[CFrance]

Originally Posted by Challenger

None of thee points would survive the first court challenge.

Challenger, do you believe the "one complaint per form" idea would not survive a legal challenge? I like that idea, as it would take a lot more work for the troll-type people who run around in a golf cart with a notepad and a desire to cause trouble.


I favor the deed restrictions totally. People should just follow what they agreed to, and we'd have no problems. As well, I'm all for the anonymous complaint system if TV is not going to police its own rules. But from time to time it does get out of hand.

[Challenger]

Originally Posted by CFrance

Challenger, do you believe the "one complaint per form" idea would not survive a legal challenge? I like that idea, as it would take a lot more work for the troll-type people who run around in a golf cart with a notepad and a desire to cause trouble.


I favor the deed restrictions totally. People should just follow what they agreed to, and we'd have no problems. As well, I'm all for the anonymous complaint system if TV is not going to police its own rules. But from time to time it does get out of hand.

Maybe that one would , although , those challenging the rule would attack it as merely a method to deter people from exercising their right to report on what, in their opinion, might be a violation. Any procedure installed would need to be reasonable.

Wonder what would happen if someone placed a Buddha in their front yard (as opposed to a cross)???

[CFrance]

Originally Posted by Challenger

Maybe that one would , although , those challenging the rule would attack it as merely a method to deter people from exercising their right to report on what, in their opinion, might be a violation. Any procedure installed would need to be reasonable.

Wonder what would happen if someone placed a Buddha in their front yard (as opposed to a cross)???

It might depend on the neighborhood. I know one where it might be accepted...

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by CFrance

Challenger, do you believe the "one complaint per form" idea would not survive a legal challenge? I like that idea, as it would take a lot more work for the troll-type people who run around in a golf cart with a notepad and a desire to cause trouble.


I favor the deed restrictions totally. People should just follow what they agreed to, and we'd have no problems. As well, I'm all for the anonymous complaint system if TV is not going to police its own rules. But from time to time it does get out of hand.

People should follow what they agreed to, yes. But not everyone does. The enforcement is not done evenly, and is complaint-driven, rather than pro-active. This results in people moving in, seeing that three neighbors on one side of their home, one on the other, and two across the street ALL have "x ornament" on their front lawn. They think it's a pretty nifty ornament, and figure - well these people have lived here for years and no one's made them move these ornaments - so obviously this rule is not enforced.

And they would be 100% correct. If you're going to have a rule, it needs to a) be enforceable and b) be enforced. If you're going to ignore either a or b then just ditch the rule. Come up with a different way of maintaining the overall look of the community.

Or invite the neighbors in the community to meet and discuss this rule, and see if they might want to adjust it for the current generation of residents.

In 1936, the speed limit anywhere in Utah was 35MPH. Anyone who moved there agreed to follow that law. Fast forward to 2019, and the speed limit is no longer 35MPH maximum in the entire state of Utah. Why? Because things changed. People and society evolved. Technology improved, safety precautions were invented.

Just because you agreed to a rule 20 or 30 years ago, doesn't mean it's a rule worth having today. That is why they have meetings and votes.

[patfla06]

[QUOTE=Mikeod;1622819]Here’s another view of the problem. Let’s say your neighborhood either likes or tolerates a yard feature that violates the deed restrictions. Someone from a different neighborhood drives in to visit or maybe just looking at landscaping ideas (very common IMO) and sees the feature. They assume it’s OK, since it’s still there. So they go ahead and put something similar in their yard. Repeat this many times per day, week, month and the problem is epidemic.

There are many residents who accepted the deed restrictions although it meant altering their desires for home and yard decor. But they accepted these restrictions to safeguard their property value and keep the community beautiful. I would ask those who think it’s fine to ignore the restrictions on lawn ornaments what other deed restrictions we can ignore and what ones should be rigidly enforced. The answers to those questions would reveal the chaos that would ensue.[/QUOTE

//////

[CFrance]

Originally Posted by Jazuela

People should follow what they agreed to, yes. But not everyone does. The enforcement is not done evenly, and is complaint-driven, rather than pro-active. This results in people moving in, seeing that three neighbors on one side of their home, one on the other, and two across the street ALL have "x ornament" on their front lawn. They think it's a pretty nifty ornament, and figure - well these people have lived here for years and no one's made them move these ornaments - so obviously this rule is not enforced.

And they would be 100% correct. If you're going to have a rule, it needs to a) be enforceable and b) be enforced. If you're going to ignore either a or b then just ditch the rule. Come up with a different way of maintaining the overall look of the community.

Or invite the neighbors in the community to meet and discuss this rule, and see if they might want to adjust it for the current generation of residents.

In 1936, the speed limit anywhere in Utah was 35MPH. Anyone who moved there agreed to follow that law. Fast forward to 2019, and the speed limit is no longer 35MPH maximum in the entire state of Utah. Why? Because things changed. People and society evolved. Technology improved, safety precautions were invented.

Just because you agreed to a rule 20 or 30 years ago, doesn't mean it's a rule worth having today. That is why they have meetings and votes.

You're talking about a state vs a developer-owned community.


To me it wouldn't matter if everyone around me is not following the rules. I agreed to them and I will follow them, because I think the rules are worthwhile. Those flaunting the rules are taking their chances. I hope they will be brought into compliance.



If something looked very bad and threatened the value of the community, I would file a complaint. But I also wish the developer family would step up and enforce its own rules. I think they don't want to spend the money, and that's too bad.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Jazuela

People should follow what they agreed to, yes. But not everyone does. The enforcement is not done evenly, and is complaint-driven, rather than pro-active. This results in people moving in, seeing that three neighbors on one side of their home, one on the other, and two across the street ALL have "x ornament" on their front lawn. They think it's a pretty nifty ornament, and figure - well these people have lived here for years and no one's made them move these ornaments - so obviously this rule is not enforced.

And they would be 100% correct. If you're going to have a rule, it needs to a) be enforceable and b) be enforced. If you're going to ignore either a or b then just ditch the rule. Come up with a different way of maintaining the overall look of the community.

Or invite the neighbors in the community to meet and discuss this rule, and see if they might want to adjust it for the current generation of residents.

In 1936, the speed limit anywhere in Utah was 35MPH. Anyone who moved there agreed to follow that law. Fast forward to 2019, and the speed limit is no longer 35MPH maximum in the entire state of Utah. Why? Because things changed. People and society evolved. Technology improved, safety precautions were invented.

Just because you agreed to a rule 20 or 30 years ago, doesn't mean it's a rule worth having today. That is why they have meetings and votes.

We have no deed restrictions challenged in our entire village. The new areas it is more widespread, as they have not been turned over to the CDD yet. AND....TheY do not have "meetings and votes". This is a CDD form of government. This is a government run by the developer and we voted on it when we bought our homes. This place is not like any place any of us lived before. No one can come here and change things. Sometimes they act on suggestions, and I think they have thought things out well, but it would be chaos and financially unfeasible for everyone to have a say in this or that. Some want not only heated pools but cooled pools in the summer. Some want lockers at the sports pools. Some want indoor pools and more dog parks and more softball fields and more pickleball courts. Some want ways to identify golf carts so they can be policed better. Some want real gates, which means we would undertake the financial burden of the streets.Some want separate walking paths from the cart paths. Some want someone watching to see that no one saves seats and some want a parking patrol. In no time if everyone got what she/he wanted the price to live here would go sky high. As it is now, it is affordable for most people and we have many different levels of earnings here. I like it like it is and it really runs well the way it is.

[CFrance]

Some things could be made better/safer/more convenient for very little money. I think Harold would have a slightly different approach than the kids.

[CWGUY]

[QUOTE=patfla06;1623538][QUOTE=Mikeod;1622819]Here’s another view of the problem. Let’s say your neighborhood either likes or tolerates a yard feature that violates the deed restrictions. Someone from a different neighborhood drives in to visit or maybe just looking at landscaping ideas (very common IMO) and sees the feature. They assume it’s OK, since it’s still there. So they go ahead and put something similar in their yard. Repeat this many times per day, week, month and the problem is epidemic.

There are many residents who accepted the deed restrictions although it meant altering their desires for home and yard decor. But they accepted these restrictions to safeguard their property value and keep the community beautiful. I would ask those who think it’s fine to ignore the restrictions on lawn ornaments what other deed restrictions we can ignore and what ones should be rigidly enforced. The answers to those questions would reveal the chaos that would ensue.


I asked that 5 days ago in post #88...... still waiting for an answer.

[Challenger]

[QUOTE=CWGUY;1623567][QUOTE=patfla06;1623538][QUOTE=Mikeod;1622819]Here’s another view of the problem. Let’s say your neighborhood either likes or tolerates a yard feature that violates the deed restrictions. Someone from a different neighborhood drives in to visit or maybe just looking at landscaping ideas (very common IMO) and sees the feature. They assume it’s OK, since it’s still there. So they go ahead and put something similar in their yard. Repeat this many times per day, week, month and the problem is epidemic.

There are many residents who accepted the deed restrictions although it meant altering their desires for home and yard decor. But they accepted these restrictions to safeguard their property value and keep the community beautiful. I would ask those who think it’s fine to ignore the restrictions on lawn ornaments what other deed restrictions we can ignore and what ones should be rigidly enforced. The answers to those questions would reveal the chaos that would ensue.


I asked that 5 days ago in post #88...... still waiting for an answer. [/QUOTE

Bingo!!!!

[VApeople]

Originally Posted by Challenger

what other deed restrictions we can ignore

Simple question with a simple answer - You can ignore all of the deed restrictions.

Of course, if there is a complaint lodged against you, you will probably have to rectify the situation or you will be forced to leave TV.

[Chellybean]

Originally Posted by VApeople

Simple question with a simple answer - You can ignore all of the deed restrictions.

Of course, if there is a complaint lodged against you, you will probably have to rectify the situation or you will be forced to leave TV.

OMG no one can force you to leave the villages they don't have that power.
Please lets not over reach.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by VApeople

Simple question with a simple answer - You can ignore all of the deed restrictions.

Of course, if there is a complaint lodged against you, you will probably have to rectify the situation or you will be forced to leave TV.

Would like to know where you got this information. In 16 years I have never heard of someone being evicted for deed violations. Or anyone forced to leave TV.

[EviesGP]

Although I like the way the VillageTinker tinks, and don't like trolls(or busy body people myself), I don't think a fee would be appropriate, I also tink that there's a difference between a simple gnome on a front yard, and thirteen pink flamingos? Like Gracie, and many others, I adore the beauty of this community, and want it to stay that way. But, I also love the "Friendliest Village" slogan, and see it every day. And I want to keep it that way, by not feeling we have to go around trolling streets and neighborhoods, to find everything that may be a violation, and upsetting people? Enough said.

[Challenger]

Originally Posted by VApeople

Simple question with a simple answer - You can ignore all of the deed restrictions.

Of course, if there is a complaint lodged against you, you will probably have to rectify the situation or you will be forced to leave TV.

Nonsense