Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Alberta's Child
I'd be curious to know what issues you were facing in an HOA that were overridden by Maryland law.

The one that springs to mind is that the HOA-ARC tried to regulate where the satellite dishes could be mounted on the houses, but the owners prevailed, because the location if the dish affected reception. Another is that people succeeded in running low-density home day care (one or two other children besides their own) in spite of the HOA by-laws forbidding home-based businesses.

The HOA did succeed in having a high-density day care put out, but only because it was completely illegal in terms of the state-mandated safety provisions for chlldren, and was being run by renters, who had not secured permission in their lease.

Renters were a real problem altogether -- maybe 8 to 10% of the 150 attached houses. The HOA didn't allow renting for the first 6 years, but when the economy tanked when Obama came into office, people just couldn't sell, and the HOA started allowing it. Now that community is infested with Section 8'ers in the rental units.

175 posted on 02/15/2015 3:03:58 PM PST by Albion Wilde (It is better to offend a human being than to offend God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child

location “of” the dish, not “if” the dish....


176 posted on 02/15/2015 3:07:49 PM PST by Albion Wilde (It is better to offend a human being than to offend God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies ]

To: Albion Wilde
The satellite dish issue was probably subject to Federal statutes aimed specifically at permitting the installation of these things on residential buildings. In effect, the Federal statute basically overturned every HOA regulation governing satellite dishes. I believe the wording of the statute states that the only regulation that can be imposed on them is that they are mounted safely on the outside of a building.

I'm just speculating here, but in the case of the low-density home care as you've described it, I suspect the owners prevailed against the HOA because the arrangement in question doesn't qualify is a "home-based business" by any objective measure. I'm actually surprised that the HOA even pushed to enforce that provision in an arrangement like that, because it sounds like the HOA rules as they were written could technically prohibit people from even hiring babysitters for their own children.

180 posted on 02/15/2015 3:15:14 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson