|
Quote:
When I told of these two stories, it was to let people know that there are times the rules are broken. TV cannot do anything if the neighborhood condones the breaking. TV can do something about ornaments in the front although some people have gotten around those rules, too (at least to an extent) and does when they notice the problem. Other rules (children, too many pets) can only be enforced when known. In a community the size of TV, I'm sure there are others who have and are breaking the rules regarding children under 19 or more than 2 pets. Personally, I feel that if the neighbors don't care, I'm going to stay out of it -- they are the ones inconvenienced. As I said, I know that in my neighborhood it would not be condoned and would be reported and I believe this is true in most neighborhoods. But I do resent you calling me a liar. I can understand the misunderstanding, but not the accusations that I would lie about the girl still living here; that I lied when she did live here. True, I did not report her living here; it was not my neighborhood and it was the choice of the neighborhood and, thus, not my business, IMO. |
"...in the neighborhood" What is the neighborhood? At what geographic point does the neighborhood end. If there was a code violation of some significance 3 doors away, would you report it? 10 doors away? 50 doors away. Or, is "The Villages" your neighborhood?
Isn't this like the old "Domino Theory" Allow a ceramic bunny on the front porch and pretty soon, we'll have abandon trucks in the front yard and goats grazing in the side yard. :jester: |
VT2TV and TH.
:thumbup: :BigApplause: |
As someone who takes pride in trying to do the right thing (and I certainly have plenty of other faults) I really should not have called REDWITCH a liar on a public forum. Regardless of what I think about her actions, liar was probably not the CORRECT word. The reason myself and others feel like it is your neighborhood is because you have intimate knowledge about the entire situation. So, although I still stand by my postings, I publicly apologize to REDWITCH for calling her a liar. I have no problems admitting when I am wrong.
|
Okay, I promise this will be my last post on this. First, could you please point out where I said I would have no problem lying. That is so not in my character that I'd love to see where I might have said it.
I watch homes all over TV. I make it a practice to get to know the neighbors -- that way they know I'm supposed to be there and also so that they can call me if something happens in between my visits. Both instances of the children living on these streets are in areas where I watch homes. If the neighbors and my homeowner were okay with things as they were, I was not about to report it, any more than I would be willing to report lawn ornaments in the front or back yard. If someone who lives near the lawn ornament placer objects, they can take the necessary steps to have the items removed. The neighbors of these children could have taken the necessary steps to stop the actions. Personally, I understand the rules about children and the logic behind them. I also understand that sometimes this rule will be broken (the grandmother who babysits her grandchild every day while mom works; the grandchildren who visit for the entire summer or a month during the summer and then come for Christmas; etc.). We all have to do what we feel is right. Regardless of how I personally feel, it would never have been right for me to turn these families in, even if they lived in my neighborhood: (1) none of my business; (2) compassion for the grandparents put in these horrible binds; (3) I didn't see the true harm since I understood it to be a temporary situation in both cases (and, so far as I know, both were). And what is considered a major violation to one person may be a minor irritation to another. Trash should not be put out days before pick up, yet it is constantly -- especially lawn clippings, which can sit out all week. Bicyclists and golf cart drivers who don't stop at stop signs is a far worse violation to me than a child living in TV. Trash can and does draw vermin. Speeders and stop sign runners frequently cause accidents. Lawn ornaments may not be my thing (they're not) but other than being an eyesore to me, they do no harm. A child staying over the time limits is not right, but sometimes circumstances cause things to happen that are totally unplanned. And, quite frankly, I'm not about to report any of these violators. (I will call 911 if I think someone is drunk and driving or driving completely recklessly, but not just speeding or running a stop light.) It is all a matter of perspective, I guess. |
Questions before committing
I need answers (premove) to TV questions. How much of your property can you enclose with a birdcage. And, if you have three dogs (Mother and 2 adult off springs) is it ever overlooked. I have 5 dogs and have found homes for two, but Mama and pups are inseparable. I believe in adherence to rules, but my heart will break if I have to leave Lola as well as her heart. We have had her since she was 6 weeks old and she is now 10. All three are poms with papers, but fixed. No more babies. Lola barks too much but we have a shock collar which ends the problem when we put it on her. We now live on 26 acres which we are selling so we can move to TV. We are 69 and 67 and don't want to completely wear ourselves out keeping up with it. If anyone has an answer to my questions. Please let me know.
DianeKKG |
Redwitch I think that you seem to be OK with rule breaking as long as it doesn't upset your understanding of the rules. I have to side with the others who wonder why you have rules if any one person can decide which rules he will follow. Everyone knows the score when they move in.
|
Diane, I think that you can keep three if you have them when you come here but when they pass over the rainbow bridge you should have no more than two.
That is my understanding. Someone will clarify this. |
Lordy, Lordy
After reading this thread, I'm blurry eyed, I'm afraid that VT2TV will find rule breakers where ever they go, that is human nature....The Villages is a great place, and I know you will love your friends and neighbors here and they will love you, but I have to say, a lot can be said for compassion and kindness to your fellow man irregardless of the rules...BBQman you have my vote!..I guess you have to decide if a rule has "wiggle" room for exceptional cases.
|
Quote:
|
I think that the "glass house" rule should apply here. If you live in one, stop throwing stones. From what I have seen here in my first month of residency, at least half of the residents live in those glass houses by breaking rules that are far more deadly than residency violations. Speeding is rampant and I have seen dozens of near accidents involving golf carts and autos because the golf cart drivers assume incorrectly that golf carts have the right of way. The best policy is to trust the system and stop trying to manipulate it. If a situation does not directly impact you, ignore it. Leave the policing to those directly and negatively impacted.
|
We all know the rules. It's our choice to keep them or not, but we should be prepared to accept the consequences of our actions if we choose to break the rules for whatever reason.
I don't always come to a complete stop at stop signs. It isn't unsafe, because I am positive no one is coming and I am clear to make my turn. If I get caught by law enforcement, I don't have a leg to stand on. I know the law and I know I broke it. I will pay the fine. I think the same principle applies to this thread. Right or wrong, when we knowingly or unknowingly break a rule, we may have to pay the price. |
Interesting that those who post here in support of certain TV residents (who flagrantly ignore their deed restrictions) say it is out of a sense of "compassion" for these people.
I would like to know where is your sense of "compassion" for the residents who move to TV and discover they are living next door to someone who offers daycare in their home..... or even worst.....has underage children residing in their home on a permanent basis. While "reckless" golf cart drivers, "inconsiderate" pet owners and "connoisseurs" of yard art may also be guilty of violating their deed restrictions, these infractions are hardly as serious as harboring an illegal resident in one's home. VT2TV, Villa2, Iandwk and the others on this thread who believe that the long term success of TV depends greatly on the desire and willingness of it's residents to accept and honor the restrictive covenant set forth by the developers of TV: "would you be mine, could you be mine, won't you please be my neighbor!" Annabelle |
.
|
nosey neighbors,,,
I have found that if my neighbors start being concerned about my business... (notice i didnt say breaking the rules) if they are worried about me,, the best cure is for me to walk around in my house in my underwear, or put on my NINJA outfit, and jump off the furniture, and act like I slaying the dragons! REALLY give them something to worry about when they are looking thru my windows with binoculars.
|
Quote:
|
I think someone might be hearing voices again... :loco:
|
Quote:
|
Wow
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
so we can brake some rules for some people some times , if we like the people who are breaking them , or if we agree that their cause is worthy, but not for others with whom we do not agree. My point is that this is a very slippery slope and can cause invalidation(if not enforced) of certain or possible all deed restrictions.
Not meant to be negative about extreme circumstances, but understanding about the ultimate course (unintended consequences)is important. Rather than ignoring the rules, there is or should be an appeals process that is fairly administrated to hear and pass on exceptions. Obviously there are some very minor issues that occur and are rectified in a short period and making a big tado would be counterproductive. |
Quote:
I agree, Challenger. I have been down "the slippery slope" in two prior subdivisions. The consequences were not nice. Among other things, property values were effected. I think we are better protected in a CDD of the magnitude of The Villages. The CDD has the wherewithal to enforce the restrictions. I am not sure an appeals process would help. Once an exception was granted it could apply to all similar cases. If I obtain an exception to raise my grandchildren here why can't everyone do the same? (Don't worry. I have no intention of raising my grandchildren.) |
[QUOTE=downeaster;353603]I agree, Challenger. I have been down "the slippery slope" in two prior subdivisions. The consequences were not nice. Among other things, property values were effected.
I too have seen nasty result from good intentioned variances from the rules. Two particular areas that were a real problem were fence and satelite dish violations . |
I understand that this is an old topic but let me add a new wrinkle to the fracus.
There is a possibility that TV was aware of the youngster at some point ( I have no info that they did) Keep in mind that TV is in the business of selling houses, With the tough market over the past few years the last thing they would want would be negative publicity. Imagine they did give the boot to Mom Mom ,Pop pop and the young child of a soldier serving in the middle east who's father had just died. How would that play out in the media. (anyone can drop a reporter a note) I can just see them on one of the morning fluff news shows. Can you imagine the fallout from senior groups, veteran groups, parent groups and so on. "Americas friendliest hometown" would take a beating publicly. If it were me faced with the choice of kicking them out. Or riding it out and no one is raising a stink about it...... Technically it was against the rules but given the choice with the potential consequences with either choice what would you do? And a side note if/when I buy there that's the neighborhood I want to be in! |
Letter vs. Spirit
It would appear that we are on the slippery slope of one of the oldest legal debates in the world. Montesquieu's masterpiece, The Spirit of the Laws is a fascinating treatise on the social, cultural and political implications of law.
A biblical reference can be found in Romans 2:29 (New American Standard Bible) 29But (A)he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and (B)circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the (C)Spirit, not by the letter; (D)and his praise is not from men, but from God. The best explanation for the debate I can find is from an author unknown in Wikipedia. The letter of the law versus the spirit of the law is an idiomatic antithesis. When one obeys the letter of the law but not the spirit, one is obeying the literal interpretation of the words (the "letter") of the law, but not the intent of those who wrote the law. Conversely, when one obeys the spirit of the law but not the letter, one is doing what the authors of the law intended, though not adhering to the literal wording. My best guess is that each of us selectively subscribes to the position that fits are comfort zone as defined by our personal values, experience and biases. That is not to say we might be for the letter of the law in some matters and for the spirit in others. Maintaining 25 mph in a 25 mph zone comes to mind. By the way.....I am predominately a spirit of the law advocate. 4thekids |
Quote:
I do know that if we have a bunch of kids living here, than it is not a retirement community...to me anyway. |
Ironic Isn't It?
I know the Villages are not exactly the liberal center of the universe. Indeed, there is a rumor that many of you (hopefully, soon to be "us") are a wee bit on the conservative side.
If this is true..I find it very interesting that everyone is OK with the concept of "Big Developer" and "Big Covanent Rules" that intrude on individual liberty. I'm not judging. Heck, I wanna join you. But - the willingness to surrender personal liberty in exchange for the greater good....well, that's a pretty lefty concept. Maybe the Villages will add a health insurance mandate. Sal'right by me. Villages Care! Please - I am not trying to offend or judge anyone. It's all OK from my perspective - we need to understand our differences and celebrate what each brings to the table (I'm liberal in that way). But - it is an interesting contradiction and one that I see as slightly ironic. Cheers! Harbor |
Quote:
I totally understand the restrictions on kids. I agree that those restrictions are important. If by magic they were lifted, the negative implications on schools, taxes, and lifestyle would be significant. However, the spirit of the restrictions addresses those issues squarely and adequately. Some Villagers have advocated the letter of the law and speak of doomsday for the Villages if a rare exception, as in the example posted, is tolerated. They infer that it puts us on an exaggerated "slippery slope" ....a lame, worn out turn of words......and erroneously suggest calamitous consequences for a single breach or false step. It conjures and deviously excites alarm that presupposes inevitable disaster. Those who use it do not recognize a vast middle ground where the community as a whole.....you know...Florida's Friendliest Hometown.....may be better served by the spirit of law. I am delighted that children are allowed (tolerated) by the covenants. I enjoy the sound of children playing and hearing their laughter. I smile when I see young families walking downtown. There is so much joy and hope in their exploration of life. I also get the "retirement" component you mention. Surely we are not in danger of the slippery slope that will overnight take our lifestyle away by exploring the middle ground or making a reasonable accommodation under exigent circumstance. I doubt the sky will fall or our lifestyle will be compromised. I am aware of the strong feelings regarding kids in paradise, therefore, I will retreat to an undisclosed bunker and await incoming. Great mind????? Nahhhhhh........just a wannabe golfer between rounds with to much time on his hands.:wave: |
I see you in your bunker.:wave:
I like kids too. No I love kids, always will. It is just when they are around I worry about them. I like being with my peers. I don't want to worry. Most of us are sensible...and kind. I guess we can debate this ad infinitum, but give an exception and you have a mess. And you do have a great mind Cabo. |
For the record, I have two kids and two grandkids, and love them all without reservation. That being said, there are people who don't like kids, or like them fine but don't want them living next door during retirement. I respect that attitude, even if I don't share it. The person who doesn't want kids living next door moves to The Villages partly because he knows that the rules don't allow his next door neighbor to have kids living there full time. By allowing exceptions to the rule, aren't we are infringing on this person's rights as a homeowner in The Villages? As far as I'm concerned, he should have the ability to force the powers that be to enforce the rules. That's JMHO.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
:agree: Great Post. Eloquently expressed thoughts. :BigApplause: |
Quote:
Isn't it funny that I don't remember being annoyed when our son cried, but went bonkers when we are around other kids crying! Now that he is 26, I'm crying because he still has his hand too close to my wallet!! Guess that is why I'm ready to be around people my own age. . . play lots of golf, and enjoy my afternoon "bourbon and branch waters", and love on his mamma!!! I think TV has and will survive an occasional infraction. I understand the rules and haven't moved there yet. I respect all the differing opinions expressed here and regret some new readers of TOTV get the wrong opinion of the residents there. No Chicken Little, the sky isn't falling! I plan to be as protective as most "frogs" are and will probably want the squares restricted to residents and card carrying guests! After all it is YOUR hometown once you move there!! It quit raining and I have to sign off and vacuum the Pro Shop. So. . . my times up and I thank you for yours!:ho: |
Quote:
:confused::confused::confused: The public is welcome in the Squares, shops, movie theatres and restaurants. Without people from surrounding communities, many business would probably end up closing. The roads are owned by the County, not by The Villages. |
Quote:
Bill :) |
Quote:
Quote:
It just bothered me to read emotions getting so out of hand to the point that new members were stating they were having second thoughts about considering TV!! |
All is forgiven, John. Now put that pointy little hat on and go sit in the corner for a while..................... :jester:
Bill :wave: |
Quote:
I think it is healthy when potential buyers question whether TV is right for them. Not everyone is comfortable with deed restrictions. I personally love them, but there are lots of "free spirits" out there who want to do their own thing. TV isn't for everyone. I know at least 20 couples and some singles who moved to TV, and then regretted their purchase. Not because of Deed Restrictions, but because of lifestyle issues. It's a small percentage of the peeps who are estatic about their decision. But TV doesn't suit everyone's needs, and potential buyers are wise to think twice. |
For every rule created there is someone that will find a way to circumvent that rule. Unless someone is being hurt or bothered I don't see a problem.
|
Not trying to derail the topic, but I thought I'd share a funny thing my son said. My first weekend down here after closing on my home, I went for a ride in the golf cart with my sister and my son (he's 21). We rode past the town square just after 9 Pm when things were winding down and passed a group of women who were late 20's to early 30's. I'll put this as nicely as possible but they were dressed like hookers. My sister said "why would they want to come here to party?" My son quickly replied "lookin for a sugar daddy!" I guess he's wise beyond his years.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:07 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by
DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.