"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and will
even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe not. It's a
lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their homeowners association
north of Atlanta denied their request to install solar panels on their roof.
Neighborhood officials said the panels would look out of place and might
lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...0#.T5e33vWDl8E

On Apr 25, 7:47*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and will
even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe not. It's a
lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their homeowners association
north of Atlanta denied their request to install solar panels on their roof.
Neighborhood officials said the panels would look out of place and might
lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...-homeowner-gro...



"They're just afraid that someone's going to put up this big, honking
ugly thing that reflects light and just looks ugly," he said.

Which sounds like a legitimate concern to me. I've
yet to see one installed that didn't look ugly. If you
put it on the back side of your house where no one
else can see it, then it has no effect on neighbors.
But I've seen them put right on the front of houses.
And IMO it does lower the property value.

On 4/25/2012 7:47 AM, HeyBub wrote:
"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and will
even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe not. It's a
lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their homeowners association
north of Atlanta denied their request to install solar panels on their roof.
Neighborhood officials said the panels would look out of place and might
lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...0#.T5e33vWDl8E


There is a parallel with folks under a HOA putting up Satellite Dishes
and even On-the-Air TV antennae (as well as Amateur/CB stuff.)

My understanding is that the FCC passed a special rule that said that
HOA's could NOT block communications based stuff. (Owners can; thus
renters are stuck).

Perhaps in the fullness of time, the feds will cause a similar rule in
regard to solar heat and solar electric panels.

I wouldn't get too upset, were I you.

Back in the days of Jimmy Who, lots of folks put up solar water heating
panels. Within a decade almost all of them had been bypassed and most
of them completely removed.

In article ,
John Gilmer wrote:



There is a parallel with folks under a HOA putting up Satellite Dishes
and even On-the-Air TV antennae (as well as Amateur/CB stuff.)

My understanding is that the FCC passed a special rule that said that
HOA's could NOT block communications based stuff. (Owners can; thus
renters are stuck).

The FCC did only after SCOTUS had weighed in and said it could only
because the FCC (and thus the Feds) had pre-empted the field and could
do so under the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution. In other
words because Congress had given the FCC sole authority over the care
and feeding of radio and TV in the US. There is no similar agency in the
US for solar panels.


Perhaps in the fullness of time, the feds will cause a similar rule in
regard to solar heat and solar electric panels.
I am not sure they can, at least using the same legal idea as was
used in the FCC.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

wrote in message
...
On Apr 25, 7:47 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and will
even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe not. It's a
lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their homeowners association
north of Atlanta denied their request to install solar panels on their
roof.
Neighborhood officials said the panels would look out of place and might
lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...-homeowner-gro...



"They're just afraid that someone's going to put up this big, honking
ugly thing that reflects light and just looks ugly," he said.

Which sounds like a legitimate concern to me. I've
yet to see one installed that didn't look ugly. If you
put it on the back side of your house where no one
else can see it, then it has no effect on neighbors.
But I've seen them put right on the front of houses.
And IMO it does lower the property value.

For my next house, I'll pay extra to have solar panels already installed so
I can enjoy lower energy bills. Maybe the hand-wringers in Atlanta should
just mandate the use of the type of solar cells that look like roof shingles
so their aesthetic sensibilities aren't compromised.

Tomsic

On 2012-04-25, John Gilmer wrote:

Back in the days of Jimmy Who, lots of folks put up solar water heating
panels. Within a decade almost all of them had been bypassed and most
of them completely removed.

I think a lot of this was due to old technology. PVC, which most of
those early systems were made of, was not UV resistant and in a short
span of a few years most of it broke down and fell apart. Those early
systems were jes not reliable. I also don't think they were very cost
effective in the long run, so didn't get rebuilt when newer material
technology appeared. Jes a guess.

nb

--
vi --the heart of evil!

On 4/25/2012 9:27 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2012-04-25, John wrote:

Back in the days of Jimmy Who, lots of folks put up solar water heating
panels. Within a decade almost all of them had been bypassed and most
of them completely removed.
I think a lot of this was due to old technology. PVC, which most of
those early systems were made of, was not UV resistant and in a short
span of a few years most of it broke down and fell apart. Those early
systems were jes not reliable. I also don't think they were very cost
effective in the long run, so didn't get rebuilt when newer material
technology appeared. Jes a guess.

nb


One of my neighbors had some type of system on his roof that was
shredded during the last hail storm. He didn't reinstall it.

On Apr 25, 9:51*am, "Tomsic" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Apr 25, 7:47 am, "HeyBub" wrote:

"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and will
even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe not. It's a
lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their homeowners association
north of Atlanta denied their request to install solar panels on their
roof.
Neighborhood officials said the panels would look out of place and might
lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...-homeowner-gro...

"They're just afraid that someone's going to put up this big, honking
ugly thing that reflects light and just looks ugly," he said.

Which sounds like a legitimate concern to me. *I've
yet to see one installed that didn't look ugly. *If you
put it on the back side of your house where no one
else can see it, then it has no effect on neighbors.
But I've seen them put right on the front of houses.
And IMO it does lower the property value.

For my next house, I'll pay extra to have solar panels already installed so
I can enjoy lower energy bills.

Only problem with that is that for the enjoyment you're
going to shell out a hell of a lot of money upfront to
hopefully recover it over decades. And it only
makes economic sense at all if the installation is heavily
subsidized. Meaning someone else is then paying
for your enjoyment.

And if you want them, why wait for a new house?
They go on an existing house just as well as a new
one.

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:51:54 -0400, "Tomsic" wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Apr 25, 7:47 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and will
even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe not. It's a
lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their homeowners association
north of Atlanta denied their request to install solar panels on their
roof.
Neighborhood officials said the panels would look out of place and might
lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...-homeowner-gro...



"They're just afraid that someone's going to put up this big, honking
ugly thing that reflects light and just looks ugly," he said.

Which sounds like a legitimate concern to me. I've
yet to see one installed that didn't look ugly. If you
put it on the back side of your house where no one
else can see it, then it has no effect on neighbors.
But I've seen them put right on the front of houses.
And IMO it does lower the property value.

For my next house, I'll pay extra to have solar panels already installed so
I can enjoy lower energy bills.

You can pay extra right now.

Maybe the hand-wringers in Atlanta should
just mandate the use of the type of solar cells that look like roof shingles
so their aesthetic sensibilities aren't compromised.

However, you miss the entire point. They don't help the NEIGHBORS, but are an
impact on them.

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:34:31 -0400, "
wrote:




Eye of the beholder. The lower utility bill is more important to me. I'd
not object to them. I may even pay more for a house with them.

Except that it's not your house that is being depreciated because of them.

But as the price of energy goes up and up, it may be Appreciated.

I've seen some installations that don't look bad at all, black panels
on a black roof.

On Apr 25, 11:37*pm, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:34:31 -0400, "

wrote:

Eye of the beholder. *The lower utility bill is more important to me. *I'd
not object to them. *I may even pay more for a house with them.

Except that it's not your house that is being depreciated because of them.

But as the price of energy goes up and up, it may be Appreciated.

I've seen some installations that don't look bad at all, black panels
on a black roof.

one day such panels may be required by law........

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 06:47:34 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and will
even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe not. It's a
lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their homeowners association
north of Atlanta denied their request to install solar panels on their roof.
Neighborhood officials said the panels would look out of place and might
lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...0#.T5e33vWDl8E


The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Remove 333 to reply.
Randy

"bob haller" wrote in message
...
On Apr 25, 11:37 pm, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:34:31 -0400, "

wrote:

Eye of the beholder. The lower utility bill is more important to me.
I'd
not object to them. I may even pay more for a house with them.

Except that it's not your house that is being depreciated because of
them.

But as the price of energy goes up and up, it may be Appreciated.

I've seen some installations that don't look bad at all, black panels
on a black roof.

one day such panels may be required by law........

Or essential. If California is going to comply with their own law which is
to achieve their goal of building mostly zero energy homes by 2020, that's
a lot of roof panels.

Tomsic

"HeyBub" wrote in
m:

"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and
will even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe
not. It's a lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their
homeowners association north of Atlanta denied their request to
install solar panels on their roof. Neighborhood officials said the
panels would look out of place and might lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...omeowner-group
s-16208070#.T5e33vWDl8E




At a higher level than solar panels, a home having an HOA lowers home
values.

Randy333 wrote in
:

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 06:47:34 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and
will even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe
not. It's a lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their
homeowners association north of Atlanta denied their request to
install solar panels on their roof. Neighborhood officials said the
panels would look out of place and might lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...omeowner-group
s-16208070#.T5e33vWDl8E


The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

****! Beat me to it :-/


Remove 333 to reply.
Randy

On 2012-04-26, Randy333 wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

nb

--
vi --the heart of evil!
"Avenge me!" --Bill Burr

On Apr 26, 8:46*pm, notbob wrote:
On 2012-04-26, Randy333 wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. *Comply or be
sued. *Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

nb


Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

wrote:
On Apr 26, 8:46 pm, notbob wrote:
On 2012-04-26, Randy333 wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

nb


Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

Somebody (Woody Allen?) said "Ninety percent of success is just showing up!"
You, and no more than five of your neighbors can probably take over the HOA
governance at the next election.

Then, as another great worthy once said, "Payback's a bitch."

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 20:26:16 -0500, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:
On Apr 26, 8:46 pm, notbob wrote:
On 2012-04-26, Randy333 wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

nb


Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

Somebody (Woody Allen?) said "Ninety percent of success is just showing up!"
You, and no more than five of your neighbors can probably take over the HOA
governance at the next election.

Then, as another great worthy once said, "Payback's a bitch."

A good friend tried that after their HOA president was hiring himself for
renovations (which weren't getting done). The covenants required 50% of the
*members* (not just those in attendance) for any elections and 60% for a
change to the bylaws.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:30:02 +0000 (UTC), Red Green
wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in
om:

"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and
will even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe
not. It's a lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their
homeowners association north of Atlanta denied their request to
install solar panels on their roof. Neighborhood officials said the
panels would look out of place and might lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...omeowner-group
s-16208070#.T5e33vWDl8E




At a higher level than solar panels, a home having an HOA lowers home
values.

Not buying that. There are as many, or more, who like some control over their
neighborhoods than not.

On 04/26/12 09:00 pm, wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

Several years ago I read a report that somebody asked to see the HOA
rules for a subdivision in which he was thinking of buying a property
but was told that they were proprietary information and that he wouldn't
be allowed to see them until he had bought the property and become a member.

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

Perce

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Somebody (Woody Allen?) said "Ninety percent of success is just
showing up!" You, and no more than five of your neighbors can
probably take over the HOA governance at the next election.

Then, as another great worthy once said, "Payback's a bitch."

A good friend tried that after their HOA president was hiring himself
for renovations (which weren't getting done). The covenants required
50% of the *members* (not just those in attendance) for any elections
and 60% for a change to the bylaws.

Possible, but I wasn't referring to a change in the by-laws; I meant a
change in the board.

To elect a board member or president, the by-laws can't require a vote of
half the property owners! Such a rule would be tantamount to "President for
Life." Once you control the board, you control the enforcement (or
non-enforcement) mechanism.

I've been to campaign management schools, run political campaigns, and held
public office. Trust me: taking control of a meeting is trivial with a
little planning.

On 2012-04-27, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

.....and amateur radio (ham) or TV antennas. Ham magazines often have
articles on howto make disguised or construct hidden antennas.

nb

--
vi --the heart of evil!
"Avenge me!" --Bill Burr

On Apr 27, 8:15*am, notbob wrote:
On 2012-04-27, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:



In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

....and amateur radio (ham) or TV antennas. *Ham magazines often have
articles on howto make disguised or construct hidden antennas.

nb

--
vi --the heart of evil!
"Avenge me!" *--Bill Burr

the federal law that allows dishes for satellite tv also allows tv
antennas

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 07:13:04 -0500, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:

Somebody (Woody Allen?) said "Ninety percent of success is just
showing up!" You, and no more than five of your neighbors can
probably take over the HOA governance at the next election.

Then, as another great worthy once said, "Payback's a bitch."

A good friend tried that after their HOA president was hiring himself
for renovations (which weren't getting done). The covenants required
50% of the *members* (not just those in attendance) for any elections
and 60% for a change to the bylaws.

Possible, but I wasn't referring to a change in the by-laws; I meant a
change in the board.

To elect a board member or president, the by-laws can't require a vote of
half the property owners! Such a rule would be tantamount to "President for
Life." Once you control the board, you control the enforcement (or
non-enforcement) mechanism.

They do. According to their bylaws, it took 50% of the members for a quorum.
Can't have a vote without a quorum; board for life.

I've been to campaign management schools, run political campaigns, and held
public office. Trust me: taking control of a meeting is trivial with a
little planning.

....and 50% of the members.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:17:56 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
wrote:

On 04/26/12 09:00 pm, wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

Several years ago I read a report that somebody asked to see the HOA
rules for a subdivision in which he was thinking of buying a property
but was told that they were proprietary information and that he wouldn't
be allowed to see them until he had bought the property and become a member.

We've all heard that before; "we have to pass this law before we can see what
is in it".

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

Which they have no jurisdiction over. Do you believe they have the power to
allow slavery, too?

On 27 Apr 2012 12:15:40 GMT, notbob wrote:

On 2012-04-27, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

....and amateur radio (ham) or TV antennas. Ham magazines often have
articles on howto make disguised or construct hidden antennas.

Why?

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:15:16 -0400, "
wrote:

On 27 Apr 2012 12:15:40 GMT, notbob wrote:

On 2012-04-27, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

....and amateur radio (ham) or TV antennas. Ham magazines often have
articles on howto make disguised or construct hidden antennas.

Why?

Having lived near a ham I think I can answer that. Unless they are
shielded properly, a powerful ham rig will cause interference on
things like TV and radio reception. So hiding them makes it difficult
to find the culprit.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 22:00:00 -0400, "
wrote:

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:30:02 +0000 (UTC), Red Green
wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in
news:O7mdnXeiJcfKeQrSnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@earthlink. com:

"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and
will even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe
not. It's a lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their
homeowners association north of Atlanta denied their request to
install solar panels on their roof. Neighborhood officials said the
panels would look out of place and might lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...omeowner-group
s-16208070#.T5e33vWDl8E




At a higher level than solar panels, a home having an HOA lowers home
values.

Not buying that. There are as many, or more, who like some control over their
neighborhoods than not.

We all do to some extent. I have no HOA, but we do have zoning
requirements. I don't want someone ripping down the house next door
and building a slaughterhouse. You probably don't either. And many
homeowners in retirement communities don't want kids pounding a
basketball next to their window all day long.

My mother's community maintains all the outside of the houses
(landscaping and so on). That keeps things nice and property values
up. Nothing like a neighbor who decides that it's too much work to
paint or mow the lawn.

On 04/27/12 08:15 am, notbob wrote:

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

....and amateur radio (ham) or TV antennas. Ham magazines often have
articles on how to make disguised or construct hidden antennas.

It's no doubt the amateur radio and CB transmitters at which the rules
were aiming, but their wording is much too broad.

Perce

On 04/27/12 09:45 am, dgk wrote:

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

....and amateur radio (ham) or TV antennas. Ham magazines often have
articles on howto make disguised or construct hidden antennas.

Why?

Having lived near a ham I think I can answer that. Unless they are
shielded properly, a powerful ham rig will cause interference on
things like TV and radio reception. So hiding them makes it difficult
to find the culprit.

Mostly, it's not the fault of the amateur radio equipment but of poorly
designed radio or TV receivers ("We'll save 50 cents on each set, and
most people will never know the difference; if somebody does experience
interference from an amateur radio transmitter, we'll send the set owner
at no charge the parts we omitted, but s/he'll have to pay a local
service person $xx to install them").

Cable TV systems are supposed to be immune to outside interference, but
installations aren't always up to standard, especially if Joe Homeowner
decides to extend the wiring.

Perce

On 04/27/12 09:14 am, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

Several years ago I read a report that somebody asked to see the HOA
rules for a subdivision in which he was thinking of buying a property
but was told that they were proprietary information and that he wouldn't
be allowed to see them until he had bought the property and become a member.

We've all heard that before; "we have to pass this law before we can see what
is in it".

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

Which they have no jurisdiction over. Do you believe they have the power to
allow slavery, too?

When one agrees to join a(n) HOA (by buying the property), one is bound
by the rules: it's considered to be a private contract entered into
freely that governments will not overrule. What about the ex-Marine
whose HOA took him to court and won because he was flying a US flag
larger than the rules permitted?

Perce

"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ...
On 04/27/12 09:14 am, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

Several years ago I read a report that somebody asked to see the HOA
rules for a subdivision in which he was thinking of buying a property
but was told that they were proprietary information and that he wouldn't
be allowed to see them until he had bought the property and become a member.

We've all heard that before; "we have to pass this law before we can see what
is in it".

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

Which they have no jurisdiction over. Do you believe they have the power to
allow slavery, too?

Sorry my friend same rule that would be applied here is
"YOU HAVE PURCHASE AS IS" as man siad you most abied by community rule

When one agrees to join a(n) HOA (by buying the property), one is bound by the rules: it's considered to be a private
contract entered into freely that governments will not overrule. What about the ex-Marine whose HOA took him to court
and won because he was flying a US flag larger than the rules permitted?

Perce

In article ,
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:

When one agrees to join a(n) HOA (by buying the property), one is bound
by the rules: it's considered to be a private contract entered into
freely that governments will not overrule. What about the ex-Marine
whose HOA took him to court and won because he was flying a US flag
larger than the rules permitted?

http://bentcorner.com/someone-suppos...can-flag-in-pr
otest-of-homeowners-association/

dgk wrote:

Not buying that. There are as many, or more, who like some control
over their neighborhoods than not.

We all do to some extent. I have no HOA, but we do have zoning
requirements. I don't want someone ripping down the house next door
and building a slaughterhouse. You probably don't either. And many
homeowners in retirement communities don't want kids pounding a
basketball next to their window all day long.

My mother's community maintains all the outside of the houses
(landscaping and so on). That keeps things nice and property values
up. Nothing like a neighbor who decides that it's too much work to
paint or mow the lawn.

On the other hand, if I own a piece of property I should be able to do with
it whatever I want. If I decide to do something not in keeping with the
neighborhood, I have to be prepared for a not-pleasant response..

Here's a true story.

In my town, there is no zoning. Some years back, Shell Oil bought a corner
lot in the ritziest part of town (by far). They announced plans to build a
gas station.

The neighbors didn't like the idea. They cut up their Shell credit cards and
mailed them to the company with notes that this was only the first step in
retaliation for such rascally behavior on the part of Shell.

Those who vowed retribution included John Connally (Sec of the Navy,
Governor of Texas, Sec of the Treasury, and wounded while riding with JFK in
Dallas) and the sitting Secretary of Commerce, Robert Mossbacher.

Shell donated the corner lot to the city for a pocket park.

We have our ways...

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:45:56 -0400, dgk wrote:

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:15:16 -0400, "
wrote:

On 27 Apr 2012 12:15:40 GMT, notbob wrote:

On 2012-04-27, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

....and amateur radio (ham) or TV antennas. Ham magazines often have
articles on howto make disguised or construct hidden antennas.

Why?

Having lived near a ham I think I can answer that. Unless they are
shielded properly, a powerful ham rig will cause interference on
things like TV and radio reception. So hiding them makes it difficult
to find the culprit.

The problem is *rarely* the ham. Just tell the people with a problem to get
it fixed.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:04:08 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
wrote:

On 04/27/12 09:14 am, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

Several years ago I read a report that somebody asked to see the HOA
rules for a subdivision in which he was thinking of buying a property
but was told that they were proprietary information and that he wouldn't
be allowed to see them until he had bought the property and become a member.

We've all heard that before; "we have to pass this law before we can see what
is in it".

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

Which they have no jurisdiction over. Do you believe they have the power to
allow slavery, too?

When one agrees to join a(n) HOA (by buying the property), one is bound
by the rules: it's considered to be a private contract entered into
freely that governments will not overrule. What about the ex-Marine
whose HOA took him to court and won because he was flying a US flag
larger than the rules permitted?

So you do believe that an HOA can allow slavery.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:24:41 -0400, "Grumpy" wrote:


"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote in message ...
On 04/27/12 09:14 am, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

The biggest thing that lowers home value is a HOA.

Seems to me, HOA wields their power thru litigation. Comply or be
sued. Turn it around.

If solar pwr actually will save you money, sue the HOA on the grounds
of how much money you will lose by not converting to solar power.
IOW, sue based on how much $$$ the HOA is costing you!

Ridiculous suit that has no merit. When you buy a
home in a HOA community, you know and agree to
the HOA having control over certain aspects of what
you can do with your property. If you don't want that
arrangement, then you simply buy somewhere else.
If you do buy, then you are bound by the convenants
imposed and if they include control over what the
exterior looks like, then too bad, so sad, but you're
gonna lose.

Several years ago I read a report that somebody asked to see the HOA
rules for a subdivision in which he was thinking of buying a property
but was told that they were proprietary information and that he wouldn't
be allowed to see them until he had bought the property and become a member.

We've all heard that before; "we have to pass this law before we can see what
is in it".

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

Which they have no jurisdiction over. Do you believe they have the power to
allow slavery, too?

Sorry my friend same rule that would be applied here is
"YOU HAVE PURCHASE AS IS" as man siad you most abied by community rule

Next time you post, lay off the booze.

On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:49:04 -0400, dgk wrote:

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 22:00:00 -0400, "
wrote:

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:30:02 +0000 (UTC), Red Green
wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in
news:O7mdnXeiJcfKeQrSnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@earthlink .com:

"The government wants you to install solar panels at your house, and
will even give you a tax break to do it. But your neighbors? Maybe
not. It's a lesson Angel and David Dobs discovered when their
homeowners association north of Atlanta denied their request to
install solar panels on their roof. Neighborhood officials said the
panels would look out of place and might lower home values..."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/s...omeowner-group
s-16208070#.T5e33vWDl8E




At a higher level than solar panels, a home having an HOA lowers home
values.

Not buying that. There are as many, or more, who like some control over their
neighborhoods than not.

We all do to some extent. I have no HOA, but we do have zoning
requirements. I don't want someone ripping down the house next door
and building a slaughterhouse. You probably don't either. And many
homeowners in retirement communities don't want kids pounding a
basketball next to their window all day long.

Um, I'm on your side, more or less. I challenged the silly assumption that
HOAs, in general, lower property values. If that were true, builders wouldn't
start them.

My mother's community maintains all the outside of the houses
(landscaping and so on). That keeps things nice and property values
up. Nothing like a neighbor who decides that it's too much work to
paint or mow the lawn.

That's a condo, no?

On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 10:53:41 -0600, bud-- wrote:

On 4/27/2012 7:15 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On 27 Apr 2012 12:15:40 GMT, wrote:

On 2012-04-27, Percival P. wrote:

In addition, HOA rules often outlaw "radio transmitting equipment,"
which logically means no cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors,
wiFi, garage door openers, etc.

....and amateur radio (ham) or TV antennas. Ham magazines often have
articles on howto make disguised or construct hidden antennas.

Why?

I don't believe you can regulate "radio transmitting equipment".

Me? You mean the HOA. That was my point; why disguise the antenna?

HOAs regulate antennas that are visible (like solar panels). Long
distance transmissions are below 30MHz, often far below. The antennas
are large and likely to be visible on the outside. Those visible
antennas would an eyesore that would strain the sensibility of
neighbors (just like the solar panels) and thus HOAs might restrict them.

But the HOAs have no control over antennas. Telecommunications comes under
the power of the FCC, which has jurisdiction here.

You might hide antennas (as notbob suggests) as something that is
permitted, maybe a flag pole.

Why?

Municipal zoning may try to limit ham antennas. Courts have said
antennas are the jurisdiction of the FCC, not municipal zoning.

SO you think HOAs have some power that municipal governments don't? Odd.

HOAs get away with it because there is a contract that is extorted from
potential residents.

Nonsense. Federal laws supercede contracts.