COL Barfoot -Threads Merged

[SOTB]

Originally Posted by Section8

....and we are sheople....

Aww, look -- someone who meets the definition of melodramatic....

[Section8]

Originally Posted by SOTB

Aww, look -- someone who meets the definition of melodramatic....

Patriotism is what this country is founded on!!!

"Stand for something or fall for everything" ............... your call!

[Decon]

Originally Posted by Section8

Patriotism is what this country is founded on!!!

"Stand for something or fall for everything" ............... your call!

Originally Posted by SOTB

Aww, look -- someone who meets the definition of melodramatic....

...

[SOTB]

Originally Posted by Section8

Patriotism is what this country is founded on!!!

"Stand for something or fall for everything" ............... your call!

And there it is -- I love when people do exactly what I think they will....

[greenwarrior1]

I think it is a stupid ass decision by the HOA. Yeah they had their rules, etc. but if they really stopped to think about the NEGATIVE press they would have (and now are receiving) because of this issue - they might have decided to turn the other cheek. I mean, really, it's a flagpole - not a trashy trailer or some shit. According to the article the neighbors don't mind anyway. Sure the HOA is in the "legal right," but now they look like ass to a lot of people and people know about the area and this issue and many may think twice when moving somewhere in that area. Wonder what THAT will do to their precious home values.

[KidA]

Easiest solution:

Allow a flagpole at the entrance to the subdivision that the MOH recipient attends to daily. Done and done.

[SOTB]

Originally Posted by greenwarrior1

Sure the HOA is in the "legal right," but now they look like ass to a lot of people and people know about the area and this issue and many may think twice when moving somewhere in that area. Wonder what THAT will do to their precious home values....

I would think it would mean those home values remain intact. Which is the goal of the whole thing. If I were looking at a home in that area, this event would not deter me from purchasing there -- unless I had aspirations to put up a flagpole.

As stated previously in this thread, there are "protections" already in place regarding flying the flag on your property, including within an area covered by an HOA.

IE, there is FLORIDA. I think people might find that the HOA in this instance does have rules, so does the State of FL, and these rules did not prevent this vet from flying a flag. Some orgs are forward-thinking and looking to prevent issues from occurring -- some of the readers of this thread will state there are no issues when flying a flag. Whatever. To those with a desire to have an open mind, read that link.

I lived in Westchase when THIS issue was big news. I supported the HOA's ruling -- except when it voted to lower the fine. There is more to the issue than just putting up a sign to say you support the troops. Some people won't see that.

I'm sure that I can now have the obligatory comments about my patriotism as well. Right. 'Cause I sure as fuck haven't EVER done anything that could be termed as supporting my country....

[MakoZeroSix]

On one hand, I see the point of those who say "Hey, he signed a contract". I really don't think anybody should be idiotic enough to live somewhere with an HOA at all unless they want to obey all kinds of gay rules.

Then again, what if the HOA made a rule like "No African Americans shall visit said property" or "No acts of oral copulation shall be permitted within the premises"? Is that okay because he signed it? Or would everybody say that is unconstitutional. So isn't it unconstitutional to prohibit the display of an American flag? What if the flag was gigantic and said "Go fuck yourself, fuckers" on it instead of being a patriotic flag?

I don't know what to think. Easy solution is don't live where there is an HOA.

[Longrifle]

This is the solution:

On May 28, 2008, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist became the latest politician to wade into the debate over homeowner associations' restrictions on flag displays. Crist signed a law allowing Florida homeowners to build a freestanding flagpole of 20 feet or less and fly a flag as large as 4.5 feet by 6 feet.

Bold is mine. It should be clarified somehow to apply only to the US flag.

Now if Virginia (and other states) had something like this . . .

[J2S]

OK, last post in this thread tonight - sorry, I am a dirt lawyer at heart....

Originally Posted by SOTB

I would think it would mean those home values remain intact. Which is the goal of the whole thing.

Agreed. That is the goal.

Originally Posted by MakoZeroSix

I really don't think anybody should be idiotic enough to live somewhere with an HOA at all unless they want to obey all kinds of gay rules.

LOL. Yep, don't purchase or rent in a deed restricted community if you don't like the rules.

[Mad Man]

For a background on the rise of H.O.A.s, and the problems they have created, read this article (2,200 words) from seven years ago.

And then visit Evan McKenzie's blog. He used to be an H.O.A. lawyer.

The choice of whether or not to live in an H.O.A. is not a simple matter of consumer choice as H.O.A. proponents make it out to be.

How do cities mandate or require community associations?

Many cities require that all new construction must be in CIDs. They do this in several ways, but the most common takes advantage of PUD zoning. Cities have planned unit development zones where housing is exempt from setback and other density requirements. Developers want access to PUD zones to obtain higher density and thus higher profits. So, the City requires all development in PUD zones to have certain features (open spaces, landscape vegetation, perimeter walls). They, the City requires that there must be an entity to maintain features in perpetuity. HOAs are the recommended option.

Result: the City in effect mandates HOAs in all new construction within PUD zone.