The Glade 4.0

Nazi bastards.

The should hire the A-Team. It wouldn't take Face long to shmooze the secretary that keeps he records and then Hannibal could pay a visit to the head of the association and kindly ask him to insert a waiver for hardship cirumstances into the bylaws.

If that doesn't work then BA and Murdoc are gonna seriously cause some bylaw violation for the members of the board that will force them to either pay fines till they are bankrupt, have sporadic enforcement which will overturn the case, or cave.

Then Hannibal can smoke a cigar while Face complains they took another job for free.

HELL YEAH!

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Can we get a time loop for Elmarnieh and leave him in the 80s? He seems to love it so much there.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

I don't want no crazy blood.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Back to the original topic, gotta wonder why the homeowners that are ***** about the little girl are bothering. Is the little girl being a PITA? Or are they afraid of the precedent it sets.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

You forgot the part where the team uses scrap metal to armor up a golf cart for the climactic action scene at the rec center!

_________________
Women are from Hoboken, men are from Trenton. ~ Jimmy Kimmel

And Hannibal at some point needs to say "I love it when a plan comes together."

_________________
The Dude abides.

Obviously not enough info, but I can think of the following as reasons:

1) Depending on the nature of this retirement community, it could very well be a matter of insurance and liability for how the community is designed, planned, etc. Having a 6 yr old in the neighborhood without the proper facilities could be raising the rates, which would be passed to all the members, who are presumably living on fixed incomes. Does the community have a pool? I would think there is a tremendous different in pool rates for adults and children.

2) It may also be an issue with the needs of a 6 yr old, such as school and bus issues within the community, which would account for the problems coming to a head now, given her age (5-6 start first grade). Which could also tie back to liability issues.

3) Most HOA's are created with the premise to protect the property values of those that live within the community, whether it is through enforcement of rules regarding individual properties or maintaining the communal enhancements, such as pools, play areas, meeting rooms, etc. Most of those rules, since it is considered a contract, have legal force behind them. This may seem like a minor issue, and because it involves grandparents trying to provide for their grandchild whose parents are unfit drug addicts, it pulls at the heart strings, but the next issue might not be minor, and the board members are responsible for all the residents equally, and can't arbitrarily enforce the rules. If they do "ignore" this violation of the rules, any future issues that have to result in court action will be found against the HOA.

4) Because they said so and they have to force the court to uphold their status as the binding little blood suckers they are.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Okay, I'm going to weigh in from the unpopular side of the argument. The neighborhood association is doing exactly what it should do and what is required by law. An ongoing situation in violation of the contract it holds with all members of the association is being addressed in the only fair way possible.

The people who choose to live in senior communities often do so precisely because there are no little kids to disrupt their lives, and they pay good money to do so. They commit to living in these communities, usually with higher rent/mortgages than they would be paying elsewhere and they pay the association dues. The associations set the rules up front and everyone who buys there agrees follow them and not to sell the property unless the buyer also agrees to them. This is a contract situation, and yes they do have the right to do this.

In this case, the grandparents took custody of their granddaughter and have lived with her in their community for six years in violation of the association's rules. The rules have been ignored, sidesteppped, or avoided for those six years. For some reason the situation now exists whereby the association can no longer overlook the rules, cannot pretend it isn't happening. Something forced the issue. I'm curious if there is some kind of a time limit the association is facing, or if someone is suing them to enforce their own rules or if the kid is acting out in some way.

Are not the people who live in that neighborhood, who pay their association dues, who follow the rules, not entitled to ask the association to enforce the rules they themselves follow?

The grandparents are not forced to live in that community. They can live elsewhere. They know they are breaking the rules and choose to keep breaking them by continuing to live there. By stepping up and doing the right thing, choosing to take their granddaughter and raising her themselves when their own child couldn't/wouldn't/be better off if she didn't, they are making a commitment with consequences. The other people in the adults only community are not bound by the grandparents good and honorable decision. This goes back to the whole personal accountability for your own actions code so many here (including myself) are fond of. They signed the original contract without knowledge that their granddaughter would need to live with them. The contract is not invalidated by the existence of that need. The violation of that contract has been going on for six years. The association, for whatever reason, is saying its time to live up to their end of the contract.

Next door lives a couple around my age. They have adopted two grandsons of the wife of the couple. The parents of the boys are not fit to raise them, for the same reasons as the article at the top of the thread. The boys are loud and happy are they are having a great time with grandma and grandpa, and are respectful of the other neighbors, when its pointed out they are doing something they shouldn't they immediately stop doing that (and find something else active and noisy to do). Occasionally they knock on my front door and ask if they can have their big rubber ball back, because they weren't careful and it went into my back yard. Grandpa has agreed that if it does that and I'm not around, he and only he can go into my back yard to retrieve it. We don't have a neighborhood association, and the boys do not bother me at all. I can however see how if the kids were problem kids with serious acting out issues the situation might be different.

I also note that I do not live in a neighborhood with an association like in the article. My neighborhood is a nice older blue collar neighborhood with mostly older families and just a few kids.

While I admit being required to live up to their word makes it tough for the grandparents, the situation as described is fair for everyone in the neighborhood association. The grandparents are probably going to lose money because of the recession, and it will probably take awhile to sell the house. Life is tough. The grandparents have been required to leave because of an ongoing violation of their contract that cannot be easily fixed or repaired. This isn't like a fence that can be rebuilt or the wrong color paint on the house. This is about a human being and the association realizing that they can't ask the grandparents to get rid of the little girl like she was a dog that was too loud. There are plenty of other places the grandparents and granddaughter can live. This is not like they are kicking them out on the streets with nowhere to go. Six years is a long time to look the other way when contract law is involved.

It is another case of the media bending the story to show only one side. Once more only the ones with cute on their side have any rights.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

Maybe the rest of the seniors should all buy labrador puppies to counter!

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Normally I despise the HOA's also; but, in this case I agree with Micheal.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

I'm with Michael on this one. If they want to have the little girl live with them, they need to move some place that doesn't have this restriction.

Not enforcing this is not fair to the other residents.

Since when is it legal to tell 40% of the population where they're not allowed to live? would the Equal Housing Act come into play here?

No, it wouldn't.

The original article seems to state that the grandparents are acting in good faith to rectify the situation. They have attempted to sell the property to relocate. I do not know if that is ongoing, nor when the first? only? current? attempted sale occurred. One would think the equitable solution would be for the HOA to buy out the Stottlers at fair market value, has this been proffered and rejected? We don't seem to know.

_________________

This has been an ongoing issue for 5 years!

I don't care what the market is like, that IMHO is not acting in good faith to rectify the situation. Not to metion that the housing market was CRAZY good even 2-3 years ago.

Reading between the lines, I suspect that association finally got tired of listening to fake excuses and "plans" to correct the issue.

Four years, according to the article. How much time elapsed before an attempted relocation? Was the housing market in this area still riding high at that time, or had the slide begun? What negotiations have occurred between the HOA and these residents?

_________________

That is a good question. You can say "no un-old people allowed" and the laws will uphold it? Wouldn't it follow then that I could create housing and say "no poor minorities allowed?"

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

The Equal Housing act does not come into play. For some stupid reason that I can't be arsed to remember at the moment. It was explained to me at one time (I worked in Real Estate) but I have since forgotten.

http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/progdesc/title8.cfm

Looks like the 55 and older proviso is both new and improved. (1988 anyway)

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Fair Housing Act, Section 3607 lists an exemption for "age restricted adult communities". The exemption also states that they have to strictly adhere to their age restriction, or they lose the exemption, hence the kids gotta go.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Sorta. As long as 80% of the residences contain one or more persons over the age of 55, they can maintain their status.

One 6 year old girl in one of the residences isn't a threat to that.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Actually it is. If they don't enforce their policy here, then some poo-jockey will sue when they try to enforce some other statute.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Having the age restriction documented, posted and enforced is part of the exemption, it shows their intent to comply.

edit: As well as for Coro's poo-jockey.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Since Jackson marched the Cherokees to Oklahoma.

_________________
"If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me." - Alice R. Longworth

"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun." - Ash Williams