"The ARC (Architectural Review Committee) has established guidelines for the posting of political signs...The guidelines for duration of the posting of political signs is posting no more than 30 days before an election and removal within 10 days after the election.
I believe you posted your sign in support of the Virginia primaries which occurred June 14. Since 10 days have passed since that date, the ARC must respectfully request that you remove the political sign on your property."
Cute, huh? Now, I tend to think that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has a little more authority on the matter of free speech than my HOA. I think they call it an "Architectural Review Committee" because it's supposed to deal with enforcing architectural standards, not attempting to regulate political (or any other type of) expression in the community.
So, I'm preparing my response. But I wanted to get your input -- any thoughts, suggestions, ideas, rants, you'd like to share?
I have lived in this subdivision for 24 of the last 25 years. And only this past year or so were we permitted to have signs. I am betting that as the HOA cases wind their way through the courts, it will be more and more likely that other HOAs see the handwriting on the wall. Good luck.
The German officers taking receipt of the statement puzzled over the response, "vas is das?", to which the attending Colonel said, "it means, go to hell".
Of course, in the absence of yard signs there are always bumper stickers.
Was there a vote? Were residents informed of the vote to adopt a new guideline, and allowed to state an opinion?
I'm with you on the 1st amendment. And we should encourage political involvement -- not enough people vote!
You know what's best for you, but I think if I were in your situation, I would just take it up. I would definitely be upset with a partisan enforcement of such rules.
It looks like a unanimously passed Senate bill has been held over for the next session. And it would permit some restrictions:
"The bill provides, however, that an association may restrict the display of such signs (i) in the common areas or (ii) in accordance with federal or state law, and may establish reasonable restrictions as to the size, place, duration, and manner of placement or display of such signs, except that no restriction on the duration of the display of such signs shall be less than (a) 30 days before the primary election, general election or vote on the proposition or (b) seven days after the primary election, general election, or vote on the proposition. The bill also requires the association disclosure packet to contain a statement of any restrictions on the size, place, duration, and manner of placement or display of such signs."
My advice: spend energy instead chatting up neighbors who would be willing to put up Webb signs on their property before the general election. Yard signs do make a difference, especially if on the lawns of well-respcted and well-liked individuals. (I hope Webb does not waste money on those roadside signs; he should issue a statement that he will not use them because they are an eyesore and present a litter problem -- and will only supply signs for homes.)
We had a neighbor (firmly moderate Republican) who happened to have the name Jim Moran. The week after the 2000 election, he woke up with about 50 "Jim Moran for Congress" signs in his yard. We all had a good laugh over that.
We had another neighbor who never fertilized the weeds over Virginia clay we call yards around that community, so his buddies put down fertilizer, but then spelled out words in the fertilizer. After a week it was obvious what that lawn was telling us.
Put signs inside the windows?
Mow the words Webb for Senate into your lawn?
Plant daisys in a Webb pattern...
Just ideas.
I'm still planning a polite but firm response to the HOA on First Amendment grounds. After that, I'll figure out what to do. (I like the window sign idea!)
I believe it is important, however, to distinguish between the permanent improvements to a house and its surroundings that fall within the ARC’s purview, as opposed to temporary displays that are clearly forms of expression protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Neither the HOA nor the ARC has the authority to regulate free speech in the community unless all members of the community expressly cede this right to them.
While I would have no quarrel with granting the ARC the right to provide guidance on the manner of display (e.g., limiting the size of displays, prohibiting obscenity, etc.), I cannot agree to allowing the ARC the right to regulate the content of speech. In singling out political signs for special treatment – as opposed to, say, commercial signs, flags or religious displays – the ARC is proposing to do precisely that.
To be clear, I do not believe that the ARC has the authority to regulate any of these non-architectural, non-landscaping forms of expression. I also do not see any reason for these activities to be controlled. Our community is not threatened by the free speech of its members – it is enriched by it. I strongly encourage the members of the ARC to continue your valued work to maintain the architectural standards of our community, and not attempt to expand your mandate to regulate or limit Constitutionally-protected speech within our community.
Thank you again for your guidance, and please let me know if you would like to discuss this matter any further.