Flordia Homeowners Association Proposes Ban On Children Playing Outside!!

I also wanted to add a comment regarding the board member who was quoted in the article I posted above. The board member stated it was someone who rents. If you rent in a community with HOA, you still have to abide by the HOA, and renters have no say in the terms of a HOA either, the unit owners do.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


Except the owners cannot discriminate based on familial status, and any fines will be levied against the owners, not the renters. Therefore, the owners are in the unenviable position of being forced to rent to someone that might cost them a lot of fines. If they dare not rent, they are opened up for litigation, if they do rent, they are opened up for fines.

Perhaps the HOA should also outlaw subletting or renting?

Perhaps the HOA will ultimately legislate itself right out of existence! That is a fairly common death for HOAs. Many times they start with decent intentions, and they run away with themselves until there is no one left to fund their adventures, and no one left to serve on the association. A fitting end if you ask me.

reply to post by hotbakedtater

I wont engae in personal attacks and apolgize for my previous one against you.

My point stands though, we live in an age when people purposely want to limit childrens ability to be children, while at the same time everyone wants to complain that all American children do is sit in fron to the television and play video games...so which is it? You can't have it both ways.

And I do agree with almost every poster above. HOAs are little fiefdoms, if these people want to be involved in politics, then run for city council or some other civic post, being the furhrer of a neighborhood is not politics...it's self agrandizement.

reply to post by hotbakedtater

WOW, I tried to reset my emotions and open my mind to your point of view...fair enough right?

Then you jump on renters??? So first children are second class citizens and now renters are as well. You do realize that most who rent actually pay higher rent than most homeowners pay in house payments...I understand, it's a business agreement, need to make a bit of profit...ok. Does not lessen their rights as free Americans though.

Is there any other segment of our society you would like to relegate to second class citizen status while your at it?

Originally posted by deadbang
reply to post by hotbakedtater

 

I wont engae in personal attacks and apolgize for my previous one against you.

My point stands though, we live in an age when people purposely want to limit childrens ability to be children, while at the same time everyone wants to complain that all American children do is sit in fron to the television and play video games...so which is it? You can't have it both ways.

And I do agree with almost every poster above. HOAs are little fiefdoms, if these people want to be involved in politics, then run for city council or some other civic post, being the furhrer of a neighborhood is not politics...it's self agrandizement.

Thank you for the apology, I appreciate it.

The only entity that wants to limit what the children can do outside on the community property is the HOA. In no way does it limit a child from playing. In no way does having play restrictions equate into video games and tv. If it does, I blame the parents, always, not a HOA.

There is a simple solution, don't live under HOA. Most townhomes and condos have HOA. Lots of people like to have them, those who do not have a lot of other options. I disagree about HOAs, I happen to be one of millions of adults who enjoys hers. And we have no children living here, it is sadly other supposed adults (to a one most of them rent their units vs owners) that are problem neighbors.

reply to post by hotbakedtater

I happen to be one of millions of adults who enjoys hers. And we have no children living here, it is sadly other supposed adults (to a one most of them rent their units vs owners) that are problem neighbors.

It seems to me that your HOA is probably breaking some Federal Laws.

The FAIR HOUSING ACT

Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act) prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of dwellings based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Title VIII was amended in 1988 (effective March 12, 1989) by the Fair Housing Amendments Act, which:

expanded the coverage of the Fair Housing Act to prohibit discrimination based on disability or on familial status (presence of child under age of 18, and pregnant women);

Source

Under the Fair Housing Act, the following activities are illegal:

*Refuse to rent or sell housing
*Refuse to negotiate for housing
*Make housing unavailable
*Set different terms, conditions, or privileges for sale or rental
*Provide different housing services or facilities
*Falsely deny that housing is available for inspection, sale or rental
*For profit, persuade owners to sell or rent (blockbusting)
*Deny any access to or membership in a facility or service (such as a multiple listing service) related to the sale of housing
*Refuse to make reasonable accommodations in rules or services if necessary for a disabled person to use the housing
*Refuse to allow a disabled person to make reasonable accommodations to his/her dwelling
*Threaten or interfere with anyone making a fair housing complaint
*Refuse to provide municipal services, property insurance or hazard insurance for dwellings, or providing such services or insurance differently

CivilRights.org

It seems your HOA would consider familial status a "disability" and it would provide a different set of rules for people that are disabled in this way. It would seem that they are refusing to make reasonable accomodations for people hindered by the disability of having children. It would seem they have found it profitable to persuade people with families to rent or purchase elsewhere, while at the same time using the "quiet neighborhood" as a selling point in your HOA.

I would say that a nice young family could arrange for a sizeable college fund for their children by attempting to rent or buy a home in your HOA area.

I am a licensed Real Estate agent, and certain terms are off limits or extremely limited in their usage. It seems "quet neighborhood" is now a bad word in light of your HOA, and others. A real estate agent that ran a listing of homes in a certain price range, and then showed an elderly couple homes in your area, while showing a young family homes in another area, would be in clear violation of both the letter and the spirit of this law.

I hope you are not an officer or decision maker on your HOA, or if you are, I hope you have access to free legal services, because the ACLU offers to litigate these things pretty regularly on behalf of the wronged family!

reply to post by getreadyalready


Excellent post getready!! I too lived and live in that same neighborhood. Kids are allowed to roam FREE and their parents know where they are. If someone gets into to trouble, then the kids whom are involved must be accountable for their actions. You don't just punish the entire neighborhood of kids only the ones whose behavior crossed the line.

This proposal is ABSURD!! Completely discriminatory

Thanks for your insight!
Pax!

reply to post by hotbakedtater

Were going to have to agree to disagree, I see a sad, sad world when we get to a point where children are supposed to be seen and not heard.

I also take umberage with your renters statements, renters actually perform a service for the neighborhoods they live in, that house could sit idle and become the neighborhood eyesore.

I would also submit that some renters are more responsible than the people who ran out and bought houses that they could not afford, living within ones means is a virtue not a vice.

Um I stated we have no children living here. I did not state the specific terms of my HOA nor am I going to post that online in this forum. There is no restrictions on who can live here.

Originally posted by deadbang
reply to post by hotbakedtater

 

WOW, I tried to reset my emotions and open my mind to your point of view...fair enough right?

Then you jump on renters??? So first children are second class citizens and now renters are as well. You do realize that most who rent actually pay higher rent than most homeowners pay in house payments...I understand, it's a business agreement, need to make a bit of profit...ok. Does not lessen their rights as free Americans though.

Is there any other segment of our society you would like to relegate to second class citizen status while your at it?

Please quote where I stated renters are second class anything. You are the one managing to get the insults in towards renters, I was debating different aspects of living under HOA.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Um I stated we have no children living here. I did not state the specific terms of my HOA nor am I going to post that online in this forum. There is no restrictions on who can live here.

There doesn't have to be "restrictions." It would be easy to prosecute just based on the cross section of people in your HOA. Almost anything said, could be isolated and deemed "discouraging." A random poll of 6 or 10 real estate agents in the area could be conducted and the majority would probably tell a young family there were places where they would be "more comfortable."

Sorry, but if there are no children in your HOA neighborhood, then you are clearly in violation, and it will only take an accusation to knock down the whole house of cards! I have seen it myself here in Tallahassee. There was a community of retirees, and the old lady running the HOA was very cautious. There were no "restrictions" but somehow all the college kids were persuaded to rent or buy elsewhere. Until some college kids Dad had the right connections, the place was sued into bankruptcy, the management changed, half the renters ended up moving, etc., etc.

Your HOA is a timebomb waiting for the right trigger.

reply to post by hotbakedtater

I can guarantee not all of the kids were displaying UNbratty behavior.

Can you? Based on what exactly?? You were not present at the meetings, so all we have is your opinion, not fact.

The one POV you keep driving home is everything is the parents responsibility. Are you aware that children are not robots and will test the rules? They are supposed to. Another question at what age do you believe this constant supervision should end? If a child does not rebel somewhat as they are growing and learning they definitely will later and it will be worse.

Why punish all children and parents because of the behavior of a few, if those few actually did misbehave? The problem with most in these organized committees is they approach all problem solving with negative consequences! Positive reinforcement works much better! Instead of gossiping among themselves about whose child is the worst behaved, could they not organize a fund raiser and include the parents and children and use the funds to build a nice playground or park?? It would be at least a step in the right direction.

As far as I'm concerned, every family should pack up and move out! Bankrupt the place!

How about adults who have outdoor parties get loud and a little rowdy. Should they be banned from going outside too? Where does it end? This is another example of politics gone amok and eradicating someones free will to choose!!!

Pax

Originally posted by deadbang
reply to post by hotbakedtater

 

Were going to have to agree to disagree, I see a sad, sad world when we get to a point where children are supposed to be seen and not heard.

I also take umberage with your renters statements, renters actually perform a service for the neighborhoods they live in, that house could sit idle and become the neighborhood eyesore.

I would also submit that some renters are more responsible than the people who ran out and bought houses that they could not afford, living within ones means is a virtue not a vice.

What statements towards renters did I make that you supposedly take umbrage with? I think you just take umbrage with me.

I am not debating renters or the good or bad they can do in a community. I do have first hand experience that some renters do not care about the units like an owner does, and can lead to new bylaws being passed to address the unique problems that come with someone who does not own the unit.

Also can you please provide some further evidence that voluntarily living under a HOA leads to a sad sad world of children seen and not heard? That is huge leap, and you place this eventual ending at the feet of the HOA instead of a parent, who is the one who controls what their offspring does.

reply to post by hotbakedtater

If you did not state it overtly, you certianly implied it.

"it is sadly other supposed adults (to a one most of them rent their units vs owners) that are problem neighbors."

Maybe I took that the wrong way, but I have walked in those shoes, raising 8 children and living in a rental. It was many years ago, before I established my career, but my wife and I alsways made sure our house was the gem of the neighborhhod and our children well behaved.

children and renters are people too, you know.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by hotbakedtater

 

I happen to be one of millions of adults who enjoys hers. And we have no children living here, it is sadly other supposed adults (to a one most of them rent their units vs owners) that are problem neighbors.

It seems to me that your HOA is probably breaking some Federal Laws.

The FAIR HOUSING ACT

Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act) prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of dwellings based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Title VIII was amended in 1988 (effective March 12, 1989) by the Fair Housing Amendments Act, which:

expanded the coverage of the Fair Housing Act to prohibit discrimination based on disability or on familial status (presence of child under age of 18, and pregnant women);

Source

Under the Fair Housing Act, the following activities are illegal:

*Refuse to rent or sell housing
*Refuse to negotiate for housing
*Make housing unavailable
*Set different terms, conditions, or privileges for sale or rental
*Provide different housing services or facilities
*Falsely deny that housing is available for inspection, sale or rental
*For profit, persuade owners to sell or rent (blockbusting)
*Deny any access to or membership in a facility or service (such as a multiple listing service) related to the sale of housing
*Refuse to make reasonable accommodations in rules or services if necessary for a disabled person to use the housing
*Refuse to allow a disabled person to make reasonable accommodations to his/her dwelling
*Threaten or interfere with anyone making a fair housing complaint
*Refuse to provide municipal services, property insurance or hazard insurance for dwellings, or providing such services or insurance differently

CivilRights.org

It seems your HOA would consider familial status a "disability" and it would provide a different set of rules for people that are disabled in this way. It would seem that they are refusing to make reasonable accomodations for people hindered by the disability of having children. It would seem they have found it profitable to persuade people with families to rent or purchase elsewhere, while at the same time using the "quiet neighborhood" as a selling point in your HOA.

I would say that a nice young family could arrange for a sizeable college fund for their children by attempting to rent or buy a home in your HOA area.

I am a licensed Real Estate agent, and certain terms are off limits or extremely limited in their usage. It seems "quet neighborhood" is now a bad word in light of your HOA, and others. A real estate agent that ran a listing of homes in a certain price range, and then showed an elderly couple homes in your area, while showing a young family homes in another area, would be in clear violation of both the letter and the spirit of this law.

I hope you are not an officer or decision maker on your HOA, or if you are, I hope you have access to free legal services, because the ACLU offers to litigate these things pretty regularly on behalf of the wronged family!

As a moderator, I am surprised you chose to use the entire post to speculate on my HOA, making an entire off topic post speculating on a personal subject about my off board personal life. Why did you choose to do that, instead of couching it in general terms? Please stop making this debate about me, I have debated in general terms through out. This is getting ridiculous, and to come from a moderator makes it even worse.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater


This is not another step towards no freedom, this is not poor kids, this is good business. I sure as hell do not want to be rolling in after work to a parking lot ful of skateboarders and children unsupervised. That is a danger to me and my vehicle. Plus, townhomes have community prperty.

Sorry but didn't you ever play outside as a kid? I know there were always about 20 of us outside ALL day til night playing all kinds of games and riding bikes. Nobody ever got hurt and the only thing that ever happened was my brothers friend smashed my moms windshield with a baseball. It was an accident...Nowadays it is sad to think that if this were to happen people would get all sue happy. It was resolved between my mom, the kids parents and him. HE had to pay my mom back for the window with his allowance. He learned a valuable lesson I would say

If one wants their precious pumpkin to have free reign, go live in the ghetto apartments like I had to live in once, because no one cares if Little Larry rides his bike hooping and hollering all day or Little Jane skateboards all over the place, or the children play Tag, with each other or spray paint.

Um ok....You do know that kids can still be outside and not act like animals? It's the parents not the kids. Kids will act according to how their parents allow them mostly. If their parents let them roam the streets they will. Also this doesnt just happen in the "ghetto" it happens in the burbs to...Anywhere. It is not just one area and type. That is a bit judgemental dont you think?

I am totally not seeing the problem with this. An HOA is a choice not a mandate.

It is a choice BUT these people already lived there so why should they have to change because a few snotty members dont like kids?

reply to post by hotbakedtater


It was not off-topic. The topic is "Florida Homeowners Association Proposes Ban On Children Playing Outside!!"

You have responded that you live in Florida with a HOA, and that your neighborhood has "no children."

You have also defended the position that there is absolutely nothing wrong with restricting children's rights to play outside. Your statement about living in such a HOA is relevant.

I didn't "make it about you." It is about your HOA, and I gave you friendly advice of the liabilities of serving on such a HOA. I hope you do not actively serve, and I posted sources to support my advice.

If you are feeling singled out, it is because you have the lone dissenting opinion on what seems like common sense to the rest of us. I admire your courage and willingness to stay and battle, even though I think your stance is ridiculous and quite possibly illegal.

So, don't start crying, "but you're a Mod" or "why is this about me?" I am a Member, before I am a Mod, and it is about you, because you have chosen that side of this debate.

I never asked you about your HOA, you volunteered that information, and truth be told, your HOA sounds worse than the one in the OP. Therefore, your HOA is perfect fodder for this debate.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


I support getready, his post was not at all off topic. He made no personal attacks on you whatsoever. Everytime someone makes a point your actions have been to call "FOUL" "I'm telling! You have accused every single poster of making this about you and personally attacking you. I see this as nothing more than weak attempts to derail an important topic.

No one can control another human being including our "offspring" One can certainly monitor their child's behavior, but kids like adults have their own minds and make their own choices. Controlling anyone including a child is not loving that person.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I never gave details of our HOA, nor do I live in Florida, both facts easily checked by my posts.

reply to post by hotbakedtater

Living here is a choice, if someone with kids moves in, they know in advance the rules, and for those with kids who already live there, why would this be a problem? Unless they just want their child to be a brat. No one is shackling people to this townhouse community either, if people do not like it move.

Actually, I knew you lived in Louisville from your other posts on ATS, but I forgot. This post might have been the source of confusion.

I happen to be one of millions of adults who enjoys hers. And we have no children living here, it is sadly other supposed adults (to a one most of them rent their units vs owners) that are problem neighbors.

Here is where you posted that you lived in an HOA with "no children living here." That was the part that turned my attention from the OP's HOA to your HOA. The OP at least has children, but they are trying to regulate them. Your HOA doesn't even have children, and that is indicative of a much more severe violation.

I don't want the thread to be about you anymore than you do. The fact is, you are serving as devil's advocate for a terrible law and a terrible HOA, and you are using your own childhood, your own experiences, and your own HOA as examples.

If it helps you any, I put some of my own shenanigans up in here, so feel free to attack my credibility as a bad kid. Maybe I have an issue with authority (not maybe, i think that is a given). I will own my posts, the same way you are owning yours. No whining, just debating. You have voluntarily picked a very tough position though. I don't think you are going to find a lot of empathy for regulating kids that want to run around, make noise, and act like kids.