I had a cool uncle who gave me those great gifts that parents never seriously consider...
Y'know... some asbestos would've made a great accessory!
Posted on 04/03/2007 6:15:39 AM PDT by ShadowDancer
Community Sues To Oust 3-Year-Old
Child With Drug-Addict Mom Lives With Grandparents
POSTED: 3:04 pm EDT April 1, 2007
LARGO, Fla. -- A Florida homeowners group wants 3-year-old Kimberly Broffman to take her Big Wheel and hit the road.
They've banded together to oust the toddler from their Tampa-area community, which bans residents under 18.
The child's grandparents, Judie and Jimmy Stottler, admit Kimberly's been living there in violation of homeowners' association rules for three years. They said her mother has a drug problem, and isn't capable of caring for the child.
The grandparents said they live on a fixed income and can't afford to move until they sell their house. So far, there have been no takers to buy their house, even after they lowered the $189,000 asking price by $10,000 six months ago.
They also said they can't afford to hire an attorney.
Judie Stottler supports the family with her $18,000-per year dishwashing job because Jimmy Stottler is disabled and is unable to work.
Judie Stottler's friends told the St. Petersburg Times that they are worried.
"It is so ridiculous that this has gone so far," said Keith Tinsley, a cook who works with her. "She's trying her best to sell her house. It's like they are trying to force her to put Kimberly in foster care.
"These people keep batting her down and batting her down. They're just mean."
Judie Stottler said she is scared that she wil lose her house before she is able to sell it.
"We don't have any family to take us in," Judie Stottler said.
The Lakes homeowners association filed suit to oust Kimberly last month.
Pretty cheap way out of an argument when you no longer have a point to make.
I wholeheartedly agree.
There is no way I’d enter into a business relationship with a person who feels that contracts can be dishonored at will. Yes, I am suggesting that such an attitude shows a lack of charecter.
>> Umm, ... what makes you think you can pick and choose which law you want to abide by...
I can think about anything I wish and who are you to say otherwise? And to assist your thought process, I’m not advocating one should break the law nor do I desire to break the law.
I never stated a priority nor expressed relationships but simply listed at least six things some people care about. You made assumptions about the meaning of the list.
I’m having difficulty understanding your comment. Maybe you can clear it up. Keep in mind, contracts are not law, but are subject to law and can be broken in accordance to law.
>> There is no way I’d enter into a business relationship with a person who feels that contracts can be dishonored at will.
Good and you shouldn’t.
>> Yes, I am suggesting that such an attitude shows a lack of charecter.
When the issue involves the means and domicile of the grand parents to care for the child in discussion, the community contract is something that can and should be challenged in a court of law. Your emphasis on honor and character is misplaced and is but something for you to squawk about.
If you were the caretaker of this child and were financially locked into that community, how would you demonstrate honor and character?
I had a cool uncle who gave me those great gifts that parents never seriously consider...
Y'know... some asbestos would've made a great accessory!
That is incorrect. My response to you, which you are quoting, was in answer to a question you asked me. You asked me what my definition of a "good parent" was. That question had nothing to do with the subject of this thread and I didn't care to get into a conversation, debate, and/or argument about the definition of good parenting.
If you can't sell your nice house, you rent it for market rates, and you rent a small apartment to live in.
that can and should be challenged in a court of law.
You are familiar with the Housing for Older Persons Act, aren't you (42 USC Sec 3607 (b)) which specifically exempts age restricted communities from fair housing laws, aren't you?
And since such communities may have received special treatment for school impact fees, if the community loses its classification as an age restricted community, there might be a financial burden placed on the homeowners. See generally Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, LP
KICK EM OUT! I wish they had this rule in my community.
Buy an older house in an established neighborhood, slap a coat of paint on it and rent it out for triple the mortgage.
ROTFLMAO!
The tiny sounds of bubbles bursting is music to my ears.
As for this specific article.
Not enough details have been given to nail down the exact HOA retirement community.
No matter where it is, or what the owners originally paid for it, chances are very high that nobody in their right mind would buy it now, due to current property taxes and insurance rates for the new buyer.
Now, since all those new houses nobody who works for Florida wages can afford have been built,who is going to buy the old ones? Since they all seem to have the same price?
>> You are familiar with the Housing for Older Persons Act, aren’t you (42 USC Sec 3607 (b)) ...
I would be inclined to argue with reference to §3631.
The child is not yet of school age and the community is only required to maintain an 80% 55+ occupancy to qualify for the protection enumerated in the code.
I think it’s unlikely the family will stay. My sentiment towards the community remains; a sad reminder of the Reno / Elian Gonzalez disaster.
That's the minimum requirement for a qualified development under federal law. States and local communities are free to set higher standards. In addition, if the HOA doesn't enforce the contract as to these owners, they will likely be estopped from enforcing as to other homeowners, so there is no way to legally maintain the character of the community once they start down the path.
As for the child not being of school age, since he was probably exposed to drugs in -utero (he's 3, and has lived with his grandparents for 3 years, suggesting that the mother's drug problem pre-dates his birth), he's probably got physical or emotional conditions which could qualify him for pre-K services. See the Pinellas County School syterm page for pre-K programs:
http://www.pinellas.k12.fl.us/ . So there is a fairly good chance that he is of school age.
I like living in Houston. I miss living closer in - I used to live about halfway from here to downtown - but the further out, the more space for the money.
A good parent is first a good person. A good person does not deprive others of the quiet enjoyment they paid their good money to have. I am sorry for the troubles these folks have but a need on their part does not create an obligation on the part of their neighbors. It's not clear to me why they couldn't get a reasonable price sometime in the last 3 years but even if they have to sell at a loss, they are obligated to honor the terms they agreed to in their community. That's being a good person.
How would YOU feel if that neighbor decided to paint his house fucia pink with lime green shutters? How would you like him to put a couple of old clunkers on cinder blocks...right next to a satellite dish...oh, about twelve feet in diameter?
How would you like it if he decided to breed pit bulls and put a nice dog run in the back yard?
Well, in all of those situations, I'd try to politely ask him to change his ways. Of course I'd be a little irritated as well. If he refused to comply with my request, I have two options:
1. Deal with it. It's his property. I don't want him telling me what to do with my property.
2. Move out of that neighborhood.
Simple.
1. Deal with it. It's his property. I don't want him telling me what to do with my property.
2. Move out of that neighborhood.
Simple.
Do you think the value of your home is affected by this neighbor?
It is. And that isn't even discussing your children who are forced to change schools...lose friends...stability.
All because there wasn't an HOA to protect your interests. ;^)
Cheers!
Well, at least until someone's grandchild needs to move in. Then it doesn't matter what their wishes are. Too bad.
The HOA has to file a lawsuit or risk losing the rule altogether. They allowed the little girl to be there for 3 years, perhaps in an effort to be undestanding, and that already may leave them on shaky ground, legally.
Certainly, I feel for these grandparents. But let's remember, they were all for not having any children around until it came to THEIR grandchild. They put their housing situation at risk in the hopes that a druggie daughter would turn her life around and made no alternative plans.
This reminds me of New Orleans residents, sitting on their butts, confident that the world would save them, somehow.
Huge amounts of the newer housing that is being built nationwide is age-restricted. It thus limits the ability of the young to the market for housing, and DISCOURAGES child-bearing. It sets us up to be the next Europe. It is certainly a suicidal tendency at the national level.
Because you quoted only part of that statue, and left off a very significant part:
Related to question of prohibitions based on age is the legality to of “age-restricted active adult (55 years and older) communities”. The answer is that Fair Housing Act, Section 3607, provides an exemption for these types of communities, making them legal if certain criteria are met. For an “age-restricted community” to qualify under this exemption, it must have eighty (80%) percent of its units occupied by at least one person whom is fifty five (55) years or older, the community must publish and strictly adhere to policies and procedures that demonstrate the intent required under Section 3607 (i.e., intent to restrict housing to individuals over age 55), and the community must comply with the rules issued by the federal and state officials for verification of occupancy.In other words, PAR35, this household with child has NO, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA, NONE WHATSOEVER effect on whether the community falls under age-restricted regulatory definition. Go peddle your jokes to some other peanut gallery.(Source: Elysa Bergenfeld of Stark and Stark, http://www.njlawblog.com/elysa-d-bergenfeld.html
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.