Marine vet's 20-foot flagpole has homeowners association filing suit over a display of patriotism t

Marine vet's 20-foot flagpole has homeowners association filing suit over a display of patriotism that stands taller than allowed

www.chron.com

A Marine Corps veteran is being sued by his Cypress-area homeowners association because the flagpole on which he flies the United States and Marine Corps flags does not meet his subdivision's design guidelines.
Mike Merola and his lawyer, Lee Thweatt, say this is a classic case of overreach by a nitpicking homeowners association. Lakeland Village Community Association says it is seeking to enforce its rules evenly on all residents.
Standing in his backyard in a black T-shirt bearing an eagle and the American flag, the 60-year-old Merola called that argument "a lame excuse." After his appl

(visit the link for the full news article)

Just love how these elite corporations infringe on the American, much less the pride that some have! I'm glad to see this guy stand up for what he believes in.

Also good to see that the Flag Act of 2005, supersedes the HOA bylaws. Hope it goes to court, so the HOA in question will be seen as the asses they are!

www.chron.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

If I were him, I would cover my house in the American Flag, and even install another flag pole.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Just love how these elite corporations infringe on the American, much less the pride that some have! I'm glad to see this guy stand up for what he believes in.

Also good to see that the Flag Act of 2005, supersedes the HOA bylaws. Hope it goes to court, so the HOA in question will be seen as the asses they are!

www.chron.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 7-1-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)

I am not a fan of homeowners associations, but he chose to live in one, and therefore to follow the rules of it.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
I am not a fan of homeowners associations, but he chose to live in one, and therefore to follow the rules of it.

Some rights are granted by god, not homeowner's assosciations. So sayeth our founders.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Only problem is that the Flag Act of 2005 supersedes what any bylaws issued from an HOA may submit. So the HOA has no case, there puny lil bylaws wont stand against a pass legislative law.

Originally posted by sbctinfantry

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
I am not a fan of homeowners associations, but he chose to live in one, and therefore to follow the rules of it.

Some rights are granted by god, not homeowner's assosciations. So sayeth our founders.

States rights my friend. If the state agrees that HOA's are okay, the fed cant do anything about it. There is no constitutional guideline against it.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Only problem is that the Flag Act of 2005 supersedes what any bylaws issued from an HOA may submit. So the HOA has no case, there puny lil bylaws wont stand against a pass legislative law.

Also, the thing in question by the HOA is the size of the flag pole. They are not telling him he cant fly a flag, so the Flag Act does not apply.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Flag ACT of 2005:

To ensure that the right of an individual to display the flag of the United States on residential property not be abridged.

SEC. 3. RIGHT TO DISPLAY THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES. A condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association may not adopt or enforce any policy, or enter into any agreement, that would restrict or prevent a member of the association from displaying the flag of the United States on residential property within the association with respect to which such member has a separate ownership interest or a right to exclusive possession or use.

SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS. Nothing in this Act shall be considered to permit any display or use that is inconsistent with-- (1) any provision of chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code, or any rule or custom pertaining to the proper display or use of the flag of the United States (as established pursuant to such chapter or any otherwise applicable provision of law); or (2) any reasonable restriction pertaining to the time, place, or manner of displaying the flag of the United States necessary to protect a substantial interest of the condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association.

source: www.govtrack.us...


So yeah, The flag act does apply! It was signed and passed into law.

The only reason the HOA is complaining is because they think it will drive down the value of their precious homes. What they don't realize is since their complaints have gone public they have effectively driven down their value themselves. Who wants to live in a community where patriotism is not allowed? That particular HOA should expect their neighborhood to be vandalized now as a response.

reply to post by Whereweheaded


Wow I hope he sues them for being d*ckholes

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Flag ACT of 2005:

To ensure that the right of an individual to display the flag of the United States on residential property not be abridged.

SEC. 3. RIGHT TO DISPLAY THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES. A condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association may not adopt or enforce any policy, or enter into any agreement, that would restrict or prevent a member of the association from displaying the flag of the United States on residential property within the association with respect to which such member has a separate ownership interest or a right to exclusive possession or use.

SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS. Nothing in this Act shall be considered to permit any display or use that is inconsistent with-- (1) any provision of chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code, or any rule or custom pertaining to the proper display or use of the flag of the United States (as established pursuant to such chapter or any otherwise applicable provision of law); or (2) any reasonable restriction pertaining to the time, place, or manner of displaying the flag of the United States necessary to protect a substantial interest of the condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association.

source: www.govtrack.us...


So yeah, The flag act does apply! It was signed and passed into law.

edit on 7-1-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)

Sorry but you're wrong. They are not "restricting or preventing" him from flying his flag. They are going after the pole on which it is flown. It is semantical, but it WILL get passed the courts, because of this.

Your last quote says it all. A 20 foot high flag pole could easily be considered an unreasonable display. And like it says "Nothing in this act shall be considered to permit any display or use that is inconsistent with...any reasonable restriction pertaining to the time, place, or manner of displaying the flag of the United States necessary to protect a substantial interest of the condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association

A 20 foot high flag pole not be allowed will be considered a reasonable restriction, and by your own quote, HOA's have a right to do that.

reply to post by sbctinfantry


It doesn't matter what rights god or the founders granted or secured. This man moved into a community with an HOA. He was told about the HOA before he moved in (the HOA addendum to the contract for sale and purchase of real property in FL) yet he still moved in. He signed documents, including restrictive covenants, and should honor them. This man speaks of honor but he will not honor his own word and not violate the HOA.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


I like how you pick only one portion of the evidence to use as your basis of argument. Are you done? Allow me to retort. If you re-read section 3:

(1) any provision of chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code, or any rule or custom pertaining to the proper display or use of the flag of the United States (as established pursuant to such chapter or any otherwise applicable provision of law); or

Now, you obviously didn't bother to research the US code:

§5. Display and use of flag by civilians; codification of rules and customs; definition The following codification of existing rules and customs pertaining to the display and use of the flag of the United States of America be, and it is hereby, established for the use of such civilians or civilian groups or organizations as may not be required to conform with regulations promulgated by one or more executive departments of the Government of the United States. The flag of the United States for the purpose of this chapter shall be defined according to title 4, United States Code, Chapter 1, Section 1 and Section 2 and Executive Order 10834 issued pursuant thereto.

Between the US code, and the Flag act, I'm pretty sure you'll be able to figure out the error of your ways.

But then again, ignorance is bliss for some.

reply to post by Dilligaf28


Again, the HOA bylaws do not supersede the laws passed by Congress. With that logic, I decided to make a law issued by me, that no one pays taxes anymore...does that now mean my law supersedes the Federal Law? Come on..pull your head out~

Sounds like the guy just wants his 15 minutes of fame. He signed a contract, and should honor that contract regardless of any overriding law. It's the principle of the thing.

Or, he didn't read the contract before signing it and now he's pissed because he bought a 20 ft. flag pole and can't use it.

reply to post by Dilligaf28


It does matter. Buying property does not give these fascistic little busybodies the right to steal our rights. I would outlaw HOAs altogether. People should be able to do as they wish on their property.

Lets boil it down and make this really simple. This man moved into a community with an HOA. The HOA was no forced upon him. The HOA was fully disclosed to him per Florida law (I am a former FL realtor so I do know of what I speak). He agreed to abide by the HOA.

Now the man is not abiding by the HOA. He is breaking the contract he signed in good faith. It does not matter what he wants to do to his property or how he wants to do it if it is against the HOA he agreed to. He gave his word he would abide and now he is not willing to live up to his word.

He could have moved to a community without an HOA. I had a client that refused to move into a HOA governed community and with patience and determination we found the perfect non HOA property for him to purchase.

I wonder if all the people that are for this gentleman's fictional "right" to put up a giant flagpole are as casual to break a contract and their word as he is?

Please explain what kind of world it is that it is ok for men to break contracts and not live up to their word?

reply to post by Whereweheaded


And wanting to whine about things that people have agreed to is bliss for others.

Again, no one is telling him he cannot fly the flag. They are telling him he cant have a 20 foot pole.

Talk about ignorance.

Please, re read the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005. It says NOTHING about restrictions on the size of pole which can be used in an HOA.

Again, I will post section 4 of the bill, which blows all of this out of the water:

Nothing in this Act shall be considered to permit any display or use that is inconsistent with-- (1) any provision of chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code, or any rule or custom pertaining to the proper display or use of the flag of the United States (as established pursuant to such chapter or any otherwise applicable provision of law); or (2) any reasonable restriction pertaining to the time, place, or manner of displaying the flag of the United States necessary to protect a substantial interest of the condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association.

The act is not a permit to fly a flag anytime, any way you wish. The HOA has a right to restrict it, to "protect a substantial interest of the condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association."
I get why you are upset about this, but legally speaking, there is not a leg to stand on here.

reply to post by sonofliberty1776


He didn't have to buy the property in a community that had an HOA did he?
2nd line