[CFrance]

Originally Posted by dbussone

And why worry about that? I don't.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Right. 'Cause if I don't wake up, I won't know it, anyway.

[manaboutown]

If I were wont to run a crack house or a meth lab I would opt for the least likely neighborhood in which to conduct my illicit operation. A 55 and over community would certainly be an attractive choice IMHO.

[Packer Fan]

I am just going to say as a homeowner who rents my home, and has always had excellent renters, that you offend me. This was an OWNERS RELATIVE. This has zero to do with renters. Some people chose to invest in the villages before we can live there, and we take good care of our investment just like you do. The people who rent from me are very nice, and do not attack owner occupied people. I would say they are nicer than you and several others on this forum. My renters come back year after year and love the villages, they just do not want to own.

So basically this whole thing was an owner occupied property and somehow you want to bash renters. REALLY? Owners who rent provide opportunities to try before you buy, to enjoy without having to buy, and possibly to have people who would otherwise not have the capital to invest to enjoy the villages. We also keep your property values up by providing more demand for property.

I just think you are totally off the mark.

Originally Posted by rubicon

nkirfats: In all due respect I am not talking against renters nor did I address the legality of renting. My concern was not in the short run but in the long run... how will this community develop?

To better understand my point of view is to begin with your point of view. How do you view The Villages? Is it a retirement community for 55+ or is it someone's vacation destination?

The rationale early on for renting was to give people an opportunity to determine if they could adjust to the community............

Well its gone beyond that and if you are looking closely at the menu on this board you will find people who actually want to RENT JUST A ROOM.

there are some who continue to buy units only for rental income and they do not even live here.

clearly they are within their right to rent their homes out. clearly there are a greater percentage of decent people renting.

However, in my view it becomes problematic because homeowners are permitted to transfer their amenity
rights to renters. The Villages could have made it policy that amenity privileges could not be transferred or assigned Recall how the sales people marketed The Villages. its actually cheaper to rent here than to buy here and that dog won't hunt

There are other communities in Florida that stopped permitting renting because it was damaging their community.

Perhaps I am mistaken but you would want to believe that leaders in this community are on the look out to ensure that this community lives up to its reputation and promises to those residents that wanted to call this community home.

and yes I am an advocate for live and let live but i am also concerned as to how this community will develop and what we sow now we reap later.

[rubicon]

Originally Posted by Packer Fan

I am just going to say as a homeowner who rents my home, and has always had excellent renters, that you offend me. This was an OWNERS RELATIVE. This has zero to do with renters. Some people chose to invest in the villages before we can live there, and we take good care of our investment just like you do. The people who rent from me are very nice, and do not attack owner occupied people. I would say they are nicer than you and several others on this forum. My renters come back year after year and love the villages, they just do not want to own.

So basically this whole thing was an owner occupied property and somehow you want to bash renters. REALLY? Owners who rent provide opportunities to try before you buy, to enjoy without having to buy, and possibly to have people who would otherwise not have the capital to invest to enjoy the villages. We also keep your property values up by providing more demand for property.

I just think you are totally off the mark.

Well then Packer Fan you are going to be more offended when you learn that I am a Viking Fan. The Vikings resided in my community and a few were my neighbors.

Kidding aside I continue to post that I am not talking about PEOPLE but rather POLICY but the subject matter to some posters sets off premature fire alarms.

I continue to say I am not speaking to the LEGALITY of it but that the affect and effect ,the good and the bad it has on this community....lack of continuity of relationships, overuse of amenities, etc

Once again it depends on how one views The Villages. Is it your retirement community (home) or someone's vacation destination... And yes I understand the financial benefits of the latter. However one also has to remember that only a few reap the rewards while the vast majority suffer the consequences. Oops don't want to offend so let me change the word consequence to circumstances ( crowding.......)

There are probably as many different thoughts on this issue as there are people living here. So clearly I am not offended that you are offended. Because thoughts or opinions are not harmful. I have not marched in the streets with signage protesting renters.

I respect your point of view and am pleased that you spoke up so that the discussion circle widens and we all learn more about an issue .

The best of all to you and yours.

Personal Best Regards:

[Moderator]

This thread has veered far away from the original topic. It is now closed. If you wish to start a new thread discussing rental vs. owner occupied property, feel free to do so.

Moderator