SIGNS II: Freeper fights back at neighborhood meeting.

self | Sept 19, 2002 | WOSG

[WOSG]

this is the letter I wrote in response to neighborhood nannies taking a political sign off my property and citing it as a violation of a covenant

I was informed by your letter that claimed we violated a prohibition on yard signs, just days after our yard sign mysteriously disappeared.

See Original article for my first reaction

Thankfully, we live in a free country still, and the prohibition that is claimed in 8.0216 of the Travis Country covenants is in clear violation of our First Amendment free speech rights. If this is not obvious enough to you or the Travis Country CSA Board, I have taken the liberty of enclosing a Supreme Court decision - City of Ladue v. Gilleo - that unanimously struck down such ordinance limits and held they violate resident's right to free speech.

I am frankly shocked this invalid restriction is being taken seriously, especially when every political season many dozens of signs appear on front yards in our neighborhood (including on the properties of current and former Travis Country Board members over the 11 years I've lived in the neighborhood). What is next? Going after the 'Travis Country Sharks' swimming team yard signs too that are commonplace?

I don't feel it should be necessary to belabor these obvious points at a Board hearing but I do hereby request a board hearing as soon as possible if that is necessary. But a simple alternative solution would avoid this trouble: Please reverse this so-called 'violation' and return the 'Ben Bentzin' sign that was stolen from my property so that it may be returned to its rightful place in our front yard.

I appreciate your attention and care given to our neighborhood.

[WOSG]

Congrats...but the problem seems to be your own doing...did you or did you not agree to the covenants when you bought the house? They should not have removed the sign. That said...If you did agree, to break a provision and then snivel about it being enforced, is...well, what a liberal would do.

Read the other thread on this point ... It is simply not the case that I happily "agreed" to this provision, which by the way was NOT ENFORCED for the previous ten years of my living in this neighborhood. You are forced to sign onto association if you want to buy a house in these neighborhoods and you are ROUTINELY not told of covenant provisions until the closing. It happened to me. We werent even aware of fine print and even if we were, what could we do about it? Have you successfully bought a house and said "well we dont like these provisions, let negotiate over them" Sorry, non-negotiable.

If you dont like the provisions, you buy and cross your fingers your neighborhood isnt "run" by the would-be "Napoleonic complex" types ...

The idea that it is 'snivelling' to stand up for own rights and trying to have a friendly neighborhood not run by fascists, btw, I find a little insulting.

[WOSG]

I'd still like to know if they can require you to join the homeowners assn when you buy a house. I don't see how they could, but I've known for a long time that the law is an ass.

$30/month in homeowners assoc. fees says they can require you to join ... If I can get out of it, someone tell me how!

[zeugma]

Sorry for the late replies, but I just noticed it in my 'posts to you' page.

To follow up, I'd like to ask if you contested signing the thing when it was initially presented to you at closing? That's the place to say no, though I would hope there was a way to opt out at a later date.