Florida law 509.032(7)(b) appears to prohibit any post-2011 local laws attempting to affect rentals.

You are right again. By "non English speaking day workers" he surely meant Swedish bikini models.

Thanks for the info. Most likely to protect against any discrimination against renters?

Ahhh, the unintended consequences of good intentions...

I HATE it when they move next door! They won't leave me alone! :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

The Developer is not making laws. They're making rules. It's not against the law to rent property in the Villages. And your Florida law, above, will support that. But the law doesn't prohibit owners of private property from allowing or forbidding rentals on their own property. The law can't force me to rent my property out, and the law can't prevent me from renting it if I want to. The rules of this community, however, can. It doesn't prohibit it in my part of the Villages, but it might in others. And it can be prohibited in new construction, if the Developer wanted to prohibit it.

Don't know how the statute might apply to deed restrictions on homes that are not yet built. It certainly seems to apply to any attempt to affect rentals.

On the other hand, this discussion is moot if no one attempts to enforce a restriction. If the Developer cannot or will not and if no homeowner attempts to then effectively there are no restrictions against rentals.

The statute doesn't apply to deed restrictions at all. It applies only to local governments making laws about rentals. The Developer isn't a government and the deed restrictions are made on the Developer's private property. And no - it doesn't matter, since the Developer doesn't make much effort to enforce their own rules.

That is really something for a court to decide, which isn't likely to happen anytime soon.

Restriction
 

Deed restricts running a business ftom your home where customers have to drive to your home. So, by definition, if your renters drive to your home, it is a business in violation.

I suspect renters are not customers in the sense that the deed restrictions use the term. But again, that is up to a court to decide. If you have any examples where the Villages restrictions have been upheld in that way, please share.

No offense intended gentlemen, but Mr. Bill & OrangeBlossomBaby, you have little or no understanding of real estate law, zoning and restrictive covenants.

Real Estate ownership in most countries is based on a "Bundle of Rights". Those rights can be transferred, sold or withheld, almost at will. The Developer can sell some lots with "restrictions", yet not restrict others. (Bundle of rights - Wikipedia)

The "Law" can effect real estate in general and can limit or control almost anything and can tell you, your home can't be rented or painted purple.

The "Law" in Florida regarding prohibiting regulation of STR's, applies to communities and counties, not individual land owners. Land owners selling property, can "retain" the right to restrict the use of properties they sell. They are only selling the part of the "bundle" they want to sell.

About the only right a Seller can't retain, is a "right" which offends public sensibilities (i.e., prohibiting a certain race or religion from buying or living on the property).

The Developer can reserved the right not to enforce some restrictions (within reason), but that generally doesn't prevent a 3rd Party Beneficiary from seeking to enforced those restrictions (either within the framework of the restrictive scheme or perhaps under the theory of Detrimental Reliance).

Before you go much further down the road of what's legal, what the developer can do or not do and how Florida law effects individual landowners, you should acquaint yourself with the how property rights work.

Restrictive Covenants – Everything You Need to Know

Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions | Attorneys' Title Guaranty Fund, Inc.

Can a Restrictive Covenant Be Removed From a Property? | HowStuffWorks

Restrictive Covenants: Definition, How They Work, and Examples

Land Use 101 is dismissed for the day.

I would be surprised if the covenants are EVER enforced.

First, for short term rentals - it will negatively impact market value. Many buyers rely on the STR income to either afford the house as a snow bird or buy as an investment. Less demand = lower price. Not only for developer, but for us, in the resale market.

Second, MANY people run a business out of their home. Just look at the market events at the square. The guy selling golf cart screens, the embroidery people, the sign people - probably all keep inventory at their house, do their books out of the house.

I am glad I don’t like near a STR, I think the stability of owner occupants is important, but I just don’t think it will be addressed.

Right. After each "village" is completed and the 1 year "warrenty" is up on the property/village, T V takes control of the "Village" and ARC plus the CCD has the approval and deed restriction compliance control.

So where does that leave us....

Most deed restrictions do not mention rentals at all. When businesses are mentioned in the deed restrictions, most specify maintaining an inventory or customer visits, neither of which likely apply to rentals.

The Florida law 509.032 mentions law, ordinance, or regulation but does not mention deed restriction. This likely means it would not invalidate a Villages deed restriction (but that would be up to a court to decide).

No one has yet cited a case ruling against renting in the Villages.

Thank you for doing some research and providing links but I'm still feeling pretty good about my understanding of things.

There is no HOA BUT here is a Property Owners Association. Not that it makes a difference it is not their responsibility. This matter probably fall under the CDD, using his Distric representative to see if there is any violation.