Posted on 07/03/2002 11:18:52 AM PDT by chance33_98
Florida Man Free To Fly Flag Judge Removes Restrictions On Flags Posted: 9:04 a.m. EDT July 3, 2002
JUPITER, Fla. -- He's paid a high price for his patriotism, but a Jupiter man won his three-year battle Tuesday to fly the American flag.
After thousands of dollars in fines, dozens of public protests and a lien on his home George Andres walked out of court a winner Tuesday.
A judge ruled that Anders could continue to fly his American flag, despite the fact that the way he flies it is against his neighborhood association's regulations.
Andres, a former Marine, has been fighting his homeowners' association for almost three years to keep his flag flying on top of a 12-foot pole in his front yard. The Indian Creek Homeowners' Association guidelines state the flag may only be flown from brackets attached to a house.
"Guys overseas right now -- what are they putting their lives on the line for? That flag," Andres said. "Millions of people have put their lives on the line to protect the flag. For me, I feel the same way. I would go again tomorrow if I had to."
In a surprising ruling Tuesday, circuit judge Ronald Alvarez removed all homeowners' association's restrictions against flying the American flag.
"It's a great thing to happen right before the Fourth of July, because now, George is independent from any type of restriction on his right to fly the flag," attorney Barry Silver said.
The homeowners' association fined Andres $100 a day for flying the flag, but during that time, he garnered support from people all over the country.
Last July, veterans raised their voices in salute of Old Glory to show their support.
A local radio station also raised money to help Andres keep the flag flying. And Gov. Jeb Bush signed a law in April that makes it illegal to ban anyone from flying the American flag, unless it poses a safety hazard.
Bush visited Andres last month on Flag Day to show his support.
In nearly three years Andres has racked up fines close to $70,000. He has paid out almost $40,000 in attorney's fees. A lien recently was placed on his house.
"The last two months have been very rough on us, trying to figure out how we're going to pay bills. We live on social security and our pension. I had to go out and get a temporary job to help bring in some funds, so I can pay my bills," Andres said.
A hearing will be scheduled to determine whether Andres will have to pay the fees that are still outstanding.
I realize that it wouldn't be strictly legal but a hearing SHOULD be scheduled to determine if the HOA will REPAY all the fines and his lawyers expenses.
IMO, HOA are nothing but little versions of socialism at work.
I'm in a community with a strident Home Owner's Association, and 99% of the time, most of us agree with their decrees. There has been a time or two that they came up with some silly stuff, but the homeowners so far have been able to convince them that there are some things that we won't stand still for.
For enforcing the rules he agreed to? If the members of the HOA follow the correct guidelines(if they can even be impeached), then so be it.
Correct. HOAs are pure evil, but nobody put a gun to this guy's head and made him live in one. You are also correct in stating that this is a property rights issue, because the HOA/POA essentially owns the property and the resident rents it from them.
Got sick of the hate-mail and negative news articles, eh? No problem, I'm sure Floridastan will find another way to stomp on the rights of patriotic Americans.
Care to apply that arguement to the Boy Scouts?
Why anyone would sign up with a HOA is beyond me.
Say What??
You are joking, right? Oversight of what? No laws were violated. No rights were violated. He voluntarily signed away the right to do certain things with his property when he purchased a home in that community. That's his dumbass fault. Keep your government off the property I own interest in.
These organizations are de facto governments and the courts are very reluctant to get involved in holding them accountable under the law,
Under what laws? You have no idea what you are talking about. He AGREED to the rules of the HOA, which were interpreted to mean no flag poles. I'm not sorry for his stupidity. Retroacvtive laws are unconstitutional.
thus giving the actual homeowners, who own the association, very little control.
They own a per rata share of the HOA, not an equal, undivided share. They vote on rules and a certain majority gets their way, per legal contracts all parties agreed to. If you do not like a direct democracy, then do not get involved with a HOA. Its that damn simple.
Can this guy now go out and raise his flagpole to 35 feet, and fly one of those HUMONGOUS flags that you see car dealerships flying?
If not, then that means there are limitations. So who sets those limitations? To me, this decision is simply a practical one. The court just made an arbitrary decision that the way THIS guy chose to fly his flag didn't inconvenience anyone else--even though his neighbors disagreed.
So is this open ended, or are there limits to his ostentatious patriotism?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.