paghat wrote:

...I saw a beautifully designed fence that was over six feet tall but had
huge round porthole windows to look in & out of. If I ever do put up an
enclosing fence I'll probably rig up something like that so no one
imagines I'm trying to shut them out...


We had a house that had a chain link fence along the back. It was just
sort of there when we bought the place. It was 6' high and we got tired
of climbing over it to visit the neighbors, so we put a gate in. It
served as an impediment to the deer while not restricting our neighbors
(who were neighborly, not the type who are the subject of this thread).
The gate works well as a mitigation of the KEEP OUT implication of the
fence.

Julia Green wrote:

...I used to live in Montgomery Village, a planned community in Montgomery
County. Its covenants were pretty bad--had to get approval for almost
anything one wanted to change, no matter how minor or commonsensible.... I couldn't wait to buy our next house and move outta
there. So I looked for something with lots of land and privacy, and, best
of all, NO covenants...




rant The phrase that comes to mind is "caveat emptor". There are lots
of houses out there. People should do their homework so that they aren't
caught by surprise when the restrictions are enforced.

I'm not a fan of neighborhood covenants, but the people who buy into
them have only themselves to blame. Similarly houses by major highways,
airports, other noise sources; houses by farms which generate odors at
certain times of year; houses near orchards which use wind generators
for frost protection (all night) and sprayers that start at 4 am.
Admittedly, those houses can be cheaper than houses without those
"amenities", but the restricted developments tend to be more expensive
(for reasons obscure to me).

One of my pet peeves is people who move from the city to "the country",
expecting it to be quiet and peaceful. Then when it doesn't meet their
expectations they try to get laws passed etc. to restrict the activities
of those farms and industries which were there for many years before
they moved in.

I would never recommend a restricted neighborhood to anyone. Even if one
thinks that he/she/they can live with (or even enjoy[?]) the
restrictions, there could come a time when their interests change (mine
have through the years), and you want to do something that is "not in
the interest of the community", like putting up windmills on your lawn
or having a basketball hoop for your athletic child to practice on.

If you're the type that moves every few years, then this is not a
problem, but that's not my style. I like to stay put.

These comments apply to communities as well as neighborhoods. Towns have
character, which is defined by their residents. Some towns are really
snooty, and restrict things on a town-wide basis. Others are more open
and allow the individual character of the residents to show. Personally,
I prefer the other type towns. /rant

"paghat" wrote in message
news
Thing is, there's ALWAYS something to report, if you have some "I'm the
cops" style loony neighbor with a bug up their butt looking hard enough.


Then in your world the only acceptable situation is anarchy? As long as
there is one rule, then it would give a "loony neighbor" the opportunity to
complain. As I have pointed out several times, there are rules everywhere.
In your rant you illustrated rules about loitering and parking. Home
owner's associations don't pass legislation dealing with such items except
that they have the right to specify conduct on their commonly owned, private
property just as you do. You have the right to keep people from parking in
your yard or sitting on your porch. The only remedy that would satisfy your
needs would to abolish all government.



There is no one on earth who never breaks a law or a zoning code or
ordinance or regulation.

As far as I know, I don't have any violations.


In my neighborhood the streets are all posted for two hour parking, no
exceptions, no way for the locals to get a permit to park longer.

Why don't you get together with your neighbors and petition the city to take
down the signs? After all, in your world there shouldn't be any
restrictions.



The
signs are to keep nearby shipworkers from parking up here instead of in
their own pay parking lots, & the violations are never enforced unless
someone calls to have somebody towed or ticketed, so the locals are happy
of the law, it's not used against us.


But that bring up the question of why you "hate" the shipworkers. You said
that the laws are only enforced against the people that are already hated.
May I suggest that as an gesture of kindness you allow the shipworkers to
park in your yard. That would show the dirty *******s who hate the
shipworkers at thing or two.



But if we started fighting with each
other, we COULD have sundry of our neighbors' cars towed from time to time
for parking in front of their own houses all day.

Which brings up the issue that stringent enforcement of the rules is
generally a sign of underlying friction.


Ordinances & regulations
are often badly written to apply in weird ways, so when enforcers find
themselves facing nervous breakdowns, they can misuse actual laws that
were intended for unrelated purposes, like keeping shipworkers from
parking here.

There are two remedies. One is to pass new legislation or repeal the
original rule or ordinance. The courts offer the second opportunity for
remedy. The expansion of intent is seen in all areas of law. Abortion
rights are predicated on the right to privacy. Some people see that as a
misuse of the law and other see that as rational and intuitive.


This has never happened in my neighborhood yet, but I once
lived in a place where there was one crazy S.O.B. who kept reporting cars
all the time for parking in front of their own homes for more than two
days in a row.

Would it be OK to park in front of your own house if there was a fire
hydrant there? Rather than embrace the victim role, why don't you lobby for
a permit system for your neighborhood. We have that here. People who live
in areas where there is limited parking and where there are also attractions
like bars and museums are able to get parking permits that allow them to
park in front of their homes while excluding others.


So when Vox thinks everyone should just live according to every
life-controlling ordinance passed by some loon, or badly written by
retarded politicians so it can be maliciouisly enforced by the
neighborhood loon, I do hope she does always swallow her own bile, because
that's what she's demanding others do under threat of prosecution. For it
remains that the majority of ordinances are just that stupid, churlish,
irrational, or vulgar. And there they are, those regulations, waiting for
the stupid churlish people to use against their betters.

That is stretch, especially considering in the case of HOAs, the people
passing the rules are the homeowners themselves. It isn't a case where some
political machine driven by high powered attorney on the payrolls of
developers are lobbying for rules that will impact people thirty miles away.
We are talking about very small communities passing rules of conduct for
themselves that only reach for a few blocks in most cases. It's a
democracy.



Another strange thing about my town, most of the larger homes have little
houses out back, relics of World War II when thousands of extra
shipbuilders came for the duration of the war. These remain as "mother in
law" mini-houses. None were built legally; none have ever been
grandfathered as legal in retrospect.

I doubt that what you are saying is well informed. It would be unlikely for
title insurance companies to guarantee clear title for properties that have
significant nonconforming structures. No title insurance - no mortgage - no
sale.



There are just too many laws. The vast majority of these laws are
nonsensical, or selectively enforced, or not enforced at all, or enforced
at the wrong times for the wrong reasons, & overlooked by everyone
universally in the meantime.

That's what I hear from the neo-cons. You must be a Rush Limbaugh fan.



At every minute of every day there is that possibility of some crazy-ass
power-mad worthless piece of shit proving themselves empowered to make
YOUR life miserable FORCING you to swallow your own bile, drumming up
everything they can against you, assisted by some dumbass town ordinance
or Racist Housing Association bylaw.

But here is a good example of why you don't have any credibility. I already
cited the federal law that prohibits discrimination in housing and you
insist that that law doesn't exist. No matter how often you insist the sky
is plaid, it doesn't make it so.

"Dwight Sipler" wrote in message

rant The phrase that comes to mind is "caveat emptor". There are lots
of houses out there. People should do their homework so that they aren't
caught by surprise when the restrictions are enforced.

We weren't caught by surprise but we didn't know just how ridiculously petty
some of the rules would be. We learned our lesson and will never again live
in such a community. I think communities like that (with very strict HOA
rules) attract just the kind of people I wouldn't want as neighbors. Like
the NAN across the court--ugh. None of the rest of the court (about 4 other
houses) could stand him. He had an on-going dispute with one immediate
neighbor that went back 10 years. Seems he couldn't abide this neighbor's
cracks in his driveway. I saw these unabidable cracks and they were no big
deal. Some people desperately need to get a life.



I'm not a fan of neighborhood covenants, but the people who buy into
them have only themselves to blame. Similarly houses by major highways,
airports, other noise sources; houses by farms which generate odors at
certain times of year; houses near orchards which use wind generators
for frost protection (all night) and sprayers that start at 4 am.
Admittedly, those houses can be cheaper than houses without those
"amenities", but the restricted developments tend to be more expensive
(for reasons obscure to me).

One of my pet peeves is people who move from the city to "the country",
expecting it to be quiet and peaceful. Then when it doesn't meet their
expectations they try to get laws passed etc. to restrict the activities
of those farms and industries which were there for many years before
they moved in.

I would never recommend a restricted neighborhood to anyone. Even if one
thinks that he/she/they can live with (or even enjoy[?]) the
restrictions, there could come a time when their interests change (mine
have through the years), and you want to do something that is "not in
the interest of the community", like putting up windmills on your lawn
or having a basketball hoop for your athletic child to practice on.

If you're the type that moves every few years, then this is not a
problem, but that's not my style. I like to stay put.

These comments apply to communities as well as neighborhoods. Towns have
character, which is defined by their residents. Some towns are really
snooty, and restrict things on a town-wide basis. Others are more open
and allow the individual character of the residents to show. Personally,
I prefer the other type towns. /rant

What you say is not correct. There is no permit required for putting up a fence
along a lot line. When governments start writing ordinances that start banning
activities like parking certain vehicles, dictating fence type and style, color of
houses and kinds of swimming pools, it has nothing to do with ZONING and everything
to do with the city becoming "BIG BROTHER" like an HOA.
Zoning has to do with the uses to which land is put and laws concerning public
safety. So they can specify that there MUST be a fence and how high around a
swimming pool, but not what KIND of swimming pool or what KIND of fence... that is
cosmetic and has nothing to do with health and safety.
She didnt "have" an attorney UNTIL she was sued.
Ingrid

"Vox Humana" wrote:
You also said that there was no permit required for a fence but this is not
true.
Governments have zoning regulations, not Home Owner's rules.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

No, you are wrong. They did not require a permit for a fence along lot lines.
Hey, I was there, I put the split rail fence up with 6 good friends basically in the
rain on a Sunday while she went absolutely ballistic including calling the police,
the gas company, the electric company and the alderperson trying to get em to stop
us. WE DIDNT HAVE A PERMIT. WE DIDNT HAVE TO TAKE THE FENCE DOWN EITHER!!!!!!!!!!!
They did pass all kinds of laws stating how it must look and what it is made of,
which is cosmetic just like an HOA would dictate. Ingrid

"Vox Humana" wrote:
You claimed that your mother didn't have to have a permit for a fence, but
in reality she did. This is probably the same situation.




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

then you are very, very lucky indeed!!! Ingrid

Ann wrote:

expounded:

ahhhh.. but you are one election away from your city, town, whatever if they start
passing laws!! they can change the laws on you any time they want. Ingrid

No, they can't. They have to get them through town meeting. Small
government is still a beautiful thing!



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

wrote in message
...
What you say is not correct. There is no permit required for putting up a
fence
along a lot line.

I guess you didn't see my earlier message so I will copy the information
about fences below.


City of Brookfield, Wisconsin
Department of Community Development
2000 North Calhoun Road
Brookfield, WI 53005
Phone (262) 796-6646 M-F (7:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.)
FAX (262) 796-6702

THIS IS A LIST OF THE MOST FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS REGARDING FENCES

Q. Do I need a permit?
A. Yes, except for a decorative fence more than 50% open and less than 3' in
height.
Q. How much will a building permit for a fence cost?
A. $30.00.
Q. Can I put up a fence around my entire yard?
A. Yes, but only if it is a decorative fence more than 50% open and less
than 3' in
height such as a picket or split rail fence.
Q. You mean I can't fence in my own yard for privacy if I want?
A. Correct. You may not fence in your yard for privacy EXCEPT for a 20'
maximum
length, 6' maximum height privacy fence for a patio that must be located in
the rear
yard.
Q. What if I want to put up a chain link fence?
A. A chain link fence is permitted if it is used for one PET ENCLOSURE not
in excess
of 100 square feet in the rear yard and at least 10' from the lot line.
Chain link fence
is also allowed to enclose an ACTIVITY AREA FOR CHILDREN not more than 4'
in height and not more than 500 square feet in area.
Q. What about the fence at a swim pool or tennis court?
A. Fences at swim pool or tennis courts are governed by the swim pool and
tennis
court ordinances.
Q. How do I apply for a fence permit.
A. Application forms are available at the Inspection Services Department
Service desk.
Bring two copies of a typical fence panel drawing and four copies of a
survey (with
the proposed fence sketched in to scale) of the lot along with you when you
apply
for the permit.
Q. Must I have the lot line identified?
A. Yes. The corners shall be located with intermediate stakes or a reference
line from corner to corner. This line must remain in place during
construction
and final inspection.
NOTE: The property owner is responsible for correct placement of structures
upon a parcel of land to comply with the building and zoning law.
The edge of the City street pavement or back of curb is usually
NOT located on a property line.
Good luck with your project! Remember we are here to serve and protect you,
our
residents.
Our hours are Monday thru Friday 7:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Inspectors are in
from 7:00-8:00
a.m. and 2:30-3:30 p.m. Our telephone number is (262) 796-6646. Please call
if we may
be of further assistance.
S:\inspection\Handouts\HANDOUTS\FENCE 1/11/01

wrote in message
...
No, you are wrong. They did not require a permit for a fence along lot
lines.
Hey, I was there, I put the split rail fence up with 6 good friends
basically in the
rain on a Sunday while she went absolutely ballistic including calling the
police,
the gas company, the electric company and the alderperson trying to get em
to stop
us. WE DIDNT HAVE A PERMIT. WE DIDNT HAVE TO TAKE THE FENCE DOWN
EITHER!!!!!!!!!!!
They did pass all kinds of laws stating how it must look and what it is
made of,
which is cosmetic just like an HOA would dictate. Ingrid



City of Brookfield, Wisconsin
Department of Community Development
2000 North Calhoun Road
Brookfield, WI 53005
Phone (262) 796-6646 M-F (7:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.)
FAX (262) 796-6702

THIS IS A LIST OF THE MOST FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS REGARDING FENCES

Q. Do I need a permit?
A. Yes, except for a decorative fence more than 50% open and less than 3' in
height.
Q. How much will a building permit for a fence cost?
A. $30.00.
Q. Can I put up a fence around my entire yard?
A. Yes, but only if it is a decorative fence more than 50% open and less
than 3' in
height such as a picket or split rail fence.
Q. You mean I can't fence in my own yard for privacy if I want?
A. Correct. You may not fence in your yard for privacy EXCEPT for a 20'
maximum
length, 6' maximum height privacy fence for a patio that must be located in
the rear
yard.
Q. What if I want to put up a chain link fence?
A. A chain link fence is permitted if it is used for one PET ENCLOSURE not
in excess
of 100 square feet in the rear yard and at least 10' from the lot line.
Chain link fence
is also allowed to enclose an ACTIVITY AREA FOR CHILDREN not more than 4'
in height and not more than 500 square feet in area.
Q. What about the fence at a swim pool or tennis court?
A. Fences at swim pool or tennis courts are governed by the swim pool and
tennis
court ordinances.
Q. How do I apply for a fence permit.
A. Application forms are available at the Inspection Services Department
Service desk.
Bring two copies of a typical fence panel drawing and four copies of a
survey (with
the proposed fence sketched in to scale) of the lot along with you when you
apply
for the permit.
Q. Must I have the lot line identified?
A. Yes. The corners shall be located with intermediate stakes or a reference
line from corner to corner. This line must remain in place during
construction
and final inspection.
NOTE: The property owner is responsible for correct placement of structures
upon a parcel of land to comply with the building and zoning law.
The edge of the City street pavement or back of curb is usually
NOT located on a property line.
Good luck with your project! Remember we are here to serve and protect you,
our
residents.
Our hours are Monday thru Friday 7:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Inspectors are in
from 7:00-8:00
a.m. and 2:30-3:30 p.m. Our telephone number is (262) 796-6646. Please call
if we may
be of further assistance.
S:\inspection\Handouts\HANDOUTS\FENCE 1/11/01

the height was under 3 feet. And we had planted stuff to climb up it. But against
the brush background sticking thru the fence, you really cant see the fence. It is
my first choice even now for invisibility, but they specified it MUST be wood.
you have to actually see how open rabbit fencing is. it has narrow opening at the
bottom and larger openings at the top and the gauge is very fine. Ingrid

zxcvbob wrote:
Ingrid's mom's little fence sounds like it might be allowed under the code
that someone posted if it was under 3' tall. Wire mesh is over 50% open --
all you gotta do is call it a "decorative fence" and it is exempt from
requiring a permit because it's under the height limit. Depends on whether
they define "decorative". (I think that was the term used.) Maybe she
shoulda planted sweet peas on it.

Best regards,
Bob



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

On Fri, 6 Jun 2003 07:52:47 +0100, "Charlie"
wrote:
"Vox Humana" wrote in message
. ..
You would have to put your toys
away, mow the lawn on a regular basis, put your trash cans out of sight,
and
limit yourself to four dogs.
What happens if your dog has ten puppies? Would they could round and
slaughter them all?

Charlie.
Wouldn't be surprised. Try to have them for dinner and see what
happens.

Swyck

In article , "Vox Humana"
wrote:

"paghat" wrote in message
news
Thing is, there's ALWAYS something to report, if you have some "I'm the
cops" style loony neighbor with a bug up their butt looking hard enough.


Then in your world the only acceptable situation is anarchy?

If in YOUR neighborhood tolerance & a DECENT reluctance to play tinfoil
police officer over ever minor nuisance is just not an option, then yes,
even anarchy would be an improvement. Happily in my neighborhood tolerance
& treating one another well works, even on the one strange old fart who is
much harder than average to get along with.

As long as
there is one rule, then it would give a "loony neighbor" the opportunity to
complain. As I have pointed out several times, there are rules everywhere.
In your rant you illustrated rules about loitering and parking. Home
owner's associations don't pass legislation dealing with such items except
that they have the right to specify conduct on their commonly owned, private
property just as you do. You have the right to keep people from parking in
your yard or sitting on your porch. The only remedy that would satisfy your
needs would to abolish all government.

Homeowners Association as I documented thoroughly have a racist origin.
Period. It's the sole origin, though you don't like to face that fact. If
many address issues other than their desire to keep ******s & jews out of
their enclaves nowadays, it remains all their motivations are tainted &
suspicious -- the banning of basketball hoops, the intolerance of meadows
vs lawns or concrete, it's all suspect. As for Homeowners Associations not
passing legislation, when Bush was governor of Texas he signed a
Homeowners Association piece of legislation that would make it easier for
such associations to foreclose on "rabble" in their enclaves on the
flimsiest of excuses. In California, the Homeowners Associations helped
write the laws that were immitated nationwide that in essence legalized
bigotry & discrimination for the semi-independent villages run by
Homeowners Associations. The remedy here is not to banish government, but
to banish Homeowners Associations as part of the American legacy of racism
& hate. Then, you could only unite with a Neighborhood Association WITHOUT
the backing of legislation, & what one discovers, is that Neighborhood
Associations are only rarely as crazy, because they aren't so greatly
empowered, & instead of harrassing people about the nature of their lawns
or their hateful basketball hoops & other pickypicky nonsense, the
Neighborhood Association limits itself to REAL issues of child safety,
street watches, & mutual assistance instead of mutual policing.

There is no one on earth who never breaks a law or a zoning code or
ordinance or regulation.

As far as I know, I don't have any violations.

You most certainly are NOT Saint Vox & the world's only exception. You're
being delusional now.


So when Vox thinks everyone should just live according to every
life-controlling ordinance passed by some loon, or badly written by
retarded politicians so it can be maliciouisly enforced by the
neighborhood loon, I do hope she does always swallow her own bile, because
that's what she's demanding others do under threat of prosecution. For it
remains that the majority of ordinances are just that stupid, churlish,
irrational, or vulgar. And there they are, those regulations, waiting for
the stupid churlish people to use against their betters.

That is stretch, especially considering in the case of HOAs, the people
passing the rules are the homeowners themselves.

And as you (a "relatively" reasonable person all things not being equal)
have given evidence of some degree of delusion & insanity. If you're as
good as they come, these people are a menace, as the entire history of
Homeowner Associations has proven to be indeed the case!

It isn't a case where some
political machine driven by high powered attorney on the payrolls of
developers are lobbying for rules that will impact people thirty miles away.
We are talking about very small communities passing rules of conduct for
themselves that only reach for a few blocks in most cases. It's a
democracy.

Two points. Homeowners Associations exist for all the reasons & backing
you just said don't exist. You are living on the largess of a racist WASPy
political power that permitted the incorporation of neighborhoods as
separate entities within which you "voluntarily" sign away many of your
property rights to live there under the thumb of Regulations that wouild
have no power of enforcement except that a political machine bought & paid
for by racist land developers with high powered attorneys & lobbyists.

Second, a Democracy is NOT the right of the many to abuse the few. An
ACTUAL democracy protects even the minorities. This is the thing crazy-ass
people such as bigots & Homeowner Association "volunteers" never figure
out. They actually mistake their "authority" to vote away the rights of
anyone they dislike for a democratic process. The right of the many to
control the lives of the few is vastly closer to mob rule than the anarchy
you delusionally believe would descend upon you if so many of the laws
that are simply stupid were discarded.

Another strange thing about my town, most of the larger homes have little
houses out back, relics of World War II when thousands of extra
shipbuilders came for the duration of the war. These remain as "mother in
law" mini-houses. None were built legally; none have ever been
grandfathered as legal in retrospect.

I doubt that what you are saying is well informed. It would be unlikely for
title insurance companies to guarantee clear title for properties that have
significant nonconforming structures. No title insurance - no mortgage - no
sale.

You have GOT to stop assuming people who know a great deal more than you
bother to learn are ill informed. As point of fact, none of the illegal
apartments EVER have the apartments & little detached houses & converted
garages figured into the house values by insurance companies & mortgage
companies. If your house burns down, it can be rebuilt sans the
half-century-old illegal portions. If you sell your house, the mortgage
companies will refuse to factor in as potential income the illegal
detached rentals. But titles, insurance, & mortage are otherwise unimpeded
-- as is not at all strange. And the state nevertheless taxes properties
higher that have these detached rentals. So it is a FACT: the government
(local & otherwise) by tradition rather than by any existing law tolerates
these illegal apartments & converted garages & miniature houses, because
they were originally built to assist in the War effort & support a
shipbuilding workforce. Mortgage bankers aren't as accepting of them as
the government has remained, & even the government could change their mind
at any moment, but your scenario of "no sale" is as irrational as
virtually all your arguments have been.

There are just too many laws. The vast majority of these laws are
nonsensical, or selectively enforced, or not enforced at all, or enforced
at the wrong times for the wrong reasons, & overlooked by everyone
universally in the meantime.

That's what I hear from the neo-cons. You must be a Rush Limbaugh fan.

Right, me & Rushy are anarchists. Rather YOU with your law & order
scenarios that you even permit random pigshit Homeowner Associations makes
YOU sound like the crazed conservative if not the happy sycophant of the
next totalatrian regime to come along with plenty more vaunted rules for
you to feel so obedient to while you help round up or punish those who are
less so.

At every minute of every day there is that possibility of some crazy-ass
power-mad worthless piece of shit proving themselves empowered to make
YOUR life miserable FORCING you to swallow your own bile, drumming up
everything they can against you, assisted by some dumbass town ordinance
or Racist Housing Association bylaw.

But here is a good example of why you don't have any credibility. I already
cited the federal law that prohibits discrimination in housing and you
insist that that law doesn't exist. No matter how often you insist the sky
is plaid, it doesn't make it so.

Now there you go just with your head in a hole. Homeowner Associations are
semi-independently governed entities which, if they do not accept
government funding of the HUD sort, do not have to follow
antidiscrimination laws. In theory this "protects" the rights of Jews &
Latinos & Blacks to also have their own communities, but until the
relatively recent phenomenon of Latino-only HOmeowner Association enclaves
in California, the only two groups of bigots to take advantage have been
honky-ass white people, & retirees with age restrictions on their tract
housing communities. Homeowner Associations are legally permitted to
operate pretty much as are private clubs. State Attorney Generals in
California, Texas, Florida & elsewhere have begun to challenge some of
this in the courts in the last three or four years only, it is still being
worked out in the courts, & so far the limited legislation like that which
Senator Inouye successfully sponsored has NOT done away with Homeowner
Association right to persist as bigots. The fact that you don't even know
the laws & the realities explains in part why you never make sense in this
thread yet think you do.

You clearly didn't bother to read the factual history I posted previously
because you want to remain pigshit ignorant. I had suggested you invite
the NAACP to your Homeowners Assoication to address this aspect of your
complete & utter ignorance. They have a consciousness raising program that
is not threatening to honkies but eye-opening for people who dont' MEAN to
be part of the evil systems they've signed up for. Your response to that
is to remain pigshit ignorant. Which is why 1966 Supreme Court decisions
agaisnt the legality of specifically racist wording in Homeowner
Association charters were enforced NOWHERE until 1998 in California, but
instead racist real estate developers continuously saw to the preservation
of the private-club aspect of your right as either an Apartment Coop
member, or a Homeowner Association member, to maintain a discriminatory
housing standard at will.

Get educated, kiddo. That way, even if you remain the hardass wicked soul
you paint yourself being, you'll know the facts & can argue for your
continued authority a BIT closer to the fringe of rationality.

-paggers

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com/

In article , wrote:

No, you are wrong. They did not require a permit for a fence along lot
lines.
Hey, I was there, I put the split rail fence up with 6 good friends
basically in the
rain on a Sunday while she went absolutely ballistic including calling
the police,
the gas company, the electric company and the alderperson trying to get
em to stop
us. WE DIDNT HAVE A PERMIT. WE DIDNT HAVE TO TAKE THE FENCE DOWN
EITHER!!!!!!!!!!!
They did pass all kinds of laws stating how it must look and what it is
made of,
which is cosmetic just like an HOA would dictate. Ingrid

Vox is in a foxhole where the sound of reason cannot reach. One has to
wonder why someone would WANT to stay so unaware, as it is qutie a
difficult chore to not absorb knowledge. My suspicion is that, when
someone simply doesn't want to see large truth sno matter how obvious &
well documented simple, it's because they know they do wrong & have to
believe the world is different than it is, as otherwise they cannot
justify their own actions nor nearly so well make villains out of people
like your mother. Hence when I outlined the reasons the federal
antidiscrimination law she cut-&-pasted & did not understand did not apply
to limited equity coops, Homeowner Association governed neigbhborhoods,
private clubs, or any similar privately incorporated entity, her reply was
"Does too apply! Yes it does!" therefore sustaining the racist status
quo. When I pointed out the continuing racist legacy (citing specific
cases in the courts right now) that remain the inevitable outcome of the
racistly-inspired concept of Homeowner Associations as founded by powerful
arch-racist real estate tycoons (notably Saint Ole Hanson the Patron Saint
of Homeowners Associations & evil incarnate), Vox just ignored it, because
a history lesson is beyond her. When I outlined the ten year campaign of
hate tactics & terror against one elderly Malaysian woman by a TYPICAL
Homeowners Association in San Clemente (where Nixon himself once lived),
she just had to stay mum about such current events.

So of course no matter what you say about that fence, from her foxhole
perspective she sees only her own wall of mud, she will just never see
beyond it, having stood down in that hole so long she's ankle-deep in her
own feces. Any experience you document will never gain you anything but a
"Tain't so! Nah ah!" Your mom's a baddy & no one did anything against her
she didn't deserve. Don't get upset about that attitude; pity it.

-paghat the ratgirl

"Vox Humana" wrote:
You claimed that your mother didn't have to have a permit for a fence, but
in reality she did. This is probably the same situation.

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com/

In article , Ann
writes:

zxcvbob expounded:

You probably do live near people who think like that. They just haven't
organized yet.

Ann threatened

Eh, every once in awhile they try, but we shoot them down at town
meeting.

Wow Ann, that's pretty drastic! You Massachsetteans mean business
I thought "shoot first and ask questions later" was a Western thing.......
Do you give them a blindfold first?

:^ )

Emilie
NorCal

"paghat" wrote in message
news

. Homeowner Associations are
semi-independently governed entities which, if they do not accept
government funding of the HUD sort, do not have to follow
antidiscrimination laws.

That is completely and utterly false. I challenge you to cite a single
instance where a homeowner's association implemented a discriminatory policy
that was upheld in a state or federal court.