>> 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.
PAR35 gave a very mistaken interpretation of that law, see my prior post above.
Yes! The same kind of selfish callousness that set machine-gun toting thugs in Federal Uniform into a bedroom closet to capture a boy out of his rescuers arms.