[Velvet]

Originally Posted by VAtoFLA

Sorry Velvet, I think you're seeing something in my posts that I'm not intending. I'm asking, on the situation you describe above, with the revolving door and the cars where they are trying but both parents work. Are they residents or renters? I really couldn't tell from your post.

They are residents. And to their credit, they introduce all the 20 or so young people that come off and on, and do their best to get them to do “Villages” behavior eg no playing water polo in the neighborhood pool etc… the real difficulties exist with the STRs where there is no attempt at civilized behavior by some.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Velvet

It’s really easy to tell when they are teens and early 20’s in the neighborhood pool, when they throw peanut shells under their chairs and tables and leave a great mess behind them when the garbage can is just a couple of feet away, when they sneak away whenever they see the checker show up… and that is just at the pool. People have been reporting, and reporting and reporting.

So by definition Villager=good and not-good=not-Villager? Ha!

*I* have left the pool area when I realize I have forgotten my ID. Was I not a Villager for that part of one day?

Part of the problem seems to be is that the landlord may vet the actual renters, but then they let in their kids and their kids friends etc and if you report you are constantly at war. This is not why one retires to a basically retirement community.

So the kids..... Only renters' kids and not Villagers' kids? Is that full-time Villagers and Snowbirds' kids should be shunned as well? If weekly renters' kids are the problem does that mean that if you rent for 31 days rather than 27 days your kids are allowed in the pool? STAY OFF MY LAWN!

Perhaps one should have spent some time learning what the community was actually like before they attributed characteristics based on the word "retirement."

I think, like with other things, when people break the law, there should be fines. People should not be allowed to sneak out of the pools, for example, they should be caught and fined.

There are fines and penalties for people who break the law. Like it or not, sneaking out of a pool area is not an infraction of the Florida Statutes or Sumter County Regulations. A fine is out. Caught? Are you volunteering to put on your cross trainers and chase them down the road?

If they do not have a form of resident ID or guest pass then they should be out of the pool. If they sneak away then they are out of the pool - the system worked. If there truly are pools that have a problem with non-residents use then as I mentioned above, perhaps there needs to be a permanent ID checker at those pools. There is a PWAC meeting Monday morning, 8:30 at Seabreeze. I plan to be there and I'll be anxious to hear the response when you stand up and make the suggestion. (NOTE: I believe there is a joint AAC & PWAC meeting on 8/22 to cover amenity access)

[Velvet]

The pools and recreation areas, golf courses, as far as I know, are private properties and therefore, people who do not have passes are trespassing.

And you are trying to split hairs, it’s not whether it’s the renters’ kids or Villagers’ kids, it’s the behavior and the large numbers that is the problem.

I understand that you would like to justify some renters’ actions to promote business income but it hurts the lifestyle that people hoped to have in the Villages. Turning this place into a ghetto is not what most of us would like to see - even if it makes some landlords well off.

[Flyers999]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I think eliminating short term rentals would be adequate. Put a 1 month or 4 week minimum. It can be done.

Works for me but that would end the 4-7 day lifestyle visit. I don't see how they could allow one owner do one thing and others not be allowed.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Velvet

The pools and recreation areas, golf courses, as far as I know, are private properties and therefore, people who do not have passes are trespassing.

I understand that you would like to justify some renters’ actions to promote business income but it hurts the lifestyle that people hoped to have in the Villages. Turning this place into a ghetto is not what most of us would like to see - even if it makes some landlords well off.

That's what you understand, eh?

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Flyers999

Works for me but that would end the 4-7 day lifestyle visit. I don't see how they could allow one owner do one thing and others not be allowed.

I would think The Villages could find a way to categorize lifestyle visits as something other than a short-term rental. Perhaps as a promotion or a 1-week temporary resident.

[kbrkr]

Originally Posted by Bay Kid

Sooooooo true. It is a shame to allow a 'hotel' in residential neighborhoods.

I am considering purchasing within the next couple of months. I rented the AirBnB because I was not interested in staying in a Lifestyle Cottage down south where there are no amenities, shopping, or even trees; lol. We wanted something more centralized.

I was the Vice President in an Gated HOA community and I'm fully aware of what a detriment rentals can be to a community.

[Bay Kid]

Originally Posted by kbrkr

I am considering purchasing within the next couple of months. I rented the AirBnB because I was not interested in staying in a Lifestyle Cottage down south where there are no amenities, shopping, or even trees; lol. We wanted something more centralized.

I was the Vice President in an Gated HOA community and I'm fully aware of what a detriment rentals can be to a community.

Lucky the neighbors had you. Next week it might be families going to Disney with 5 or more kids, or groups of young people looking for a getaway. You just never know what you are going to get.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I would think The Villages could find a way to categorize lifestyle visits as something other than a short-term rental. Perhaps as a promotion or a 1-week temporary resident.

If the community as a whole adopted a "must have local, active, licensed insured property management company responsible for all rentals" that would solve the problem, since The Villages sales department has a property management section to handle all those lifestyle visits. Landlords of residences here could use one of the others in the area, like the Hometown Management company located right here in The Villages.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

If the community as a whole adopted a "must have local, active, licensed insured property management company responsible for all rentals" that would solve the problem, since The Villages sales department has a property management section to handle all those lifestyle visits. Landlords of residences here could use one of the others in the area, like the Hometown Management company located right here in The Villages.

Perhaps, but could a property manager deny renting to a family with 5 kids???? And would they????

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

If the community as a whole adopted a "must have local, active, licensed insured property management company responsible for all rentals" that would solve the problem, since The Villages sales department has a property management section to handle all those lifestyle visits. Landlords of residences here could use one of the others in the area, like the Hometown Management company located right here in The Villages.

Not a bad idea for longer term rentals. But how would this address the big problem of people renting out rooms in their home by the night while they are concurrently living there (AIR BnB type rentals)?