Quote :

"TAMPA - Before David Kelley went to Iraq, he bought his wife a "Support Our Troops" sign to display outside the couple's home in the Westchase subdivision. When Kelley, an Army private, went overseas in November, Stacey Kelley posted the sign outside their home. For her, the sign is a daily reminder of the sacrifice her husband and fellow soldiers are making. But officials of Westchase, in northwest Hillsborough County, view the sign differently. They say the 2-foot-high sign violates community rules. Stacey Kelley, 24, received a letter from the homeowners association last month stating she could be fined $100 a day if she does not remove the sign. "I've been crying and everything since I got that," she said. "It's ridiculous that no one can even show their support." Deed restrictions prohibit Westchase residents from displaying signs outside their homes except "for sale" or "for rent" notices. Residents get a copy of the rules when they move into the community. Stacey Kelley, who has lived in the gated Stonebridge neighborhood in Westchase for about five years, said she hasn't received complaints from other residents since putting up the sign more than three months ago. The red, white and blue ribbon-shaped sign sits back from the street, next to the Kelleys' garage. Inside the house is a room filled with photographs and memorabilia David Kelley, 24, has sent home. Displaying the sign and photographs is one of the ways Stacey Kelley stays connected to her husband during his two-year tour of duty, she said. During their rare telephone conversations, Stacey Kelley said, she makes sure to tell her husband about the other signs, bumper stickers and symbols of support she sees. "If we're showing any kind of support to them, I know they love it so much," she said. "They should never be forgotten." One person who does understand the significance of the sign, both for Stacey Kelley and the troops, is Westchase homeowners association President Daryl Manning. As the community's elected leader, Manning must enforce community standards, but as an Army reservist who served in Iraq, Manning is sympathetic to the Kelleys' situation. "This sign is not offensive to me," Manning said. "In fact, I appreciate the support of the community, because I was one of those troops." Manning said his personal feelings can't be allowed to trump his responsibility to the community. If Stacey Kelley is allowed to keep her sign, Manning said, there's nothing to prevent other residents from putting up signs that have negative messages about the troops. Pat Gross, who lives across the street from the Kelleys, walks by the sign every day and says it hasn't stirred political debate in the community. If the association ever were to consider making an exception to its rule, Gross said, this would be the time. The rule "is there for a reason, but sometimes the reason doesn't make sense," he said. Neighbor Barbara Mulvihill said the association should be celebrating the sacrifice one of its residents is making, not creating problems for his wife. "He's fighting for us, all of us," Mulvihill said. Manning said the homeowners association will address the issue tonight at its monthly board meeting. The board could decide not to fine the Kelleys. Even so, Manning said, the sign likely will have to go. Stacey Kelley, who plans to attend the meeting, said she's going to follow the advice her husband gave during their last conversation. "He said even if it comes down to paying the fines, he doesn't want to take it down.""

They knew about the rules when they moved in. By contract, they agreed to curtail some of their 1st amendment rights.

Seems like this Homeowners Association could pass a rule that allows signs of a certain size/type which show support for the troops. Then they could get back to the more important jobs of harassing people to mow their lawns and paint their mailboxes.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:14 AM. Reason : ..]

3/9/2006 11:12:24 AM

IF YOU DONT LIKE THE RULES THAN MOOOOOOOOOVE YOUR WHITE TRASH BUTT.

seriously I hate home owners associations but why should they should they make an exception for this when I bet her neighbor wants to put up a big ass rainbow flag which you would not like much mr. man.

3/9/2006 11:14:47 AM

why don't we just outlaw all Homeowner's Associations...
simple solutions for simple problems...
(of course, people would have to go back to mowing their own damned lawns again, but whatever)

3/9/2006 11:14:51 AM

the 1st amendment serves a very particular purpose

and regulating the right of companies and organizations to curtail your right to free speech is not it

take a goddamn civics class

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:17 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2006 11:16:48 AM

^^ b/c we buy the right to buy their land and live in our big ass houses with the neighborhood pool and stuff like that. It would be like outlawing the Earth b/c we got sick of gravity or earthquakes.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:18 AM. Reason : ^^]

3/9/2006 11:17:41 AM

That's an ugly sign with a politcal message.

If I was her neighbor I would put up a sign that said "I Don't Support Your Troops, you Fatty"

3/9/2006 11:20:30 AM

My response hinges on two things.

1) I believe that the Bill of Rights and subsequent Amendments only guarantee you those rights on federal, public property. Private property is another matter entirely. For example, you are allowed to peacefully assemble out by the Washington monument, but you are not allowed to assemble onto somebody's private property if they do not give you their express permission (to do so would be trespassing).

2) Is the Homeowner's Association a private entity? If so, then if they have a rule against having signs out in the yard, then that is simply one of their terms and conditions for living in that area. If the area belonged to the government, however, then this could be considered unconstitutional.

And I don't know that the entire 1st Amendment is being "outlawed" here. I'm a bit surprised, EarthDogg, you don't usually exaggerate like this.

3/9/2006 11:23:30 AM

^ EARTHDOG!!!!

EXAGERATE!!!!!!!

NEEEEVAAAARRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!

3/9/2006 11:24:46 AM

why don't we post the 1st amendment on here

so people can read it, and understand what it says

Quote :

"Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "

ahh, here we go, so we can all be learn'd

3/9/2006 11:26:49 AM

Congress shall make no law

3/9/2006 11:34:50 AM

^he may have exaggerated but you are being overly shallow

so you contend that the state legislature can make a law restricting those freedoms and not have it shot down in the supreme court?

3/9/2006 11:38:55 AM

State CONGRESS

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:40 AM. Reason : !]

3/9/2006 11:39:01 AM

Shitty, but perfectly (and rightfully) legal.

Was there a point to this thread somewhere?

3/9/2006 11:41:47 AM

Earthdogg took a dump on america

3/9/2006 11:42:52 AM

actually it is the state legislature, is it not?

i believe congress is a term reserved for the federal legislative branch

3/9/2006 11:43:03 AM

^ yeah i was just adding to all the sillyness in the thread

3/9/2006 11:48:43 AM

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:49 AM. Reason : this website's flood control is restricting my 1st amendment rights]

3/9/2006 11:49:18 AM

I may never come up with any solid, logical, Constitutional grounds for it, but I will go to my grave saying that homeowner's associations and anything resembling them should be illegal and the people currently in charge of them subject to pogroms and lynchings.

3/9/2006 11:58:57 AM

Not to mention, nearly every state has its own bill of rights, most of which I suspect include something about the freedom of speech.

Yet again, a homeowners association is NOT a governmental entity. It is a private entity so all the bill of rights in the world do not apply.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 12:10 PM. Reason : pr'vate]

3/9/2006 12:09:02 PM

Quote :

"I'm a bit surprised, EarthDogg, you don't usually exaggerate like this."

Yes, you got me there. I did pump it up a bit.

Quote :

"the 1st amendment serves a very particular purpose and regulating the right of companies and organizations to curtail your right to free speech is not it"

Total agreement with you here. Contracts are very important in a libertarian world. As I said in the original post, the couple knew what the rules were when they moved in. They probably had to sign something that said they would follow the association's rules.

But despite that fact, the voters in the homeowners association should amend the rules to allow some type of political expression. Just at least so you'll know which houses to egg on Halloween.

3/9/2006 12:11:16 PM

I see what you did there.

3/9/2006 12:12:34 PM

sure, i understand her wanting to put a support our troops sign but i bet she'd get pissed off if someone put out a 5ft sign saying "I worship the devil". as a home owner, i'd have to say that i fully support home owners associations. they help maintain my property's value. if my next door neighbor had cars on cement blocks out in his yard, it'd hurt my property value. same way cities have grass/trash/car laws. you sign the contract (and it is usually fairly specific) before you buy so i don't get why people get mad when someone calls them out after they violated the contract. i actually wish my association had more teeth than it does.

3/9/2006 12:23:06 PM

the neighborhood my parents live in put timed gates on the parking lot for the tennis courts and locked some people in.

HIIIIILAAAAAAROIUS!

3/9/2006 12:25:17 PM

Quote :

"Not to mention, nearly every state has its own bill of rights, most of which I suspect include something about the freedom of speech. Yet again, a homeowners association is NOT a governmental entity. It is a private entity so all the bill of rights in the world do not apply."

yep, and yep.

3/9/2006 1:28:51 PM

Homeowners Associations suck.

They'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.

3/9/2006 1:33:08 PM

i believe that would be Earthdogg

3/9/2006 1:34:43 PM

I'm not too big on tyranny, but I'd be all for a law banning this type of bullshit.

3/9/2006 1:41:57 PM

It is kinda lame for the HA to come down on something like this. I mean, it's tacky, but it's not that bad. This woman may have an argument if it turns out other neighbors have violated the rules of the HA and have not been penalized the way she was.

3/9/2006 1:43:40 PM

well yes

thats the point of the RULES

so that one person can't say

"well ms. kelley gets her sign, why can't i have mine?"

then you're right back to the kind of neighborhood the HOA is designed to discourage

3/9/2006 1:55:17 PM

Quote :

"then you're right back to the kind of neighborhood the HOA is designed to discourage"

A neighborhood that doesn't suck, in other words...

3/9/2006 1:58:04 PM

Given how detailed the rules of the HOA typically are, I promise you that there are dozens of other homes in this neighborhood that are violating the rules and not being penalized for it. Which isn't fair.

3/9/2006 2:01:15 PM

This reminds me of that X-Files episode Arcadia...

3/9/2006 2:05:49 PM

^ is that the one with the swampthing looking bastard eating people. If so that one was siiiiiiick.

3/9/2006 2:07:40 PM

I always felt signs and bumper stickers were to draw attention to the person left at home and not the one abroad.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 2:14 PM. Reason : .]

3/9/2006 2:14:34 PM

this is rediculous, she's crying because she can't support her husband without a plastic sign in her yard. If she really wants to put something in the yard that bad, sew it onto a sign and fly it on a flag, that's probably fine by HOA rules.

3/9/2006 2:32:46 PM

Or she could have gone before the HOA and asked for an exemption instead of living in rainbow brite cheesecake factory land where the rules don't apply to her.

I abhor HOA's, but I don't challenge their right to exist. I just choose not to buy within their confines.

This isn't even newsworthy IMO.

3/9/2006 7:52:55 PM

Again, I don't have a problem with contracts as an important means of holding society together.

At the very least, any situation where a person has no reasonable choice but to live in a HOA that's going to tell them what they can and can't do with their own damn house should be prohibited.

3/9/2006 9:13:58 PM

Quote :

"At the very least, any situation where a person has no reasonable choice but to live in a HOA that's going to tell them what they can and can't do with their own damn house should be prohibited."

this happened to us. we hate them, but in central florida it is hard to find a neighborhood without one. we've got some jackass that lives accross the street and reports every minor thing thats wrong with our house cuz he has no life and lives with his mother. we got yelled at for a 1sq ft moldy spot on our roof (in hurricaine country no less) when other ppl had theirs entirely covered in mold and got no notice at all. that guy is such a douche.

either way she is dumb though, you can support your husband with a sticker on your car, a ribon on your shirt or a variety of other ways.

3/9/2006 9:31:06 PM

^ just do the same thing to that jackass find shit wrong w/ his house and turn him in for it every other day

3/9/2006 10:07:54 PM

Private property is another matter entirely.

3/9/2006 10:24:21 PM

^^^ I suggest renting. Then it is the owners problem.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 10:30 PM. Reason : ^]

3/9/2006 10:30:29 PM

Quote :

"we've got some jackass that lives accross the street and reports every minor thing thats wrong with our house "

This reminds me that most of the gov't tyranny you will face these days is on the local level. We are at the mercy of zoning boards, county commissioners, school boards, and state legislatures. Most of the imminent domain abuses have been carried out by city and county politicians.

And probably the most local source of tyranny is the homeowner's association. Granted it is a contractual arrangement, but you still have to keep an eye on it. Just one nutcase neighbor could get something awful passed just because (like with our gov't) we're not paying attention and/or are unwillling to participate.

3/9/2006 10:46:24 PM

by us i meant my family, i doubt my parents want to rent. shits too expensive for poor ass college kids anyways.

^ he was once the president, think he's running again. we've got gay local laws about parking on the street too, not that anyone follows them.

3/9/2006 11:08:56 PM

News$Observer did an article recently about a Cary neighborhood that had a coup against their HOA. The president of an HOA is still elected by the neighborhood I guess.

3/9/2006 11:30:50 PM

Quote :

"Cary neighborhood that had a coup against their HOA."

"The hapless HOA members were trotted out to the wall, passing angry homeowners who hurled verbal abuse at them.

"You want me to fix my mailbox now?" taunted one man as they passed.

Some homeowners dumped pre-emergent fertilizer on the now-weeping members while others sprayed them with liquid weed-killer.

Each was lined up against the wall. A copy of the community covenants was stuffed into each members' mouth, the sentence read aloud and then they were run through with poles bearing colorful flags of ducks, rainbows and college symbols."

3/10/2006 12:26:29 AM

read the fine print

3/10/2006 12:33:16 AM

I have never lived in a Homeowners Association, but I was wondering. In such an arrangement, there are exceptions built into the contract, right? For example, if I need to break one of the rules, is it alright if I get a plurality of the neighborhood to agree to it? Or is it usually the neighborhood elects one or two guys who are then dictator for the term?

3/10/2006 1:27:58 AM

YOU WANT ME TO FIX MY MAILBOX NOW?? HUH??? WHAT?

YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I FUCKING THOUGHT, BITCH.

[Edited on March 10, 2006 at 1:35 AM. Reason : AHAHA]

3/10/2006 1:34:55 AM

^^
Here is a part of the Lochmere HOA bylaws...

Quote :

"Section 1. Powers. The Board of Directors shall have the power to: (a) adopt and publish rules and regulations governing the use of the Common Area and facilities, the personal conduct of the Members and their guests thereon, and to establish penalties for the infraction thereof;"

I didn't see anywhere that the rank and file can vote for anything but the board of directors.

3/10/2006 1:37:02 AM

Oh, OK, so it's like fascism, but because upper-class pricks do it in the framework of a contract, we don't care.

3/10/2006 1:41:14 AM