It’s why we pay absurd amount taxes and get little in return

They ARE offered shelter----they REFUSE
And feel free to offer them "comfort"----somewhere else

You don't rid a community of a herd of feral cats by feeding them.

All this over one homeless dude...

If only it were just one

Offer them a room and a Guest Pass in your house. They'll take it.
Not sure about feeding them, but I'd lock the drinks cabinet.

I'd rather offer them a guest pass to San Francisco, and give them a drink cabinet as a roadie

Great idea, bus them to localities where there are more kindred spirits, a more open and welcoming environment, make everyone happy,same obvious logic applies to illegal aliens.

Where they go is up to them, unless they are on your property, you may not like the decisions someone else make about who they allow on their property but that is their choice just as the "homeless" make decisions on how and where they live, I have property rights they have freedom of movement, I will not interfere with their rights they have no right to interfere with my rights,, what's your complaint??

EXACTLY!!!!

That's not to say homelessness is a great way of life, that it isn't a problem, and that shuffling them off elsewhere is a solution.
But.......while we as a society figure out what to do, let's figure it out ELSEWHERE. I wonder how long the illegal aliens were allowed to stay at Marth's Vineyard. Would the homeless be welcome in Key Biscayne or get to stay there very long???? How about Hyannisport? Beverly Hills?

Martha's Vineyard would not have the 50 or so Venezuelan illegals flown there from San Antonio, TX and ASAP shipped them to Joint Base Cape Cod. lol

My point exactly. I like to think of The Villages as closer to Martha's Vineyard than Haight-Ashbury

Yes. The next spot. Do you know where that next spot will be? This all stems from the mentality of "I don't care where they go, as long as they leave where they are."

That is a common thread, in this thread. They just want them gone from Location1. They don't care where Location 2 is.

And my argument is that it's a really really myopic perception that leads them to this opinion.

No, they won't be going to Portland. They can't afford it. If they could afford the trip to Portland they'd be living in a rented apartment right here, and not be homeless.

They will go wherever their feet can carry them. In Location 1, and even at the local police department where they're let out of jail and told to seek residency elsewhere, there is no mass transit. There's no Greyhound, there's no city bus, there's no airport, there's no shuttle. They don't have their own cars.

They will be staying in the area, whether they're in Location 1 or Location 2, or Locations 5-27.

They'll go somewhere local, stay a few days til they're kicked out, and move to ANOTHER somewhere local.

As long as people continue to insist that they don't care where they are, as long as it's not "here." - the homeless will continue to do that. At some point in time, that "Location X" will be in your neighborhood. Right now they're in the Chitty Chatty area. Next, they'll be in Fenny. After that, maybe they'll move northeast and end up in the Rohan area. Could be this time next year they'll be hanging out under the water oaks at Lopez Legacy CC.

And that's all because people "don't care where they go, as long as it isn't here." I care where they go. I don't want them in MY neighborhood. I'm willing to help, in my limited budget way, to get them some SPECIFIC place where they can be safe, not a nuisance to anywhere else, with the ability to shower, find clothing, food, shelter, SAFETY (remember a lot of these homeless are stark raving bonkers - if you were one of the unfortunate sane people who ended up on the streets, would YOU want to shelter with the dangerous addicts? Or would you rather take your chances in the woods?), and resources to get themselves back up on their feet and contributing to society again, getting jobs, paying rent, buying things with earned money, and thus improving the economy.

Even converting one of the older motels in the general area into some kind of halfway home, with a social worker on premises, would be better than forcing them into shelters or to some wooded area down the road from where they were kicked out.

The problem with providing the homeless with a nice shelter or hotel room, and food, etc., is that it will attract more homeless people to come here. They may sleep in the shelter, but they will be roaming the streets during the day. This would cause a lot of people who came here for a quiet retirement to feel uncomfortable and unsafe. If that situation were to happen in The Villages, I, for one, would move somewhere else. I have a lot of options as to where I can live. But, I am not in favor of making The Villages area a homeless friendly place.

While I applaud your empathy for these people, I still think The Villages cannot be the place where society figures out how to handle the problem. By doing so it would create a Mecca for the homeless. Personally, I am in favor of dumping them on the doorstep of those who created the problem, but naturally I cannot state who they are on this forum. I also think that as a group they are a LOT more mobile than you think----Many migrate north-south with the seasons. Just think how many gathered in Denver or Portland with changes in the marijuana laws.

I am not referring to those who are temporarily homeless, had jobs that they lost, and are looking to find another and re-enter normal society. I am referring to the hardcore professionally homeless who embrace their lifestyle. And the last thing we need here are a gaggle of social workers, do-gooders, and other assorted bleeding hearts.

Maybe I missed more than one being reported?

Certainly no evidence of an encampment as sensationalized by the OP.

I saw law enforcement at the bridge two days later and no reports since.