Signs of trouble? Neighborhood divided over political displays: "The signs are looking a bit troubling in the Grand View Homeowners Association. Residents in this 198-home subdivision northeast of Patterson and 28 roads are banned from placing political campaign signs in their yards. The president of the HOA, Tom Lowrey, is so adamant about enforcing the association’s rule that he has taken it upon himself to walk the neighborhood and uproot all campaign signs."
--------------
Thanks to Chris Casey for the link to yet another example of why HOAs have gotten a bad name.
2 comments:
What I don't get about HOA actions like this is . . . what's the point? Does Tom Lowrey think that temporary political signs will affect property values? Or is this just another example of "the rule must be good because otherwise there would be no such rule"?
We've got signs in my neighborhood, not many but at least they represent a good variety of political philosophies. I always took such signs to be a sign of a vibrant, engaged community. Why bother going to small claims court over such a thing, whatever the CCRs say?
Beth--the only explanation I have been able to come up with is that CID governance attracts people who are unqualified to exercise power over others but desperately eager for it.
Post a Comment