Yet another community that does not want a flag pole…

[Keith B]

The yard in his neighborhood is community property.

Missed that he is in a townhome and the yards are community property. I stand corrected.

I think the issue really boils down to the neighbors. Unfortunately there will be those that don't want it and that weighs heavily on the issue. I think those neighbors need to move.

I do hope he gets his wish.

[Keith B]

The compromise should be the Home Owners association should pick a place for a flag for their Neighborhood and give the guy the duty/honer to Raise it everyday.

That is a great idea. Maybe you can drop them a note and see if they have thought of that??

[bdickens]

HOAs exist to protect the value of the properties that are owned by their membership. Any HOA that pulls this crap is without question hurting the value of the properties and are therefor violating the sole purpose of their existence.

HOAs exist to enforce conformity under the color of law.

[Purplehood]

The compromise should be the Home Owners association should pick a place for a flag for their Neighborhood and give the guy the duty/honer to Raise it everyday.

That is a great idea. Maybe you can drop them a note and see if they have thought of that??

I totally agree. In fact, I would be amazed to find a condo neighborhood that didn't already have a flagpole on its grounds. If it didn't, and I was considering moving in, I would ask to erect one or not move in.

[casingpoint]

By now, this guy Barfoot must be near the top of Homeland Security's list of former military veterans who are potential terrorists. He's already violated the homeowners association rules. Where's he going to stop? And is Homeland Security good 'enuff to stop him? Mano-a-Mano, it doesn't sound like they stand a chance. But they'll gang up on him. Maybe burn him out like Waco. It'll be a good fight, though. 1911 versus 357 SIG.

[The Annoyed Man]

I know that some people swear by HOA neighborhoods, but I personally fail to see the need. Here in Grapevine, we have both HOA and non-HOA neighborhoods. I live in one of the latter, and I have friends who live in one of the former. Both are very nice neighborhoods where people maintain their properties. I fail to see any qualitative difference in how we each live, except that my friends have less freedom than I do.

I, on the other hand, invested heavily in re-landscaping my property (front and rear) and making the front view an "curbside appeal" of my house more unique than my neighbors'. It was tastefully done, and I have gotten nothing but compliments from my neighbors. My friends who live in HOA neighborhoods would not have had the freedom to do what I did. It is for reasons exactly like this that I refused to consider a home in an HOA neighborhood when we were house hunting.

I'm just not sold on the concept of surrendering my options to a "governing authority" who will tell me what I can and cannot do with my home. I think the fundamental problem with HOAs is mission creep. It's just like Congress in that regard. They keep creating barriers to personal freedom in order to justify their existence. You start off requiring that everyone keep their lawns cut and their trees properly trimmed, and pretty soon you're telling them they can't put up a flagpole in their yards... Oh wait... it's NOT "their" yard, it's the HOA's! Yet another reason for not living with one.

[karl]

I fail to see any qualitative difference in how we each live, except that my friends have less freedom than I do.

You should look at some of the unrestricted property near my church, you might change your mind if you were in the greater Houston area. On the other hand, not being able to own and maintain my lawn would be very disappointing. In my area we have a lot of freedom to do what we please, painting the house is really the only thing you have to ask permission for, but for any tasteful color there won't be a problem.

[chabouk]

HOAs are a government. They're a voluntary government, and there's nothing wrong with that: it would be nice if all government was voluntary.

The problem with HOA boards is that they're made up of people who have a self-selected predisposition to be busybodies, conformists, and authoritarians with narrow minds and narrow views of what is or isn't "acceptable".

[5thGenTexan]

The problem with HOA's and I live in one by choir is that until they sell 80% of the properties the developer controls all seats on the board. The management group enforces the rules on the homeowners but letsthe developer slide. To get the to mow their lots this summer we wound up having to get the city councilman who lives in the HOA neihghborhood adjacent to pressure odes Enforcement to come out and cite each of 300+ lots for tall weeds, construction debris, etc... Before they would do anything about it.

But even after the get the 1100 lots sold to hit the 80% most likely 20% or less of the people will control the board and the rest will gritch rather than participate to change the rules. Good old voter apathy just like every election of any kind vote your like minded neighbors in as a slate and the majority can run it.

[The Annoyed Man]

The problem with HOA boards is that they're made up of people who have a self-selected predisposition to be busybodies, conformists, and authoritarians with narrow minds and narrow views of what is or isn't "acceptable".

And that is the mission creep to which I referred. It isn't unusual to board members feel like they have to meddle in stuff to justify the board's continued existence, or their own importance to it. Not all of them certainly... but many do. And of course, their decisions have a real impact on the lives of people who are subject to their power. If they acted compassion, wisdom, and discernment instead of like rigid little martinets, it would be fine, but they don't. And the result is that some great old guy whose jockey shorts they are not worthy to carry is being denied the right to fly Old Glory on a pole — the emblem of the nation for whom he put his life on the line, not once, not twice, but three times.

[ChuckW]

For what it is worth, I do not much care for home owners associations. The last two neighborhoods that I have lived in have one. What sometimes happens is that a very few who bitch a lot (out of hundreds in the neighborhood) like to get in positions of power and enforce their misguided "standards" and ideas for expenditures on everybody else.

That said, the guy erecting the flagpole is probably in the wrong! When moving into neighborhoods with HOAs papers get signed that indicate agreement with certain rules. If these rules cover the flagpole situation then the MOA veteran is violating a contract he has signed.

[casingpoint]

people who have a self-selected predisposition to be busybodies, conformists, and authoritarians with narrow minds and narrow views of what is or isn't "acceptable"

Off topic. This thread is not about cops.

[marksiwel]

people who have a self-selected predisposition to be busybodies, conformists, and authoritarians with narrow minds and narrow views of what is or isn't "acceptable"

Off topic. This thread is not about cops.

[Keith B]

Just saw this

Neighbors relent, Medal of Honor Winner's Flag OK

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — A 90-year-old Medal of Honor winner can keep his 21-foot flagpole in his front yard after a homeowner’s association dropped its request to remove it, a spokesman for Democratic Virginia Sen. Mark Warner said Tuesday.

The Sussex Square homeowners’ association likewise has agreed to drop threats to take legal action against retired Army Col. Van T. Barfoot, Warner spokesman Kevin Hall said.

The association had threatened to take Barfoot to court if he failed to remove the pole from his suburban Richmond home by Friday. It had said the pole violated the neighborhood’s aesthetic guidelines.

Neither Barfoot’s daughter, Margaret Nicholls, nor homeowners’ president Glenn Wilson immediately returned telephone messages.

Dropping the issue effectively ends a request that White House press secretary Robert Gibbs on Monday called “silly.”

Warner and Sen. Jim Webb, both Virginia Democrats, had rallied behind Barfoot, a World War II veteran.

In a letter last week, Webb urged the association to “consider the exceptional nature of Col. Barfoot’s service when considering his pride and determination in honoring our flag.”

Barfoot’s fight also has lit up veterans bulletin boards and blog sites supporting him.

Barfoot won the Medal of Honor for actions while his platoon was under German assault near Carano, Italy, in May 1944. He was credited with standing up to three German tanks with a bazooka and stopping their advance.

He also won the Purple Heart and other decorations, and served in Korea and Vietnam before retiring from the service in 1974.

[Purplehood]

Did you catch the news video of him showing his awards on his wall? I saw a MOH and what looked like a Silver Star and 20 or more other decorations. It reminded me of Chesty Puller (reputedly the most decorated Marine in history).
Off topic.
People like the ACLU (and even myself to an extent) rant about religious symbols being displayed on public property.
I was driving to work this morning and heard about the Houston National Cemetery wreath program. It suddenly dawned on me...how does the ACLU reconcile gravestone markers with religious symbols on veterans grave sites in National Cemeteries?
To me it is a no-brainer, they belong there. But logically, it contradicts my beliefs regarding keeping religious symbols and icons off of public property. How do I reconcile that contradiction?