///

What area did the Developer take the time to change the deed restriction? Interesting.

District 12, unit 20

The Law Verbatim
 

Florida state law does not allow local governments to ban short-term rentals entirely or regulate the length of stays or their frequency, but local governments may pass rules to control negative effects of vacation rentals. The state law restricting local authority over vacation rentals was originally passed in 2011, and local short-term rental laws passed before June 1, 2011, are still valid.

Furthermore, The Villages residential neighborhoods CAN restrict AirBnBs if they are paying amenities such as an HOA. The amenity fees is key to classification as an HOA. In other words, if you pay to live there you can do something about it, but only through a vote. In such case, the District would need to vote on the issue and formalize it through minute etc and give residents a 30 day notice. Anyone wishing to appeal can do so.

NO. Being part of an HOA is key to classification as an HOA. There is no HOA agreement for the homes in the Villages.

The Villages operates as multiple Section 190 Community Development Districts. An HOA is a section 720 entity. Completely different things.

A few have sold their homes and have left in my area because of rentals. All bought villas and found approx 25% of them were used for rental income. The owners were Villagers and asked them to keep an eye on their properties and would call and ask for favors. That did not go over well! Why would a homeowner want to keep an eye on rental homes? Why should they be responsible for the clean up? And why would a Village landlord expect them to do so? Some just packed up and moved North.

I am not familiar with the Fenney/MarshBend area. Is there a reason the Developer would prohibit rentals and then change the deed restriction to allow?

Litigated
 

We shall see during litigating I’m sure.

Meanwhile, back at your ranch and mine. Also CCDs CAN regulate amenities (I.e ban non residents or set rules for amenities), CAN regulate residential requirements (ie. resident must be in home if guests are present) and CAN regulate hours for visitors.

There is no doubt on these points! They are CDDs.

I have no insight into the reasoning of the Developer.

Exactly! And neither does anyone else posting on this thread.

A lot of people have posted something to the effect that "the greedy developer will never do anything to curtail STRs because it will hurt sales". I have to disagree with that reasoning, because:

There are about 70,000 homes in TV and growing, how many are rented out and how many were bought as investment property for the sole purpose of renting them out? And of them, how many are STRs? The only number I saw thrown out here is about 800 listings for rentals in TV, which would be about 1%. So, let's be generous and call it 3-4%. Do we really think that savvy businesspeople like the Morse family will cater their business to 3-4% while disgruntling the vast majority? Do they want their core business of a 55+ "friendly" retirement community to become a flop house haven? I don't think so. Besides, they have absolutely no problem selling everything they build without selling to slumlords. And why would they spend a ton of money on the new schools if they want STRs? My suspicion is that either STRs are a problem that is evolving and the developer hasn't addressed yet, or they have already had their lawyers look at it and are not ready to get involved yet.

In fairness, his response was to a post in which the Developer changed the deed restrictions. In the Fenney area, the deed restrictions stated no rentals allowed. They were then crossed out, and rentals are permitted.

And yet my response was in general to the whole thread. No idea what happened in Fenney. Certainly I do see a problem with 2 "neighbors"---one a snowbird who rents out for a minimum of 1 month when they are not here, and the other who bought an investment to uses as a STR-----the "no rental" restriction would have to be a lot more specific

But, the Developer made a decision to change a deed restriction in Fenney that prohibited rental properties. He now allows them. Either he changed the deed restriction to have consistent rules throughout the Villages or he wants and believes in rentals.

What is a CCD?

If you're talking CDD's, you're 1/2 right. They can manage amenities and make rules regarding their use. There's a cloud of doubt hanging over your other assertions, that would rival the cloud from the Canadian forest fires.

They have no zoning power and it would be a gigantic leap for them to try to exercise any control over individual homes, other than as they relate to the infrastructure.

Folks keep confusing TV CDD's with local governments. CDD's only function as a local government, with respect to infrastructure. Lady Lake, Oxford and the towns that make up TV, still maintain jurisdiction over the homes/land within their town borders.

Community Development Districts – What you should know! | CFM Community Development District

Community Development Districts in Florida - Cobb & Gonzalez, P.A.

Interesting to know but has nothing to do with the post you responded to.

The post said: CDD can regulate amenities, make certain homeowners are present when there are guests, and set hours for guests. What in his statement has to do with local government and zoning?

The post said:

I don't have a Master's Degree in Political Science like some folks on here, but I do understand Zoning and Land Use fairly well. I also know that CDD"s have no zoning powers.

Perhaps if you read Post #116 & Post #118 and then acquaint yourself with Euclid v Ambler Realty Co., you'll see the nexus.

Not interested in reading Euclid v Amber Realty Co. Why? it has no relevance to this thread nor do your posts #116 and #118.

f you understand zoning and land use fairly well then answer the question. What does controlling use of amenities, requiring a homeowner to be present when there are guests, and setting hours for guests have to do with zoning and land use?

Let me help you out. Nothing! But, I get it! You just want to confuse the readers on this thread. Yet, AGAIN. Perhaps, you are an STR owner? Why not go back to the gun owner facts you input into this thread? At least that irrelevant information was a little more interesting.

What does it mean to set hours for guests? Are you asserting that the CDD has the authority to literally roll up the streets and force non-residents out of the area?

The requirement that a homeowner be present was based on the zoning of where the home was located.

CDDs can control amenities though in our case that would be VCCDD and SLCDD rather than our numbered CDDs. CDDs do not have control over zoning or how you use your home.

The Developer *might* have some control with their ability to amend the deed restrictions. Still, there must be some limitation to what those amendments can be.

In the past three years, my CYV neighborhood went from zero rentals on my street to 10. I am constantly bombarded by investors who want to purchase my villa. I live walking distance to a square and they see potential for high rent. When Eastport is built, I think investors are going to try and snatch up as many villas as they can.

Interesting

Cater to the 3-4 percent? Probably not. But, it is confusing why the Developer changed the deed restrictions in Fenney. At first, the deed restrictions prohibited rentals and now they are permitted.

Asking the more permanent residents to let them know if the renters are causing problems for the neighbors seems like a responsible thing to do.

Asking for favors goes too far - there are management companies and handymen for things like that.

Asking neighbors to clean up? That sounds like grounds for the neighbor to file a complaint with Community Standards. Not on the grounds that the they were asked but on the grounds that the property was not being taken care of by the owner.

So the data shows 1%. We multiply that by 3 or 4 "to be generous," yet the claim (not necessarily by you) is that the villages is becoming overrun with STR's to the point that our lifestyle is being completely ruined. No wonder I posted that I have never personally experienced the issues with STRs. By those percentages, not many have.

It seems investors are interested in patio villas and CYV. These types of homes are usually cheaper than others. Lower bonds and less property taxes. I can speak from experience that they definitely have a high interest in villas near town squares. My neighborhood is becoming the Comfort Inn. I will have to move to escape it.

A google search for airbnb The Villages bring up over 1000, v r b o The Villages brings up 1179. That is only 2 sites, there are several more. More and more people are being affected but as long as it is not you it is fine.

This is from an article by Dave Ramsey:

"Maintaining an Airbnb is essentially like operating a small business, Ramsey says. Much like running a hotel, Airbnbs demand intense involvement: you’re responsible for keeping the place clean, making repairs and being available to renters for emergencies or questions.

On top of that, you’re generally dealing with new tenants every few days. And short-term tenants can be more careless with property than long-term renters.

"They'll destroy your property," Ramsey says. And while you’re stuck doing the clean up, you may have to contend with angry neighbors complaining about noise.

Finally, there’s a growing backlash in certain cities against short-term rental properties — especially in downtown cores or high-tourism areas. Some cities are starting to restrict the type of eligible dwellings, require costly licenses, impose additional taxes and only allow you to rent out your primary residence.

Even if your area doesn’t currently have restrictions on rentals, the laws could change — leaving you on the hook for a home you suddenly can’t rent out."

To intelligently discuss and understand land use and zoning, e.g., the regulation of STR's, you need to understand the "Bundle of Rights" theory and the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Euclid vs Ambler Realty Co.

Pontificating on zoning & land use issues, without having some knowledge and understanding of those fundamentals, is like doing brain surgery, after watching YouTube videos. The results are likely to be less than optimal.

Asking a permanent homeowner to keep tabs on the rental properties in their neighborhood is not the right thing to do. That is the responsibility of the investor. He/she should drive past the home to see if everything is fine. At least, 3 times a day! I don't help the investors in my neighborhood. If something happens it is their responsibility not mine.

And reading your many posts that are irrelevant to this thread is like putting a metal stake in my eye and hoping it doesn't bleed.

Please try to understand the words that I used.

Asking the neighbors to let you know if you are doing something that bothers them is neighborly and responsible.

Asking the neighbors to keep tabs on the rental properties is a bridge too far - there are management companies for that.

Driving by the property at least three times each day is ridiculous and could be considered stalking by some.

So 3% or 4% of the homes in TV, might be used as an STR ?

Let's say 70% are run by slumlords who don't care about their neighbors.

So now we have 2-3 out of every 100 homes are arguably, a lousy neighbor?

Once again, The Villages turn out to be America's Friendliest Hometown. 97% of your neighbors are going to be great folks! I like the odds.

I'd hate to see anyone go blind, from reading my nonsense.

Perhaps a more logical solution would be to simply block my posts?

That's probably a better solution, as you'd be able to maintain your eyesight and avoid those pesky warnings and suspensions from TOTV..

One can only hope......

1. I never said that as long as I am not affected it is fine. In fact, in a previous post in this thread, I stated that I do not want to minimize the negative impact of those who have experienced it. If you read my post with the intent to comprehend, it is very clear that I was commenting on the actual pervasiveness of the problem vs what is claimed by many posts, not the seriousness of the problem for those who do experience it.

So you are assuming that only one person will be affected by one of these undesirable properties in a neighbor hood when in actuality the entire neighbor will be affected especially in the villa neighborhoods.

My thoughts exactly.

You post most villagers do not have common sense. You post villagers are the most intolerant people you know. You request two posters to get off of their computers and get out and about insinuating they need help because of their internet use. You post, now I know the name of the king in the emperors new clothes. You post a giant picture of a man laughing at another poster's response,. You insult a poster who wants to sell his home FSBO. And, I can go on.

Yet, when someone throws a jab at you; you need to report them!

This is the slippery slope we are on. STRs ruining the quaint and quiet lifestyle homeowners expect. If rules are enacted, investors must sell their rental properties and now there is a flood of homes on the market.

Asking a neighbor to let you know if a renter is doing something to bother them is not neighborly. An investor should make certain it never happens before it gets to that point.

But those who have are experiencing problems. If strs
are allowed to continue, it won't be long that some are in your neighborhood. Where there is smoke; there will be fire.

Hopefully, we will see some action on these points soon.