When Villages residents complain to their community development district supervisors about potential deed restriction or architectural violations, the supervisors shut their ears.
They refuse to listen to these complaints on the advice of the district counsel because they might be asked later to make a judgment on these cases.
A dual role of supervisors as both legislators and judges creates a conflict and CDD 3 Supervisor Gail Lazenby said he doesn’t like it.
“It’s hard to avoid someone who stops you in a golf cart,” he said. “I would like to make sure the community understands why we can’t talk to them.”
District Counsel Valerie Fuchs reminded supervisors at their meetings Friday that they should avoid listening to these complaints or investigating them. She said it constitutes ex parte communication, where they are listening to one side of an issue without hearing the other side of the affected homeowner.
“Before you took on the deed compliance roles, most of your work was legislative in nature,” she said. “You’re prohibited from receiving any kind of ex parte communication. That includes site visits.”
The restrictions run counter to political common sense that has been a cornerstone of government service for centuries.
Politicians traditionally win favor with voters by handling their complaints and seeking resolution. And citizens understand that the best place to lodge their complaints is with their elected local representatives.
Another effect of the restrictions is that all architectural and deed restriction complaints are funneled directly to Villages staff, where they can be handled quietly.
Instead of listening to resident complaints, CDD 3 Chairman Bill Ray said he explains the process when approached and then offers to have a Villages staff member call the resident.
“I just don’t want people to think we don’t care,” Lazenby said.