Posted on 05/27/2008 6:54:11 AM PDT by peggybac
“He needs to run for the board and change the rules.
Having said that - do not take down the flag make then take you to court.”
Yes, that’s what we thought. So the Board changed the election rules. They won’t allow any statements on policy or anything regarding the HOA in an election. They just don’t have to follow the law, so they don’t.
This is the board statement: “Biographical statements may not advocate any particular position on any issue, nor can they contain campaign statements. The Association shall not edit or redact any Biographical statement content but will REJECT those statements that contain prohibited items”
And what the law says:
(1) Ensure that any candidate or member advocating a point of view is provided access to association media, newsletters, or Internet Web sites during a campaign, for purposes that are reasonably related to that election. Equal access shall be provided to all candidates and members advocating a point of view, including those not endorsed by the board, for purposes that are reasonably related to the election. The association shall not edit or redact any content from these communications, but may include a statement specifying that the candidate or member, and not the association, is responsible for that content.
We moved into a neighborhood that called the city code enforcement officer on us because while we were moving, we left boxes on our front porch for a few nights. Needless to say, we won’t be joining the neighborhood association.
Somebody needs a bigger flag
I pledge allegiance to the HOA
of city of Clermont of Florida,
and to the Fascism for which it stands:
one HOA under thumbs, monthly fundable,
with no-Liberty and Law Suits for all.
Oh, I will be. Best to slowly poke the finger in the eye ever harder each time than to just jab it in there all at once.
There are several of us, including members of the board (of which I am not) who are laying the groundwork for "Operation Bite Me" to really cheese off the management company, HOA board members, and pain in the ass neighbors with nothing better to do than seek out CC&R violations.
I don’t think those are HOA rules, but deed restrictions put in place by the owner way back when.
However in that process I learned that the past few house the builder had finished had several city code and CC&R infractions. Also most of my neighbors had violations as well. At this time I am trying to get an HOA formed for the expressed purpose of lifting the deed restrictions and then dissolving.
It’s interesting how some HOAs are so strict and some are not. I live in a very sought out subdivision and some of the lawns and homes look like crap. My neighbor hasn’t cut her back lawn (hidden by a 6’ wooden fence) but I’m noticing critters in my yard then running back over to hers when my dogs come out. There’s no telling what is living in that back yard. I’ve already found a dead mouse on my lawn and I cut it regularly.
The construction of the utilities owned by the MUD was financed by bonds, whose method of retirment is through a slice of the taxes paid by property owners.
Often, particularly when there's no effective HOA, the MUD has the right (according to Texas law, anyway) to enforce deed restrictions, on the theory that declining standards in the neighborhood leads to a decline in property values, which leads to a decline in tax revenues, which leads to an increase in the risk of the MUD being unable to service its bonds.
That's the theory, anyway. The practical problem, of course, is how, and how broadly/narrowly/stringently the restrictive covenants get interpreted and enforced.
The case at hand seems like OZ (overzealousness) on the part of some HOA rules enforcer. Did the restrictive covenant really mention the flying of flags and place restrictions thereon? Was the flag-flyer putting up a thousand-square-foot flag? (I confess in advance to having only skimmed the OP <}B^)
You might be right. I can’t remember.
I think it is unusual for a developer to continue to be interested in the enforcement of restrictive covenants once he has completed building out his development. In your case, did this developer have plans for expanding into adjacent areas?
I doubt HOAs existed back then.
The HOA is banning the pole not the FLAG, which is federally protected.
“Operation Bite Me”
LOL. First good laugh I’ve had all day.
Give um hell.
Sorry, dudes, but just because higher law trumps HOAs on racial discrimination, antennas, and such (by specific statute) does not mean that it trumps on flag flying prohibitions.
Disagree? Show me the law.
Signed into law July 24, 2006.
It was actually a proclamation:
We, the other posters on this thread, having duly considered the nonsense beelsandwhizzles spews herein, proclaim May 27th of this year, and each year hence, as "beelsandwhizzles get-a-life day".
720.304 Right of owners to peaceably assemble; display of flag; SLAPP suits prohibited.--
(2) Any homeowner may display one portable, removable United States flag or official flag of the State of Florida in a respectful manner, and on Armed Forces Day, Memorial Day, Flag Day, Independence Day, and Veterans Day may display in a respectful manner portable, removable official flags, not larger than 41/2 feet by 6 feet, which represent the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard, regardless of any declaration rules or requirements dealing with flags or decorations.
Liberals created hellholes in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts and other places; then fled south. It takes a special kind of denial for these transplants to not realize they they were the problem.
****************************
For God sake, dont tell them about Texas...
Thank you. If this is the law, I suspect that there is more to the story.
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.