Living in LoCo
Political Signs in South Riding Spark Ire
LoudounExtra.com staff at 10:20 a.m., October 22, 2008 (38 comments)
Living in LoCo correspondent Val Cavalheri writes about the South Riding neighborhood and has this dispatch for us.
As the presidential candidates take firmer stands on the issues in the last couple of weeks of the campaign, a South Riding couple is taking their own stand by displaying political signs in their yard.
Krista Woods sitting in front of her home with one of her McCain signs (Photo by Val Cavalheri)
It all started a few weeks ago when long-time residents, Krista and Chris Woods put up two McCain signs on their front lawn. After all, Krista said, they had seen political signs in yards during last year's election and thought nothing of it.
What followed surprised them both.
First was the letter they received on Oct. 6 from their home owners association telling them that they had five days to take down the signs. South Riding Proprietary prohibits signs posted on lots and common areas but does allow them to be displayed in the windows of residents' homes. Accepting the decision, the Woodses decided to keep the signs up for the remainder of the week (which was within the five-day time period).
Two days later, they found a letter in their mailbox. "The signs are offensive," it stated, "and must be taken down immediately." The letter also informed them that they would be fined $35 per day, per sign. It was signed with the name "Neighborhood Watch Patroller." South Riding does have a neighborhood watch, but both the committee and the HOA denied sanctioning or approving the letter.
Elaine Stoner, the covenants director for South Riding, in an e-mail to Chris Woods, wrote that she understood the couple's "disbelief" at having received the note from the so-called patroller. But Stoner renewed her request that the Woodses comply with the HOA rules by removing the signs, saying she was "receiving 'angry‚' emails daily about them."
Irritated and disappointed at the response from some of their neighbors - and with only a couple of days left before they were to remove the signs - Chris decided to illuminate the signs with floodlight. That evening, Krista said, she was outside when a "car barrels out, almost running us over. The window rolls down and a woman asks me if I knew that the signs were against South Riding rules. When I told her, 'Yes,' she yelled that I was a 'stupid idiot.'"
The Woodses, who are in the process of moving to Ashburn, did some research and learned that the process for sign removal could take up to 30 days in Virginia. With Election Day only a few weeks away, they decided not to take them down until after the election.
"I'm not going to let anyone bully me into taking my signs down," Krista said.
Since this decision, the dirty looks have continued, but the couple has also received some support for their position.
The Woodses' nanny, Motalane Tseptse, a huge Obama fan, recently had a party at her employers' home. Knowing that there would be many Obama supporters attending, Krista asked if Tseptse wanted her to take down the signs for the evening: "No," Tseptse said, "I'm proud of what you're doing."
Their next-door neighbors, Lisa and Chris Romano, agreed.
"It's their property. They should be able to put up signs," Lisa said, adding, "We still love them, even though they are voting for the wrong candidate."
The Romanos, who are as equally committed to the Obama campaign as the Woodses are to McCain, have decided to put up their own signs, a decision wholly supported by their neighbors.
"This is America. No matter who is elected, it can't be only one party searching for solutions. We need to work together to fix whatever is wrong," said Krista, still puzzled by the anger she and her husband have experienced about the signs.
When questioned about the possibility that other residents may want to put up signs but don't because of South Riding rules, Krista repeated that everyone should be allowed to express their viewpoint. In the meantime, she and her husband will put up with the dirty looks.
"Of course, we have spare sets in the garage, just in case," she admitted, laughing.
Deal of the Day
$25 Off House Cleaning From Maid To Please!
Maid To Please is offering LoudounExtra.com readers $25 off their first house cleaning, or $10 their third house cleaning.
• View all deals from Maid To Please | All deals
Latest Deal
• $25 Off House Cleaning From Maid To Please! posted: 4/28/09
|
Search Deals and Business Directory |
Your Thoughts...
Are you happy that the school year is over?
Comments:
Note: LoudounExtra.com does not necessarily agree with comments posted below — responsibility lies with the relevant reader alone. Peruse our reader agreement and privacy policy
If you want to keep your rights. Don't choose to live in a HOA neighborhood. Simple really.
Posted by mazman128 (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This couple should be applauded. All over the country, McCain supporters are having their cars vandalized and threats made against them for having the temerity to display McCain signs in hostile environments.
I do find it hard to believe that South Riding is not solidly for McCain.
Posted by dingus3 (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 11:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Not so simple. Try to find a new house not in an HOA.
Posted by bschweiker (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 11:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wish they would move next door to me in Cascades. They would be welcome with open arms.
Posted by dingus3 (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To all supporters (especially the rude type Krista referenced above) --- Your passion speaks volumes when you are polite and respectful. When you're angry, obnoxious and disrespectful your actions override your cause and you miss the message.
As we go into this election with less then 2 weeks away remember to be nice and less angry at someone because they don't have the same beliefs you do.
For example, I still love the Romano's "even though they are voting for the wrong candidate" :)
MCCAIN/PALIN '08
Posted by PartiesByDesiree (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 11:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
True. If you NEED to have a new/newer house then your options are limited. Luckily for me I don't. Anyway, I think it's reasonable that SR allows signs in windows.
Posted by mazman128 (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Krista should move to my neighborhood. The ONLY signs that get vandalized are the Obama signs. Even the Mark Warner signs sitting right next to the Obama signs are not touched! It is a problem for both parties everywhere (sadly).
Posted by quietobserver (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 12:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's not about whom you are voting for - those who think it is are missing the point! Those of us who live in SR are always getting infractions for the most minute of things. You have a weed in your yard, you get a nasty letter, your work vehicle is parked in your driveway, you get a nasty letter, your front door paint has faded, you get a nasty letter. So if we all have to follow the crazy rules why the hell don't they have to follow the rules? I don't give a hoot if it's McCain or Obama - it's not allowed. Their rebellion speaks volumes on their integrity and character - not that they are being American. Please! I am sick of people using that excuse every time they want to do whatever they want to do without consquences.
And yes Loudoun county is blue now but that has nothing to do with this issue - don't mix up the point here.
Posted by malizia3456 (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 12:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think I will put up a vote for AYERS sign.
Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 1:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with malizia. The point is that signs (no matter what they are for) are not allowed in their neighborhood-plain and simple. It has nothing to do with politics, it has to do with following the rules. In Ashburn Farm, you are given a certain number of days to get into compliance with whatever HOA rule you are breaking, then you are fined by the day until the infraction is remedied.
Posted by qazwsxedcrfv (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 1:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Not all HOA's ban signs. For example, Broadlands allows 3 political signs per property.
Posted by shevco (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ah, the rules on signage. If the research Mr. and Mrs. Woods is correct, then Commonwealth Law overrides any conflicting HOA rules. From a legal perspective, it would have been interesting had the Washington ComPost explained Virginia's laws on political signs.
Posted by any1 (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 4:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No signs allowed in Lansdowne On the Potomac, but they are ubiquitous. We'll live.
Posted by Craig_Colgan (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
THATS MY MOM! i agree with her 100% and stand by my parents decisions. :)
Posted by kelssaliciouss (anonymous) on October 22, 2008 at 10:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We moved to South Riding knowing the rules, having to sign the HOA agreement as part of the purchase process when getting a mortgage. My grandchildren can't leave their bicycles on the side or front of the house. We are not allowed to paint our fence. We aren't allowed to put up a screen door without getting the permission of everyone on our block. And you know what? Hooray! It's a neat and tidy neighborhood. Presumably these people signed the same HOA agreement we did and they have now BROKEN THEIR PROMISE! They've gone back on their word, signed in a contract. In my ethical world, it's called lying when I say I will do one thing and then do the opposite. How can such behavior be construed as honorable in any way?
Posted by octamatilda (anonymous) on October 23, 2008 at 6:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We wouldn't be talking about this if deranged Obamaniacs didn't drive the Woodses to this extreme situation. It's not too early to blame Barack.
Posted by dingus3 (anonymous) on October 23, 2008 at 7:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's a sign. Jeez!! No one's going to die over it. HOAs are good for some things, but in others, they take their busybodying a little too seriously. It's once every 4 years election. It ends Nov. 4. Doesn't anyone have ANYTHING better to do??
Posted by ms1234 (anonymous) on October 23, 2008 at 10:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It doesn't matter that it's just a sign. It's in violation of the HOA rules. Don't like it? Go live in a neighborhood without an HOA. I moved into my neighborhood partly b/c the HOA. Yes, I may not agree to all of their "busybodying" but I agreed to abide by them and assume my neighbors, who also agreed to abide by them, would do as they should. It keeps the neighborhood looking nice. This situation is one family, hiding behind politics, that are violating the HOA guidelines. It is irrelevant whether it is a political sign, an RV, mobile home, purple trim, dog run, hunting stand, commercial vehicle or an outhouse... I bet you'd probably be upset if your neighbor had any of those things.
Posted by qazwsxedcrfv (anonymous) on October 23, 2008 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
For those of you who responded, "Rules are Rules" I couldnt agree more! I have lived in SR for 12 years and ALWAYS obeyed the rules. I had every intention of removing my signs after I received my letter. However, that is not the point here. The Rules went out the window when the reaction of some in this community became bullish and down right mean! I will stand up for myself! All over the country terrible things are happening to people in this country and it is wrong...on either side! We are NOT fighting the HOA nor were there letters nasty. We are fighting those extremist who are out of line! And yes, my signs have been stolen and we did replace them immediately. Please do not question my honer, character, or integrity. Question the Bullies that started it! I have not said a hurtful thing to anyone during this. I am fighting back by leaving up my signs...thats it! Whatever fines I happen to occur in the mean time it is worth every dollar!!
Posted by kristawoods (anonymous) on October 23, 2008 at 11:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Pay FICA on Nanny or no need to follow that rule?
Posted by hoaaudit (anonymous) on October 23, 2008 at 11:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Go Krista! I agree 100%! It is not about the signs or the HOA. It is about the bullish behavior of the people who disagree with you. They claim to be from the "tolerant" party but they are only tolerant when people agree with them. The fact that they spend the time to send nasty complaints to the HOA, yell at you as they drive by and steal your signs is proof of that. You said you planned on obeying the original HOA letter until this behavior started. Well good for you! Their immature and mean spirited behavior should not be rewarded. They should support the ideas of our founding fathers a little bit more since it is their laws that give them their very freedoms to act like this.
Posted by kktehan (anonymous) on October 24, 2008 at 8:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dollars to Donuts it's only the Obama faithful who can't stand to see signs of people that don't agree with them, and are in a tizzy about how they can supress this.
Posted by OhTheHumanity (anonymous) on October 24, 2008 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
qazwsxedcrfv is porbably upset because she constantly gets HOA letters about her unkempt lawn, garbage toter stashed outside, etc.
.
After the elction, the signs will be taken down; face it, you're bitter because the signs are in direct opposition to your views.
.
You sound just a tad bitter; please take your meds ... Your "honer" is at stake.
Posted by OhTheHumanity (anonymous) on October 24, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
to qazwsxedcrfv: I don't live in SR, but I do live under an HOA. My neighbors have McCain signs & Obama signs & Halloween decorations, etc. No one gets all bent out of shape over it. Further, that's why I thought the time I spent in the Marines was so important. So that we have the right to act and speak and do as we please. However, as someone else mentioned, it's getting a bit more difficult to move somewhere not governed by an HOA. And you must admit, that oftentimes the "condo commandos" take their roles a bit too seriously. So don't get your knickers all in a bunch. Have a coffee & a very nice day.
Posted by ms1234 (anonymous) on October 24, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't have a dog in this (political) fight and don't live in SR, so I don't have a dog in that fight, either. I'm voting for Mickey Mouse this year. Okay, maybe Peter Griffin. I guess I'm undecided.
Posted by qazwsxedcrfv (anonymous) on October 24, 2008 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
First Amendment -- Freedom of Speech. Read it.
Posted by glastonbury27 (anonymous) on October 25, 2008 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I love both the Romanos and the Woods, and would love to see both Obama and McCain signs allowed on private property. But if it's the law of the HOA and you agreed to it, then you need to abide by the law, regardless of how soon you're moving or who you want to tick off. I am quite frankly surprised that the entire state of Virginia, both the "real" and "fake" Virginia, are not solidly behind the most qualified candidate, Barack Obama. Good luck with this battle, and for all of the McCain supporters, listen to Fleetwood Mac's song "Landslide..." Get ready for the inevidible.
Posted by kjsydnor (anonymous) on October 25, 2008 at 7:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Signs of any sort are not allowed by HOA rules. This is not discriminatory. It is not a violation of free speech. It is simply a rule designed to prevent just the sorts of situations we find are occuring now. Neighbor on neighbor animosity is not worth the limited value of displaying your lawn sign in violation of the rules. You definitely will NOT have any issues if you do NOT have a sign up. It's that simple.
If people would like to post signs and think it's worth all the hassle it creates for everyone, then please run for your HOA board and amend your bylaws. We have had several attempts to do so in LOTP, but none have passed because more reasonable positions have prevailed and the community has gone with a "less controversy, better" approach.
Thank goodness, but now lax enforcement, and the unwillingness of residents to live up to their commitments as homeowners has created problems nonetheless.
The people thumbing their noses at the SR HOA and their upset neighbors and others by not only putting their sign up but leaving it up and then highlighting it, and then fighting a rule which they know is black and white in the face of this controversy are simply fanning the flames of discontent in an area where it sounds like tensions are already high.
It's not about your candidate, it's about trying to live together in relative peace in a confined area. We all make sacrifices to do so, this is one of them, live with it, please.
The HOA has to notify people before simply taking their signs down. Hence the 5 days to comply. What I don't get is the delay on the part of the homeowner. If you steal my car, and I catch you and tell you to give it back, you don't get to ride it around for 5 more days and then give it back when you're done. If you know you're violating a rule that's really clear cut, then comply. Be an American by trying not to alienate other Americans by your inappropriate behavior. You're not heroes. You're not patriots. You got caught doing something you're not allowed to do and you are enjoying being in the spotlight BECAUSE it pisses other people off. You're the problem. Other people's inappropriate responses may also be a problem, but you're the root of the problem.
Posted by RobLeesburg (anonymous) on October 26, 2008 at 8:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The rule is the rule and they know it. Regardless of what the sign says, they are not allowed.
What if it says ACME Painting, or ACE Driveway Sealers, would there be such a stink - - dont think so.
Take down the signs and comply, or move out.
Posted by loudoun99 (anonymous) on October 26, 2008 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think I'll make up a new sign that reads:
"Lansdowne on the Potomac
Declaration of Covenants
Article 7: General Use Restrictions
Section 7.15: SIGNS
No Signs, banners or other displays shall be erected or maintained on any Lot, on the exterior of any building or other improvement on a Lot or within any public right of way or Common Area, except for one sign advertising the Lot for sale or rent, or as approved by the Covenants Committee. "
"I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it." - Mitch Hedberg
Posted by RobLeesburg (anonymous) on October 26, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The HOA's action is a violation of our right to free speech. As was stated before, they cannot overrule laws of the commonwealth or the Constitution. The ACLU has fought and won this arguement in other states: http://www.aclu.org/votingrights/gen/130... This is not the first time the SR HOA has overstepped their authority: They are in the process of photographing the front AND back of all our homes, something which I NEVER agreed to in the HOA docs.
Posted by mxw128 (anonymous) on October 26, 2008 at 9:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
MXW128...
The ACLU was correct in the case you mention. That is a government entity (town, city, etc.) enacting a ban.
HOA's have been determined in almost all states not be government entities (although I would disagree to some extent), and therfore do not have the same standards.
An HOA is a private organization and its members agree to abide the rules. Of course, all members have a right to effect change.
Posted by loudoun99 (anonymous) on October 27, 2008 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The HOA rules which the Woods agreed to also included the ramifications for not abiding by the rules. The ramification is usually a fine. Choosing not to abide by the rules and choosing to pay the fine assessed is the Woods’ choice. They have the right of this choice. This does not make them ‘non-neighborly’ nor does it make them ‘liars’. So for all of those criticizing the woods, get a grip and learn about the issue before questioning the integrity of your neighbors. Go Woods.
Posted by davidramadan (anonymous) on October 27, 2008 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The situation discribed is a common missunderstanding. The Covents are not laws. they are a binding contract that the buyer agreed to when they purchased the home. They exist outside and are not governed by the local, state, or even federal law. You signed a binding contract and agreed to abide by all the elements contained. IT HAS NOTHING ! I repeat IT HAS NOTHING to do with the constitution.
Posted by beenaroundhere40ormore (anonymous) on October 27, 2008 at 5:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So will the Woods family happily pay their several hundred dollar fine when it comes due? Or argue that they shouldn't have to for whatever reason? I agree with RobLeesburg that while nothing justifies the reaction the Woods have received, they were the ones that became "bullish" (Krista) by trying to leave their signs up as long as possible before complying with HOA covenant restrictions. The Woods are the original "extremists who are out of line." (Illuminating your signs at night after being notified to take them down? Really?!)
Also, I noted that the print story in the Post said the 30 days allowed for sign removal was to allow for an appeal. Well, you can appeal a decision to deny a request for a modification, but you can't appeal a covenant restriction that you've violated. So much for trying to live in harmony with your neighbors.
Posted by jlstapleton (anonymous) on October 27, 2008 at 5:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We live in SR and always try to abide by the rules, but our neighbors do not. The way in which the Proprietary moved with such alacrity to enforce the sign rules on political signs while not enforcing the same rule on yard sale signs is tantamount to censorship of the worst kind. They are deliberately infringing on political speech but turning a blind eye to commercial enterprise.
We suburbanites are so prone to sitting on our sofas or getting wrapped up in the cocoons of our daily lives, that we just rock along with it, but I think it's time that the 15,000 + dues-paying homeowners of SR took action and got the rules changed. Political free speech should no longer be fined in our community!!!
Let's stop signing away our Constitutional rights at the closing table.
Posted by AngelaB44 (anonymous) on October 28, 2008 at 4:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I live under HOA covenants w/40 homeowners that prohibits "commercial signs, including advertising signs of any kind." People are confusing constitutional law with legal analysis of contractual terms. As a matter of contract law, words such as "commercial advertising" have specific meaning as defined by state law. Owners normally pay little attention to covenants - even when sitting on the board - until there's a complaint by a few who want to control the rest. With that basic understanding of human nature, the Bill of Rights was adopted & has proven the test of time. Anyone who lives in a HOA needs to read Orwell's "Animal Farm" & let it be a reminder to stay vigilant against the tyranny of a few.
Posted by momshugs (anonymous) on October 30, 2008 at 7:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dont have an account? Sign up!
Post a comment