nbc4i.com - Family - Texas Developers Creating Sex-Offender-Free Neighborhood
Ah, the advantages of private government. Here's something no municipality can do--exclude sex offenders.
LUBBOCK, Texas -- The sales pitch for a planned subdivision promises safety: criminal background checks for homeowners and, guaranteed, no convicted sex offenders. It's a concept that might prove right for the times, said first-time developer Clayton Isom, one of three partners in a company that's creating Milwaukee Ridge on the outskirts of this West Texas city.
1 comment:
"Here's something no municipality can do--exclude sex offenders."
Some municipalities exclude sex offenders the same way HOA board members run people they don't like out of their developments--they harass them to the point that they move out.
HOA board members have used smear campaigns, retaliatory violation letters, manufactured lawsuits, reprimands, reimbursement bills, inconsistent enforcement of the governing documents (harassment), fraudulent fines, the intentional infliction of emotional distress, liens, morally insensitive judicial foreclosures, nonjudicial foreclosures that surely ought to be illegal, neighborhood cleansing, the suspension of voting rights or usage of facilities or services -- and a variety of other vile tactics -- to squelch or crush opposition like a ruthless dictator.
A board member can decide s/he doesn't like you and wants to pick on you, but put the ass'n in between and claim that everything the board member is doing is in 'good faith' and it's just a coincidence that it all appears to be directed at you (and that others are allowed to do what you get violation letters for).
A board member with a "criminal mentality" can decide to target you -- with no concern whatsoever that s/he's exposing the ass'n to unreasonable risk of liability.
While people worry that he or she might get the ass'n into a lawsuit, they're not suspicious or skeptical enough to realize that that's what the tyrant wants! S/he doesn't have to pay!! If the association's the plaintiff and it loses, all the owners split the cost. If the association's the defendant -- because the tyrant drove the homeowner so crazy he sued the ass'n and unleashed the monster (directors and oficers liability insurer) -- and the ass'n loses, the insurer pays (maybe) and the homeowners get to share in the increased insurance rates! If the insurer won't pay, because the trial reveals that the board member was willful or wanton or grossly negligent, or acted outside the scope of his or her duty, or in bad faith, then all the owners of the CID get to share in the legal fees of the fiasco the tyrant started -- all for his or her personal reasons.
Post a Comment