:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:

The clothes line issue is a state law and takes precedence over deed restrictions.

LOL, I know, I just find it funny!:a20::a20::a20::a20::a20:

You can put it out until someone complains. As someone who has lived here a long time told me, "the inside of your house is yours, the outside belongs to everyone" His point was that the density here makes it almost impossible for the houses not to impact their neighbors or the neighborhoods.

Im sure that those who wre upset will not like this post, however, all real property purchasers in TV should have known what things were prohibited in their village. Covenents and restrictions are recorded in county property records. Zoning ordinances are public documents. There should be no mystery about the "rules"

I live in Tamarind Grove and commented to my wife several months ago that many of the properties here were violating the rules and some streets were becoming "tacky". Suddenly the infractions disappeared. I wondered if someone had finally complained.

I for one , like the rules, and when I see infractions, I have from time to time regestered complaints. Especially annoying are religious signs in many yards during the holidays. Sesonal decorations are acceptable for a limited period. Signs , however. are signs and as such are violations. Slippery slopes abound.

This thread reminds me of those who get traffic ticket and then trash the police for enforcing rules.

Ignoring the rules is an offense to those of us who have moved here because such rules exist. Our rights are essentually contractural and the contract is being violated.

Fines and liens
 

If you fail to comply then the HOA can assess a fine and file a lien against your property to compel payment.

I like Challengers post
 

I really feel we should all get behind Challengers post as he has stated what we all signed and now so many want to do what ever they want.

[QUOTE=drcar;1056265]Whats valid, I guess they are if you want to say so, BUT we are talking about small, and I mean small statues, about 8 inches high. Yes I know what the rules state, BUT these people are looking for problems! One person was informed that the flat stepping stones had to be removed because they had words on them!!!![/QUO

At what point does one obey the rules??

No where in our deed papers does it say a little statue is okay

Sunshine Law
 

:girlneener:You must go to the District Office in person and file a Sunshine Law request in order to see the complaints, which are a public record.

No you do not, just asked the deed compliance office and they will send it to you! That is a fact.

Nip it in the bud.
 

One man's Garden Gnome is another man's pile of dog poop.

Just follow the restrictions in the area where you live and Code Compliance won't bother you.

I would like to put a 43' aluminum mast (not a flag pole) in my yard, but it is prohibited. Maybe I could start with a 6' mast and have it grow over time. If you don't nip it in the bud and you give me an inch, I might take a mile later.

Ask for it.
 

No problem. The point was that the poster stated that the information could not be found on the web site, and I was saying that you must ask for it.

[quote=Warren Kiefer;1056707]Clearly when he does not violate them!!! They are not hard to understand>

Does anyone find it ironic that when a handful of folks were doing aerobics in a neighborhood pool, posters were all riled up because "rules are rules." It wasn't even clear that this practice was verboten.

Now, in the case of yard ornaments, rules should be overlooked.

I don't have a dog in either fight. Just sayin...

So, to me, there are three issues:

First, the issue of deed restrictions being violated. This should be corrected by individual homeowners. You signed the paper. If you didn't like the restrictions, you should have moved further north where there are less restrictions. This is pretty black and white to me.

Next, we have the issue of a mean-spirited, petty individual complaining about every violation she sees, even in neighborhoods that do not impact her in the least. Let the neighbors deal with it. They're the ones who have to live with it. And, if you have to drive by the offender constantly, I put you in the neighbor category, so do what you feel is right.

The biggest issue is that we are forced to be tattletales if there is a problem. That's just wrong. Community Watch can easily see issues and can just as easily report same to Community Standards. It should not be our job.

Rules are meant to be bent. I would much rather look at a bronze egret then a pair of undies hanging on the line.

What rules are meant to be bent????? The choice is not egrets or undies, it's neither,

I haven't had time to read every response, but from what I understand, the couple that has this vendetta against EVERYONE had something in their yard that was complained about.

So, in essence, someone's need to tattle on this couple started this ball rolling.

Wow, this is getting like the kid's game of "Telephone".

I pretty much agree.I've never turned in my neighbors for anything mainly because I'm busy living my own life, I don't memorize regulations and codes, and I'm not consumed with my neighbors' business. No one issued me orders and binoculars.:beer3:

Thank you challenger

What rules are meant to be bent? Any stupid rule that makes me supposedly have to turn in my neighbor for minor infractions. Give me a break. Short of painting your house hot pink I don't give a good rat's behind what you do. Live and let live. I'm not going to memorize silly rules. I'd much rather just live my life.

No one has said that you need to turn anyone in.

There always seems to be a Mrs Kravitz looking to find fault! In our old area, it was a man who went out walking his dog at 5 pm with nothing better to do than see if he could find fault with someone who just may have made a minor slip in the area. He annoyed everyone and soon became the most hated person in the subdivision.

Big difference between the letter and the spirit of rules! Live and let live ... Unless it is totally outrageous in my opinion ..which may not be worth much to the Mrs Kravitz' s of the world.

By whose authority do we determine outrageous. How does it work if one puts up a small egret and a neighbor puts up a small statue of Count Dracula. They are equally in violation. Can we require that the Count has to go and the egret can stay. Strong rules, enforced uniformly serve to maintain property values for all.

At this point in this discussion I feel that I am beating a dead horse just by putting in my two cents worth. Nevertheless, here goes. First of all I have owned many houses over the years within communities both with and without restrictive covenants and have seen many of the positives and negatives which can result from each situation. I personally prefer to have such rules in place to protect my investment and will abide by them until they can be changed if it is for the good of the community as a whole. That said, there are times when the rules can be misinterpreted by the governing authorities to an extreme which can be just as bad.

Our community clearly has rules against any "yard ornaments" other than seasonal ornaments which must be removed after 30 days. I know that the OP used a small (approx. 8") ornament as an example and my question is if one 8" ornament is acceptable what happens when it becomes 6, 8 or 12? One of the latest fads for decorating yards are what I believe are called gazing balls (10-12" brightly colored reflective balls) placed as accent pieces in the flower beds. Personally I like the look but can easily see how even that could get out of hand very quickly if someone decided to place one of every color around their yard.

Although it may seem a minor infraction to some once the rules begin to be broken and even worse ignored by the governing body they are essentially worthless. One statue leads to a fence or a storage shed or perhaps a 30' short wave radio antenna (painted blue of course to match the sky)! I am exaggerating of course but you can see my point. The rules are there for a reason. Rather than acting like the rules should apply to everyone else except you accept the fact that this is what you agreed to when you signed the purchase papers and decided to move to TV.

In our particular area of The Villages the restrictive covenants were created "For the purpose of enhancing and protecting the value, attractiveness and desirability of the lots or tracts constituting such Subdivision". This same document further speaks to the enforcement of this covenants by the property owners by stating "All Owners shall have the right and duty" to prosecute violators of these covenants, conditions or restrictions. The Villages of Lake-Sumter Inc. as having the "right but not the duty to enforce ....... as though Declarant were the Owner...". Notice the differences? We as Owners have a duty to attempt to rectify violations whereas The Villages can do so if they see fit but is under no legal obligation to enforce these regulations. Although it may not seem the neighborly thing to do to turn someone in it is your duty! This does not mean you have to be rude or mean spirited in your actions but you certainly owe it to yourself and your neighbors to bring the infraction to someone's attention. Perhaps you are too shy to directly talk to the offending party and would prefer ask The Villages to do so on your behalf. Personally I see no problem with either scenario. That said, submitting 70, 80 or 90 so called violations seems to be someone going overboard trying to make his/her point.

I believe at this point I have exceeded my two cents worth and have probably used up the better part of a nickel. Thoughtful comments are welcomed. Rants will be politely ignored!

The revelation that there were at least 90 violations kind of makes the point that things can get far out of hand without strong , timely enforcement.

I agree. I have lived next to people that took tacky yard ornaments to the extreme. One thing leads to another and it gets out of hand. The only way to do it is say "none allowed". I knew that when I moved here and agreed to it.

According to one post, the complaint filer is moving. Things will then get back to "normal" for the neighborhood. I'm not a fan of lawn ornaments myself but to each his own.

I don't know, nothing says "Central Florida" to me like a flock of pink flamingos.

Yessiree Bonanza, right you are. Can't people just let it go...If you aren't living next to it, in which case feel free to report, how much does it actually impact your life? For a retired laid back livin' the good life group of people, don't they have enough happiness to stop raining on other's parades? sheesh.

I am sure this will be an unpopular position to take, but I agree. I suspect most people have not read the deed restrictions. I suspect there are many who feel that they don't need to comply because the deed restrictions shouldn't apply to them because their violation is "tasteful and how could anyone object". You can argue whether compliance should be complaint driven or whether the CDD should employ people to drive around looking for violations but that is tangential to the real issue. As in almost everything in life, it behooves you to know the rules and make sure you comply. When you do otherwise, there may be consequences that involve misunderstandings, bad feelings, conflict, and turmoil. I think it is safe to say that we are all better off without these in our lives. If you bought here, follow the rules. If you don't like the rules then either move or be prepared for conflict.

I suspect compliance officers will not taken action without a specific complaint.

Biker 1, you are correct. The compliance officers will not act without a specific complaint. They do their duty, nicely and professionally. My point to which keeps getting twisted, do we really want a community to which people drive around and file hundreds of complaints because they can! Some posters have said "if you can't take the heat". Again my point is NOT to say that the lawn ornaments are legal or tasteful but to point out the way this is being handled. Myself and my neighbors could place statues of any kind on the front porches to prove a point and that would be ok. And to have posters state that no one should judge on what is tasteful, I agree, but the compliance officers are already doing that by using their judgment about what is and is not a lawn ornament. JUST SAYING!!

Back in November when we closed on our home in St. James, we asked the ARC about two yard lights that we bought for our home in Louisiana, then took to STL and then to KC. Now, these are CONCRETE lights about 4' tall (and approx. 100lbs.) that only illuminate a small area w/ 25w lights and are on dusk to dawn timers. They are a lot nicer than the yard lights in front of all TV homes - cost about $200 each. "Nope" was the answer we got.

Then we started looking around the neighborhood; plenty of violations, but we took the high road and didn't report them, all the time thinking "Yep, our lights are going up".

Two weeks ago we sold our home our KC home. After the sale, the couple that bought it wanted to meet with me to find out how to work the heat/ac system, the security system, the sprinkler system and what I did to have the best looking yard in our neighborhood :D. When we got done, they offered $300 each for the lights; needless to say, as much as my wife loved them, they are not coming to TV. :laugh:

The moral of the story? "Live and let live". Problems have a way of taking care of themselves, even pink flamingos.

What is a Compliance Officer? Who employs and/or pays him? How many of them are there? What are their normal duties - in office taking complaints? Out on patrol? Do they wear uniforms? Do they patrol in their own vehicles, or golf carts, or those owned by the CDD they represent? Or do they represent all CDDs in TV?

Have seen many referrals to these guys in this thread, but have zero idea who they are.