HOA's definition of Christmas

[justalayman]

No, it really boils down to SELECTIVE enforcement. Either allow ALL who celebrate Christmas AND choose to have outside lights celebrate in THEIR timeframe, or allow NO one to have lights up

actually, if they allowed you to have your lights up beyond the 7th, THAT would be selective enforcement.

I believe you mean discriminatory policies/rules.

Either allow ALL who celebrate Christmas AND choose to have outside lights celebrate in THEIR timeframe, or allow NO one to have lights up

but you said they would allow you an exception. That means this has nothing to do with your lights. All it is is a means for you to cause an argument with them.

as I said, and you reinforced, this isn't about the lights. Don't try to claim you are offended because you want to be able to put up Christmas lights after the 7th because that isn't what this is about. You are trying to use your religious affiliation to make a point. It isn't because you have any real desire to do what you are complaining about.

If you want to argue with your HOA about discriminatory rules, then do so but don't try to disguise it in your claim you wish to celebrate your Christmas in the same manner as others are allowed. It is obvious this has nothing to do with you wanting to display Christmas lights.

If those how follow Julian calendar START their holiday on 1/7, then THAT should also be honored.

It can be. You just can't put up lights for it.

They have found themselves embroiled in a number of lawsuits in which the HOA lost, thus costing ALL members $$.

gee, nothing like picking your own pocket. How about becoming the controlling members of the HOA. That way you can do whatever you want and it would be a lot cheaper.

They did NOT state HOLIDAY lights. They state CHRISTMAS. Therefore, they could find themselves (thinking board members) in ANOTHER lawsuit. I just want them to fix it to AVOID the issue.

Really? How many Eastern Orthodox Christians want to put up lots in your division? Unless there are others, you would be the one suing so to prevent the HOA from being sued for this, you simply decide not to sue.


It is obvious what your intention is. It has nothing to do with your religion. It has nothing to do with the lights. Claiming it is based on your religion is an insult to your religion.

Raised in the Eastern Orthodox religion, guess what day STARTS Christmas? January 7th, and it continues to the 19th for Epiphany.

How you were raised means nothing. It is what you practice today. If this is based on how you were raised and not on your current practices, then it speaks very poorly for the orthodox church.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

I currently have my house INSIDE decorated. I didn't put the lights up before because it technically meant that I would either have to take them down BEFORE my Christmas, or take them down ON Christmas.

I don't want to have it "selectively" bypassed just for us. That means that every year, you are asking "permission" to celebrate your dates. I'm not the only one in the neighborhood; I'm just the one who is most VOCAL.

I'm looking for the right terms so that I can have them CHANGE the rules so that no one has to feel OFFENDED.

I personally think it's pretty to have the lights up regardless of whether a household is religious or not. But, I would like it to be CONSISTENT for ALL residents.

PS - our Christmas is much cheaper Everything seems to go on sale after 12/25.

 

[justalayman]

I'm looking for the right terms so that I can have them CHANGE the rules so that no one has to feel OFFENDED.

I'm trying to figure out why anybody would be offended. What you are displaying is jealousy. I think the Bible speaks to that somewhere. Not sure it's a good thing.


I personally think it's pretty to have the lights up regardless of whether a household is religious or not.

But, I would like it to be CONSISTENT for ALL residents.

but it is. all lights down by the 7th. Seems pretty consistent to me. It happens the same time every year.

Why do I get the feeling that you are the one person that likes to walk on the left hand side of a sidewalk in the opposite direction of the people on that side of the walk and continue to murmur to yourself "I have a right to walk on either side of the sidewalk" just because you can.

I guess some people have to always have drama in their lives to be happy. Glad I'm not one of them.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

I want was is FAIR. I believe it should state X amount of days on either side of the holidays. Don't care if you celebrate Chinese New Years, Hanukkah, or any other holiday.

But, I have much more fun fish to fry. I'm requesting a clothes line. The documents say no, but the STATE OF FLORIDA states that they can make NO rules that excludes clothes lines. I'll see where that one goes.

I'm still going to the board meeting next week over the lights issue.

FLORIDA STATUTES

TITLE 11. COUNTY ORGANIZATION AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
CHAPTER 163. INTERGOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS
PART I. MISCELLANEOUS PROGRAMS
Fla. Stat. § 163.04 (2003)
§ 163.04. Energy devices based on renewable resources

(1) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter or other provision of general or special law, the adoption of an ordinance by a governing body, as those terms are defined in this chapter, which prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the installation of solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources is expressly prohibited.

(2) No deed restrictions, covenants, or similar binding agreements running with the land shall prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources from being installed on buildings erected on the lots or parcels covered by the deed restrictions, covenants, or binding agreements. A property owner may not be denied permission to install solar collectors or other energy devices based on renewable resources by any entity granted the power or right in any deed restriction, covenant, or similar binding agreement to approve, forbid, control, or direct alteration of property with respect to residential dwellings not exceeding three stories in height. For purposes of this subsection, such entity may determine the specific location where solar collectors may be installed on the roof within an orientation to the south or within 45 degrees east or west of due south provided that such determination does not impair the effective operation of the solar collectors.

(3) In any litigation arising under the provisions of this section, the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.

(4) The legislative intent in enacting these provisions is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by encouraging the development and use of renewable resources in order to conserve and protect the value of land, buildings, and resources by preventing the adoption of measures which will have the ultimate effect, however unintended, of driving the costs of owning and operating commercial or residential property beyond the capacity of private owners to maintain. This section shall not apply to patio railings in condominiums, cooperatives, or apartments.

 

[justalayman]

see, you have proved your intent again. You simply want to stir things up. It has nothing to do with fair, righteous, or just. You simply want what you want.

Well, you enjoy your hobby. I can think of too many other things to do that are actually constructive.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

I have smiled sweetly about the lights issue for 6 years, but am tired of it.

If there needs to be an association, then treat ALL fairly. I follow the rules. I don't put my cans out before 5 pm the night before. I get them in as soon as I get home from work. I keep the yard well maintained. We followed the rules to paint the house. Our hedges are no higher than 5 feet (I've measured.) Etc, etc, ad nauseum. But, when board members choose NOT to follow the SAME rules, then yes, it is time.

Most of us have stated that we would NEVER live in an HOA again. Until the market recovers, we don't sell the house.

So, your take pretty much gives an opinion. I guess I'll just stick to the argument with more teeth (clothes line.)