Posted on 12/05/2009 5:32:50 AM PST by Silly
No doubt you have heard of the flagpole complaint* against Col. Van T. Barfoot, a 90-year-old Medal of Honor winner and Choctaw Indian. His homeowner’s association is trying to force him to remove the flagpole on his property, for purportedly “aesthetic” reasons, even though the association’s bylaws do not expressly forbid free-standing flagpoles or vertical masts.
Hoping to catch a pedestrian’s eye view of Barfoot’s house using Google’s Street View, I looked up his Richmond, Virginia address in an Internet phone directory, and then plugged it into Google Maps. His house was not pictured; Google’s cameras have not reached his street.
What the map does reveal, however, was a surprise: Barfoot’s property is situated in a cul-de-sac at the end of a winding lane. The only way to get there is to turn off the main street (Gayton Road), enter the cloistered neighborhood, turn off Sussex Square Drive onto Coat Bridge Lane, and follow that street around a final curve to a dead end. In other words, only a few close neighbors in his association can actually see his house. Unless you live next door to him, you would have to go out of your way to see the flagpole (or the flag, which is what I believe this is really about).
Furthermore, his property lies at the outer perimeter of the development, which borders a large tract of open land. Visible by satellite, again using Google, you can see an adjacent area covered with brush, then a large open space, past which is a shopping or business development. So the opportunity to see his property is extremely minimal.
Not that any of this matters; the flagpole is only 21 feet high. Photos of his modest home shot from the street reveal that the pole barely reaches the top of the house and is in no way conspicuous. What cannot be seen cannot pose an aesthetic issue.
I am guessing, therefore, that it is one or two immediate neighbors who are making this an issue – either that, or some idle busybodies on the HOA board.
A CONVERSATION WITH THE FAMILY
While on hold with Mark Levin’s radio show yesterday to speak about this, I telephoned the Barfoot residence to confirm that I had the right address.
I was right. Barfoot’s son-in-law, Roger Nicholls, confirmed by phone that you’d have to go out of your way to see the pole. Their phone has been so bombarded, they have had to schedule people to answer calls in shifts, he said. Because of the lawsuit, he is not providing a lot of other information to the press. But it is not a happy time for this family; the lawsuit has caused Barfoot and the Nicholls – who live on the same street – an enormous amount of stress.
Mark’s show ended before I could speak to him on-air; I’ll try again Monday.
DISTINGUISHED AMERICAN HERO
Barfoot’s life and exploits during WW II are notable enough that he actually has his own Wikipedia article. The article was not created in response to the lawsuit controversy; it was first published over two years ago.
* At present there is no lawsuit against Barfoot – only the threat of one. The HOA, in a statement on their lawyer’s Web site, states that it is a “request.” Other sources indicate there is a $10 fine for each day he does not comply with the HOA’s request. On Thursday night (December 3), the HOA extended its deadline to December 11 – the anniversary of the U.S. declaration of war on Italy and Germany.
Hurray — my story just got picked up by Lucianne:
http://blogslucianneloves.com/Forum/?Thread=DKORJADHOJMAAYIAYD
Silly
Good!
Congratulations!
Sorry. I was just defending myself as I was personally attacked first...I just didn’t whine about. I’ll consider the source and move on.
Thanks.
Thank you for your reasoned an intelligent post. I made a less detailed but similar post and had my “advice” labeled a POS. When I defended myself I was challenged by the moderator to stop my personal attacks. Though I do feel I crossed a line, as I only used terms that were thrown at me first, I do find it funny and interesting that those who attacked me simply because I did not find their misguided points of view credible THEY reported me to the moderator.
Go figure.
I am, however, glad to see via your post that there are still thinking, reasonable people who post on FR.
Have a great day.
The land behind him is a school. There was a dispute last year over the buffer zone (the wooded area between his house and the school). The HOA defended the homeowners against encroachment by the school.
There is no lawsuit. The HOA has simply sent a letter asking the homeowner to comply with a ruling. The letter was sent from the HOA attorney (paid for by the dues of all the members of the community, which includes Barfoot).
Our HOA doesn’t send letters through the attorney, we use a property management group. But I know other HOAs do use their attorney for all such letters, since it CAN end up in court. Plus, it ensures that all the legal processes are followed.
I know people like to get upset over things, and I don’t doubt it’s disturbing (I know I get disturbed when I get a letter from my HOA telling me I’ve violated some rule), but it’s hardly life-threatening. At the moment, they are subject to no fines, no legal costs, they have simply been asked to remove the flagpole.
All they have to do at this point is respond to the letter. Their HOA probably has appeals rules, so they can stay the ruling through appeal, and show up to argue why the pole is OK.
They can go to their direct neighbors and get letters of acceptance, and take them to the meeting. They can find other poles in the neighborhood, and take pictures to argue disparate application of the rules.
Of course, all of this is MOOT now, since instead they have gotten a personal friend, Senator Mark Warner, to intervene, and the HOA has asked Warner to mediate the whole thing.
So Warner will take a few minutes, write a nice letter saying the pole should be allowed, and it will be over.
I do agree that the pole doesn’t look too imposing or out of character.
Barfoot applied for permission to build the pole, and his application was denied. It wasn't a neighbor making a stink, or the HOA board being "busy-bodies".
And the board has a fiduciary, legal obligation to enforce the rules. If they ignored the flagpole, ANY neighbor could sue them for not enforcing the rules. Apparently starting next January, HOA board members will be open to being personally sued by disgruntled homeowners.
IT's easy to think that it's only those being denied a flag pole that could cause trouble for the HOA, but it's both sides. HOA board members are often just your neighbors (I'm a board member of an HOA). They take time out of their busy lives to serve the community, making sure the rules are enforced, keeping the budget, making sure common areas are kept up, handling disputes, and basically being cursed and sworn at on a constant basis by homeowners who would never think to volunteer but are always ready to complain. (Oh, that's not my personal opinion -- I don't mind other homeowners yelling at me, it's how I figure out whether I'm doing a good job or not, I'm just painting a general picture). The daily fines won't start until the deadline. And if their HOA is like most (and it might have to be because of Virginia law), the homeowner can appeal the request, which will also put the fines on hold pending a hearing with the board. I know that in my community, we have bent over backwards to give homeowners (who are our fellow neighbors, and whom we represent) the chance to make their case before we try to enforce rules or fine them. Which means that we regularly schedule hearings at which the homeowners don't show up. The worst way to handle a dispute with the HOA is to ignore their rulings and do what you want. It pretty much forces them to send formal notices and start the legal process. If they don't, they can be sued for violating their legal duties under Virginia law.
If you had a renter in a room in your house, and the rental agreement gave them limited access to your kitchen, and you came home one day and found they had installed a new refrigerator in the middle of the room because there wasn’t enough room in your frig, would you say “well, that’s freedom for you”, or would you enforce the contract that you signed with them?
I'm guessing there are a LOT of things that are not specifically prohibited in the bylaws. Bylaws to not contain lists of every item in the world that you can't put in your yard.
Instead, they generally prohibit ANY freestanding structures without prior approval of the board, and grant the HOA the right to reject structures based on aesthetics and "architectural fit" within the community.
When things ARE mentioned specifically, it is as often to specifically ALLOW them as it is to specifically PROHIBIT them.
For example, my deed grants me the RIGHT to put an external TV antenna on the roof of my house, thus prohibiting the HOA from banning or regulating it.
But my deed says nothing about pink flamingoes -- that doesn't mean they are allowed.
The same could be said for all representative forms of government.
And if so, it’s because we elect them. Boards in Virginia are elected by majority of homeowners who bother to show up at the annual meeting.
So even if there was no way to resolve this dispute before that, all he would have to do is get about 5 neighbors, and collect a bunch of proxies, and he could get new board members elected who would approve his flag pole.
In my community, if 5 people showed up wanting to run for office, we’d probably have 5 people quit the board to make room for them. It’s a thankless job.
I actually was asked to, and came back to our board, because of concern that the board was getting too picky about what neighbors did, and there was a conflict between two factions, and I was known as a person who could work with both sides and bring reason to the debate.
At least with the HOA it’s a lot easier to make a difference with your vote.
I haven’t seen a SINGLE person attack Barfoot, or the flag.
This is about the flag pole.
Apples and oranges.
I should hope we would fight just as hard for the right of George Soros to put up a flagpole and fly the flag as we would for a decorated war hero.
You must have been very fortunate to never have a neighbor who made your life intolerable. Which of course is easy if you buy a house on a large plot of land, and don’t worry about what happens at the boundaries.
Have you ever run for board member? Have you encouraged your neighbors to run, shown up a the annual meeting, and voted for people who wouldn’t be controlling busy-bodies?
If not, should you be surprised if the people YOU want running the board aren’t on the board?
It’s just like any government — if you don’t show up and vote, you will get a government you don’t like.
Well thanks for the sermon. Yes I currently serve on my board. I have done volunteer work and political work most of my long life. Much of it highly public and well documented in the press.
The federal law explicitly allows HOAs to regulate the manner and options which can be used to fly the flag.
So if they want to restrict it to poles attached to houses, the law explicitly says that is OK.
You have a right to fly your flag in A legal manner. You don’t have a right to fly it in ANY legal manner you feel like.
Of course, if the HOA rules explicitly said that no flagpoles were allowed, I doubt it would change the minds of people arguing he should have one. Most are arguing that since he is a decorated war hero, he should be allowed to fly the flag the way he wants, regardless of the rules.
What is the exact wording? I believe it reads shall not "restrict or prohibit." The HOA is not prohibiting, but they are restricting, in my opinion.
Um, we don't know that.
This is about the flag pole.
No Charles. It appears to be about a refrigerator as per post 108.
Flying the flag is not the equivalent of a refrigerator. Get help Charles. There must be someone who can treat liberal lunacy syndrome.
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.