SAN ANTONIO --With 100-degree, hot, dry days, Armando Urdiales decided to plant a new lawn.
Well, not really. It was his HOA, he said, that suggested it, after they found patches of dirt amongst the withered blades in his front yard.
Urdiales said, "That was the kicker for me. Really? You're going to tell me to grow grass in a drought."
The social studies teacher says after receiving two, threatening letters in the last 60-days, he planted $150 worth of sod and started watering it.
"Isn't there a better use of our resource--of our precious resource of water--other than maintaning grass?” he said.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"And so, Dear Homeowner, unless you do as we say we can fine and then foreclose to collect that fine. Don't forget you agreed so no going back now."
Yep, I can see long lines of people clamoring to be part of this wonderful regime, where the abuses and fines flow like cheap wine- since water is at a premium.
Thanks to Beanie Adolph for the link.
2 comments:
At least they are not homeless (fraudulent, conflict created foreclosure), assaulted, or terrorized out of their homes in one of these scams. They should be grateful they still have a yard, though, really not "theirs." However, I suspect they already know this. "Private property," with no "private property," rights, or protections, as I have been told.
Was that in the sales contract?
I am, and have bee,n so sympathetic, to the numbers forced into homelessness, in one of these scams, due to no fault of their own, but being in the wrong abusive group at the wrong time. These people/families need and deserve rectification, "their day in court..." Now, however, over the past 6-8, or, so years, there has been so much publicity, so many truthful and factual accounts of some of these bossy, pushy, bully boards and their "friends," why should anyone be surprised about a situation such as this. If common sense, good will, logic and the "law," played any role in the actions of some of these abusive boards, and especially, when involving the "targeting," of vulnerable populations and nice, competent, logical, economical, honest, people/families, this would not even be a news account. Opinion and experience, for what it is worth!
"I can see long lines of people clamoring to be part of this wonderful regime"
When the Berlin Wall was built in 1961, the official reason given by the Communists was that the wall's purpose was to keep out elements conspiring to prevent the "will of the people" in building a socialist state in East Germany. And although unspoken, I'm sure that maintaining a uniform grey appearance of East Berlin was also a consideration, less property values be affected.
But as most of us know, except for those apologists we called "useful idiots" during the Cold War, the real purpose of the Berlin Wall was to keep the population of the Soviet Bloc in. By 1961 an estimated 1,500 people a day were fleeing to the West, with a total of 3.5 million East Germans having defected before the Wall's construction.
I suspect that after 1989, many of the border guards who enforced the rules, and the Party apparatchiks who claimed that people wanted to voluntarily live under the Soviet-occupied regimes of Eastern Europe, found jobs at the Communisty Associations Institute, an organization dedicated to the collective ownership of American homes.
Imagine how many people would defect from their common interest communities -- where they have all of the burdens, obligations, and responsibilities of home ownership without almost none of the rights -- if given a true choice to own their own homes they currently live in, free of any collective ownership regime.
Post a Comment