signs.