Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
Florida community might ban sign; ..."Support Our Troops"
Topic Started: Mar 9 2006, 06:58 AM (415 Views)
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

It's a sticky situation, but this is one case where they need to change the law or wait for a significant amount of complaints...they haven't even received one complaint:

Posted Image

http://www.tampatrib.com/MGBY9HYLKKE.html

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."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
89th
 
It's a sticky situation, but this is one case where they need to change the law or wait for a significant amount of complaints...they haven't even received one complaint


You sure about that?

Quote:
 
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.


Perhaps the sign violates the deed restrictions.

Quote:
 
But officials of Westchase, in northwest Hillsborough County, view the sign differently. They say the 2-foot-high sign violates community rules.


Sounds like the officials are complaining plenty.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
I think they should follow the rules. If they make an exception for this, they then will have to make exceptions for lots of other worthy causes. What about a big sign saying 'Everybody be Nice'? You can't argue with the sentiments of the sign, but if they're not allowed to put it up, they shouldn't.

Rules is rules. It doesn't matter what the sign says. Any other approach is emotional blackmail, and that's exactly what this is.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Yep, perzactly.

(I personally think the officials involved should only persue it if there's a complaint, but eh, John's right. Rules is rules.)
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Aqua Letifer
Mar 9 2006, 10:10 AM
89th
 
It's a sticky situation, but this is one case where they need to change the law or wait for a significant amount of complaints...they haven't even received one complaint


You sure about that?

Yes, see:

Quote:
 
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.


And yes, the sign violates the agreement, and that's why I said I think they should ammend the rule. I think it's a bad rule.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Well, there were complaints, just not from the residents. Officials have a problem with it. That's what I meant.

And anyway, what would the rule be, then? You obviously can't have a rule just for "nice signs". If she's allowed to post that in her lawn, her neighbors should be allowed to post a sign of equal size saying "the troops have smelly underarms." Laws protect and prosecute the well intentioned, malicious, and crazy alike.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Aqua Letifer
Mar 9 2006, 11:15 AM
Well, there were complaints, just not from the residents. Officials have a problem with it. That's what I meant.

And anyway, what would the rule be, then? You obviously can't have a rule just for "nice signs". If she's allowed to post that in her lawn, her neighbors should be allowed to post a sign of equal size saying "the troops have smelly underarms." Laws protect and prosecute the well intentioned, malicious, and crazy alike.

If I lived there, and they changed the rules, I'd plant an odiferous shrub, and then plant a big warning sign next to it saying 'Bush Stinks!' That's just me, though, and as everyone knows, I'm a dick.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Yeah, I was talking about no complaints from residents. Which as you said, should be the way it should go...but the rule is there.

And the rule, I guess would be something along the lines of what can be said in public.

For example, maybe the rule should say no obscene or offensive signs.

Perhaps they should use the 1973 case Miller vs California as an example?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Quote:
 
For example, maybe the rule should say no obscene or offensive signs.



WAYYY too grey-area. Why not just say "only positive, uplifting and patriotic signs allowed"? Even if that kind of language would be allowed, I wouldn't want it.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kenny
HOLY CARP!!!
Why did they move into a neighborhood that limits this kind of speech?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Aqua Letifer
Mar 9 2006, 11:23 AM
Quote:
 
For example, maybe the rule should say no obscene or offensive signs.



WAYYY too grey-area. Why not just say "only positive, uplifting and patriotic signs allowed"? Even if that kind of language would be allowed, I wouldn't want it.

Regardless of the variables involved, it really strikes me wrong when you can't put a patriotic sign on your own land.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kenny
HOLY CARP!!!
I thought the title of this thread was:


Florida community might ban sin
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aqua Letifer
Member Avatar
ZOOOOOM!
Emotional blackmail, as John said. The content of the sign doesn't matter in the slightest. Is it, or is it not, violating a deed restriction? If it is, then sure, work to change the law if you want, but in the meantime go along to get along and follow the rules.

And kenny has a good point. They should've known about this restriction going in.
I cite irreconcilable differences.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Aqua Letifer
Mar 9 2006, 11:31 AM
Emotional blackmail, as John said. The content of the sign doesn't matter in the slightest. Is it, or is it not, violating a deed restriction? If it is, then sure, work to change the law if you want, but in the meantime go along to get along and follow the rules.

Yup, exactly what I've been sayin. :nerd:

...I wonder if they can put the sign in their window or on their roof? :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
The 89th Key
Mar 9 2006, 11:28 AM
Aqua Letifer
Mar 9 2006, 11:23 AM
Quote:
 
For example, maybe the rule should say no obscene or offensive signs.



WAYYY too grey-area. Why not just say "only positive, uplifting and patriotic signs allowed"? Even if that kind of language would be allowed, I wouldn't want it.

Regardless of the variables involved, it really strikes me wrong when you can't put a patriotic sign on your own land.

I feel the same way.

I had a big sign up saying 'NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION' up, and a big English Flag with a 'V' sign on it (not V for Victory, the other one), and they made me take it down. Whine, whine, whine. Next thing you know, they'll make me take down the 'DETH TWO SCOTCHMEN' placard I have in my back yard.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The 89th Key
Member Avatar

Exactly!

...bastards.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
taiwan_girl
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
America is generally a country of individuals, and it is very hard for some people to give that up and conform. I think that is why there are a lot of problems and disputes in homeowner associations.

People do not want to give up the control over what they can or can't do.

In this case, I have to agree with Mr. Aqau Letifer and Mr. John D'Oh. The rules were spelled out - as soon as one exception is granted, someone else will try to take advantage. I don't think that anyone has a problem with this particular homeowner, but it is difficult to allow this and not others.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
Something about Homeowners Associations just hit me as wrong. Almost unconstitutional. Your land is your land. Once you own it, you should be able to do with it as you wish, as long as you stay within local ordnances and laws set up for the health and safety. If I want to paint my house deep purple, then install alot of black lights around the perimeter of my house, then hey, it's my right. I don't see myself ever moving into a neighborhood with a HOA.
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
We live in a resort area with an HOA -- very restrictive regarding gardening standards, colors of paint, putting the trash out after dark, no parking on the streets after dark, etc.

But the upside is that no one is rebuilding their '72 El Camino on their front lawn, and whereas Phoenix property values have generally increase 40% since we bought, our area has gone up 55%. That's not a bad price to pay.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
Ahhhh, but prices in wealthier neighborhoods tend to raise quicker at any rate, HOA or no HOA. Plus, if you're living in an upper scale neighborhood where prices are higher than the norm, I rather doubt your neighbor's going to have an El Camino sitting on blocks in the lawn. :wink:
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Phlebas
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
I heard of someone who lived in an area like this with restrictions. He started painting his house purple, and the HOA people came up to him saying purple is not an approved color, and gave him a list of "approved colors." He proceeded to paint his house using every one of the approved colors.
Random FML: Today, I was fired by my boss in front of my coworkers. It would have been nice if I could have left the building before they started celebrating. FML

The founding of the bulk of the world's nation states post 1914 is based on self-defined nationalisms. The bulk of those national movements involve territory that was ethnically mixed. The foundation of many of those nation states involved population movements in the aftermath. When the only one that is repeatedly held up as unjust and unjustifiable is the Zionist project, the term anti-semitism may very well be appropriate. - P*D


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
Luke's Dad
Mar 9 2006, 02:52 PM
If I want to paint my house deep purple, then install alot of black lights around the perimeter of my house, then hey, it's my right.

I feel a little queasy even thinking about it. In the UK they have ASBO's (Anti-social behaviour orders) to deal with your sort. Stops the riff-raff from getting above themselves, don't you know.

:)
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luke's Dad
Member Avatar
Emperor Pengin
In reality, I would never paint my house purple. However, I would have no problem if a neighbor did. Heck, I'd have no problem with the El Camino on blocks. I'd just take a six pack over, and help them work on it.
The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bernard
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
"... gated Stonebridge neighborhood... "

That's the reason.

But that's nothing compared to what the Domino pizza guy wants to do with the community he plans to build!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Well, this is a subject I know a bit about. I live in a rural Township that has strict signage regulations, because it doesn't want visual pollution throughout. Most of the developments in the area have restrictions via their HOAs even more strict in some ways than the Township regulations.

Personally I feel that our sign code is a little too strict, and I favor a slight loosening of its stipulations (but not as much as is desired by the code's opponents, mostly local real estate agents). But based on court cases challenging codes like ours (and here's where the relevance to the story comes in), courts seem to uphold a jurisdiction's, or a HOA's, right to restrict signage in general - particularly commercially oriented signs or other advertising signs; but when the restriction begins to encroach on a.) political or b.) religious, speech or expression, courts have generally taken positions against the jurisdiction's or HOA's authority to limit such signage.

In any case, I think if the woman fought the HOA, she'd win. She's not the first to run up against this thing, and there's lots of precedent in her favor.
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1