Online Now 3276

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2619
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3336
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

HOA tells man he can't fly the American flag, so he does this

  • USMCAG said...

    Beautiful. It's a sad damn day when we can't fly our own flag in this country.

    That pisses me off to no end! What has happened to this country over the last 25 years?

    oufisherman

  • oufisherman said...

    That pisses me off to no end! What has happened to this country over the last 25 years?

    Did you even read the thread?

    signature image signature image signature image

    "A political call, the fall guy accord...We can't afford to be neutral on a moving train..."

    BamaLivesFootba ●

  • RTR13 said...

    I have to deal with HOA issues for my company. Had to send out a couple letters today to people in violation of our covenants. Flying any kind of flag is against our covenants as well. It has nothing to do with loving or hating America. It has everything to do with keeping the neighborhood looking good and keeping property values high.

    If we allow one guy to fly an American flag, we cannot keep another guy from flying an Iraqi flag or another kind of flag if he wants to, that's discrimination. The only way around that is to not allow any flags, signs, etc. Otherwise, our neighborhood could be blanketed with all sorts of nonsense and make it look like shit, not to mention hurt our sales and property values.

    If you don't like it, don't live here. The covenants are clearly explained to everyone who buys here. Nobody is tricked into anything. If you want to fly an American flag, do it inside. Why do you HAVE to show it off to everyone else?

    For the record, the HOA where I live is the same. I don't mind it. I don't need to fly any kind of flag to express my feelings. I do think the guy who painted his house like the flag is hilarious though.

    That logic is so incredibly flawed. Flying a flag of nationality whether American or Iraqi doesn't look tacky or decrease the value of property. I live on a military base and I love the fact that I drive by house after house that has flags ranging from American, British, Australian, Mexican, Canadian and plenty of sport teams including my home that has a Bama flag out front. I think it looks awesome. It certainly does nothing to diminish the value of the property. I would bet some of the highest valued property in this Nation has the American Ensign flying in front of it.

    I do understand banning signage/flags that are offensive in nature. I'm talking about across the board offensive and not one person trying to be a douche. Things that are associated with racial discrimination or a symbol of oppressiveness. You can put contracts together that allow for national ensigns to fly while banning any other signage.

    Anyone that thinks a national flag flying in front of a house decreases the value of the property has completely lost reason or sanity. There are several lawsuits from veterans across the country against HOAs pertaining to this very issue. I believe it will one day reach the Supreme Court and I think this has a real chance to go the way of the veterans. You can't hide behind a contract if said contract violates someone's constitutional rights...I imagine flying the national ensign falls under protected speech/expression.

    This post was edited by bamabum5 on 4/19/2012 at 5:31 PM

    bamabum5 ●

  • bamabum5 said...

    That logic is so incredibly flawed. Flying a flag of nationality whether American or Iraqi doesn't look tacky or decrease the value of property. I live on a military base and I love the fact that I drive by house after house that has flags ranging from American, British, Australian, Mexican, Canadian and plenty of sport teams including my home that has a Bama flag out front. I think it looks awesome. It certainly does nothing to diminish the value of the property. I would bet some of the highest valued property in this Nation has the American Ensign flying in front of it.

    I do understand banning signage/flags that are offensive in nature. I'm talking about across the board offensive and not one person trying to be a douche. Things that are associated with racial discrimination or a symbol of oppressiveness. You can put contracts together that allow for national ensigns to fly while banning any other signage.

    Anyone that thinks a national flag flying in front of a house decreases the value of the property has completely lost reason or sanity. There are several lawsuits from veterans across the country against HOAs pertaining to this very issue. I believe it will one day reach the Supreme Court and I think this has a real chance to go the way of the veterans. You can't hide behind a contract if said contract violates someone's constitutional rights...I imagine flying the national ensign falls under protected speech/expression.

    headslap

    This post was edited by BamaLivesFootba on 4/19/2012 at 5:36 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    "A political call, the fall guy accord...We can't afford to be neutral on a moving train..."

    BamaLivesFootba ●

  • RTR13 said...

    I have to deal with HOA issues for my company. Had to send out a couple letters today to people in violation of our covenants. Flying any kind of flag is against our covenants as well. It has nothing to do with loving or hating America. It has everything to do with keeping the neighborhood looking good and keeping property values high.

    If we allow one guy to fly an American flag, we cannot keep another guy from flying an Iraqi flag or another kind of flag if he wants to, that's discrimination. The only way around that is to not allow any flags, signs, etc. Otherwise, our neighborhood could be blanketed with all sorts of nonsense and make it look like shit, not to mention hurt our sales and property values.

    If you don't like it, don't live here. The covenants are clearly explained to everyone who buys here. Nobody is tricked into anything. If you want to fly an American flag, do it inside. Why do you HAVE to show it off to everyone else?

    For the record, the HOA where I live is the same. I don't mind it. I don't need to fly any kind of flag to express my feelings. I do think the guy who painted his house like the flag is hilarious though.

    Then do you believe a country club has the right to ban Jews and people of color? HOAs and club boards are identical. They are made up of members who decide what they want the neighborhood or club to be like.

    signature image

    Looks like another perfect day.

    Under Review

  • Under Review said...

    Then do you believe a country club has the right to ban Jews and people of color? HOAs and club boards are identical. They are made up of members who decide what they want the neighborhood or club to be like.

    To bamabum, flags and signs in the yard absolutely can diminish property values depending on what they are. I don't know what else to tell you but that is a fact. As for national flags, they may not lower property values on their own but they can certainly scare off buyers. Fair or not, a prospect could drive in and see an Iraqi flag and drive right back out. It is easier for us to just outlaw everything to be safe. If we only allow national flags then that opens us up to people complaining about us not allowing other flags, then they say it isn't fair, then maybe they sue. It's a liability issue...why not just say "no" across the board to avoid that? That's what we do, it's smart business.

    Under Review, not a good analogy. We can't keep out Jews or people of color like a country club can, that's against the law and the fair housing act. Not allowing flags is more akin to a country club not allowing jeans on the golf course. People who join the club know they can't wear jeans before they join. People who buy from us know they can't fly flags before they buy.

    HADOUKEN

  • Also bamabum, your personal opinion isn't the opinion of everyone else so the fact that you think a Bama flag flying in a yard looks awesome doesn't matter. Some people think wal-mart jerseys look awesome.

    A lot of people find that stuff tacky so it is better to just not allow any of it. We sell some $1 million+ homes, I can tell you most of those people don't want Bama flags flying in front of those homes...if you were in my business, you'd understand. Everyone is different so it is best to keep things as uniform as possible to help sell houses and not offend anyone.

    HADOUKEN

  • RTR13 said...

    To bamabum, flags and signs in the yard absolutely can diminish property values depending on what they are. I don't know what else to tell you but that is a fact. As for national flags, they may not lower property values on their own but they can certainly scare off buyers. Fair or not, a prospect could drive in and see an Iraqi flag and drive right back out. It is easier for us to just outlaw everything to be safe. If we only allow national flags then that opens us up to people complaining about us not allowing other flags, then they say it isn't fair, then maybe they sue. It's a liability issue...why not just say "no" across the board to avoid that? That's what we do, it's smart business.

    Under Review, not a good analogy. We can't keep out Jews or people of color like a country club can, that's against the law and the fair housing act. Not allowing flags is more akin to a country club not allowing jeans on the golf course. People who join the club know they can't wear jeans before they join. People who buy from us know they can't fly flags before they buy.

    It's actually a violation of federal law to put blanket bans on flying the American flag. It is protected under the freedom to display the American flag act of 2005. You can put some restrictions on it such as erecting a flag pole in the front yard but some States have already started to protect homeowners from those restrictions as well. I think Gov Crist in Florida sign a law in 2008 that allowing homeowners to erect poles up to 20 ft and flying the national ensign. If you association is banning the flying of the American flag altogether, the association is in violation of Federal Law.

    bamabum5 ●

  • bamabum5 said...

    It's actually a violation of federal law to put blanket bans on flying the American flag. It is protected under the freedom to display the American flag act of 2005. You can put some restrictions on it such as erecting a flag pole in the front yard but some States have already started to protect homeowners from those restrictions as well. I think Gov Crist in Florida sign a law in 2008 that allowing homeowners to erect poles up to 20 ft and flying the national ensign. If you association is banning the flying of the American flag altogether, the association is in violation of Federal Law.

    I can't believe that is a law.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "A political call, the fall guy accord...We can't afford to be neutral on a moving train..."

    BamaLivesFootba ●

  • bamabum5 said...

    It's actually a violation of federal law to put blanket bans on flying the American flag. It is protected under the freedom to display the American flag act of 2005. You can put some restrictions on it such as erecting a flag pole in the front yard but some States have already started to protect homeowners from those restrictions as well. I think Gov Crist in Florida sign a law in 2008 that allowing homeowners to erect poles up to 20 ft and flying the national ensign. If you association is banning the flying of the American flag altogether, the association is in violation of Federal Law.

    We have never actually had anyone fly the flag before (probably because they knew the covenants prohibited it). If you're correct though, we would obviously allow it. However, does the act say anything about other nationality's flags? I feel like that would open us up to some lawsuits from people from other countries, which we have sold to recently, if we didn't allow their flags too.

    I have no personal problem with flying the flag. It is strictly a business and liability issue. I am younger and have only been in this business a few years but you learn quickly that if you allow one thing, you better allow everything or your ass is going to hear about it. Having strict covenants helps avoid a lot of headaches and issues that could cost you time and money...as well as helps you sell houses easier.

    HADOUKEN

  • RTR13 said...

    Also bamabum, your personal opinion isn't the opinion of everyone else so the fact that you think a Bama flag flying in a yard looks awesome doesn't matter. Some people think wal-mart jerseys look awesome.

    A lot of people find that stuff tacky so it is better to just not allow any of it. We sell some $1 million+ homes, I can tell you most of those people don't want Bama flags flying in front of those homes...if you were in my business, you'd understand. Everyone is different so it is best to keep things as uniform as possible to help sell houses and not offend anyone.

    I realize some may like it and some may not like it. I was simply pointing out the fact that your statement that it looks tacky doesn't apply to everyone either. I see neighborhoods as communities. I personally think driving through neighborhoods(even million dollar home neighborhoods) where every house looks bland and there is no character to the neighborhood is boring. That's just my opinion.

    The bigger issue is the fact you think a flag flying devalues property. Most associations have restricted such things as flood lights or high flag poles being erected because of neighbors having issues with noise or the ability to sleep at night. Those are legitimate concerns. There is simply no basis to believe that an American flag flying in front of a house has any bearing on it's value. None. That said, I understand the concern someone might have if they were selling a home next to someone flying an Iraqi flag. I tend to think that if it's a million dollar neighborhood, that wouldn't be too much of an issue though. Again, just my opinion.

    Regardless, if someone can walk into the sheet and burn an American flag because it is his private property and he can do to it what he wishes, I certainly will take the position that if I own a home and want to fly an American flag in front of it, I am going to do and no-one is going to tell me I can't. I really don't care what you say the contract says. Simple as that. Sue me.

    bamabum5 ●

  • RTR13 said...

    We have never actually had anyone fly the flag before (probably because they knew the covenants prohibited it). If you're correct though, we would obviously allow it. However, does the act say anything about other nationality's flags? I feel like that would open us up to some lawsuits from people from other countries, which we have sold to recently, if we didn't allow their flags too.

    I have no personal problem with flying the flag. It is strictly a business and liability issue. I am younger and have only been in this business a few years but you learn quickly that if you allow one thing, you better allow everything or your ass is going to hear about it. Having strict covenants helps avoid a lot of headaches and issues that could cost you time and money...as well as helps you sell houses easier.

    It's a law. Like I said, many States have even gone further with protecting homeowners from these type of restrictions. This specifically pertains to the American flag. Other restrictions are allowed which would cover other National flags I suppose.

    bamabum5 ●

  • RTR13 said...
    Under Review, not a good analogy. We can't keep out Jews or people of color like a country club can, that's against the law and the fair housing act. Not allowing flags is more akin to a country club not allowing jeans on the golf course. People who join the club know they can't wear jeans before they join. People who buy from us know they can't fly flags before they buy.

    Perfectly good analogy. It's against the law because the law infringed on peoples rights and it was changed. The same applies here and it may well be changed also.

    signature image

    Looks like another perfect day.

    Under Review

  • RTR13 said...

    If you want to fly an American flag, do it inside. Why do you HAVE to show it off to everyone else?

    You have to be kidding me. Go jump off a cliff.

    signature image signature image signature image

    SEC SEC SEC!!!

    USMCAG

  • RTR13 said...

    We have never actually had anyone fly the flag before (probably because they knew the covenants prohibited it). If you're correct though, we would obviously allow it. However, does the act say anything about other nationality's flags? I feel like that would open us up to some lawsuits from people from other countries, which we have sold to recently, if we didn't allow their flags too.

    I have no personal problem with flying the flag. It is strictly a business and liability issue. I am younger and have only been in this business a few years but you learn quickly that if you allow one thing, you better allow everything or your ass is going to hear about it. Having strict covenants helps avoid a lot of headaches and issues that could cost you time and money...as well as helps you sell houses easier.

    If people from other countries don't like it, too damn bad.

    signature image signature image signature image

    SEC SEC SEC!!!

    USMCAG

  • Under Review said...

    Perfectly good analogy. It's against the law because the law infringed on peoples rights and it was changed. The same applies here and it may well be changed also.

    Your analogy isn't applicable, as already pointed out.

    The things you listed were discriminatory. They restricted the rights of a certain race based solely on race.

    The flag ban has nothing to do with discrimination and everything to do with legitimate contractual provisions.

    If a 'right' can't be denied through contract, then a HOA would be forbidden from setting any rules at all. We all know that isn't the case.

    AbsenteeTrojan

  • bamabum5 said...

    The bigger issue is the fact you think a flag flying devalues property. Most associations have restricted such things as flood lights or high flag poles being erected because of neighbors having issues with noise or the ability to sleep at night. Those are legitimate concerns. There is simply no basis to believe that an American flag flying in front of a house has any bearing on it's value. None. That said, I understand the concern someone might have if they were selling a home next to someone flying an Iraqi flag. I tend to think that if it's a million dollar neighborhood, that wouldn't be too much of an issue though. Again, just my opinion.

    Regardless, if someone can walk into the sheet and burn an American flag because it is his private property and he can do to it what he wishes, I certainly will take the position that if I own a home and want to fly an American flag in front of it, I am going to do and no-one is going to tell me I can't. I really don't care what you say the contract says. Simple as that. Sue me.

    Too rambling.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by AbsenteeTrojan on 4/20/2012 at 1:42 AM

    AbsenteeTrojan

  • bamabum5 said...

    It's actually a violation of federal law to put blanket bans on flying the American flag. It is protected under the freedom to display the American flag act of 2005. You can put some restrictions on it such as erecting a flag pole in the front yard but some States have already started to protect homeowners from those restrictions as well. ... If you association is banning the flying of the American flag altogether, the association is in violation of Federal Law.

    Just to get this out there... I agree that national flags should be able to be flown. HOAs are overbearing, but they are entered into consensually and by contract.

    With that said, you're not exactly right about the law. Like you said, restrictions about flag pole height, etc, are allowed. But there is also some very vague language where it says that a HOA has a right to restrict the flag where it is protecting a substantial interest of the HOA.

    A HOA is in place to help maintain property value, therefore it could be argued that placing this restriction is clearly protecting a substantial interest.

    Like you said, this may go all the way up to the Supreme Court. Probably not, but you never know. They have plenty of practice defining things such as 'substantial interest'.

    AbsenteeTrojan

  • Forgot to quote.

    This post was edited by oufisherman on 4/20/2012 at 8:45 AM

    oufisherman

  • BamaLivesFootba said...

    Did you even read the thread?

    Most of it! My reply was in regard to the tread topic not everyone's response. Does this help?

    oufisherman

  • oufisherman said...

    Most of it! My reply was in regard to the tread topic not everyone's response. Does this help?

    thumbsup

    signature image signature image signature image

    "A political call, the fall guy accord...We can't afford to be neutral on a moving train..."

    BamaLivesFootba ●

  • AbsenteeTrojan said...

    Just to get this out there... I agree that national flags should be able to be flown. HOAs are overbearing, but they are entered into consensually and by contract.

    With that said, you're not exactly right about the law. Like you said, restrictions about flag pole height, etc, are allowed. But there is also some very vague language where it says that a HOA has a right to restrict the flag where it is protecting a substantial interest of the HOA.

    A HOA is in place to help maintain property value, therefore it could be argued that placing this restriction is clearly protecting a substantial interest.

    Like you said, this may go all the way up to the Supreme Court. Probably not, but you never know. They have plenty of practice defining things such as 'substantial interest'.

    It really depends on the direction the argument goes in. With regards to the american flag, homeowners have federal and in somecases, State law on their side. They are protected from blanket restrictions that ban the flying of the American flag. Period. I don't see the Supreme Court deciding that a ban against the National Ensign is protecting property value or any "substantial interest".

    If the HOA wants to argue that it opens the door for other flags to be flown, it might have a valid argument. However, the current state of the argument deals specifically with the American flag.

    I wonder what the real issue with the OP's story really is because the argument has changed drastically in recent years. HOAs have been vilified as unpatriotic for blanket bans on American flags so they now say flags can be flown as long as it is on one of those house mounted things you can get at home depot. They don't want flag poles being erected. I actually think they have a more reasonable argument there. Nearly every story out there today is in regards to a flagpole being considered a permanent structure to the property which are not allowed in many contracts.

    Still though, lawmakers at the state level are still siding with homeowners. For instance, Florida law says homeowners can erect a flagpole despite any HOA restrictions as long as it is 20 ft or less and does not interfere with sightlines. Taking on the National Ensign is a losing cause for HOAs. They can fight but I don't think they will win.

    As I said before, If I buy a home and I sign a contract that tells me I can't fly an American flag, I will fly it anyways. I'm not going to go overboard and I will make sure it is attached to the home as to not interfere with neighbors and such but I will fly it. I have my reasons and that's all I'm going to say about it.

    bamabum5 ●

  • AbsenteeTrojan said...

    Your analogy isn't applicable, as already pointed out.

    The things you listed were discriminatory. They restricted the rights of a certain race based solely on race.

    The flag ban has nothing to do with discrimination and everything to do with legitimate contractual provisions.

    If a 'right' can't be denied through contract, then a HOA would be forbidden from setting any rules at all. We all know that isn't the case.

    But they weren't considered discriminatory under the Jim Crow laws which were changed because they were wrong. You insist on masking the bigger picture that both issues are discriminatory and that certain HOA powers could be found to be unfair.

    I understand the issue of contracts even though I'm obviously the only non lawyer here. Unfair contracts can and should be challenged.

    I dealt with HOAs and condo boards for 30 years as a contractor and I know how petty and power crazed certain members can be. They are usually the ones who bully the rest of the board. BS rules should be confronted and brought to light like this situation.

    signature image

    Looks like another perfect day.

    Under Review

  • Well, RTR13, looks like the HOA will have to risk taking a hit in profits if this is indeed a true law. You can't make it illegal to fly the American Flag, and you can't discriminate against people flying other national ensigns, for fear of discrimination, so you don't really have a choice in the matter any more. Here's a thought; maybe the HOA could stop backing up generalized stereotypes when trying to sell a home. Re-organize and re-affirm your marketing tactics. The problem exists because no one is making an effort to change. This is something the HOA should have anticipated, especially in an extremely patriotic country like the USA.

    Killswitch225

  • Under Review said...

    But they weren't considered discriminatory under the Jim Crow laws which were changed because they were wrong. You insist on masking the bigger picture that both issues are discriminatory and that certain HOA powers could be found to be unfair.

    This isn't discriminatory. The blanket ban on flying flags applies to everyone equally. There is no way to describe that as discriminatory in the same sense as the racially discriminatory example you used.

    It's not based on anything racial, religious, sexist, agist, etc.

    AbsenteeTrojan

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports