[sam&rog]

The developer is promoting turning over inside deed restrictions to the districts under the guise of stopping under age kids living here.

Sounds good until you realize that enforcement of short term rentals would also be included.

Airbnb website lists 1000 plus rentals under The Villages Fl.

Imagine the costs to address this with lawyer fees and court costs paid by us. Because the developer sees what is happening and wants to pawn another problem onto the districts.
Time to say no thank you.

[Shipping up to Boston]

Originally Posted by sam&rog

The developer is promoting turning over inside deed restrictions to the districts under the guise of stopping under age kids living here.

Sounds good until you realize that enforcement of short term rentals would also be included.

Airbnb website lists 1000 plus rentals under The Villages Fl.

Imagine the costs to address this with lawyer fees and court costs paid by us. Because the developer sees what is happening and wants to pawn another problem onto the districts.
Time to say no thank you.

All due respect, this one was covered extensively in a recent thread.

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by sam&rog

The developer is promoting turning over inside deed restrictions to the districts under the guise of stopping under age kids living here.

Sounds good until you realize that enforcement of short term rentals would also be included.

Airbnb website lists 1000 plus rentals under The Villages Fl.

Imagine the costs to address this with lawyer fees and court costs paid by us. Because the developer sees what is happening and wants to pawn another problem onto the districts.
Time to say no thank you.

In my view, doesn't matter. The Developer didn't enforce them and I doubt the District will either.

[rustyp]

Originally Posted by JoMar

In my view, doesn't matter. The Developer didn't enforce them and I doubt the District will either.

A good argument for leaving it with the developer. Nothing from nothing equals nothing.

[Shipping up to Boston]

Originally Posted by rustyp

A good argument for leaving it with the developer. Nothing from nothing equals nothing.

I like that
I usually say ' nothing changes if nothing changes '

[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by JoMar

In my view, doesn't matter. The Developer didn't enforce them and I doubt the District will either.

The new Florida bill mandates enforcement. Owners will have to register their homes with the local government. Two occupants per room and someone must be available 24 hours to handle complaints. The developer has the most rentals in the community. I guess we will have to wait and see how this plays out. I would vote NO until I knew all the facts. Enforcement is handled by the local governments? Or who?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

The new Florida bill mandates enforcement. Owners will have to register their homes with the local government. Two occupants per room is allowed and someone must be available 24 hours to handle complaints. The developer has the most rentals in the community. I guess we will have to wait and see how this plays out. I would vote NO until I knew all the facts. Enforcement is handled by the local governments? Or who?

The developer also owns its own property management company, and actually does a good job handling those properties.

The properties that are "problem" rentals are owned by individuals who think they don't need a property manager at all, but don't live nearby to handle anything if something goes wrong.

[dewilson58]

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

The new Florida bill mandates enforcement. Owners will have to register their homes with the local government. Two occupants per room and someone must be available 24 hours to handle complaints. The developer has the most rentals in the community. I guess we will have to wait and see how this plays out. I would vote NO until I knew all the facts. Enforcement is handled by the local governments? Or who?

Not only about rentals, internal also goes to having kids live with you, kids staing more than 30 days a year, noise complaints. Also, not sure the state bill has any teeth in it or how they will enforce.

[Stu from NYC]

The developer is not going to lose any money by doing this

[Shipping up to Boston]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

The developer is not going to lose any money by doing this

Correct
Most developers do just that ....develop.
They leave maintenance and enforcement of this type of legislation to yet another layer of local or state bureaucracy....or attorneys. Either way, if and when enacted, watch your line items very closely. Somebody has to pay for its rollout

[banjobob]

Originally Posted by sam&rog

The developer is promoting turning over inside deed restrictions to the districts under the guise of stopping under age kids living here.

Sounds good until you realize that enforcement of short term rentals would also be included.

Airbnb website lists 1000 plus rentals under The Villages Fl.

Imagine the costs to address this with lawyer fees and court costs paid by us. Because the developer sees what is happening and wants to pawn another problem onto the districts.
Time to say no thank you.

I have never heard of any inside deed restrictions ever being enforced by the developer, Does anyone know of any?

[justjim]

CDD’S have never had “police powers”to enforce anything in TV that I know about. Fore!

[bsloan1960]

Originally Posted by Shipping up to Boston

All due respect, this one was covered extensively in a recent thread.

So it is your belief that because you are aware that this subject was addressed in the past that all other members are automatically aware as well? I stop in here every day and haven't seen it. The fact that people are adding comments to this new, revisited posting on this subject is evidence that the new posting about this matter is of interest to them.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by bsloan1960

So it is your belief that because you are aware that this subject was addressed in the past that all other members are automatically aware as well? I stop in here every day and haven't seen it. The fact that people are adding comments to this new, revisited posting on this subject is evidence that the new posting about this matter is of interest to them.

With just a little bit of searching the original thread from 3/18 could have been found. It was active for five days so it's surprising you missed it.

To summarize:
- CDD4 asked whether it wold be possible for them to assist with enforcing internal deed restrictions
- The developer did not initiate this discussion
- It may be necessary to amend section 190 of the Florida Statutes before this can be done
- Children living in homes and businesses being run out of homes were the two issues CDD4 was concerned about

I suspect the agreements with each numbered CDD would need to be amended for them to accept this responsibility. If this is the case then each of the CDDs would have a choice whether to take on the additional work and any additional cost.