Posted on 12/05/2009 5:32:50 AM PST by Silly
No doubt you have heard of the flagpole complaint* against Col. Van T. Barfoot, a 90-year-old Medal of Honor winner and Choctaw Indian. His homeowner’s association is trying to force him to remove the flagpole on his property, for purportedly “aesthetic” reasons, even though the association’s bylaws do not expressly forbid free-standing flagpoles or vertical masts.
Hoping to catch a pedestrian’s eye view of Barfoot’s house using Google’s Street View, I looked up his Richmond, Virginia address in an Internet phone directory, and then plugged it into Google Maps. His house was not pictured; Google’s cameras have not reached his street.
What the map does reveal, however, was a surprise: Barfoot’s property is situated in a cul-de-sac at the end of a winding lane. The only way to get there is to turn off the main street (Gayton Road), enter the cloistered neighborhood, turn off Sussex Square Drive onto Coat Bridge Lane, and follow that street around a final curve to a dead end. In other words, only a few close neighbors in his association can actually see his house. Unless you live next door to him, you would have to go out of your way to see the flagpole (or the flag, which is what I believe this is really about).
Furthermore, his property lies at the outer perimeter of the development, which borders a large tract of open land. Visible by satellite, again using Google, you can see an adjacent area covered with brush, then a large open space, past which is a shopping or business development. So the opportunity to see his property is extremely minimal.
Not that any of this matters; the flagpole is only 21 feet high. Photos of his modest home shot from the street reveal that the pole barely reaches the top of the house and is in no way conspicuous. What cannot be seen cannot pose an aesthetic issue.
I am guessing, therefore, that it is one or two immediate neighbors who are making this an issue – either that, or some idle busybodies on the HOA board.
A CONVERSATION WITH THE FAMILY
While on hold with Mark Levin’s radio show yesterday to speak about this, I telephoned the Barfoot residence to confirm that I had the right address.
I was right. Barfoot’s son-in-law, Roger Nicholls, confirmed by phone that you’d have to go out of your way to see the pole. Their phone has been so bombarded, they have had to schedule people to answer calls in shifts, he said. Because of the lawsuit, he is not providing a lot of other information to the press. But it is not a happy time for this family; the lawsuit has caused Barfoot and the Nicholls – who live on the same street – an enormous amount of stress.
Mark’s show ended before I could speak to him on-air; I’ll try again Monday.
DISTINGUISHED AMERICAN HERO
Barfoot’s life and exploits during WW II are notable enough that he actually has his own Wikipedia article. The article was not created in response to the lawsuit controversy; it was first published over two years ago.
* At present there is no lawsuit against Barfoot – only the threat of one. The HOA, in a statement on their lawyer’s Web site, states that it is a “request.” Other sources indicate there is a $10 fine for each day he does not comply with the HOA’s request. On Thursday night (December 3), the HOA extended its deadline to December 11 – the anniversary of the U.S. declaration of war on Italy and Germany.
Images can be found at the link.
Not being,
Silly
I sent him a Christmas card and told him to keep fighting.
HOA’s are socialist in nature. What they are doing is normal behavior for them. That doesn’t make it less grievous for freedom lovers.
Thanks for your report. Shame on us for not putting a stop to this madness!
Nice job.
Start calling his neighbors instead and find out why they have their panties in a bunch. It might be far more informative to get them to talk, and goad them into a lather to the point they start revealing the truth.
We’ve got a lake association but it only has around 30 members and has been pretty hands off. Mostly it just collects money to pay for spraying weeds during the summer.
I plan to.
What, specifically, is the wording of the HOA contract in relation to flagpoles? HOA’s are ridiculous, but you don’t have to live in an area with one; you’re free to find a place which doesn’t have one. But if you agree to the HOA covenants when you sign on the line, that’s the deal. It all depends on what the covenants say regarding the flagpole.
The bylaws of the HOA do NOT prohibit free-standing flagpoles or vertical masts. The bylaws are silent on this issue.
The objection is for “aesthetic” reasons that are purely subjective.
Here is the MOH awardee, Col. Van T. Barfoot.
His intolerant neighbors are mere specs of scat next to this guy.
Some of them are downright communist. You WILL comply. We looked for a house 10 years ago and very emphatically said “No HOA’s”. If I’m paying the mortgage, no nut’s going to tell me what color I can paint my house. Oddly enough, the bargains were in HOA neighborhoods. lol
Please ping me for any of your updates if you don’t mind.
I’m happy to.
Thank you. As much as I think the HOA is stupid, it existed before he moved there. Unless I’m missing something, this is the kind of thing FReepers would be blasting the guy for, say, if it involved an Obama flag. Rule is rules. Don’t like the rules, don’t move there.
I wonder if Mr. Barfoot bought the house under the HOA or if it was added after?
It is likely that the community established bylaws and firm rules before he moved in. The board of directors has the legal responsibility to the entire community to require conformity to the rules despite the temptation to give into special examples.
The community is a representative republic, just like the Constitution of this country that this man defended in his war involvement. Now relatives, community members, and the media supports breaking the rules because of a higher morality....respect for an outstanding military record. The argument is that some should be above the law because of their special circumstances, and just think of where that type of thinking will take us.
This is not the spirit or intent of the community to which he belongs. This is the tyranny of the masses, not the rule of law.
His situation can be addressed by an amendment to the bylaws, which can be instituted by the majority of the community acting through the board of directors. Law vs. anarchy??
HOAs are all -eventually- controlled by stupid, busy-body, communist control freaks, no matter how wonderful the original intentions were when the HOA was formed.
Yes and no.....My first year in my condo assoc. I was talked into joing the board.
Everyone on the board was cool except for one old fart who was probably a nazi......He would complain about everything. Fortunately that was his last year on the board, nobody voted for him the following year.
All it takes is one busybody who has nothing to do but drive around the complex day in and day out looking for violations and the board has to take appropriate action as defined in the association bylaws.
Personally, I don't have any problems with a homeowners association and believe the benefits far outweigh the negatives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.